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."
The delicious irony is the wailing about "author's intent" and bemoaning someone other than the original author covering the same ground coming from a group that would gladly see copyright curtailed so that EVERYONE would be free to butcher an author's vision after a period of time.
The thing about not having copyright on the book is that there could be no 'official' sequels. Everything would be, more or less, fan fiction. Sure, some of that fan fiction could be marketed and sold, but it is not 'official' fan fiction.
SSC
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.
As a counterpoint, I submit LOTR.
There are a couple of scenes that I found absolutely awful; totalling maybe 60 seconds out of the, what, 7 hours of movies?
As someone who had read the series a dozen times over, well, a few years, I have to say that the movie is a shining example of what can be done in translating from paper to film, but so seldom is.
And the worms ate into his brain.
Asimov did not write hard sci-fi in any definition of the word. It was soft sci-fi, focusing mainly on social sciences, like psychology. Any proper scientific discipline lacks technical detail, infact he *Made Up* the science of robotics, from scratch. That's not what Hard Sci-fi writers (like Clarke) do. The Foundation series is definitly soft-sci fi, and more of a space opera than anything else. (Note the difference between Hard, Soft and Pulp sci-fi. Hard and Soft are equally valid as science fiction, its all a matter of taste. Pulp Sci-fi is the likes of Planet of the Apes, Forbidden Planet, Flash Gordon or hell, even Star Wars, that use Science Fiction as a thin veneer for action orientated stories)
Asimovs ideas are what drives the story in I, Robot, not the science. His ideas stand the test of time, if not the technology (His earliest stories pre-date the invention of the transistor, so futuristic computers still take up warehouses and use vacuum tubes and punch cards)
I have almost all of Asmiov's Sci-fi output in my library, I absoloutely adore it for it's unfaltering charm and idealism, as well as it's interesting, twisting plots (Particularly Caves of Steel)
The only licensed sequel I've enjoyed was Mirage by Mark W Tiedelman, admitedly I've not read many of them but there are quite a few. The second Foundation Trilogy, Caliban and Robot City. From what I've heard, both Caliban and Robot City were decent attempts and stand on their own, but the Second Foundation Trilogy was all but trash.
It pays to be obvious, especially if you have a reputation for being subtle.