|
I recently re-read the Foundation trilogy for the first time since the early 80s. Reading it today, yes it felt dated, the characterization was less than I remembered, but the ideas and psychohistory were still there. And, that's what I remembered from the books. As others have mentioned, it was the ideas not the awesome prose or turn of phrase you read Asimov for.
If you think the Foundation series is badly written, please stay as far away as possible from the Lucky Starr series he wrote as "Paul French." They're a slight step up from Tom Corbett space cadet books. I've been reading a lot of 50s and 40s science fiction lately, in comparison Asimov is well beyond them in regards to his ideas, but his writing style is very much pulp SF. It's what was being read, and what he had to use to get his ideas out there.
|