Now whenever I see an ad for a new show I buy the book due to the times we live in. I know Foundation is being done by Apple but forgive me for believing this will be like every modern day reboot. I saw a recent interview with the show runner and he said he wanted to make it for a “modern audience” which is a red flag as well as gender and race swapping. He said he checked with the Asimov estate. Too bad they all aren’t like Christopher Tolkien.
I don’t understand why they don’t just adapt the woke garbage that has won Hugo’s/Nebulas the last few years. I find it pretty ironic to hear the constant bashing of dead white male authors but they have no problem making money off their work.
And I know Wheel of Time is coming. I’m sure the critics will clap like seals about it but that showrunner has shown that he knows jack about the story.
I found Asimov’s use of English so jarring that it became an assignment instead of pleasure reading. He’s an atheist and his desperate desire to avoid religion or religious origin of words to cause the flow of the writing to stutter to me. I kept having to stop to use context to infer meaning to his words or phrases which became tiresome. Really in the end what I carried away is this is Asimov’s desire for a priesthood of scientists that would handout edicts and scraps of knowledge. I like the idea of creating a grand database of human knowledge so that as long as the universe survives and humanity as well then the progress is not lost to time. The issue becomes that people and institutions are corruptible. I’m sure it was addressed in later books but the tedious nature of the first book made me stop.
I liked his robot books like I robot and naked sun trilogy. I’ll see what I think of foundation
I've read mostly only his essays and non-fiction books, and that a long while ago now. I read two of his robot books (I, Robot and The Robots of Dawn), but I can't say I really care about robots' rights.
But I do have an essay collection in which he speculates on how Mankind, in its move to space, might be better served to hollow out and colonize the insides of asteroids and other smaller bodies, for various reasons (they can be enclosed, you can fit more people inside than out, wouldn't need domes or shelters, etc.) Which is fine, and might be something the Galileo Project might want to watch out for, but what turned me off was when he suggested that maybe the Earth ought to be blown up to make more room for endless humans. Boy, did I want to puke when I read that.
Bleugh. The idea of living somewhere with no sunlight, rolling hills, scenery, or none of the other things that're outside makes me sick. You'd have to be a real nerd to think living completely in some enclosed place like an asteroid or space station or whatever would be a good idea.
Sure, it'd be liveable, but what would it be bearable? I'm not so sure. I wouldn't be surprised if such a place saw rates of mental illness and drug addiction go through the roof.
The rat utopia experiments come to mind.
It certainly wouldn't be appropriate for a savannah ape, but species more used to a subterranean lifestyle would probably like it just fine.
What got me was the utter hubris (the same shown in Clarke's Childhood's End) - Humans don't need the Earth any more, so fuck it and everything else that still needs to call it home.
I got through the first book and a half of the Foundation trilogy. The dude could create a wonderful universe, but holy hell was he bad at writing characters I cared to read about. I don't even need to like your characters, but they should be interesting at the least.