[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 103 KB, 800x1311, Isaac Asimov_1951_Foundation.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5116992 No.5116992[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

what is your opinion on these series?

>> No.5117063
File: 494 KB, 1321x1740, michael_whelan__arkady.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5117063

Not for action junkies
Read the trilogy, Edge and Earth. The rest are meh.
Best have some experience with Asimov's Robot series.

>> No.5117072

>>5116992
Good Sci-Fi. In terms of Asimov it contains some of his strongest work, although the quality is wildly inconsistent. Mainly appreciable on a thematic level, as the prose is far from lapidary. Must read for Asimov. Given Asimov's place in the holy trinity, must reading for Sci-Fi. That said, it's solidly sci-fi which means that it's applicability on a literary level carries the usual genre restrictions.

>> No.5117171

>>5117072

just out of curiosity what are the usual genre restrictions? I'm not trying to be a dick I legit want to know. Like why is it that so few sf or other "genre" book make it into the mainstream canon?

>> No.5117195

>>5117171
I'm >>5117072
There are a few restrictions that sci-fi as a genre faces. Probably the most easily identifiable would be the low barriers for entry. Everyone and their mother is under the impression that they are fully capable of writing sci-fi and because it is not considered as canonical as other genres (above fantasy which is above pulp romance, below mostly all forms of poetry, short stories, and novels) these would be authors are not under the impression the erudition is required. Secondly the conception of the populace on what even qualifies a work for sci-fi is not in line with what is looked for in the canon. The lay populace consider sci-fi to be anything with certain elements (spaceships, robots, futuristic weapons, lasers, A.I., FTL travel, etc.) and essentially see it as a form of fantasy in which the nominal explanation for things is "sufficiently advanced science" rather than "magic". The canon sees science fiction as being a device for asking questions about the implications of technology and knowledge to human life, with things like future travel or alternate universes or whatever as like vehicles or media by which these questions are posed. Take Frankenstein for example, or Valis. In both these examples (which are I believe in the canon) questions are asked about the implications of technology (Frankenstein) or knowledge (Valis) on mankind and it's understanding of ourselves. This is at odds with the majority of sci-fi works which are basically more acerebral versions of a sloppy hero's journey with some props. Those are to my understanding the usual genre restrictions.

>> No.5117525

>>5116992
loved it.
it lost me a little in "edge"

>> No.5118177

>>5116992
Loved all the books, but I haven't read the prequels. I liked how everything was about logic and dialogue. More about society than individuals. Intelligent plot twists.
Should I read Dune, /lit/?

>> No.5118190

Good books, all about the concept. Really clever.
Would never get published or appreciated today, because every book these day's.

>> No.5120210

I appreciate them for their ideas; they got me into science-fiction and into reading in general. I imagine, if I read them now instead of in my youth, I would find the characters and prose to be a bit unfulfilling. The ideas are great, though.

>> No.5120278

What about the end of eterbity?

>> No.5120353

>>5120278
An interesting exploration of time travel and time police. Unfortunately the love story part isn't very good.

>> No.5120661

I'd say Prelude to Foundation and Foundation's Edge make excellent frames for the trilogy.

Nothing Asimov wrote here was worthless, but I felt a drop off in quality with the others in the series. There are two more novels, one set before the trilogy, one set after, IIRC.

As for the trilogy, it can come across weirdly if you're unfamiliar with the original form the stories took. A dying art-form, a series of short stories serialized in magazine form which were converted to novellas. I find this format charming, though I understand why people dismiss Asimov as a writer when they only look at the trilogy.

One needs to take in his full length novels written from the ground up as such to better judge. In these novels there's evidence both for and against his claims as a master of the written arts, but at least it's a fair hearing.

I think the trilogy a must read as well. They're a demonstration of what can be done with a minimalistic, interrelated, short story form. They're neither outlandishly complex nor childishly boring, and while they won't appeal to all, they're a quick breezy read. You will come away with something to use for your own works if you pick them apart a bit, finding how and why they capture some readers.

>> No.5121895

Bump because this is a good thread

>> No.5121923
File: 70 KB, 575x942, cover.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5121923

>>5116992
Awesome series, awesome universe.

Note: the Robot Series (Caves of Steel, The Naked Sun, etc) is absorbed into the Foundation universe after Second Foundation. It seems overwhelming thinking about all of those novels, but they're pretty action-packed and extremely easy to read.

The interquels by Benford, Bear, and Brin aren't that good.

>> No.5122206

>>5116992
Pleb writer at its finest.
The prose, plot and character development are some of the worst I've ever seen. Apparently I was supposed to find the "ideas" exciting. I don't like so called "philosophical novels" but fortunately, this isn't one, since there is not a single idea I would call philosophy. It is a clusterfuck of nonsensical pseudo-science. It has, of course, aged badly in that regard, but it was already retarded when it came out.

The other set of ideas concern society and politics, where Asimov proves how enlightened he is by his own intelligence. Even Warhammer 40k has a better setting.

>> No.5122673

>>5118177
Personally, I love Dune. I feel that it's a great blend of mysticism, personal philosophy, and the implications of technology (especially regarding ecological preservation). It has good pacing, and interesting main character who displays character development that echoes the themes of the book.

In keeping with the thread, the progression and halt of Paul's omniscience raises interesting questions about determinism and free will without feeling like a series of Wikipedia quotes, and always stays relevant to the effects on his character.

>> No.5122710

dreck

>> No.5122801

I thought there was a significant drop off after the first two.

>> No.5123329
File: 1.46 MB, 217x217, 1381931679897.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5123329

>>5122206
>this /lit/ poster couldn't be more wrong

>> No.5124385

>>5123329
There is a reason why there is virtually no academic criticism of his books, while people like Clarke and Verne are well accepted beyond "true hardcore sf fans".

The Library of America decided a few years ago to release an sf writer. They went for Phillip K Dick. They were right.