Sign in with Facebook
Christy's Reviews > Foundation
Foundation (Foundation, #1)
by
by
Honestly, I don't get why this book/series is so popular. There are some interesting elements to it (for instance, the use of religion as a tool of mass control and the implicit resultant argument that religion is no more than a fraud, "the opiate of the people," after all), but the book gave me little to enjoy or dig into. The forces of the novel are broad, historical, dealing with masses of people; this means that there is little to no room for individual characters here and little to be done by the few characters who do appear. One leader says, in fact, in response to a crisis, the threat of warfare and annihilation, "I'm going to do nothing. One hundred percent of nothing, and that is the secret of this crisis" (191). This is a recurring theme. Plus, there are no female characters to speak of. One man's wife makes a brief and apparently unnecessary appearance for a page-long chapter, but that's it. All else is done by and to men.
There are a couple of minor things I do like about the book. One is Salvor Hardin's statement that "violence is the last refuge of the incompetent," which I like for its endorsement of nonviolent alternatives. Another is the characters' habit of saying "Space" or "Galaxy" instead of God when they exclaim or curse.
There are a couple of minor things I do like about the book. One is Salvor Hardin's statement that "violence is the last refuge of the incompetent," which I like for its endorsement of nonviolent alternatives. Another is the characters' habit of saying "Space" or "Galaxy" instead of God when they exclaim or curse.
1015 likes · Like
∙
flag
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
Foundation.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
September 29, 2007
– Shelved
September 29, 2007
– Shelved as:
readinglist2-sf
September 29, 2007
– Shelved as:
science-fiction-and-fantasy
Started Reading
June 25, 2008
–
Finished Reading
Comments Showing 101-137 of 137 (137 new)
date
newest »
newest »
message 101:
by
Preslav
(new)
-
added it
Mar 09, 2021 01:15AM
How dare to judge it in negative way . These books only can be liked . These books are for people who found the meaning of life or the lack of it and they take fun to the rest of their lives in the way they want it
reply
|
flag
Of course it comes down to “there’s no wemmen.” Of course.
Just finished this and completely agree with you. Great review.
Change your review to 5 stars right now. Tamamo warned me about people like you
Hi Christy, I just wanted to say that I agree with your review, especially the point about women, which I found really jarring. I applaud you for standing up to multiple people condescendingly mansplaining to you about the presence of females in science fiction and what it means, etc., especially when you've literally read the book on it. I don't know whether you've read Rebecca Solnit's "Men Explain Things to Me" but it was going through my mind as I was reading the comments.
Agreed. And completely disappointed since I’ve heard it ranked up there with my favorite sci-fi book. Dune.
Yes! I thought all of the same things, and was especially disappointed in the lack of women anywhere near, let alone relieve at to the story. I’ll try finishing the series because they’re easy reads, but I certainly find it’s pages lacking thus far.
I do understand your criticism, but you are aware that the book was written in the late 40s/early 50s and started with short stories. That‘s the great accomplishment. And more or less the foundation series is the basis of the sci-fi genre we know today!
ask a book - it’s just a bunch of meetings and committee hearings. with a heavy dash of commentary on religion. i don’t see why people are saying “but it was written in the 1950s!”. why does that matter?? it’s still bland.
The book is a story for people to enjoy but here you have some fool saying it is not political correct grow up and get a life if you dont like dont read i think the whole set of books are great give them all five stars
This is an incredibly helpful review. I haven’t read it, but have enjoyed the comments here from the triggered 🤣
Christy, I know you wrote this over a decade ago but I couldn't have put it any better myself. Some decent counter points too by fellow readers which have merit in their own right but for me, aside from the spectacularly well written and posited future of a galaxy written in the 50's, I'll end my journey of this series with this book.
You must understand the culture of the time Asimov wrote this. I suggest reading Millicent Glenn's Last Wish to get an idea of what the times were like.I agree with most of what you said, but I am old enough to have read the Foundation Trilogy within a few years of when it was first published and at the time it was groundbreaking. Much like Star Wars started a completely new direction, Foundation did the same for Science Fiction way back when.
I agree with you. I honestly don’t understand the appeal of this book. The problem with the lack of women is more than just a “political correctness” issue. It’s just one more aspect that makes the cast of characters flat and homogeneous. As for the argument that you have to be a STEM person to like this, I have a BS in math and I did not like this book. I like the idea of statistics being able to predict the future, that was cool. But then we move on from that character after about 30 pages and the rest of the book is people arguing about politics. As for the argument that you have to read the whole series to really *get it* that annoys me so much because if I didn’t like the first book, I do not OWE anyone any more of my time reading the rest of them.
I read it 40 years ago and that was enough for me, I like the Apple TV version.
Exactly. I just had to abandon it halfway through. It was just a very boring and repetitive story. A few elements stand out, the character of Salvor Hardin was interesting but that bit of the story was so two-dimensional I felt like I was reading a kids book. I’ll keep watching the tv series which is itself a bit of an effort to get through!
Nick wrote: "Exactly. I just had to abandon it halfway through. It was just a very boring and repetitive story."Asimov seems to like that trope. Have you read his small story "The Last Question"? (You can find it on the internet - I cannot link it, just google "Last question Asimov pdf" and a link from Princeton comes out first - it is only 9 pages and worth your time).
It SEEMS repetitive, but at the end it rewards you with a very unique ending and idea and you go "now THAT was very interesting/smart. I had never thought of that this way"
The difference is that unlike the Last Question where Asimov presents the idea for all to see, each smaller Foundation story does not do that. Those that miss the point are usually the ones that declare to be bored of the book.
(Of course there are those that are bored of it because they are so smart that they figured out the plot/solution of each tale on their own, but, let's face it, that is not likely to be the majority of the people that complain about the book)
If you haven’t read the entire series - robot books, galactic empire books, foundations trilogy, sequels and prequels, then don’t bother passing judgment. Taken as a whole, Asimov’s Galaxy is one of the all time great works of epic fiction. If you can’t see that, then it is your loss, plain and simple. If you’re bored by the first book because it didn’t have enough action for you, well, not to put too fine a point on it, but maybe you’re not in Asimov’s intended audience.
^ agree with Neil. One simply cannot review Foundation on its own. People have suggested to me this series but when I checked in reddit the reading order and followed that, Im glad I started from the Complete Robots, Robots series, Empire series and now this.
I never thought about that, but it makes sense. I'm an old codger who read The Foundation trilogy back in the 70's when most SF was 'nerds only' and published in pulp magazines. Reading the first book again, I can see why a modern reader would think it was flat. It's like listening to music from the 50's and wondering what the big deal is.
I haven't finished it yet because is so boring. I totally agree with you about this book being about things done by and to men. I also didn't like the fact that every 10 pages there are new characters that in essence are the same type of men: full of themselves, not willing to talk about their plans and crazy to acquire power and recognition.
This book series is excellent and u haters are making me engry. I mean from angle it is an excellent vivid science fiction novel. And the talk of all men in the book is nonsense. In the sequel the protagonist is a woman who plays a major role
I agree. From the perspective of 2022, I'm not going to go back 45 years and spend months rereading Asimov's ouvre. SF has evolved, thank Space!
Gwen wrote: "SF has evolved, thank Space!"Yeah, but humans have not ... they are subject to the same trickery and tactics that are evident in those old books.
You could say that "Fahrenheit 451" is "old SF", but can you honestly say that "because it is old there is nothing interesting or worthwhile about it"?
> spend months rereading Asimov's ouvre
I've actually done that and I will always consider it as a time well spent. :)
To all of you who speak about Asimov's secondary in his story female characters. Clearly, if you have read the rest of his foundation books, you should know that it is a woman that, using her wits and her nerve and her sentimental intelligence, literally saves the galaxy from destruction....
There are also no children characters in this book, that is horrible and even no dogs. You have to suffer to read this book. No one should read this.
Can’t believe people are still arguing on a review left 9 years ago. People are allowed opinions. An opinion cannot be wrong.
You shouldn’t need to read every book written by an author to “be able to pass judgement”. How silly!
I’m halfway through Foundation and it’s hard to follow, almost disjointed. Concept is great but style is outdated.
Oh no! As if I’m leaving an opinion when I’ve only read one Asimov book!
C.J wrote: "People are allowed opinions. An opinion cannot be wrong. "LoL Really? Of course it can be.
Look things are simple. If you say "I read this book and I do not like it" fair enough and no problem.
If you say "I've read this book and I think the author is this and that and whatever epithets", that's not fair and not right, especially for an author like Asimov that penned 500+ books.
The main "issue" here is that the "opinion" is that people complain that Asimov doesn't like women, because THIS book doesn't have any.
What me and other people noted is that OTHER Asimov's books have the MAIN CHARACTER being a woman, and a VERY VERY smart and successful one.
Ergo that "opinion" is, in fact, wrong, because it is based on "insufficient data for meaningful answer" (to make a "Last Question" reference) :)
In order to have a valid opinion on a book, you need to read the book.
In order to have a valid opinion on the author, you need to read MORE than one books.
Simple.
You must be fun at parties
I finally got around to reading this. And I love it! Devoured it in a day. I get it’s not your cup of tea, but I also read it knowing what time period it was written in, so the constant smoking didn’t phase me either.I can still enjoy things from the past that are well written and executed even if the world has evolved.
This review completely agrees with my own opinions on this book. I will read the next two books in the trilogy, but if they are similar to this one, I will consider it to have been a waste of my time.
When they came out they were great, so fantastic, afraid fantastic gets dulled by time.
“Religion is bad!” “Why is this book so boring????” You just answered your own question.
>blue hairOpinion discarded.
Just keep in mind that Asimov wrote these collected stories during the 40’s. The entire world was super focused on religion and politics.Also, at least half of this book was published (in short story form) before the atom bomb, around the time the very first female politician was elected, 10ish years before color tv and space travel, and 20 years before the women’s rights movement.
Asimov helped science fiction become a serious genre. He focused on the (now very relevant) issue of man vs. technology, which was not something heavily explored.
I agree that it is very dry. It is 98% dialogue. It reads more like a radio script than a story. But, the science fiction we enjoy today is what it is because of Asimov.
It helps to have some context.
