• niktemadur@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      As with Isaac Asimov, I much prefer order of publication.
      Woe the poor soul trying to get into Foundation and instead of getting the original trilogy, they start with Prelude To Foundation. I met a guy who did that, in college; he didn’t know where to start, at the bookstore thought “Hey… Prelude… sounds like a good place to start!”

      • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        I read Isaac Asimov in chronological order, including the robot books first, before foundation. Why woe to me?

        • niktemadur@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          For example, if one starts with Prelude To Foundation as the entry point, the reveal of Eto Demerzel being R. Daneel Olivaw in disguise all loses its’ punch, while if one reads the original Robot books first, it becomes an astounding reveal, a true “holy shit!” moment, on several levels, the delightful surprise of clearly seeing Asimov kneading together two separate series so intimately and right before your eyes, the narrative doubles in size and scope in the snap of a finger.

          The power of that moment, that opportunity that Asimov seized, makes it worthwhile to follow Isaac’s mind instead of the plot in chronological order.

          • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            It doesn’t lose its punch, because he’s described all through Prelude To Foundation, it’s still a big reveal. And then you read the later books in that context.