Hacker News Reader

Comment by Afforess | Hacker News Reader

I've read the books and watched the show as far as it's aired. I agree, but I almost think it's good that Asimov's vision is getting smoothed out a bit. After "second foundation" in the book series, the books go in a very different, unscientific "woo" direction. The end of the entire series is bizarre and controversial. I'm not all that convinced I want the original ending to be preserved - it wasn't that good anyway.

The powerful bit about foundation was always the ability to predict larger events better than smaller ones, as well as criticism of empire and overdependence on interconnectedness. In that, the TV show preserves the themes very well.

View on HN

> The powerful bit about foundation was always the ability to predict larger events better than smaller ones, as well as criticism of empire and overdependence on interconnectedness. In that, the TV show preserves the themes very well.

I can't see how you'd think this, with respect to the show. Seldon literally tells another character that that character's decision (on that day, apparently) will shape the fate of the galaxy. It loses the plot about psychohistory being about prediction of populations and turns it into predictions about individuals (and that's just the most overt example). Maybe they'll find a way to redeem it by the end of the first season, but so far several characters are presented as Chosen Ones, selected by Seldon to get through a specific crisis (or crises).

"presented as Chosen Ones" -- from the Goyer AMA, he said the show explores when believe think they are Chosen Ones, but that there are no Chosen Ones.

In fact, the whole thing about Salvor believing she's a Chosen One is falling apart, as every one of her schemes (involving violence as well) are falling apart.. and it seems like she's where Gaal was supposed to be, therefore she's being mistaken as the leader that Gaal was supposed to be, and things are going off the rails as a result...

What's sad is it took an AMA to fully understand this, rather than being understood via watching the show, at least in the first 7 episodes...

I'll grant you, Salvor is definitely turning into a false Chosen One (also, this would be the first Seldon Crisis which they weren't even supposed to know of until after the first one, and she's already name dropped the term). She's got an idiot ball grafted onto her somewhere that she just can't shed.

However, Seldon, to Raych, tells him that his decision with respect to Gaal will determine the fate of the galaxy. That's way too much weight for Seldon to place on one person in the context of the series, especially at this point unless he already knows about people like The Mule (which would be unfortunate, that'd be something best explored as it throws a wrench in your plans, not from the beginning of the series).

I agree, it was a stark reversal from "The Plan does not account for the actions of any one individual" but was just revealed that it somehow hinged on the actions of...one individual. I think they fell into a trap with that and hope that they don't dig that hole any deeper. I'm a very casual viewer and even I picked up on that.

Perhaps the goal was to "fix the holes in the plan" rather than "an individual will save the day with heroic actions".

3 more episodes till we find out if they went that route or really butchered the novels' premise..

But the whole point of Psychohistory (as it’s presented in the books) is that there aren’t any “Chosen Ones” at all. Sure Salvor isn’t one, but Gaal isn’t either; no one is. That’s the entire point.

Under Psychohistory, it shouldn’t matter who the leader is; what matters is the forces on the population as a whole and that populations respond to those forces in predictable ways. Individual leaders come and go and really don’t matter very much on the big-scale stuff that Psycho-History is making predictions about.

It’s the whole basis of the first several books that this “large forces acting across whole populations” model is the ‘true’ way that civilisation-scale history works and why the future history is so predictable (before stuff starts going a bit off the rails later on in ways that I’m not going to spoil).

To me, if you’re not using that concept as the bedrock of the story you’re telling, then you’re not telling a Foundation story. (It might be a quite good science fiction story of course, just not Foundation)

Just like in the books, one person close to Hari went to the Foundation to nudge it in the right direction at the start, I'm assuming that this is the role Gaal was to play, but didn't get a chance to do..

Either way, in the absolute this is correct that this isn't following the book's model, but, they aren't completely invalidating it. I hope

Disclaimer: though I think they _would_ be something I’d enjoy, I’ve for some reason never read the books.

I’m pretty sure Seldon being wrong about the smaller things is going to be a recurring thing in the series. People just _think_ he can predict them. He seems to too, despite knowing rationally that he cannot (he’s stated that numerous times).

The theme of the Seldon plot seems to be: is Seldon predicting things, or causing them? Are his actions choices that are driving events, is he being forced into his role by fate (or math), or is everything he does irrelevant? Is the very fact that he, and we, are confused about this proof that the questions don’t even make sense? Can some of all these contradicting things be true at the same time?

Might it be true that he is _both_ predicting events and driving them? Wouldn’t that mean that one of these ideas is false?

All of those themes are in the books, it's why he sets the Foundation up to make an encyclopedia. They aren't supposed to know, because (too much) knowledge of the future leads to potentially massive change (a variation on the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle). So they can't know their real purpose (or one of their purposes) without changing the results.

And the series subverts that from the start, why? What does it do to make it better?

That last question is the key for me. A show or movie is never the same as the book (or very rarely). There are a lot of things that can or should be changed for adaptation. But why would you subvert one of the key themes that defined the book series?

I only read "Foundation and Earth" before the show began (that's what was on hand where I was, I had little choice, as much as I hate starting in the middle of a series), and that book is VERY different from what I'm reading in the first book and what's in the TV series, and would indeed make for a pretty interesting show or at least a movie.

It's literally about three people's journey across the cosmos to discover the origin of humanity and really, very little of the original story re: Seldon comes into it. It makes me wonder what happens in between.

That's like starting Game of Thrones at Season 7.

It's not just "starting in the middle of a series", it's starting almost at the end...after the best part of the story is well in the rear-view mirror.

IIRC, Foundation and Earth not only benefits from reading all of the Foundation books that came prior, but also all of Asimov's Robot books.

Fair point, I wasn't being precise in my language. I look forward to finishing the books before it at any rate. For what it's worth, I'm sure it does benefit from reading them first but you can definitely piece together the major plot points established in the preceding novels from the dialogue in the book, but they are certainly enhanced by knowing the full background.

In between there's a "Second Foundation" which is similar and would make a great TV show, but I think that ship has sailed with this mediocre show.

That's probably the worst book in the series.

Maybe relatively, but it was what was on-hand (in jail) and by itself it was more than interesting enough to get me to begin reading the series in order when I got the chance.

Did he do what he did for the Rama series and hand it off to a buddy to ghost write for him?

I wish I'd know he had done that, because I wouldn't have wasted any time reading the garbage that was the sequels.

That was Clark, not Asimov. But on the topic of Rama, what a disappointing conclusion those sequels produced. I'm not sure which was worse, the Rama sequels or Crystal Skull. Either way, best to pretend they don't exist when recommending Rendezvous with Rama to people.

I'm not sure I've ever been more disappointed in a book than reading the Rama sequels.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com