Foundation

[Doctor Phibes]

@george-k said in Foundation:

@doctor-phibes said in Foundation:

Oh flipping heck, it's on Apple TV, what a PITA. I really can't justify another subscription.

I think you can get a free 6-month trial.

I'll need to time that carefully

[George K]

@doctor-phibes I was wrong.

It's only 7 day free trial. But if you get a Mac purchase a qualifying Apple device, you get one year - free.

[George K]

September 24th.

Link to video

[Mik]

That's a must, although I am skeptical they can do the story justice. Gosh, it's been over 40 years since I read the trilogy and I still remember it.

[George K]

I re-read it about 5 years ago.

This makes me want to revisit.

The interesting question is this: Should I read in order of publication, or in order of the story?

Having read through Alastair Reynolds' "Revelation Space" universe this summer in order of story, I think that might be a better option.

Chronological:

Prelude to Foundation (1988)
Forward the Foundation (1993)
Foundation (1951)
Foundation and Empire (1952)
Second Foundation (1953)
Foundation's Edge (1982)
Foundation and Earth (1986)

[Doctor Phibes]

@george-k said in Foundation:

The interesting question is this: Should I read in order of publication, or in order of the story?

I would always read in order of publication. There's a few gotcha's in there - particularly the tie-in with R. Daneel from the robot stories, which clearly Asimov hadn't thought about when he started the books.

[George K]

@doctor-phibes said in Foundation:

I would always read in order of publication.

Yeah, I get it.

Speaking from my "Revelation Space" experience, however, I'd disagree. There are SO many ideas that are talked about in the first-published books that make no sense, other than in a vague deus ex machina sense.
Reading them in chronological order was a better experience for me.

[Doctor Phibes]

@george-k said in Foundation:

Speaking from my "Revelation Space" experience, however, I'd disagree. There are SO many ideas that are talked about in the first-published books that make no sense, other than in a vague deus ex machina sense.
Reading them in chronological order was a better experience for me.

Alastair Reynolds isn't Isaac Asimov. I suspect he put a lot more planning into the series. Foundation was supposed to be a trilogy, not the ever expanding series it became.

[George K]

@doctor-phibes said in Foundation:

Alastair Reynolds isn't Isaac Asimov.

Indeed. Very different.

But I love Reynolds.

Have you read his stuff?

[Doctor Phibes]

@george-k said in Foundation:

@doctor-phibes said in Foundation:

Alastair Reynolds isn't Isaac Asimov.

Indeed. Very different.

But I love Reynolds.

Have you read his stuff?

No, but he's on my to-do list. I'm working my way through the Expanse series at the moment, rather slowly I'm afraid.

[George K]

First two episodes aired last night. Has anyone watched?

[Aqua Letifer]

@george-k said in Foundation:

First two episodes aired last night. Has anyone watched?

Watching tonight.

[Mik]

Didn’t know. Will queue it up.

[George K]

Thoughts?

I'm finding it, though engaging, "different." High production values, beautifully filmed.

But...

It just doesn't FEEL like Asimov's book(s). The series takes the concept of psychohistory and uses that as a springboard to tell a somewhat related story.

[Mik]

Haven't watched yet. Maybe queue it up tonight.

[LuFins Dad]

This is Apple TV? I will have to watch it on my phone...

[Mik]

Just queue it up on your computer and connect it to tv by HDMI.

[bachophile]

I’m first half hour into the first episode.

Please tell me it gets better.

Seems too contrived. Almost cartoonish.

[Mik]

That’s a shame. One of the best things about the books was the thematic maturity.

[George K]

@bachophile said in Foundation:

Please tell me it gets better.

I'd never lie to you, friend.