Foundation

Rating:
Summary: the Freudian & Hegelian overtones are a bit off-putting
Review: The Foundation Trilogy, one of the touchstones of Science Fiction, began as a magazine serial in John W. Campbell's Astounding Science Fiction in November 1949. Respective stories were gathered together into the three volumes: Foundation (1951), Foundation and Empire (1952) and Second Foundation (1953). Finally, the whole shebang was published as The Foundation Trilogy in 1961 and in 1966, won a Hugo Award as the best science fiction series of all time. I don't know that this last is still true, but it is certainly one of the seminal works in the history of Science Fiction and remains extraordinarily influential.

Oliver Morton, in The New Yorker of May 17, 1999, had an excellent essay about the books wherein he pointed out that Asimov is really responsible for the concept, so prevalent in science fiction, of the Galactic Empire. He particularly demonstrates the debt that the Star Wars series owes to Asimov's vision, a vision which apparently in turn owes a debt to Edward Gibbon, whose Decline and Fall of The Roman Empire Asimov had read twice as a young man.

He also draws one important distinction; where the main foundation of the Star Wars series is speed (iconified by the image of the accelerating starship), the Foundation series is built upon size. It is the epic scope, spanning thousands of years and worlds and incorporating billions of people, that really made Foundation so groundbreaking. It enabled Asimov to apply historical themes to a genre that, virtually by definition, lacked history.

All of this is certainly true, but it strikes me that the epic scope as utilized by Asimov presents a political/philosophical problem. Asimov posited a future science of psychohistory, a discipline which would bring scientific cause and effect certainty to the field of human affairs. The Trilogy traces the fall and reemergence of a Galactic Empire with the entire process having been predicted by and, to some extent guided by, Hari Seldon, the Founder of Psychohistory. This premise manages to combine two of the worst ideas that human's have ever had--first, that history is deterministic and follows some kind of iron clad pattern; second, that there is any merit to psychology, particularly as a predictive tool when applied to large populations over a lengthy period of time.

The whole thing is sort of creepy in so far as it dismisses free will and the impact of ideas and individuals on man's development. The quest for discernible patterns and laws in human existence is nothing new, most religions are predicated on the revelation of such hidden patterns. And it is natural for scientists to be attracted to the idea that there are certain universal laws that will eventually explain our behavior, everything from why we love or why we kill to why I just typed the letter r. But I for one, do not believe that our lives are predetermined. In fact, I find such an idea pretty bleak and antihuman.

I still recommend the series, particularly in light of the influence it has had on the genre and for the massive scope of Asimov's vision, but, for me at least, the Freudian & Hegelian overtones are a little bit off-putting.

GRADE: A-

Rating:
Summary: Science Fiction 101
Review: So, you're thinking about delving into Science Fiction and you just don't know where to start.

Start with Asimov's _Foundation_. Simply put, this is where science fiction starts. You will be introduced to the concept of a vast, complex history of a civilization which is certainly not Planet Earth... and, get this, it was written several decades before we sent anyone to the moon.

And there's more... Foundation leads to an entire trilogy which leads to another trilogy which, get this, actually leads you back to Planet Earth.

Five stars. Possibly more.

Rating:
Summary: Psychology - the most neglected science in sci fi
Review: I have read this book - and the rest of the trilogy - several times, and I have enjoyed it every time. It has been remarked that this trilogy isn't sci fi enough, in that it centers more on the character's lives than on aliens or alien worlds. Well, psychology is a science too, though oft neglected in science fiction, and Asimov does a brilliant and involving job of examining politics, interpersonal relations, and the mind in this outstanding trilogy. I found it both moving and entertaining, and I would highly recommend it to those who enjoy cerebral works. I would caution those looking for an action tale, however, that this is not the book for you.

Rating:
Summary: You can't get there from here...
Review: "Prelude to Foundation" describes the young mathematician Hari Seldon, and his flight from the powers that be; much like the Christ child, the wicked Old King wishes to find him in order to destroy him, and what he represents: a perceived ineluctable threat to the established order. No surprise - the mathematician DOES escape and, we learn at the outset of "Foundation", lives to successfully develop his theory of statistically-predictable underlying rhythms in the actions of humanity, (modelled on the similarly weighty equations of statistical mechanics): "psychohistory".

Asimov opens "Foundation" with Hari Seldon, an old yet intellectually vital man, sensing his impending demise. Master of powerful political intrigues, (swirling around both himself and his planned establishment of an Alexandrian Library to act as a repository of knowledge against the impending collapse of civilization), by virtue of his psychohistorical equations' predictions, he successfully establishes "Foundation" outposts in two remote sectors of the galaxy with government backing, ostensibly to create "dictionaries".

This book chronicles the early political, military, and economic development of Terminus, the home planet of First Foundation. (Players of games such as "Civilization" will not be surprised at the predictable flow of events...)

Asimov's ear for dialogue is not as great as his mind; in fact, the book's hold on the reader's imagination seems to come as much from the spirit of the author as from the interest we continually experience in the plot's continual protean plot twists; for example, we discover that "Second Foundation", Seldon's second outpost, is cloaked in secrecy and "not on any of the star charts", which becomes significant in later volumes.

Asimov's style takes a little getting used to, but once you ARE used to it, it's very hard to put these books down. Make no mistake; these books are just outstanding, and probably a very good introduction to science fiction. Highly recommended.

Rating:
Summary: Beginners: This book is NOT a series beginning
Review: For beginners into this serie of Asimov, know that their are other books before Foundation, and they are all tied-up.

-----------------

<Robot serie>:

I, Robot/ The Caves of Steel/ The Naked Sun/ The Robots of Dawn/ Robots and Empire

<Bridging novel>:

Tyrann

<Foundation series>:

Foundation/ Foundation and Empire/ Second Foundation/ Foundation's Edge/ Foundation and Earth

----------------

Some highligths:

-I, Robot: The beginning of the robots themselves

-The Robots of Dawn: Early mention of psychohystory as a possible new field

-Robots and Empire: The Earth starts becoming unlivable

-Tyrann: A view between the two series ('Robot' & 'Foundation'). You can recognize the Spatians from 'Robot', and also get a feel of the de-information humans will receive about their origins in the later 'Foundation'.

-Foundation and Earth: The loop is complete. We understand the ultimate fate of Earth, robots and humanity.

Rating:
Summary: Sociological Insights Into Stimulating Human Progress
Review: Foundation is the story of one man's attempt to positively influence human history beyond the grave for centuries to come. Set far in the future, Hari Seldon's goal is to shorten an impending period of Dark Ages from tens of thousands of years to one thousand years. To do so, he creates an organizational entity, the Foundation, and maneuvers to create circumstances so that the Foundation will recreate the Galactic Empire amid a blossoming of science and technology.

This book is the first in a series that will keep you happily reading for days. In Foundation, the stage is set for the problem, and you will begin to understand the plan that Seldon has employed by examining the first 150 years after the Foundation is established.

The book is built around four crises (Seldon Crises) that shape the potential of the First Foundation to fulfill its goal. In the first crisis, the Foundation is viewed as being a traitorous activity by the political authorities. Seldon explains that his purpose is to create an encyclopedia to encompass all current knowledge before it is lost. The crisis is survived when he agrees to take the project into exile on a planet with few natural resources at the far edge of the galaxy.

Fifty years later, that fledgling is threatened by its powerful neighbors who have greater resources and military power. The Emperor can no longer protect the Foundation. Thirty years after that, another attempt to militarily capture the Foundation occurs. Another seventy years later, a fourth crisis occurs when remnants of the Empire start funneling advanced weapons to planets at the edge of galaxy that oppose the Foundation.

Each crisis is overcome with a different approach, by a different leader. And the Foundation continues to develop towards its eventual form.

These crises are much like a good mystery story. You know there's been a crime that needs to be solved, but you haven't quite figured out how yet. Because there are four crises, you get to enjoy that problem-solving experience four times in one book! Pretty neat!

The Foundation's advantage in all of these crises is that it has advanced knowledge and has applied it, while the rest of the Empire is losing knowledge. Pretty soon, things are falling apart technically for those outside the Foundation. The key technology is built around atomic power (as it appeared it would developed in the 1950s).

Reviewing Foundation is a challenging task. This book has become a science fiction classic, yet many will see little value in it because the science fiction perspectives and forecasts about science are dated. The book has to be read in the context of the books that follow to be fully understood and appreciated, but how does that help the person who has just finished Foundation? Isaac Asimov used a most unusual style in the book, as though you are a historian uncovering bits of primary and secondary sources concerning a long ago period in time (that occurs in our future). That either makes the book more authentic (if you like that) or annoying (if you don't).

At bottom, these contrasts require the reviewer to attempt to capture for the potential reader what makes this book an enduring classic.

First, Foundation squarely asks a fundamental question: How should knowledge be built, maintained, and used for the benefit of all? A subset of that question is: What are the appropriate uses of knowledge? These are questions that we do not wrestle with nearly enough today. Many people enjoy thinking about these questions, and welcome their introduction by this book.

Second, Foundation suggests that progress is faster with the benefit of planning that takes into account human nature. Seldon's discipline is the reliable behavior of large groups of people (psycho-history). Those who like to plan and those that do not will equally enjoy Asimov's scenario for making his point that we should build from our understanding of human behavior. You can debate the point and have lots of fun forever, based on what is here.

Third, many social thinkers have been inspired by the Foundation concept to structure their own changes. Nonviolent political movements match the Foundation concept in many ways, for example. This book gives you a lens to consider many of the global agencies that have been created by international organizations.

Fourth, what should be the relationship between knowledge and power? Usually, they are united. But the Foundation posits a world in which they can be divided, and that division could have some benefits. A current example would be the unharnessed knowledge of the Internet. No government will probably succeed in trying to hold dominion over it.

Science fiction has long played a useful role in helping society to examine its most important scientific questions in advance. Then the concepts that seem useful become the early paradigms of scientific and social progress. In the case of Foundation, that paradigm here is applied to social progress primarily . . . not scientific progress. So think of this as a book about the science fiction of governing.

Foundation suggests a world where knowledge has more power than today, and is also more effective at curbing harmful exercises of power than currently. That shining ideal, I believe, is at bottom the key to understanding Foundation's lasting and broad appeal.

Whether you like, love, are indifferent to, or hate Foundation, I suggest you read the initial trilogy before making up your mind about this book. Much of the genius of Foundation (the first book) isn't apparent to most readers until the trilogy is read and grasped.

One word of caution: Asimov wrote lots of one-draft wonder books, and was certainly not a great craftsman in his writing. Look past that writing quality to the conceptual brilliance of the picture he is painting.

After you have finished the trilogy, ask yourself the question of how you can make knowledge more effective in promoting human moral and economic progress. I think you will find that to be an intriguing question well worth the attention you give to it. And you can think of Foundation to remind you of the question.

Rating:
Summary: Not worth the time
Review: I noticed that when someone reviews a book they really like, they go on and on about it, but when someone reviews a book they didn't like they usually only write a few sentences amounting to little more than "this book sucks". Well 'Foundation' does suck, but I'll go on and tell you why it sucks.

I checked out Foundation from the library a few years ago. After about five chapters I quit reading it. Recently I was looking for some good Sci-Fi and tried Foundation again, mostly because of all the great reviews it got here on Amazon.com. I was very disappointed. There are several things I did not like about this book, and really nothing I did like.

First, it is extremely dated. Asimov talks about 'atomics' as the very pinnicle of advanced technology. But nucler power is old news even today, and it stands to reason that sometime in the next millenia someone might invent something better than good old nuclear fission. Besides, you can't build a Galactic Empire if the best you have is 'atomics'. One mark of good science fiction is presenting new ideas - especially ideas that solve the problems of space travel. Asimov's solution: 'atomics', complete with radiation and all. Strike one. Second, Asimov seems to have adopted the old 60's detective novel style of writing. Everyone is sitting around smoking cigarettes and talking 99% of the time. (I mean, really, does even the most adimant smoker think cigarettes will still be around in the next millenium? Surely we'll find a better way to cause lung cancer.) Also, Asimov is under the impression humans will use a lot of corny expressions in the future, like "what in the name of space are you talking about?" and "I don't give an electron about your ship!" Come on, that's just moronic. Doesn't anyone edit this tripe? Throw in some action, some spaceships, maybe an alien or two. And if your characters are suppose to be adults, have them speak like adults, for the love of Space. Strike two.

Third, there is the story. If you ever read Gibbon's 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire', you know the story well enough. The Roman Empire fell because it rotted from the inside out, and without the Empire's influence, the world was cast into the dark ages for a thousand years. Well, it the future, Asimov sees another galactic "Roman Empire" that is being crushed by it's own weight. Harry Seldon, the closest thing to a main character in this novel, knows the future. You see, Seldon is a talent mathmatician who can predict the future using numbers and trends and statistics, etc. (a new science called psychohistory)- never mind that you cannot predict human events based on the past. Think of the incredible number of variables involved and the millions of chance events that have had a profound effect on history. (How in the name of a nutron can anyone predict the birth of Hitler, Caeser, or Napolean, the eruption of Vesuvius, the invention of the microchip and personal computer, etc.) So, I have major problems with on of the major premisis of the book. Strike Three.

So the Galactic empire breaks up into petty kingdoms and duchies and such. Literally, there are kings and dukes in the story. Why in the name of antimatter would a galactic civilization be organized along the lines of a fuedal system as were the Middle Ages? And why we are on that subject, why was there a galactic empire anyway? Did someone conquer the whole galaxy? In order to have a galactic empire you have to have faster than light communication and space travel. How is this accomplished? Like so much else in the book, Asimov provides no answers to these questions. Strike four.

Of course, Galactic Empires don't fall over night. So the story jumps around in time (sometimes 50 - sometimes 100 years with the turn of a page). This book moves through time faster than a nutrino - whole new casts of characters are introduced in every other chapter. The only constant is Harry Seldon's holographic image showing up here and there to say 'I kew that was going to happen.' I don't have to tell you there is no character development. Am I a positively charged electron or aren't novels supposed to interesting, with good characters and a plot that goes somewhere? Strike Five.

So lets recap - the writting is bad, the plot is slow and boring, the characters are flat, unreal, and fortunately short lived, and the science part of the science fiction is unconvincing. What else should a novel have? Oh yeah a point. What is the point of this book? What are we supposed to learn about the fall of this ficticious empire that we couldn't learn by reading Gibbon (who is a far better author with a far better subject)? You got me. Strike Six.

Well I'm no Harry Seldon, but according to my math 'Foundation' strikes out twice. In the end, I just didn't care about any of the characters, I didn't care about the stupid Galactic Empire, I didn't care about Harry Seldon, his dream, or his Foundation. His vision of the future is so stupid it is funny, and we come away from the miserable experience of reading this book having learned nothing. Thus, this book is a meaningless read and a waste of time.

I have not read any of Asimov's other fiction. I skimmed through his nonfictonal works- "Guide to Shakespeare" and "Understanding Physics". Not too bad, but just like 'Foundation', there is always something better to read on the same subject. Don't be fooled by the other reviews, there is alot better Science Fiction than this. Try one of these instead (in no particular order): Orson Scott Card ("Ender's Game"), Heinlein ("Starship Troopers"), H.G. Wells ("Island of Dr. Maroe", "Time Machine", "War of the Worlds"), Diane Duane ("The Romulan Way", "My Enemy, My Ally"), Arthur C. Clark ("2001", "2010", "Rendevous with Rama"), Anthony Burgess (A Clockwork Orange), Frank Herbert (the "Dune" books).

Rating:
Summary: The Foundation of Science Fiction
Review: Keep in mind: this is the first book in a trilogy. Even though each book stands on its own as a classic of science fiction, you have to take them as a whole, I think. Besides, once you've read Foundation, you'll want to read the others. That said, I first came across this trilogy in the library and was reluctant to read it. On first reading, I was weighed down and a little turned off by the politics, and I almost lost interest. Hari Seldon, a mathemetician, predicts that the mighty Empire, centered on the giant planet/city Trantor, will be destroyed in 500 years, which will be followed by 30,000 years of barabarism and social decay. Only after that will a new Empire emerge. He devises a plan to shrink that dark period to 1,000 years, and new rulers of his design will take over. After a trial, Seldon and his band are exiled to a backwater planet, Terminus, surrounded by stronger and more resourceful enemies. What band? Those working on a great Encyclopedia to preserve the knowledge of mankind once the dark period strikes. They wouldn't travel to the other end of the galaxy on their own accord. Forced exile was the only way Seldon's Plan would work. Soon the true purpose of the Plan is revealed. Seldon was dead before the Foundation established itself on Terminus. But he appears as a hologram during times of crisis. It turns out Seldon predicted these crises, and the Foundation's actions are forced down one path. The Foundation slowly gains advantage over its enemies. It will still be centuries before they are strong enough to take on the Empire. The Foundation gains these advantages sometimes by heroic acts of its leaders. But according to Seldon, the actions of the individual are unpredictable and can't be counted on. So is there some greater power guiding this whole scheme? The question is not approached until the next book, Foundation and Empire. We and the men of the Foundation know that Hari Seldon formed two Foundations, and that's all we know. You might spot elements that George Lucas borrowed for his Star Wars movies: Empires, small versus the mighty, parsecs, blasters, and as you read further, mind control. Foundation sets up the series strongly. Read it, and keep reading. The politics don't bother me so much anymore. They are a necessary part of the story. That's why I say to take the trilogy as a whole. All three books are essential to the whole story, one is not necessarily the best, but the real excitement and surprise endings are saved for the next two books.

Rating:
Summary: This gets more and more plausible as the years go by
Review: In his Foundation Trilogy (later to be extended in additional books), the prolific science fiction/fact writer Isaac Asimov told a story of a small group of people who secretly steered the course of history using technology that we would now recognize as an outgrowth of memetics. By recognizing group psychology and the effect of various memes on populations, they were able (Asimov creates) to shorten the intergalactic Dark Ages by millennia. Is such a thing possible? We are seeing the beginnings of attempts at memetic engineering today. Advertisers are designing memes that are becoming fairly effective at penetrating populations, in hope that they will carry with them a message influencing consumer buying behavior. Have you heard someone say "I love ya, man!" lately? Anheuser-Busch is delighted if you have. More broadly, I'm seeing a steady trickle of organizations copying and mutating successful Profit Viruses (MLMs) and Power Viruses (cults). It's an interesting question whether the population as a whole will ever build up an "immunity" to this kind of thing, or whether the evolutionary-psychology buttons of lust, power, fear, and so on are too powerful to overcome. Who knows? There may have been a small group of Illuminati steering us for millennia past without us even knowing...

--Richard Brodie, author, Virus of the Mind: The New Science of the Meme

Rating:
Summary: A dated si-fi
Review: For you who don't know, this book is about Hari Seldon, a mathematician who invents psychohistory - a way of predicting the future by mathematic calculations. He predicts that the Galactic Empire will fall in about 300 years and that there will be war and barbarism for 30.000 years to come. To reduce this time of barbarism he starts the Foundation that is designed to gather and the brilliant minds of the galaxy and save the knowledge of the race. Anyway, that's the basic plot of the book. I have to admit that the story was really fascinating and did keep me reading, even though it is dated. You can tell that it was written in the 50's and that nuclear power was the something new and exotic. It's also geekey. You just can't keep a straight face when you read stuff like: "You son of a spacer!" or "I don't give an electron about that". I'm not a si-fi reader and this is probably why. I also have problems with the huge leaps in time. You're reading one thing and then the next chapter it's 70 years later and all the charachters you just read about are dead and there are a bunch of new ones to get to know. But then again, those are just my own hang-ups. The plot is great. The book is good and I might eventually read the sequels. But I do have other books I'd rather read first.