Over rated Authors-Isaac Asimov

[vugtitan]

[QUO

but as a Science fiction writer he just plain SUCKS!!.[/QUOTE]

Other science fiction writers come and go but Asimov Abides.


his books are always on the shelf in a bookshelf whereas other flavors of the month disappear after a few months.

Originally Posted by Tarana

Have you considered the fact that it is YOUR TASTES and not the author that is the problem here? NO AUTHOR, not matter how wonderful or popular, is going to appeal to everybody. You complain of 'flat characters', but honestly, I think he did enough characterization for his main characters.

I agree that it depends upon the reader's tastes. I disagree on the amount of characterization.

Asimov stories are mostly about what the characters are doing and there is a bit about why the characters are doing it, though the why usually fits some sort of archetype. Yet he doesn't really get into who the characters are. I think it is best to describe Asimov-the-storyteller as a writer of adventures and mysteries, with a light touch of exploring the issues that surround science/technology and society.

Now there is nothing wrong with that. Indeed, that's probably why I like Asimov. But Asimov is not compelling as literature. There are certainly SF writers who go deeper into character and plot development. There are certainly SF writers who develop their characters and plot in more nuanced way. Yet Asimov is certainly more entertaining and more optimistic than a lot of those other authors.

[DiapDealer]

There's no such thing as an overrated author.
There is only bitterness or acceptance of the fact that not everybody shares your personal criteria for excellence.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

There's no such thing as an overrated author.
There is only bitterness or acceptance of the fact that not everybody shares your personal criteria for excellence.

True. And certainly Asimov wrote widely on many different subjects. Not just Science Fiction stories and novels. In fact after the 1950's he wrote very little Science Fiction I believe. He also has the distinction of having coined the word "Robotics" by accident. As I understand it he thought he'd read the word somewhere or other but no one has yet found a mention of it before his 1st mention. Robot(s) yes, Robotics (no).

[Cyberman tM]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

Asimov stories are mostly about what the characters are doing and there is a bit about why the characters are doing it, though the why usually fits some sort of archetype. Yet he doesn't really get into who the characters are. I think it is best to describe Asimov-the-storyteller as a writer of adventures and mysteries, with a light touch of exploring the issues that surround science/technology and society.

Probably has been said before (didn't look through the tread, sorry), but there's a good short story from him where he actually pokes fun at his own writing style and his minimal character explanations: "Gold".
(A story about a writer who apparently wrote the middle part of "The gods themselves" and didn't really describe the aliens, making it very hard to create a movie out of it.)

Originally Posted by BWinmill

But Asimov is not compelling as literature.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean - he is read by many, and wrote books. Is that not literature?
Or are you referring to some "rules" of literature?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Cyberman tM

Probably has been said before (didn't look through the tread, sorry), but there's a good short story from him where he actually pokes fun at his own writing style and his minimal character explanations: "Gold".
(A story about a writer who apparently wrote the middle part of "The gods themselves" and didn't really describe the aliens, making it very hard to create a movie out of it.)

He also appears as a character in his murder mystery "Murder at the ABA", in which he pokes fun at himself as an author at a booksellers' convention.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by HarryT

He also appears as a character in his murder mystery "Murder at the ABA", in which he pokes fun at himself as an author at a booksellers' convention.

And in his "Black Widowers" stories mention is made of a friend of one of the members in several tales and it's probably Asimov himself who is being referred to though the person is never named.

[Quexos]

I don't think for a second that Asimov is overrated. I have read his entire Foundation cycle and I consider it a seminal work that stands out in the realm of science fiction. Well there would be so much to say about it but my point is made.

[Rizla]

I prefer his Elijah Baley Robot books to his Foundation series. The characterization is more interesting and the description of competing cultures more immersive. I find it's more about people than things (and robots are people, not things).

[Greg Anos]

Issac Asimov has always been a problematic writer for me. He cranked it out, threw it against the wall, (figuratively) and hoped it stuck...

The results varied from sublime to horrible. Asimov didn't care, he just wanted to write.

I've read most of his science fiction. I have only kept the parts that I personally rate highly and ignore the rest...

[imrod]

I think another complaint from the original dated comment is one that can be leveled against all older sci fi in general, not getting technology advancements right. Think flip phones on Star Trek--I can't find one now. Maybe Next Generation is a little closer, we will be wearing our communicators as jewelry (ear rings are a great option), but I think we will most probably have them implanted, probably sooner than we think. Something else to give us cancer or awaken the c cells within. Will google glasses work and change computing again like pads? Maybe very soon we'll be waving our arms around like Ender. Clarke overshot technology in 2001. We're not going to the moon anymore let alone Jupiter. The point being is you can't predict, and you will become cheesey. It's the big themes that endure. I personally think Asimov handled those well. And one final word about character development, if you as an author have developed a character beyond which Tom Cruise can't play him you've gone to far. just a joke.

[GreenMonkey]

Originally Posted by Rizla

I prefer his Elijah Baley Robot books to his Foundation series. The characterization is more interesting and the description of competing cultures more immersive. I find it's more about people than things (and robots are people, not things).

Ditto, always preferred the various robot novels myself. The mix of mystery and sci-fi is fun.

Foundation is good stuff though, the high level concepts about predicting future history using the psychology of masses of people was fascinating. You gotta look past the lack of computers (until the later books) and stuff like that though.

[HarryT]

It's a pity that so very little of his enormous output is available as ebooks. I imagine it must be the literary estate who's blocking it.

[HomeInMyShoes]

^Agreed on it being a pity. He and Bradbury need more, although there's been movement on Bradbury's front.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by HomeInMyShoes

^Agreed on it being a pity. He and Bradbury need more, although there's been movement on Bradbury's front.

There's an awful lot of Bradbury available at Amazon UK, but we don't even have "The Foundation Trilogy" from Asimov (I believe it is available in the US).