Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: $Revision: 1.6.2.16 $; site ISM780B.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!yale!ISM780B!jimb From: jimb@ISM780B.UUCP Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers Subject: Re: SF-LOVERS digest entry Message-ID: <27800009@ISM780B.UUCP> Date: Thu, 12-Sep-85 12:18:00 EDT Article-I.D.: ISM780B.27800009 Posted: Thu Sep 12 12:18:00 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 16-Sep-85 00:05:39 EDT References: <3585@topaz.UUCP> Lines: 139 Nf-ID: #R:topaz:-358500:ISM780B:27800009:000:5695 Nf-From: ISM780B!jimb Sep 12 12:18:00 1985 Sorry for the belated reply, I was out of town. Having presented such a broad target by declaring Asimov's recent work "crud," I'll try to defend myself. Two works, FOUNDATION'S EDGE and ROBOTS OF DAWN are the subject of my opinion. My opinion of these works being "crud" rests on three basis. 1. Character. The original Foundation trilogy had a whole raft of believable, memorable characters that I could recall without flipping through the book -- Hari Seldon, Gaal Dornick, Salvor Hardin, Hober Mallow, Latham Devers, Asper the Well-Beloved and his shrewish wife (funny, she doesn't look shrewish :-;), Bel Riose, Hans Pritcher, the Mule, Arkady, and Preem Palver for starts. Likewise, Caves of Steel, had a very interesting Lije Baley, R. Daneel Olivaw, and the inspector ***** SPOILER ***** who as Lije's boss, was the culprit -- I forget his name but remember the character well. In Foundation's Edge (FE), you *might* remember Golan Treveize six months after you read the book (whereas I remembered many of the trilogy characters and haven't read that in years.) In Robots of Dawn (ROD), Lije Baley is still there, but the character seems flatter to me, being more of a device being pulled across the stage from event to event as he discovers the pieces of the puzzle necessary to solve the mystery. I do not accept that this is necessary given the mystery nature of the plot; plenty of mysteries have decent characterization. 2. Plot. FT had a very satisfactory plot in terms of problems, solutions, climaxes, anti-climaxes, etc., that concluded neatly enough. Ditto, Caves of Steel (and The Naked Sun, its sequel, for that matter.) ***** SPOILER ******* The plot of FE, the renewed search for the Second Foundation, Second Foundation internal politics of succession, and the search for Earth (without the services of Lorne Green, yet), are so ho-hum, not only in comparison to FT, but to many other s-f works. ROD is a pedestrian logic puzzle, without much interesting happening and with a poorly conceived human-has-sex-with-robot angle thrown in. 3. Finally, the WRITING. Asimov -- and I do love the man, his early works along with Heinlein's and Norton's juveniles were what brought me into the sf field -- has become a literary 800 lb. canary. Nobody will edit him. Nobobdy *has* to. Why should Doubleday bother, when anything he now writes is guaranteed megabucks best-seller? His dialogue has gotten excruciating and much of the narrative is dull and plodding. If you or I had turned in those manuscripts with our names on them, they would have been returned at light-speed, perhaps with a note saying "you have potential, but do join a workshop, okay?" Part of the problem is that Asimov is getting "cuter" with age. Following quotes are from article by Asimov in June, 1985 LOCUS. Commenting on reading the Trilogy in 1981 for the first time in 30 years, "... I marvelled at the fact that though there was virtually no action in them, the world I had created was so real that when I got to the end I was furious at being left hanging...." In my opinion, the worlds created in ROD and FE are *not* as real. Given poorer characterization and less captivating plots.... Next, Asimov got the idea of linking all his novels. "Could it be that the Earthmen finally broke away, initiated a new spurt of colonization in the galaxy, one in which robots were forbidden? Could it be that the new spurt succeeded and that the new colonists somehow replaced the spacers, who then disappeared from history? If so, the universe of my robot novels would give way to the universe of my Empire novels and Foundation series. I couldn't resist the thought. Toward the end of Foundation's Edge, I began to include intimations that that was what happened." Well, folks, I feel it's forced. There's been enough on this net about Niven saying no more Known Space books because of the complications and being backed into a corner. By trying to stretch the Robots to the Empire, I think Asimov had to warp both universes to make them "fit" -- and I liked the originals were better and, without wanting to launch an entire exchange of "How do you judge Art?" postings, I think most people would say they *were* better. By the way here is Asimov's chronology, as he published it. The whole article in LOCUS is good if you haven't seen it. 1. The Complete Robot (short stories) 1982 2. The Caves of Steel (1954) 3. The Naked Sun (1957) 4. The Robots of Dawn (1983) 5. Robots and Empire (1985) [not yet published, could be off schedule] 6. one more transition novel, planned. 7. The Currents of Space (1952) 8. The Stars, Like Dust... (1951) 9. Pebble in the Sky (1950) 10. Prelude to Foundation (planned) 11. Foundation (1951) 12. Foundation and Empire (1952) 13. Second Foundation (1953) 14. Foundation's Edge (1982) 15. Foundation and Earth (in progress) Kind of makes all the current trilogy and multi-ology writers look like pikers. So back to the original. Crud? Compared to the earlier work, definitely. Compared to decent stuff currently published by other writers? I think so. Compared to the average? Maybe not, but the mediocre is pretty mediocre, don't you think? Responses welcome. -- from the bewildered musings of Jim Brunet decvax!cca!ima!jimb ucbvax!ucla-cs!ism780!jimb ihnp4!vortex!ism780!jimb Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com