Thoughts on Foundations

So I have started to read Isaac Asimov's Foundation.  I am maybe half way though and I figured I would post some thoughts on the book thus far.

But first for some background info.  Foundation was published first in 1951; it is the first in a trilogy(not counting the four other Foundation books written much later) by Russian born science fiction author Isaac Asimov.  The main premise is that humanity has spread across the galaxy under the banner of a single empire and now the empire is beginning to crumble.  The story is focused on a organization called the Foundation.  This group was created by a mathematician who foresaw this downfall though a fictional branch of science that is basically statistics and psychology that tells the future.  With this science he arranges the Foundation in such a way that they are in a good position to rebuild a new empire and not lose all of the knowledge gained in this crumbling golden age.  Although it feels like a disservice I can sum up the book with the phrase: It is the fall of the roman empire and the descent into the dark ages. . . in space.

So what is the book like?  How is it?  Well, it is pretty damn interesting.  The book reads like a collection of short stories; each one taking place a few generations after the previous story.  This means that for the most part characters aren't seen more than once.  Moving from one story to the next could very well mean that every character you were just getting to know has now been dead for a hundred years.  There are allot of ways that I can think of where this type of thing could go wrong, but oddly enough it just works.

In terms of writing it is pretty standard Asimov fair.  There isn't too much description of the scenery; there is very little in the way of action.  For the most part the story is carried along by extended dialogue sequences between characters.  This is sort of a double edged sword for me.  On one hand, I am quite a visual person and so at times it can get a little dull, especially when characters are talking about stuff that I already know, or events from the past that I have read about first hand.  Alternatively, I am a sucker for intrigue and watching various people with their own political machinations collide; and Foundation is full of this sort of thing.  Needless to say the dialogue heavy style works well for this battle of wits type of action, so over all it never becomes too annoying or boring.

This is I think the oldest science fiction book I have ever read.  In allot of respects it is impressive that some of these ideas were around in 1951.  The first story mostly takes place on the empire's capital planet of Trantor, a planet who's entire surface is one large city.  Asimov goes into how it needs the aid of a bunch of agricultural worlds to feed it, and how people born there have nervous breakdowns when they first see the sky since their entire lives are spent in the corridors and rooms of the city.  These ideas struck me as interesting and quite forward thinking for the time (though admittedly I am not too familiar with contemporary science fiction).

That said there are a few things that really date the book and one of them is the treatment of women.  That is to say, the seeming non existence of women.  Right now I am more than half way though the book and there has not yet been a single female character.  Women have been mentioned in passing, but for a book that is mostly dialogue between two or more characters I find it extremely odd that there hasn't been one sentence uttered by a woman.  I am chalking this one up to the time when the story was written. Most of the protagonists in the stories are people of political, social or religious importance and given the fact that most of these stories were first written in the 40's I guess it shouldn't be surprising that none of those characters are female.  Even still it is just noticeably weird and frankly a weakness in the book.

My last observation is that Foundation is really focused on nuclear technology.  Planets that don't have nuclear power are sort of seen as barbaric, or at least impoverished.  It is a technology that is treated with religious reverence, and that only the Foundation can provide.  That whole business strikes me as sort of funny, but it makes sense.  Contemporary science fiction authors tend to make up some sort of new technology that makes all of the fantastic elements possible, so I am not use to this great power source being so mundane.  It is totally understandable that Asimov would do this though, at the time nuclear power was new and positively full of potential.  Nuclear power seemed to have limitless potential, and so Asimov just ran with it and used it in the story.  Reading it nowadays with what we know about the limits of nuclear power and also just how difficult space travel is (although hopefully not for long), it is sort of funny in an endearing way reading about how so much hinges on nuclear technology.  All that said, maybe this is just semantics.  Maybe mankind's glorious golden space age will be nuclear powered.  All I am saying is that in lots of the sci fi I have read authors have avoided using such specific language.

So, the conclusion.  I am really enjoying the book.  Foundation is not without its flaws, but it is a fun read and I think an essential one for anyone interested in the history of science fiction.  Whatever it is, Foundation feels monumentally ambitious and if you are looking for a book with a really epic sense of scope I recommend it.