The Jolly Good Reading Society discussion

please place your comments here :)

ok - thoughts so far. The writing style is a bit rough and as soon as you get into the story it jumps forward 50 years which is a bit disconcerting . Also - for a futuristic novel, it's not very futuristic - I mean surely that far in the future they wouldn't still be using nuclear power - they'd have dilithium crystals or something :o)
But despite all that I'm really enjoying it!

Lee wrote: "ok - thoughts so far. The writing style is a bit rough and as soon as you get into the story it jumps forward 50 years which is a bit disconcerting . Also - for a futuristic novel, it's not very fu..."

I think you should maybe bear in mind that it was originally published in 1951 so futuristic then was completely different to what we would imagine as futuristic now :)

I guess so, though nuclear power stations were on the horizon in 1951. Anyway - it's a very small niggle - I'll let Mr Asimov off!

Finished - I enjoyed this - though not sure if I'd want to read the rest of the series - I was losing interest a bit in the last section.
I don't think I've ever read a book not set on a prison, ship or other all male community that mentions the female of the species so rarely - there was only one (minor) female character and she was rather unpleasant. Sign of the times it was written in perhaps?

I hope I enjoy it more, I bought the trilogy! (I didn't like the paper in the paperback edition lol)

I'm only a few short chapters into this, and personally I like the writing style. Better than a lot of older science fiction I've read.

However I'm having some trouble with the premise. I'm totally cool with the fact that there's a galactic empire that's going to be destroyed in the not-too-distant future, and that the person pointing it out is being arrested for treason and exiled. That is all eminently practical.

The problem is the fact that someone has to be a mathematical supergenius to see that a planet entirely reliant on outside resources is a weak point in the empire. That is like an OBVIOUS FACT. The specificity of his predictions is impressive - but THAT is the math that isn't real.

Maybe it's because I'm a fantasy lady, but wouldn't it be easier to believe if he had some sort of mystic rather than a trumped-up scientific mystic who would probably assure you that magic is just science you don't understand?

I've just started reading Foundation and I'm thoroughly enjoying it! I think that having recently read The War of the Worlds and I am Legend has made me really appreciate older sci fi. I love the fact that it's all so naive and dated, it adds to the quaintness of it all :)

You've hit the nail on the head there Jen. What attracts me to older sci-fi is reading it in context. I regularly flick back to the copyright date to remind me when it was written.

Foundation, like most 'classic' sci-fi (and esp. Asimov) is a book that I'm going to have to mull over a lot. It's like a fine wine, I can't glug it back in one - got to take it slowly and think about it.

Stephen wrote: "You've hit the nail on the head there Jen. What attracts me to older sci-fi is reading it in context. I regularly flick back to the copyright date to remind me when it was written.

Foundation, lik..."

I compare reading classic sci-fi to Dickens. It can teach you so much about the era in which it was written. It's a valuable account of the thoughts at the time.

I don't know, I like classic sci-fi like Wells and the occasional Lovecraft, but there's just something about the 50s. I can't get my head there.

I can understand. For me it tends to be late 70s and early 80s that I can't enjoy as much - just can't put my finger on why...

I've just finished the book and omg I'm so happy that I bought the hardback trilogy! I can't wait to read the rest.
I thought it was a brilliant concept, very well written and it kept me interested until the very last word - at which point I said "wow" out loud.
Definitely a 5 star book :)