Enver Hoxha
13th April 2004, 21:31
I read the three original books (that is Foundation, Foundation and Empire and Second Foundation) about a month or so ago and what can I say.
Amazing.
In terms of a story with brilliant characters, plot twists and above all covering a epic scope in time you will struggle to find one that betters this. From a Communists perspective it has both positives and negatives. For example Hari Seldon's theory could easily fit into what your rather naive sociology teacher would call 'Marxist'. It is great that Seldon is able to see why the original Empire will fall, it's very complicated but simply put it's doomed to fall because it's society cant continue to function the way it is. Corruption, running out of traditional rescoures and such.
Seldon see's all this in a similar way to how a Communist would explain how the current status quo on Earth is doomed to collapse. Imperialism wont be able to continue on Earth forever simply because it's a system which in the end will destroy itself. Like a Communist Seldon see's all this through the actions of the masses, sadly contray to later on in the book it's clear that the original Empire is doomed to fall not through any individual actions such as foolish Emperor's, assasins or coups but because of the collective action of the masses.
What the members of the Foundation say is look we know it's going to collapse and it's going to be a bad time when it does but we can prepare now in order to shorten and limit the bad time and prepare for the future long term. That's very positive.
Now this isn't to say that Seldon's theory should somehow be taken to the real world. It's far to simplistic but it certainly does have merits to it which a brain far more capable in that sought of thing than mine might well be able to to do a similar thing with here on Earth today.
It's also encouranging to see the contrast between the first foundation and the Empire and various societies occupying the space there in. In the long term the first foundation is able to make use of rescourses and energies in a way the Empire even at it's height could never dream of. Another example is in the very beggining of the first foundation, when it is surrounded by break away reactionay Monarch's and warlords. The foundation is able to first fool them into thinking they are more advanced technology than they are and later on able to do this through actually being more advanced. The reactionaries only care about the short term goal, i.e getting hold of a old Imperial cruiser (atomic armed warship) much in the same way the U$ Imperialists care to grab the oil now.
Both fail to realise that that particular energy source is becoming rare, the foundation on the other hand says at the time look we can work and rebuild this Imperial crusier for you and even give it to you without asking for anything in return. In the short term it's the reactionary Monarch that gets the crusier and increases his power. But it is the Foundation which becomes a society which eventually takes on the Empire with rescourses and energy's far surpassing one cruiser.
There are many other positive elements to foundation but onto the negatives. It's a shame that a society so far into the future with such magnificent technology is stuck in the remnants of Feudalism. Lenin I believe did once observe that societies are capable of taking huge strides back socially and Engels I think once said the oppression of peasants in Europe was worse in the 18th Century than in the 13th and 14th centurys. But to really have a reactionary Emperor ruling a entire galaxy from one planet. Yes the technology goes some part to allowing this but if the Tsar couldn't manage one sixth of the Earth in 1914 it seems difficult.
Which is why it's good that Seldon can see that this is doomed to collapse no matter how the Empire may try to stop it. It simply cant go on. Which brings me to what sought of a society the First Foundation is. There are numerous references a few hundred years into it of a 'Trade-Federation' and this is how the Foundation expands, through the influence of traders and technology. Clearly more advanced and democratic (there are councils and parliaments and a great deal of the first period of the foundation is affected by the 'mob-rule') than the Empire.
That's why it's good to see that part of the reason the Foundation is able to defeat local monarchs and eventually the Empire itself is that it represents a higher form of society. Reading it one can easily see a analogy between five hundred years of Capitalism eventually overthrowing Feudalism and how the Foundation spreads and defeats the Empire.
Also when the Mule comes along it's positive that Asimov highlights the problems of both the Foundation and Seldon's preidictions and theories. The Foundation becomes corrupt and decadent in much the same way that it is now the bourgesie who oppress the world when at one time they were fighting for freedom and liberty against tyranny. One particular sentence I liked was that highlighting the work of a particular resistance fighter after the Mule had taken over, he is a worker in the factories working for precisly the same bosses who owned the factories before the Mule took control.
Seldon is breifly able to touch upon the fact that the first foundation by that stage would of become a corrupt heavy handed society (it's rulers not listening to people he says) but is not able to take into account the appearence of the Mule. This is where is whole theory suffers.
Yes ofcourse it is true that societies are above all shaped by the masses and their collective will and actions. But do not the actions of individuals make a difference? A very difficult question both for a Communist and in the book where it is raised many times. Are we to say that killing Hitler in 1930 would of made no difference? I believe it would of greatly changed the world (quite obvious) but then again looking at it it was clear that German Imperialism was at one stage or another ready for another war with it's rivals. Sure it would of been drasticly different but probably regonisable to what someone from our world could call 'A Second World War'.
In a similar way it's how one resistance fighter on his homeworld assasinates a particularly reactionary and sadistic warlord. In the end it makes no real difference. History seems to be inevitable no matter all the twists and turns you throw into it. For example I could say as a Marxist that a world Communist utopia is inevitable regardless of whether the Nazi holocaust of the Jews happened.
But how does Seldon's theory stand up to the future of the Foundation itself. Many of the crises the Foundation faces are solved by the actions of individuals, particularly when fighting the Empire and pacifing the Mule. But on the other hand there are examples of the crises being solved by being dependent on the actions of the masses.
Anyway sorry for being very dogmatic about this book. But after reading it you may know why. If not just enjoy it for a brilliant read.
Amazing.
In terms of a story with brilliant characters, plot twists and above all covering a epic scope in time you will struggle to find one that betters this. From a Communists perspective it has both positives and negatives. For example Hari Seldon's theory could easily fit into what your rather naive sociology teacher would call 'Marxist'. It is great that Seldon is able to see why the original Empire will fall, it's very complicated but simply put it's doomed to fall because it's society cant continue to function the way it is. Corruption, running out of traditional rescoures and such.
Seldon see's all this in a similar way to how a Communist would explain how the current status quo on Earth is doomed to collapse. Imperialism wont be able to continue on Earth forever simply because it's a system which in the end will destroy itself. Like a Communist Seldon see's all this through the actions of the masses, sadly contray to later on in the book it's clear that the original Empire is doomed to fall not through any individual actions such as foolish Emperor's, assasins or coups but because of the collective action of the masses.
What the members of the Foundation say is look we know it's going to collapse and it's going to be a bad time when it does but we can prepare now in order to shorten and limit the bad time and prepare for the future long term. That's very positive.
Now this isn't to say that Seldon's theory should somehow be taken to the real world. It's far to simplistic but it certainly does have merits to it which a brain far more capable in that sought of thing than mine might well be able to to do a similar thing with here on Earth today.
It's also encouranging to see the contrast between the first foundation and the Empire and various societies occupying the space there in. In the long term the first foundation is able to make use of rescourses and energies in a way the Empire even at it's height could never dream of. Another example is in the very beggining of the first foundation, when it is surrounded by break away reactionay Monarch's and warlords. The foundation is able to first fool them into thinking they are more advanced technology than they are and later on able to do this through actually being more advanced. The reactionaries only care about the short term goal, i.e getting hold of a old Imperial cruiser (atomic armed warship) much in the same way the U$ Imperialists care to grab the oil now.
Both fail to realise that that particular energy source is becoming rare, the foundation on the other hand says at the time look we can work and rebuild this Imperial crusier for you and even give it to you without asking for anything in return. In the short term it's the reactionary Monarch that gets the crusier and increases his power. But it is the Foundation which becomes a society which eventually takes on the Empire with rescourses and energy's far surpassing one cruiser.
There are many other positive elements to foundation but onto the negatives. It's a shame that a society so far into the future with such magnificent technology is stuck in the remnants of Feudalism. Lenin I believe did once observe that societies are capable of taking huge strides back socially and Engels I think once said the oppression of peasants in Europe was worse in the 18th Century than in the 13th and 14th centurys. But to really have a reactionary Emperor ruling a entire galaxy from one planet. Yes the technology goes some part to allowing this but if the Tsar couldn't manage one sixth of the Earth in 1914 it seems difficult.
Which is why it's good that Seldon can see that this is doomed to collapse no matter how the Empire may try to stop it. It simply cant go on. Which brings me to what sought of a society the First Foundation is. There are numerous references a few hundred years into it of a 'Trade-Federation' and this is how the Foundation expands, through the influence of traders and technology. Clearly more advanced and democratic (there are councils and parliaments and a great deal of the first period of the foundation is affected by the 'mob-rule') than the Empire.
That's why it's good to see that part of the reason the Foundation is able to defeat local monarchs and eventually the Empire itself is that it represents a higher form of society. Reading it one can easily see a analogy between five hundred years of Capitalism eventually overthrowing Feudalism and how the Foundation spreads and defeats the Empire.
Also when the Mule comes along it's positive that Asimov highlights the problems of both the Foundation and Seldon's preidictions and theories. The Foundation becomes corrupt and decadent in much the same way that it is now the bourgesie who oppress the world when at one time they were fighting for freedom and liberty against tyranny. One particular sentence I liked was that highlighting the work of a particular resistance fighter after the Mule had taken over, he is a worker in the factories working for precisly the same bosses who owned the factories before the Mule took control.
Seldon is breifly able to touch upon the fact that the first foundation by that stage would of become a corrupt heavy handed society (it's rulers not listening to people he says) but is not able to take into account the appearence of the Mule. This is where is whole theory suffers.
Yes ofcourse it is true that societies are above all shaped by the masses and their collective will and actions. But do not the actions of individuals make a difference? A very difficult question both for a Communist and in the book where it is raised many times. Are we to say that killing Hitler in 1930 would of made no difference? I believe it would of greatly changed the world (quite obvious) but then again looking at it it was clear that German Imperialism was at one stage or another ready for another war with it's rivals. Sure it would of been drasticly different but probably regonisable to what someone from our world could call 'A Second World War'.
In a similar way it's how one resistance fighter on his homeworld assasinates a particularly reactionary and sadistic warlord. In the end it makes no real difference. History seems to be inevitable no matter all the twists and turns you throw into it. For example I could say as a Marxist that a world Communist utopia is inevitable regardless of whether the Nazi holocaust of the Jews happened.
But how does Seldon's theory stand up to the future of the Foundation itself. Many of the crises the Foundation faces are solved by the actions of individuals, particularly when fighting the Empire and pacifing the Mule. But on the other hand there are examples of the crises being solved by being dependent on the actions of the masses.
Anyway sorry for being very dogmatic about this book. But after reading it you may know why. If not just enjoy it for a brilliant read.