[TeMPOraL]

Interesting to see you mentioning Foundation trilogy as an analogue, and in context of characters, with what I understand as an implication that in both cases, "weak characters" were their negative sides. I agree with comparison to Foundation, in that both books were not about characters at all, and that was a feature, not a bug.

With Foundation in particular, I'm perplexed when I see it being criticized for lack of character depth, given that the books literally beat the reader over their head with multiple levels of reminders that the books are about large forces shaping societies, forces infinitely greater than individuals, and the only special thing about particular characters is that they happened to be at the right place and time when large changes happened[0].

--

[0] - The Mule aside, but (rot13 - spoilers from "Second Foundation") juvyr gur Zhyr qvq chfu uvfgbel va na hacerqvpgnoyr qverpgvba ol iveghr bs uvf vaqvivqhny fcrpvnyarff, nsgre uvf qrngu, tnynpgvp pvivyvmngvbaf erghearq gb gurve abezny ribyhgvba. Rira gur Frpbaq Sbhaqngvba qvqa'g vasyhrapr guvatf zhpu gb guvf cbvag, naq qvqa'g vasyhrapr gurz zhpu cnfg gung cbvag.

[technofiend]

Upon review, Asimov had criticism for his plotting: as quoted on geek.com:

In the author’s note for Foundation’s Edge, he says that, upon re-reading his earlier work, “I kept waiting for something to happen, and nothing ever did. All three volumes, all the nearly quarter of a million words, consisted of thoughts and of conversations. No action. No physical suspense… each book in the trilogy had at least two stories and lacked unity.”

[TeMPOraL]

That's true. I've seen this quote before. But it's fair - authors are people too, their views and styles evolve. It's worth remembering that Foundation's Edge was published 30 years after the trilogy.

But it's also true that author's opinions after the fact have limited bearing on the work. People like me, who like the Trilogy as they read it, like it for what it is.

I didn't mention Foundation's Edge because, beyond being a bit more action and suspense-packed, it departs a bit from the "no special individuals" rule. Incidentally, it's not the protagonist that's special in my opinion. Spoilers (rot13) follow:

Juvyr gur punenpgref va gur obbx ercrngrqyl zragvba Tbyna Gerivmr'f fcrpvny tvsgf, vg'f erirnyrq gung ur'f bayl fcrpvny va gur Naguebcvp Cevapvcyr'f frafr: ur jnf gur crefba gung unccrarq gb or gur orfg nybat zrgevpf Tnvn jnf vagrerfgrq va, fb ur tbg envyebnqrq vagb orvat n cvibgny punenpgre. Vg'f Tnvn gung'f gur fcrpvny bar, orpnhfr vg'f orra qbvat gur fryrpgvat.

[AnIdiotOnTheNet]

I think what it all really comes down to is the simple fact that Asimov is not a very good writer. I think he would have been among the first to admit it. He had big ideas and wrote well enough to keep the reader engaged so that he could show them off, but that's about it.

Except for The God's Themselves, which feels like he was channeling a better writer.

[rsynnott]

IIRC he was fairly explicit in the author's note for that one that he was writing something out of his comfort zone.

[Andrew_nenakhov]

I never thought I would ever stumble upon something encoded with rot13.

[TeMPOraL]

It shows up on HN every now and then (though I wouldn't say it's very common). I use it when discussing potential spoilers for books/shows, because HN doesn't have a "spoiler tag".

[AnIdiotOnTheNet]

Before spoiler tags were a thing that BBs and forums implemented ROT13 was actually a fairly common way to avoid spoiling things.

[jessaustin]

I appreciate this practice. Here's a useful extension:

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/rot13/bahejodllcom...