![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Reading Asimov...
Jun. 30th, 2014 04:26 pmA friend asks whether it might be better to read Asimov "in a 1950s frame of mind?"
Of course, I've read quite a bit of science fiction over the years, including works by Asimov. (In fact, if memory serves, I was able to badger my ninth-grade English teacher into letting me read Asimov's "Foundation" trilogy for my first term paper, which was no mean feat as science fiction was generally not considered worthy raw material for such lofty academic purposes, but I digress...) That said, it's been a while since I've read any of Asimov.
"A 1950s frame of mind" is an interesting phrase. I wonder if it refers to the feeling that one can get, from time to time when reading some of Asimov's older stuff—and not just Asimov's—of how dated the ideas and general setup of the stories might be? And what of stories that we now know are completely unrealistic. (Martians, anyone? Here, Heinlein's Stranger in a Strange Land comes to mind.)
There may be a whole list of reasons for such a feeling, but chief among those (I think) is the daunting task of writing omnisciently about the future.
If you had told me, while I was watching the moon landing in July 1969, that humans would have colonies on Mars within 20 years, I would have had little problem believing it. Tell me today that humans will return to the moon within ten years (and not for the purpose of building a base, but just to visit), and I'd say you're high on drugs. Sure, Clarke may have foreseen the communications satellite, Heinlein may have "invented" the waterbed and predicted pocket-sized portable telephones, and Asimov may have coined the term "robotics," but in other areas—nuclear power comes to mind, here—the science fiction of yesteryear was way off base.
Being off base like that becomes all the more apparent if, like Asimov, you focus more on the ideas than on the characters in your stories, but that's another rant.
Cheers...
Of course, I've read quite a bit of science fiction over the years, including works by Asimov. (In fact, if memory serves, I was able to badger my ninth-grade English teacher into letting me read Asimov's "Foundation" trilogy for my first term paper, which was no mean feat as science fiction was generally not considered worthy raw material for such lofty academic purposes, but I digress...) That said, it's been a while since I've read any of Asimov.
"A 1950s frame of mind" is an interesting phrase. I wonder if it refers to the feeling that one can get, from time to time when reading some of Asimov's older stuff—and not just Asimov's—of how dated the ideas and general setup of the stories might be? And what of stories that we now know are completely unrealistic. (Martians, anyone? Here, Heinlein's Stranger in a Strange Land comes to mind.)
There may be a whole list of reasons for such a feeling, but chief among those (I think) is the daunting task of writing omnisciently about the future.
If you had told me, while I was watching the moon landing in July 1969, that humans would have colonies on Mars within 20 years, I would have had little problem believing it. Tell me today that humans will return to the moon within ten years (and not for the purpose of building a base, but just to visit), and I'd say you're high on drugs. Sure, Clarke may have foreseen the communications satellite, Heinlein may have "invented" the waterbed and predicted pocket-sized portable telephones, and Asimov may have coined the term "robotics," but in other areas—nuclear power comes to mind, here—the science fiction of yesteryear was way off base.
Being off base like that becomes all the more apparent if, like Asimov, you focus more on the ideas than on the characters in your stories, but that's another rant.
Cheers...
