Amph Questions about Foundation

I have some questions about the Foundation series for you Foundation fans out there. I have read two of the books so far: Preludes and Foundations. Beyond what I have read in these two books, I know very little about the series. What I am wondering in the following:

What order were the books written in?
What order do they take place in? (Which I realize is different than the order written. I know Foundations, Empire and Founation and Second Foundation make up the original trilogy, but beyond that?)
In your opinion, how good is the Empire series and how well does it fit into Foundation series?
What is the story behind the "expanded" Foundation series (the books written after IA's death)?

 

Let's see if I can help...

The books were published in the following order:

Foundation
Foundation and Empire
Second Foundation

Foundation's Edge
Foundation and Earth

Prelude to Foundation
Forward the Foundation

The last two are the prequels, but I think it's best to read the prequels after the original stories, or else you'll lose the surprise of who and what the Second Foundationers really are. (Just like I'd rather even new viewers would watch the OT before the PT when they first watch Star Wars.)

I haven't read that much of the Empire series, apart from a few short stories.

The Second Foundation trilogy was commissioned by IA's estate after his death. I. e. his heirs wanted to cash in on his successful stories, and allowed Greg Bear (Foundation and Chaos), Gregory Benford (Foundation's Fear) and David Brin (Foundation's Triumph) to write in Asimov's world. I haven't read the books myself, so I can't compare them to Asimov, but I've read other books by Greg Bear and he at least is a pretty decent writer.

 

Foundation and Earth? Hadn't heard of that one.

I actually intended to read the prequels first as an experiment. I had come to the opinion that prequels didn't work because of SW, Dune, B5 and Star Trek (I enjoyed most of these prequels, but found that they didn't "fit" naturally as starting chapters to the respective series). To test this theory, I wanted to find a popular sci-fi series with prequels that I hadn't read and knew only a little about. Thus, the Foundation. The problem was I didn't know Foward the Foundation was a prequel, so I only read preludes and thus ruined my experiment. I will say that Prelude and Foundation really don't fit well together. Maybe with the other books how those two fit will make more sense.

 

Even with prequels, I've found that it's usually better to read the stories in the order they were written, not the order they take place in the universe the author creates. That way, if there are any inconsistencies you can take them into account, or ignore the attempted retconning as you wish. For me as a woman, the most notable difference between the original Foundation trilogy and the later books and prequels is the presence of strong women in the latter. So even though the originals were better written, the later books are more balanced, IMO.

 

So far I would have to agree with your assessment of prequels.

 

arwen has the order of the books correct.

I mostly enjoyed the Empire series (what little I've gotten my hands on) but it doesn't have all that stong ties into the Foundation series. The Robot series on the other hand is directly linked into Foundation, although the last two of the Robot novels did drag a little bit.

The Second Foundation trilogy (lovely play on words that is) was a series I enjoyed because it was more in depth into the events leading up to the start of "Foundation" than "Forward the Foundation" was. I don't want to ruin some of the things that appear so I won't go into detail, but "Forward the Foundation" is the weakest of the entire series, and I think is a by-product of when it was written (just before Asimov died) in that it is more self-indulgent and lighter (I'd even venture into saying that some parts are downright silly) than any of the others.

 

Foundation's a great book - wonderful premise, although I haven't read any of the others.

 

Hmmmm, I'll probably skip Foundation Forward, then. Preludes was good, but not great. If FF isn't an improvement, I'd rather not read it.

So the second trilogy is just a setup to Founations, then? How well does it tie in? Any continuity problems?


The Robot series on the other hand is directly linked into Foundation

I'd heard this was done only in revisionism, and that originally they didn't tie together at all until he wrote the last couple of Foundation books. Not true?

 

No, it's true.

Originally, Asimov had put a lot of emphasis on keeping them separate, because (as he explained in his biographies) early on he was scared of getting "bored" of one of the "universes" so he wanted to keep them separate so he'd always have something to fall back on. Eventually, though, it made sense to him to bring them together.

So yeah, it was revisionism. But it was entierly his decision to do so, and I think it works nicely. It was something of a surprise for me to discover the link, but since you already know about it, I guess that options out the window. You should still go ahead and read Edge and Earth though. My favorite has always been Second Foundation.

As for the prequels by other authors, I don't think much of them. Admittedly, my experience was colored by the Dune prequels, where Herbert's own son decided to destroy his father's legacy with a bunch of vomitously bad books. But while I haven't read the "other" Foundation series, I have heard some pretty ominous things that make me feel my thinking is jusitified. For instance, someone once told me there was sex in those novels--which, if you know Asimov, is something that never happened. So it seemed to me they were, in a lot of ways, stepping outside the spirit of his works (that's not the only example, just one I pulled at random).

 

Yeah, it was retconned, but it was Asimov that did it, and in such a way as to make it not jar all that badly.


Yes, there are a few things in the "Second Foundation" trilogy that might not have exactly appeared in any of Asimov's previous books, but I don't think that it takes away from the story or themes at all. You can see a slightly more liberalness with his later books even though it never makes it that far. I'm guessing that the choice to read them and then whether you like them is going to be due in part to whether you are more interested in the story itself or the treatment of the original material.

Stryphe, there aren't any continuity problems at all with Asimov's writing as they've taken great care to weave it all around that. It builds upon some of the early beginnings of Seldon's theories and then goes on to the way in which both he was treated by the world for what he was proposing and how the choices he and those close to him affected the events that lead to the opening scene of "Foundation".

 

Do any of the prequels explain how Seldon went from someone under Hummin's protection to being hounded by the government into a kind of exile?


You should still go ahead and read Edge and Earth though. My favorite has always been Second Foundation.

Yeah, I'm planning on reading those, but at this stage, not sure if I'll read Forward or the other author's works.

 

it's actually one narrative all the way through from I Robot to Foundation and Earth.
I'm trying to remeber the bit between I Robot and the empire series (it's three iirc scifi detective novels, very good very worthwhile), but alot of the stuff in Foundation and Earth referrs to that (even bringing back the robot sidekick from said series)

grrrrr.... go check an Asimov fanpage, my copeis have been in storage for years, otherwise I would give you a full list in order. sorry I can't be more help.

 

Do any of the prequels explain how Seldon went from someone under Hummin's protection to being hounded by the government into a kind of exile?

In a word, yes. The prequels tell the story starting when Hari Seldon was a young nobody to his death, and continues with the setup of the Foundation(s).

 

Essentially all of the stuff that lead to Seldon becoming a pariah is explained on "Forward the Foundation" as an overview style (it is a slight return to the episodic nature that the original trilogy was) with the "Second Foundation" novels delving deeper into the areas between the sections.