Tolkien and Asimov

[drigel]

Read Asimov as a teen and again as an adult. Though I think that he is 'one of the greats,' I now see Asimov's stories, especially the Foundation series, as simplistic. Don't see Tolkien's works like that, and am not sure if it's due to the writing, content, or that one is science fiction in the future and the other is fantasy in the past. Asimov's stories always are pasteurized, and everything just seems to work out just so in the end. Does anyone know of an example of a Boromir-like character death in the Foundation series?

Good points. I suppose the Mule would = Sauron/Morgoth eh? Paseurized is a good term to use. Makes for less emotional dramatic reading I suppose (esp when comparing to current works of SF), but I just wonder if we will ever make it to that Asimov universe with all that conflict, drama and angst - that stuff usually gets in the way of progress, doesnt it?

I do like the Mandopsycho-history thing ..

[alatar]

Originally Posted by drigel

Makes for less emotional dramatic reading I suppose (esp when comparing to current works of SF), but I just wonder if we will ever make it to that Asimov universe with all that conflict, drama and angst - that stuff usually gets in the way of progress, doesnt it?

Not sure what you mean - having my brain realigned, and so am using a 'loaner' today.

Remember somewhere in the Foundation trilogy there was the girl who had to 'speak' a paper into existence, and just wasn't that the biggest issue? Yikes! Almost as bad as having 200,000 orcs of your doorstep.

Think that it's funny that we (almost) have the speak-write technology today, though I have yet to use it effectively ("I said 'Balrog' not 'ball rug,' not 'bail rock' you insipid machine..."). What might be odd is that Asimov was extrapolating into the future and Tolkien into the past, and I find it easier to 'buy' Tolkien's world than the one that Asimov presumes. I don't think that the reason is the direction of time nor the genre (spaceships vs horses) but due to the inherent abilities of the authors. I can feel Tolkien's world but feel like I'm getting the 'student reader' (Does anyone remember the publication, "Boy's Life?" If so, please substitute.) version of the future from Asimov.

Again he's a great author, yet I think that the king of science fiction is Frank Herbert (though his son's works show that an apple can fall way, WAY far from the tree...).

[littlemanpoet]

I find myself quite enlightened by the various responses so far.

I guess the particular thing I'm curious about is whether reading Asimov's science fiction helped Tolkien along toward a rejection of the Flat Earth mythology for Arda. I suppose there's no way to answer that, but it appears that the contemporaneity of enjoying Asimov and changing his mind toward a Round Earth mythology supports the plausibility of it.

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

Seems to me that there's one very definite similarity insofar as each author sought to create a fictional race of beings (Elves and Robots) which they saw as the idealised (but not necessarily ideal) form of humanity.

Not people-improved but people-as-they-ought-to-be in their fullest and most human(e) state.

What's neat is how alike Elves and (the very advanced) Robots are: immortal, enigmatic, withdrawn, absolutely committed to abstract ideals that are really rules engraved in the mists of time by their creators, helpers to humanity but not necessarily all that helpful (I am tempted to say "perilous"), and -- as Bethberry has noddingly indicated in her brief note -- both are absolutely anathema to change. They don't like it, they don't want it, they do everything they can to arrest it.

[drigel]

A thought did occur to me on influences. I have always thought that the idea Asimov promoted about how we as a species went forth into the galaxy to colonize and develop civilizations to the point that our planet of origin became at first a memory, then a myth, then forgotten and totally lost in obscurity does seem to remind me of something... ... ....

I wonder if the Professor had a slight influence on the Doctor's premise, and how he developed that in the Foundation novels.

Of course, that idea begins with the earth becoming totally uninhabitable because of a nuclear war (there was a robotic twist that Ive forgotton - intentionally made that way or something..?). But, it also draws on the theme of Hope for mankind as well.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by drigel

A thought did occur to me on influences. I have always thought that the idea Asimov promoted about how we as a species went forth into the galaxy to colonize and develop civilizations to the point that our planet of origin became at first a memory, then a myth, then forgotten and totally lost in obscurity does seem to remind me of something...

Another difference that I found between the two authors is that it seems (at least to me) that you can 'backtrack' the history of Earth in Tolkien's world more readily than in Asimov's. One frustration with the Foundation series is that we never get to understand what really happened to Earth (if memory serves) whereas in the Silmarillion I can see what happened, and can work out how we got to here.

Was it that Tolkien decided earlier on the fate of the world whereas Asimov wrote some cool stories then had to deal with 'loose ends,' figuring out and filling in later what 'happened' in the mythology of Earth?

[Aiwendil]

Alatar wrote:

One frustration with the Foundation series is that we never get to understand what really happened to Earth (if memory serves) whereas in the Silmarillion I can see what happened, and can work out how we got to here.

Actually, we do - I believe the explanation is partially revealed at the end of Foundation and Earth and is actually shown in Robots and Empire, the last book in the Robot series.

But I do think you may have a point - Asimov's first purpose was not world-building. At least, not in the same sense as Tolkien. I'd say that Asimov's interest was primarily in society whereas Tolkien's was in history.