This was common practice in the 1950’s as SF became marketable in hardback rather than just in those old pulp magazines. Foundation is the first four of these already-published-though-revised stories, with an additional section, The Psychohistorians, written to begin the novel and set out the tale. Campbell’s Astounding Science Fiction Magazine. Instead it was rather a series of nine stories and novellas, mostly published in sections between 19 and mainly in John W. However this is the first of a number of contradictions, for even in its original trilogy novel format, published 1951-53, it was not really a trilogy. For many years, and certainly when I first read it, Foundation was the first book in ‘ The Foundation Trilogy”, and so it was until Asimov added extra novels in the 1980’s and 90’s.
I will try and explain why in this review.įirst though, a degree of context. And yet, despite all of its faults, I still find it a ‘go-to read’. Io9, for example, in July 2015 put it on a list of Books That You Pretend to Have Read But Haven’t) Some have been quite blunt about its failings. (Others have said so, often and frequently. I must say though that 40+ years on, there’s a lot I can see wrong with it. So, I guess that this may be a word of caution. So much so that on the wall above where I’m typing this I have a signed print of the iconic Chris Foss cover that was on my Dad’s paperback covers (see below).
It is one of the first books that I borrowed from my Dad’s bookshelf in the 1970’s and was a formative influence in generating my lifelong love of SF.
I consider myself very lucky to own a signed copy, at considerable expense, admittedly. Often generally regarded as ‘one of the best’*, if not one of the most important SF novels of all time, I personally have reread this one – well, a few times. For me, returning to this novel is like spending time with an old friend.
0 kommentar(er)
