Slashdot Mirror
Asimov Estate Authorizes New I, Robot Books
daria42 writes "In a move guaranteed to annoy long-term science fiction fans, the estate of legendary science fiction author Isaac Asimov, who passed away in 1992, has authorized a trilogy of sequels to his beloved I, Robot short story series, to be written by relatively unknown fantasy author Mickey Zucker Reichert. The move is already garnering opposition online. 'Isaac Asimov died forty years after they were first written. If he had wanted to follow them up, he would have. The author's intentions need to be respected here,' writes sci-fi/fantasy book site Keeping the Door."
Probably too late for that. Sigh :(
If firefighters fight fire, and crimefighters fight crime, what do freedom fighters fight? - George Carlin
I think its the same thing as a "hall of famer" coming back to play and people thing hes going to ruin his legacy. Why don't we give this guy a chance?
The 0th law is thou shalt sell out and cash in big.
It overrides the other 3 laws ;-)
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
... this is just _wrong_!
Generally, bash is superior to python in those environments where python is not installed.
Especially, hope that they are not as spotty in quality as the post Frank Herbert Dune sequels.
If you dont like the books, dont f**king read them.
If they dont fit into your world of I, Robot books then dont include them.
Wikipedia mentions some other work in the Asimoviverse; of course, Bear, Benford and Brin are all decently well-known scifi authors.
The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
What kind of elitist crap is that? I love Asimov's books, I have read most of them and they probably helped shape me in a way. I say that if someone wants to have a go at some sequels the go right a head. I don't think that they will be even comparable but I might enjoy them anyway. The worst thing that can happen is that they are not worth reading.
The author's intentions need to be respected here.
The author no longer exists, and therefore cannot possibly have intentions.
That said, this kind of posthumous sequel is almost always a disaster, but that's only a problem for the people who read them. If the idea bugs you at all, rest assured that you are bothered infinitely more than the original author is.
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
Asimov's robot stories were pretty groundbreaking when they were written, but are now thoroughly dated. The dude didn't know jack about AI. He's hardly to blame, since the discipline was in its infancy. But why do we need more stories full of hand-waving about "positronic brains" and "laws" that are so vague as to be meaningless?
I just tried to read the recent additions to Larry Niven's Known Space canon, and I wish I hadn't. Niven and his collaborator (a guy named Lerner, who I suspect did most of the actual writing) try to deal with some of the logic holes in the original stories, but mainly manage to create new ones.
Meanwhile Fred Astaire is dancing with a vacuum cleaner.
Hey, I know money makes the world go round. But can we at least spin it with a little dignity?
Is this "oh oh" thing some sort of new troll-meme?
At this point, I'll bet that there have been more Sherlock Holmes stories written by "Holmesians" than were ever written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle himself. And hardly anyone outside of a tiny circle of fandom knows any of them, and none of them have tarnished the reputation of the originals.
I suspect there are many people reading this who haven't even heard of The Seven-Per-Cent Solution, a 1974 ersatz "Sherlock Holmes" novel. It was a bestseller at the time, was adapted into a movie--and, I'm pretty sure, is well on the way to being forgotten.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
It seems that somebody's children feel their private personalized yachts aren't big enough.
mod parent up.
No one has to read them, if they don't want to. It's a choice. If you have a problem with this, just ignore the books. One might as well complain about all the modern interpretations of Grimm fairy tales.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Mickey Zucker Reichert may seem a relative unknown but his Renshai novels were excellent and get my full read recommendation. This seems to be a good fit. Can it be worse than the big screen adaption (read bastardization) of I, robot ? That was so bad I actually cannot recall more than a few bits from the Will "Fresh Putz" Smith movie. My subconcious seems to have stepped in and protected my concious mind from suffering any further damage by hiding the trauma.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
If it worked for Jordan's family, why not Asimov's?
The only difference is the books being released under Jordan's names were done using his notes, and by his wishes. These were books he would have wrote himself.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
The original book should have entered the public domain 14 years after it was published as our original copyright laws demanded. Anyone should be allowed to create any derivative work they want. The only problem with the current situation is that someone is getting an exclusive grant to create derivative works.
I can't wait to learn about the negative oneth law.
As a copy-left type, once you unleash those characters/themes on the world it's fair game. But it certainly won't be real Asimov, just think of it as expensive over-hyped fan fic.
This wouldn't be a problem if copyrights expired in a relatively 'short' time. 7 or 14 years might be too short, but life plus 50 years is far too long.
Yeah, some sequels might be utter crap, but we wouldn't be shocked that someone *else* might want to write or create a story in someone else's universe.
No! It's a *SIG*. Keep the Special Interest Groups away! (Con joke!)
Seriously, Reichert? Of all the people to continue Asimov's stuff, I would think he is one the LEAST suited. Reichert's prior work that I've happened to encounter in brief:
- A generic fantasy series with a dude who likes to climb things and a bunch of fights/spellcasting, which is pretty braindead until the characters journey to modern day Earth at which point the novels somehow become a thousand time more dumb
- A generic fantasy series about some swordfighting people.
- A silly animal possession story (co-authored)
Nothing I have ever read of his leads me to believe that he can do justice to Asimov's work; his work is so far away from Asimov's that you couldn't get any farther without exiting the fantasy/sci-fi subgenre altogether. His work is so totally different than Asimov's so as to defy comparison...
Really, I rather hope that this is someone else who happens to have the exact same unusual name... that way there's a chance this could end in something other than a disasterously bad book.
It's like those "Isaac Asimov's Robot City..."* pieces of **** books all over again... but probably even worse, with Reichert writing it.
was that if he could do anything to help new writers along, he looked at it as fair payback for his own good fortune. He believed in the ideas. This doesn't mean he wouldn't protect his own turf copyright wise, but don't forget the Robot City books which had this exact purpose. He was a good and generous person and so quickly judging this as a money grab isn't fair to his memory.
One big thing that people should understand is that there is no single canon. Any of us can build our own notion of canon for whatever series we like (e.g. My DrWho canon ends with the last TV series of the 7th doctor and excludes all the novels).
The existing of fanfiction shouldn't bother us at all, nor should we care about the publisher or the family's wishes, because in the end we control the gates - stories in culture are like that. Can I take the first 12 books in the Wizard of Oz series, say that the rest never happened, and branch off from there in telling new stories to someone? Sure. Someone else might branch off in another way.
For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
If you don't like them, don't read them, and consider them non-canon.
If you might like it, go to a bookstore (perhaps online) and decide if you want to buy.
End of discussion. Next.
We already have that horrible I, Robot movie with that idiot Will Smith. Who cares?
This is consistent with the majority position here when discussing other works of art. How about other sci-fi writers (and Hollywood, Marvel Comics, etc) freely authoring I, Robot follow-ups as early as the mid-sixties, while Asimov was still in the prime of his career. There probably would have been many takers. Would that have been A Good Thing (tm)?
I have no idea why this is such a big deal now - this was already done. Whole book series called "Isaac Asimov's Robots in Time". The series was quite clearly based on (and trying to expand) the stories with Asimov's robots. Positronic brains, three laws, and all.
Once upon a time, before the Mickey-Mouse/Sonny-Bono nigh-perpetual copyright laws were passed, 56 years after a book was published anyone was permitted to write sequels to it. If not for that legislative retconning, I, Robot would be in the public domain (in the US) now, making it part of our cultural heritage and free for anyone to attempt a sequel, just like anyone can write a sequel to Hamlet or The Wizard of Oz or The Odyssey or Huckleberry Finn or Moby-Dick. Maybe these new books will suck. Maybe they won't. But the creator of the original work is no longer, and no one is going to force anyone to read these. So what's the problem?
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
'Nuff said. (Don't go Dirk Gently into that night)...
Disappointing but hardly surprising.
Every dead major author has had their works in progress, outlines, and basic premises whored out to hacks to make the buck for the estate.
Name a genre and it has been done, is being done, and will be done again. As long as they will be paid money to put the name on a "new" work in some way remotely tied to the author.
Some handle it with more class and style but it is still pretty sad. Look out for the NEW Douglas Adams novel in stores soon. And how did you like the NEW A. A. Milne novel?
I, Robot: The Ca$hening
To put a witty saying into 120 characters, jst rmv ll th vwls.
The travesty here isn't that someone is writing sequels to the original series. The travesty is that his heirs still have a monopoly on the series, 57 years later.
People writing sequels to books is the right for society to continue to enrichen our culture. Regardless of the quality of the works that will be produced, society grows by garnering inspiration and aid from past works. I'm sure Shakespeare has inspired and helped many a person in learning the trade of creating stories. The tragedy here is that companies like Disney reap all of the benefits of the public domain, while ensuring very little will ever be added back to it.
Before I get attacked by those who believe you have a right for all time to your ideas, this is a modern construct. Society managed to survive millenia without the damn thing. And as someone who seeks to earn their living in the software industry, I would quite happily place my work in the public domain voluntarily after a period of 25 years.
Sucks most of the time.
It was done in 1994; with Asimov's stuff; actually, with the Robots material in particular.
I have no idea why it's making headlines now - this was done more than 10 years ago; this is merely the most recent occurrence.
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo.... no one would have the
depth of Asimovs insight into human behaviour which is really the hallmark of his writing.
I still consider the foundation series offering the greatest insight into the human psyche.
barbarism -> religion -> science -> trade -> consolidation -> rebellion -> barbarism -> religion
...is that only the one person is allowed to write sequels. The first story set in that world was written in 1940; under the copyright terms in effect at the time, it should've been in the public domain in 1996. There should be lots and lots of derivative works out there competing in the marketplace, instead of only one "authorized" one making the Asimov estate a pile of money that none of them actually earned.
But doesn't that mean that the three laws robot has to be intelligent enough to recognize the difference between a Emperor Norton http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor_Norton and an Emperor Palpatine
I, Robot
You, Robot
Him, Robot
They, Robot.
In other languages there's even more conjugations possible!
I loved Asimov for the reason I love Lucas. He can tell a great story. It's not particularly great writing, not very deep stuff (although there are quite a few good reflections on human nature), but it's an entire universe in a book (or five).
If you're enough of an Asimov aficionado to get excited about this, I sure hope you're still angry at him for adding to the Foundation "Trilogy", what with the prequel and sequels written long after the Trilogy wrapped up. Hopefully you're angry with him for writing Foundation and Earth, the last I, Robot novel (not a Foundation book, some assert). Foundation's Edge certainly didn't follow the same writing style or story telling style of the first three (as written, not chronologically).
If you love the stories, I bet you'll love the next few. If you're some pure Asimov fan, you have quite a few inconsistencies built-in already, so maybe you'll love these too.
... namely the "Renshai" stuff which is pretty low-level, unsophisticated fantasy for nerdy teenagers. His time is at least as well spent on this as on anything else. I'm surprised the estate would authorize such a person, aren't there any better choices around? But that said, I think this bashing of sequels is disproportional - they really can't take any value away from the originals unless you let them and though often fairly crappy they are usually less so than very many other worthless works out there. And besides, if you really, honestly, think you're not going to enjoy them then why the hell pick up the books or go to the movies in the first place?
28 years plus 28 year extension if requested.
If you cant make money on your books in the first 56 years after publication...oh well. If the pre-1976 law were still in place,
everything before 1953 would be in the public domain.
A few select pieces of timeline:
_I, Robot_, 1950.
_Foundation_, 1951.
_Foundation's Edge_, 1982.
_Robots and Empire_, 1985.
_Foundation and Earth_, 1986.
Author's death, 1992.
It seems obvious he felt it entirely possible to follow up with a book 30 years after beginning, and it is certainly true that he didn't feel Robots were finished off as a body of story 35-36 years after beginning (Foundation and Earth is arguably a Robots novel). If he had lived another 40 years beyond 1986 and not touched the universe, then I think we could have argued about original intentions. Passing a mere 6 years after the last entries, however, tells us nothing about his true intent, or how it would change after decades of pondering his creations.
Of course, being revisionist in assessing his intent is a bit clever, isn't it? Seeing as how many times he revised his own plans, thoughts and plot/ story/ time lines.
Thinking about what has changed in the intervening 60 years, I don't think a contemporary author can claim to pen an extension that is serious and respectful of the original work.
20 years ago it wouldn't have surprised me to see anthropomorphic, autonomous robots as an everyday part of life in 20 years. Asimov saw them on the horizon 60 years ago.
But 20 years later, despite all our advances in technology, I don't even see this on the horizon, much less in another 20 years.
I think in our optimism we overlooked two important realities:
1) Human life is cheap, economically and ethically.
2) The full range of human psychology and intelligence is not beneficial to the performance of most human labor.
This is merely a bold marketing move to re-use an old success. The new writings might be the best intentions of “relatively unknown fantasy author Mickey Zucker Reichert”... However, it will always remain an intention, which follows it’s teacher’s and an inspirer’s steps. Once/if these books become bestsellers, I am sure, the same marketing body will claim those as originals and groundbreaking ideas ... Whatever is swallowed fastest by hungry Sci-Fi readers. After all “Everything new is well-forgotten old” as an old Russian proverb says... We’ll see. I am always looking forward for new good stories... Perhaps, Asimov's ideas are not too quickly being forgotten? On related note, perhaps he hasn’t been the first? Are we forgetting someone, or simply waiting for the next story to amuse us?
If you're not confused, you're not paying attention
To complain about this. Asimov himself had begun the work of integrating the Robot stories with his Foundation/Galactic Empire stories. All kinds of prequels and sequels were written by the master himself and by other authors and this is just more of the same. Details here.
Now, here is my question. In the original I Robot stories, the robot's positronic brains were made out of something referred to as Platinum-Iridium sponge. As this is written, Platinum is $1325/troy oz. and Iridium
is $425. Aren't you grateful that real computers are made out of silicon. Was any adjustment of technology made in the subsequent Robot stories?
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
Guys, it is like if they make a sequel to The Matrix. Anyway we wouldn't watch that, so let's allow them to write as many sequels to 'I, Robot' as they want. Aren't there a lot of these around, by the way?
I know Mickey, and she is a superb choice, if something like this is going to be done. A lot worse writers could have been picked, Mickey will at least respect the original material and not mangle it.
Let's think about this. Perhaps an author came up with SUCH a good idea to follow up the story (gasp, even better than anything Asimov might have come up with!??), that the estate said, "WOW YES, go write that!"
Why all the boo hoos.... Just don't read them if you don't like it. There are bunches of Star Trek, Star Wars, Babylon 5, Dr Who... Heck there are books about video games... And you guys are crying about a few books about robots. Get a life!
Probably was too busy writting other things, like others 499 books in a really lot of topics. And he did wote a follow up, a lot of them. He unified a in a single future history a good bunch of his sci-fi books and tales, from The gods themselves to Foundation and Earth, going thru the robot books almost from the start.
I just hope that this new sequels are good. If they are, well, we all win. And if they don't, just dont read/buy them.
1) A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2) A robot must obey any orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3) A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
4) ???
5) A robot collects profit.
6) WTF???
If you're not confused, you're not paying attention
What I fear is that we won't be looking at extensions of Asimov's work, but candidates for screenplays for sequels/prequels to the Will Smith movie.
Kind of like how Eric von Lustbader's continuation of Robert Ludlum's Jason Bourne series bears a lot more resemblance to the recent movies than to the three Cold War era books about a character who'd be pretty long in the tooth by now. Really, they read like auditions to be Matt Damon's new screen writer.
Speaking of which, will the new books be featuring Asimov's name on the cover in big print and Reichert's in much smaller letters?
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
Don't like the idea, don't read them.
Whew, that was a close one.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
That ROCKS! :)
The original stories were works of fiction. Their purpose was to entertain. They have no more significance than that.
Asimov wrote books because he was paid to do so. I am sure he also enjoyed writing. It is one of the more coveted jobs in the modern era. But the fact remains that he got paid to write works of entertainment, and that's it.
Getting paid for your work is not selling out. It isn't like his estate switch political positions in response to a bribe or anything. They just got paid to create a few more works of entertainment.
Nobody is betraying anybody's grand vision of anything. Someone just thinks there may be enough people who want this specific variety of entertainment to justify the expense of producing it. The rest is business as usual.
Some people really need to get over themselves.
that have been tagged with Asimov's name.
Robots in Time
Robot City
nuff said?
I'd like to propose an alternate point of view: Dan Brown. We might all be better off if he met his untimely demise so that his heirs could nominate someone else to write the remainder of his novels.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
I'm sorry when I die my shit becomes public domain so there will be no estate. Come on people go out and get a skill and quit mooching off of somebody else's.
Asimov had a style that will never be replicated, not even closely. If you look at the Second Foundation Trilogy, written by Benford, Brin, and Bear, you'll see an example of what happens when you let authors take a stab at writing another author's world. If you like Benford, Brin, or Bear's own books, you may like the SFT. If you're like me, however, you'll think the SFT sucks.
So the question is, who will write the next I, Robot books? If you like their other works, maybe you'll like the new books. If they're two-bit hacks who couldn't write their way out of a wet paper bag, it won't matter how many times they say "positronic" or "three laws", you'll avoid the books.
I void warranties.
...with some fan art?
It's not like they're saying Asimov actually put pen to paper to write them.
-- Arik
How is this any different from any of the dozens of copycat sci-fi novels, except that a chunk of the cash will go to Asimov's estate? So who cares?
That said, am I the only one who thought that Reichart's Renshai novels (in which the Norse are intrinsically Good, the Italians are intrinsically Neutral, and the Arabs are intrinsically Evil) were racist and weird? Read them as a teenager, they were fun in places, but boy. Lots of fantasy/sci-fi authors have weird crank politics (Asimov being unusual in his rationality - or at least that I agree with him,) I'm not sure if Reichart's *expressly* an Ayn Rand-type crank, but that's the only thing that I think might really harm his legacy.
The good and new comes from no quarter where it is looked for, and is always something different from what is expected.
The sequels will very likely be stupid but harmless. At worst they will waste the time and money of the gullible and the completists. It seems a strange idea to use someone who's only written fantasy to follow on from hard SF, though.
The use of the Cthulhu mythos by other writers too numerous to mention (recently, Charles Stross) is an example where this sort of thing is considered by many to have turned out well. Others have mentioned The Seven Percent Solution. Any other examples?
For what it's worth I thought the movie's core idea was entirely in the spirit of the stories. It revolved around an unanticipated interpretation of the three laws, which is exactly the formula of the originals. There were some stupid bits in the action scenes but I don't think it deserves the bagging it gets.
While all of the stories in I Robot were first written 40 years before his death, Issac's positronic robots, and the three laws were something that he kept coming back to, time and again, throughout his career writing SF. His last works of fiction tied his earlier robot and Foundation stories together into one shared continuity. He clearly did not believe that he had written the last definitive word on the subject.
I am willing to give the new stories the benefit of the doubt. I won't declare them awful, until I've actually had the opportunity to read them.
Did they authorize that execrable Will Smith I, Robot movie? If so, their "authorization" means nothing, except to copyright lawyers.
Which to the rest of us should clearly signal the abomination that is copyright law. Because the power to keep something like I, Robot exclusive to their authorized merchandizers, prohibited to anyone else (who might make something good of it) has absolutely nothing to do with "rights", and everything to do with the most inexcusable exploitation of art by commerce.
Once someone's copyable work has become folk art, the author cannot be the exclusive authority controlling it. The author is no longer the main source of its value when the work is valuable for its encoding in the culture that so many other people are perpetuating. The original US copyright term of 14 years after publication got it right for books: after a human generation (about 14 years in 1800), there is no longer any excuse to compromise the people's rights to free expression against protection of profits by a government minted monopoly. This case shows how badly wrong it's now gone, on books written and copyrighted several generations ago.
--
make install -not war
All these fights on copyright have made me think. If an author was well known enough, the books were in high demand, etc. would they have enough pull to require that the publishers release their works into the public domain after a certain period of time, upon the author's death, or a certain number of years after the author's death? Or would even some of the top authors have to find other means to publish their books?
Of course if a new author tried this they would be told 'screw you, do what we say or find another company' but when you have an author where amazon and other companies have extra security for just that book to prevent leaks (harry potter, I think one of the dan brown books may have been this way, etc.) would there be any difference?
If they are just going to publish more books in the Series then who cares. Please don't repeat what happened to Heinlein with letters from the grave. Crap that wouldn't sell on its own should not be published under the author's name. Pride, respect and dignity are dead. Its just sad.
The new stories will either be good and read, or bad and ignored. Why is this a problem?
Asimov didn't leave a clause in his will forbidding the writing of new stories about his stories and he isn't going to be an author on the new ones.
His fans need to chill the hell out. Because the dude is dead and isn't going to be producing any more good stories. Maybe someone else can.
I'd hope that my family wouldn't sell off my name along with my furniture. I'm sure that Asimov already left a goodly inheritance.
"Selling" a well known writer's name to someone else is nothing new. Ludlum's family has been doing it for years, and quality hasn't suffered (after writing the same book that many times, anyone would have to be getting good at it.) Living authors do it, with worse results: witness the horrific trashing of Clarke's work by Gentry Lee. The I, Robot movie qualifies as well: it certainly had nothing to do with the books by the same name.
Maybe it will work out: much as I love most of his stories, Asimov was not that great a fiction writer. Discovering I, Robot and Foundation 40 or so years ago was a glorious experience for me, but it was mostly because of the ideas they contain; Asimov's own sequels were disastrous, to put it mildly, and it's sad to think of all the people who may have been soured on I, Robot by that movie. I hope New Guy manages to write good books that stand on their own.
I read a trilogy of robot novels, authorized by the Asimov estate presumably, by Roger MacBride Allen. I got the first one figuring any port in a storm, I was bored, etcetera. I got the other two because I really enjoyed the first one, and I thought they were a thoughtful and well-considered exploration of part of that universe.
I've read a few of Mickey Zucker Reichert's books. The Nightfall book (and its sequel) were a little heavy on the Mary Sue for my tastes, but nonetheless had some interesting and/or well-done parts. She did a pair of "Renshai" trilogies set in a Norse setting which I really enjoyed reading, and which had some very interesting characters and plots.
She's no Asimov, but:
* The last time I read a new story set in Asimov's setting, it was rewarding and I enjoyed it.
* I have liked Reichert's work in the past.
In short, I'll probably buy them, and I'll probably enjoy them. I'm a lot happier with that than I would be with not having the option. I'd prefer if they opened things up further, but since I can't have this, I'll settle.
And seriously, quit yer whining. Mickey Zucker Reichert is a decent author with a track record. In particular, the key to that Norse series is that she managed to write stories which were convincingly and unmistakably set in an existing setting, and yet, which told new stories and developed characters in interesting ways. This is not some horrible tragedy. If they'd picked Stephanie Meyer, yeah, there'd be torches and pitchforks. But MZR will do fine if there's not too much executive meddling.
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
Not so much the risk of a hack job (I'm a fan, but not a huge one), but the fact that I mentally rendered this as "iRobot".
Who knows? They changed from Apple Computer to Apple, could change again to US Robots and Mechanical Men
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
For most programmers that'd be a huge help, actually. Most of the world's software is written for internal-use only and, if it hits the Public Domain in 5 years, you could use your own code while working for a different employer without fearing legal repercussions from your old one.
Unless the software is actually distributed (with or without permission), the previous employer might have a good case that the software is a trade secret. Trade secrets don't "expire" unless they stop being secret. And revealing them can get you in trouble, of course.
The Foundation series is reportedly incredibly popular in the Arab world, the title is usually translated as "Al Qaeda". Usually rendered into English as The Base, this also means The Foundation. A website quote says "Also, the book centers on a small group led by someone who has predicted the downfall of a powerful, yet decadent empire... which, some point out, could seem similar to the idea of religious terrorists vs. the decadent West"
This is a terrible idea. It reminds me strongly of the Dune prequels written by Brian Herbert and company, which are simply terrible. The books have no depth and simplistic plots and less-than-one-dimensional characters. All this has cheapened the legacy of Frank Herbert's original Dune series, which were masterpieces, especially the first two books. Asimov himself mess up badly by overextending the Foundation franchise and his estate will destroy the I, Robot franchise a little bit more than the movie did, which was so bad, it's not funny.
Neal Asher and Richard Morgan, two relatively new British SF authors of hard SciFi, both just as bloody and violent as Alastair Reynolds yet with much better characterisation, and less waste ; they get to the point very fast and keep the pace through much of the book. Seriously, give them both a try, starting with Asher's Grid-Linked and Morgan's Altered Carbon.
Ever read David Brin's Foundation's Triumph? It was a continuation of the Foundation series, and it was awesome, in fact the whole series I thought was great.
It is possible this guy might actually do a good job. Give it a chance.
Oh no. Poor dead author and his unknowable intentions.
Why is this important? Come on. If the books are crap then don't read them. They won't be chasing you
home from the store.
Nontroversy.
I've had a wonderful time, but this wasn't it -- Groucho Marx
But using the same names and situations pretending that the author would have so wished is unethical and immoral.
This would be the case regardless of how long copyright was, what makes it worst is that current copyright terms mean that is money not talent, what decides which new vision gets done.
Wanting to have saner, much shorter copyright terms is not opposed (and I for one frankly fail to see where you are finding the irony) to call a cynic money grab for what it really is.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
It is about the human condition.
You clearly need to re read "I robot" again.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
He died forty years after they were written. If copyright law were at all sane, there would be no need for "authorization", and there would already be 500 sequels, some of which might be good. A dead guy's intentions regarding old books should not be the concern of anyone other than someone studying literature.
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
Come on, it's the same thing every time a book (or anything) is adapted into a movie or has sequels or whatever! Everybody is making a scene of it! (I remember giant trolls about P. Jackson's LoTR...) The *original* books of Asimov won't disappear anyway! The additional fiction won't make it change. The upcoming book might be enjoyable, faithful to Asimov, or not. And what if they don't? Will that change the face of the earth? Will that change the vision of Asimov's work in you heart? Nobody force you to read them, and nobody says "now, that's the official truth, robots are made of cheese and actually work for R. What Ismyname, the super demonic robot from oblivion. Just discard everything you knew about robots" If you're not happy with what is added to the original work that you enjoy, just ignore it! Last week I was at the Surrogates movie premiere in Paris, and the two authors of the graphic novel where there to answer questions from the audience. When asked if they were happy about the adaptation, they answered that they did enjoy it (well, that's what they say in public :P but that's not the matter here) and they said that whatever could happen with the movie, their own work wouldn't be altered, since it follows its own path, it was there before the movie.
Asimov created an interesting concept, and he didn't fully explore it - so why shouldn't others write stories in the same universe? I see lots of stories around about orcs and elves, clearly based on Tolkien's universe; most are crap, but some aren't, and I think it is a good thing if people are inspired by an author.
What I find distasteful is that somebody is supposed to sort of write in the same style as the original author; it just doesn't work, and apart from that, I don't really think Asimov was a greatwriter from a literary point of view. His style seems stiff and awkward to me, where to me, good literature should be a joy read even after decades or centuries.
So, some relatively unknown author is going to write follow-up novels for a series penned 50-some years ago... "If he had wanted to follow them up, he would have. The author's intentions need to be respected here." This coming from the same crowd that writes unauthorized fanfiction is quite ironic.
Since he is dead, he will not care if the series goes on. His wishes stopped carrying any weight when he stopped breathing.
The part that irks me is that the rights persist with his heirs. Too many people are getting by on the success of their ancestors.
If you are a musician, artist or author and you die, then you are not longer contributing to society. Your family needs to succeed or fail on their own ability and merits.
I can see a case for some rights to persist for a short term. Under the current system those rights are blown out of proportion to their relative contributions to society. Give the family 2-5 years to capitalize on the death of the rights holder, then put it in the public domain. Allow their contributions to society to really be a contribution and not a measure of greed.
As to whether or not a series should be continued against the 'dead' authors wishes, the market will show the viability of the product/work. If no one buys it then it speaks for itself. If it is popular, then it reinforces the reality that the original authors are not the only source of good ideas on that theme.
Some authors actually seem to understand this... They open their 'Story Universes' up to other authors to explore.
You can disagree if you like... That's what makes this system work... The 'right' to agree or disagree.
When you mentioned Danielle Steele my mind read Daneel Steel and it took me a couple of moments trying to remember if there was another Daneel in the Robot/Foundation books that I had forgotten.
McFly777
- - -
"What do people mean when they say the computer went down on them?" -Marilyn Pittman
Asimov already let people into his Robots universe, with mixed results. There's the Robot City series of books. There's Robots and Aliens. There's the Inferno trilogy: Caliban, Inferno, and Utopia by Roger MacBride Allen. So this new author will have lots of company and a standard to measure up to.
I wonder if Virgil had these problems when he continued Homer's stories. :-)
Please learn the difference between a dissenting opinion and a troll before you moderate.
Oh, goodie!
Hollywood has probably already lined up a stellar cast for the sequel "Motion Picture Events", including Will Smith, Bruce Willis, Leonardo Di Caprio, and Miley Ray Cyrus.
Perhaps even a Jonas Brothers soundtrack and some vampires thrown in as well.
Mmmmmmmmmmm..........Muuuuhhhhhneeeeeeeyyyyyy
They're raping R. Danell Olivaw!
They're raping R. Daneel Olivaw!
...fanfiction.
I, Robot was probably the first grown-up science fiction I ever read, and gave me a life-long love of the genre. This will feel like a betrayal to me, and I for one will not buy or read them. They won't be as awful as that bloody Will Smith movie of a few years ago. (Someone reassure me). I was so excited when I heard it was coming out, it was almost like the feeling (in 1980) when a new Star Wars movie was released. Instead we got a stupid sub-Terminator action flick. Bah!
Yes, I did force myself to wade through this particular literary abomination, and I have a spoiler: You're looking through a large building for an explosive device made with antimatter which contains no metal, has no electronic emission signature to detect. You have an arsenal of bug tracking devices, and 12 hours to find it. Your only clue is that you can observe it because the terrorist who planted it stole your own wireless webcam, transmitting on your own frequency and planted it with the bomb so you would watch the timer count down.
The obvious thing to do would be to unplug your receivers off one by one until the signal was lost, go to that receiver and sweep for the transmitter. The whole thing is over in ten minutes.
I grew ever more disgusted with myself as I drudged through the obvious tripe in this novel, but once commited I have this OCD problem of continuing to the end in case there was some redeeming virtue at the last moment. There wasn't.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
I Robot the movie was the only movie I've seen that was better than the book (a collection of short stories).
Asimov was prolific. That is not the same as good. He's the one who gave SF popular stories with cardboard characters.
I look forward to new stories. If they aren't good, they won't besmirch the Robot series much because we still have Asimov's legacy. If they are good, then we get new stories, and maybe even characters we might care about.