Foundation

A good story overall if a bit light on the science (no spoilers)
Like many others, I was recommended this book as the greatest creation of the legend that is Isaac Asimov, the grandfather of science fiction. I went in expecting elaborate and exciting words created with copious technology and futuristic ideas thrown left and right. After all, the short stories that I have read by Asimov, such as the Last Question, have pointed this way.In short, I was left disappointed… but only on that front. Let me explain.The science and futurism in this book are so thin it may as well not exist. Truly the setting is in a gigantic galaxy wide empire with nuclear gadgets and funky glowing things galore. However these are merely interestingly named trinkets without much importance to the major story regarding their function.This does not mean, however, that this is a bad book. Far from it in fact. Foundation is a great book when you consider it fiction based upon history, psychology, sociology, and politics. Now this may sound gag inducing to my fellow science nerds out there, but it is so much better than I make it sound. Each “part” of the book follows at least one resident strategic genius who works to manipulate very powerful people or groups of people to align with the grand narrative plan laid out in the very beginning of the story. The result is a massively satisfying payoff as chaos flakes away to resounding success.That should be a recipe for an easy 5 star review. After all, I consider most books worth reading to be 5 stars. As you’ve probably guessed by now though, I hesitate to put the “worth reading overall” tag to this book.As great as the general premise is, there are two major flaws that I found when reading it.The First is the ambiguity of the “grand narrative plan” that I explained earlier in this review. Avoiding spoilers, this plan is set out fairly early on in the book. Middle to end of Part 1 I’d say. However, the idea is that the meat of the plan is hidden from the reader, and revealed slowly in important bits of the story as it progresses. This works initially, very well in fact, to create suspense in the story. After a couple parts though, it starts to become stale and formulaic. The golden rule for recurring suspense inducing plot elements is that they must be used with enough variety to remain entertaining. I cannot say that this held near the end of the book.My Second problem links in with the first part, and is the general formulaic nature of some of the parts, and the treatment of some characters due to it. The challenge with the format of this book is to constantly introduce a large number of characters that are important, interesting, and unique. This is rather easy for the first few parts, but you can see that Asimov struggled to not repeat earlier story patterns in later parts. Some characters start to seem like poorly constructed clones of previous characters. As a side note, you will be introduced to a certified badass by the name of Gaal Dornick in Page 1 of the book. He gets a lot of really nice character building and becomes a great foundation (lol) for a main character. You won’t see him past page 46.Neither of these have to be deal breaking flaws. After all, it doesn’t take long to read anyway, so you won’t “waste” much time if you end up disliking it.

Ao reler mais uma vez Fundação, eu fiquei com uma impressão estranha de que acabara de reler Baudolino, de Umberto Eco. Talvez a fantasia fantástica num panorama de um mundo mergulhado nas trevas da ignorância após a derrocada de um antigo império. Talvez a abundância de religiosidade patética e misturada ao poder secular. Talvez o paralelo entre protagonistas anti-heróicos que desejam apenas escapar da grande confusão em que se meteram, e usam de uma criatividade inesperada para o mundo onde vivem. Talvez a sabedoria oculta no conhecimento. Talvez nada realmente, só um delírio meu.

Asimov’s Foundation books are rightly so seen as masters of the art of science fiction. The concepts, the ideas and the execution of the books is near flawless and the basic ideas have spread through many other Asimov books.Anyone interested in these books would presumably already have some idea of the central idea of psychohistory being used to model future human events and society. It was a revolutionary concept back in the 1950’s and even today outside of fiction and in the real world of mathematics and human studies is debated.There are some who debunk the idea that humans and society can be modelled effectively to understand future events but there is a large body of research that does indicate it’s at least partially the case that we can understand future patterns based upon historical evidence. And the truth of that is of course the Coronavirus which has various governments basing their strategy upon the predicted actions of society based upon mathematical models using past information. It’s not quite the same but there are certainly parallels that make reading Foundation such an interesting thing.Now, inevitably having been written in the 1950’s the language and some of the social mores are a little quaint compared to modern society. Essentially Asimov reflected the times he lived in and no matter how far thinking – which sci-fi is by it’s very nature – it can only be written on the basis of current understanding. I do note another reviewer who takes to task Asimov for not creating more female protagonists which, I find surprising given that in many of his books the stronger lead characters are often women.Writing style is of course engaging and easy to enjoy which, is something one would expect from a writer of such renown and popularity.Overall, a masterpiece and one that is still relevant today 60 years on.

A must-read for any sci fi fan. See how a master spins a galaxy-spanning tale (decades before Star Wars!).