• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Dune 2018 (19,20,21...)

Foundation less fantastical than Dune?!?! :guffaw:

Pyschohistory is no more scientific than prescience. One just pretends to be based on math, the other genetics. Also, psychics and empaths and hive minds, oh my!

Come on man.. lay off the disrespect a little. So far i enjoyed your posts here as a fellow Dune and SF fan so don't sour the experience.

Of course Psychohistory is nothing that really exists, it's a SF concept that was given a pseudoscientifc layer to make it sound believable. The same has been done for ages in SF and Star Trek is infamous for its technobabble.

With Dune it appears that it's much more esoteric and mystical when you think about it which is fine for me - it made for some very cool concepts and action pieces and the same applies for Foundation (and i seem to have missed all the Gaia stuff as i only read the original trilogy that only handles the Mule).
 
Dune, in my opinion, blends the elements in an interesting ways. FTL travel is highly regulated and controlled, so you can't just jump from system to system without help. Governments and Great Houses are in competition over more power, while not really changing anything in the status quo. Space ships are expensive. Laser guns are incompatible with shield tech so less sophisticated weaponry is employed. At every stage there is a give and take.

The more mystical elements come far more from the spice, and the Bene Gesserit. Herbert wove that in with more scientific concepts like ecology, like physical mastery of one's body that allow for the Weirding way, and the Voice. But, there is also the struggle with concepts of prophecy and what they can mean in terms of the human struggle.

I think Dune gets more fantastical as the series progresses but the original is a balance of both, in my opinion.
 
and i seem to have missed all the Gaia stuff as i only read the original trilogy that only handles the Mule).

Trust me, you’re not missing a thing. I got to a point that any re-read of the Foundation series was kept to the “trilogy” as everything else pretty much sucks.
 
It's been forever since I read them (any of them for that matter) but I kinda remember the prequel novels Asimov wrote prior to his passing being decent.
 
Yep - the first books were quite entertaining but...the rest...?

don't remember much about any of the non-trilogy books beyond no desire to re-read them.

The ones I read where Prelude To The Foundation (the best of a mediocre bunch), Forward The Foundation and Foundation & Earth.
 
I don't usually read expansion books on classic books not written by the original author since they always suck when compared to the original, the Dune books taught me a valuable lesson there.
 
Honestly 'Foundation' as a whole never did much for me. It had big grand ideas about the rise and fall and rebirth of civilisations, but no real three dimensional characters to get a foothold into the world.

For me, Dune did a much better job of balancing the human drama and a plethora of huge sweeping concepts. I mean for one thing I can't for the life of me even remember a single name from Foundation without looking it up. Whereas I can probably name ever major player in Dune, plus a bunch of side characters with nary a google...
 
Last edited:
Foundation is just a different creature than Dune. It is high concept Science Fiction but is not really "plot" and "character" oriented. Asimov's stories were like that. It is why Foundation would never really make it as a movie. I've thought that it could be successful as an anthology style series--but I mean that conceptually and critically rather than popularity.
 
Foundation is just a different creature than Dune. It is high concept Science Fiction but is not really "plot" and "character" oriented. Asimov's stories were like that. It is why Foundation would never really make it as a movie. I've thought that it could be successful as an anthology style series--but I mean that conceptually and critically rather than popularity.

Wasn't the first Foundation novel really just a collection of vignettes he'd originally written separately that were later collected together like they WERE one big story?
 
Wasn't the first Foundation novel really just a collection of vignettes he'd originally written separately that were later collected together like they WERE one big story?

I gather they were originally published in a collection of short stories so you're probably not far off the mark.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top