reading this series is a part of my quest to read more classic sci-fi so i get more of an understanding of the pillars the genre was built on. it’s always been one of my favorite genres, but i’ve never really gotten beyond dune and star trek: the original series in terms of Old sh*t -- or classics, if you prefer [1]. i knew, however, that one day i’d still have to read asimov’s works. so here we are. isaac asimov. the dirty daddy of the sci-fi genre [2]. mr. i, robot. and incredibly well-known for the series that beat out lord of the rings for the 1966 hugo award for best series of all time: the foundation trilogy. i’ve always had a special interest in foundation because it’s built around the idea of psychohistory: a fictional, predictive science combining sociology, history, and statistics to extrapolate the behavior of massive groups. and as a certified statistics freak, that compels me. as for how it’s used, the premise of the first book is this: brilliant psychologist and mathematician hari sheldon predicts that the vast galactic empire ruling the milky way will soon fall. and what will follow is a disastrous dark age of ignorance and violence that will last over thirty-thousand years. determined to shave some years off that dark age and bring it down to only a thousand, sheldon creates the foundation: a population of mostly scientists and mathematicians who relocate to a planet on the galaxy’s outer rim while they work on an encyclopedia galactica (yes, the one spoofed by the hitchhiker’s guide). they’ll gather all the knowledge of the last twelve-thousand years of galactic empire history, while the empire itself slowly goes kaput. this book covers the first two-hundred years from the foundation’s conception to its latest sociological evolution. as such, it’s divided into five mini-stories -- each with new characters and a new crisis to overcome at that stage in the foundation’s evolution. “violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.”
foundation still fascinates even 70 80 years after its first publication.
first off: i found this book surprisingly enjoyable! a lot can be said against it -- more on that later -- but it reads fast and easy, and every individual mini-story has a nice puzzle at its center to solve.
because there’s this uncertainty principle underlying psychohistory: the knowledge that as soon as a population gains knowledge of its predicted behavior, its self-aware collectieve actions become unpredictable. so the foundation population must remain in the dark about sheldon’s ulterior motives and plans, even far into the future.
and that actually made the reading experience more fun. i was afraid it would turn into this case of: “sheldon predicted everything with Cool Space Math so we’ll survive regardless!” but asimov circumvents that neatly.
every time the characters encounter a crisis, you’re joining them in finding a solution to the problem that incorporates both sheldon’s possible forethought and prediction as well as a clever, non-violent approach (mostly because the foundation doesn’t have a lot of means and power to go to war with at the start).
the book actually plays a lot with that theme: even though psychohistory can predict the behavior of extremely large groups, it cannot predict anything on an individual level -- and therefore it (and by extension, sheldon himself) does not account for extraordinary individuals with extraordinary ideas who manage to kickstart larger sociological change.
it makes the characters consider their movements more carefully, and it creates an imminent danger to the galaxy that could harm the scientist-run society that’s still in its infancy.
and THAT is what you should be reading this book for: for clever back-and-forth dialogue (which is 90% of the book) in which characters are presented with cool sociological puzzles, and for the occasional snappy character who employs sarcasm and one-liners in an endearing way.
for me, that was enough. i’m someone who tends to enjoy dialogue a lot and the concept of this book -- psychohistory and how to deal with the decline of your society -- was interesting enough for me to stay engaged.
but you’d best bring your own imagination and cheerleading pom-poms to hype up the characters a bit, because asimov is not giving you anything on that front. in fact, i think there’s a few very specific things he might’ve been allergic to. namely:
1. descriptions
2. women
3. characters with more depth than a thimble
so many planets, so many societies, and yet i have no idea what they look like or how they’re supposed to act beyond “violent and / or barbaric”. so many characters, and yet they’re all the archetypical mr. smart hero, except for the few spineless creatures who provide a nice hurdle (or support) for mr. hero.
so few women: only one, in fact [3]. appeared for a one-and-a-half page chapter and played out the role of a nagging wife. was then threatened to have her tongue, ears, and nose cut off by her doting husband and promptly stopped nagging when he gave her sparkly jewelry.
in contrast to that, asimov seems to be extremely fond of smoking cigarettes, cigars, and / or doing snuff. at least, almost all of his characters do. mix that together with the women allergy and it makes the book feel very dated indeed, which is kind of a pity.
salvor hardin was the only character i genuinely liked: he was clever, confident with a sweep of arrogance (which was kind of deserved), and he could be quite deadpan in dialogue. luckily for me (and hopefully for you, too), he features in two of the mini-stories as the main protagonist.
“never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing the right thing.”in general, this book very much feels like a series of interconnected speculative vignettes with a focus on the sociopolitical, rather than straight-up hard sci-fi. there’s little to no detailed focus on technology and the worldbuilding is rather flimsy. i found this rather interesting, because -- well, pillars of the genre and all that.
one thing i’m curious about is if there will be a deeper examination of the continuous rise and fall of the galactic empire in the other books. because that is considered a fact due to the psychohistoric predictions, but there is not enough explanation as to why people (humans, i think? i’ve not seen any aliens anywhere) would consistently coalescence into a huge empire, experience a dark age, and then become an empire again.
(i’m sensing a roman empire inspiration here, but still. make it explicit.)
likewise, there is no discussion at all on whether the existence of such an empire is a good thing. a large part of the book is spent conquering other worlds, which are barbaric and violent -- and though there is great commentary here on which techniques can be used to control and influence the masses, there is always this… inherent superiority on behalf of the foundation.
it’s kind of an imperialist line of thought, and i hope asimov will examine that a bit closer in the books to follow. thematically, that’d also fit in with the rest of his philosophical and sociological explorations.
anyway! i will definitely be finishing the rest of the trilogy, and was pleasantly surprised by this sci-fi classic. don’t read this if you want to quit smoking or if you left your character-cheerleader pom-poms at home.
i kid, i kid. but do be warned that it’s probably an acquired taste.
✎ 3.5 stars.
[1] does frankenstein by mary shelley count as a sci-fi classic? if so, add that one to the List of Old sh*t i’ve read.
[2] read up on What to Make of Isaac Asimov, Sci-Fi Giant and Dirty Old Man? by Jay Gabler for some background on the ‘dirty’ monniker if you’re curious.
[3] check out Foundation and Patriarchy by Osian Haines for an amazing breakdown of the problems with female characters in the foundation trilogy (spoilers for all three books!).
