Asimov Estate Authorizes New I, Robot Books 426
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."
It doesn't matter. Compare Sherlock Holmes. (Score:4, Interesting)
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.
What Asimov thought (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:hope for the best (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Cry, Robot... (Score:3, Interesting)
Um, ya. I just want to add that my problem is people who start with crappy sequels, and miss out on the originals. So often when things like this happen, the original stories are much more meaningful than any derivatives.
Like the movie I, Robot. People who saw that and never read the short stories genuinely believed that film to be a meaningful derivation of the original. But it didn't even begin to do Asimov justice. Now those people won't read the book, because they saw the terrible movie. And they think that's all there is to it. They won't ever have the opportunity to enjoy Asimov's work. And that is a shame.
The problem isn't that it's an insult to some dead guy. Dead people don't care about insults. The problem is all the people who won't go back and read the original work, who might have before.
Sure, maybe a reinvention of the work will inspire more interest in the old stuff, but I doubt it. Most of the people who go back and read the old stuff would have stumbled across it anyway. I, Robot isn't an extremely unusual book.
Re:Cry, Robot... (Score:1, Interesting)
Bit of a difference between condemnation and censorship.
Re:Elitism (Score:2, Interesting)
Yea, I think it's a bit elitist too. I mean, if they don't want a sequel, don't read it!
Case in point, a classic: The Time Machine, from H.G. Wells. A century later, a sequel was authorized and written by Stephen Baxter: The Time Ships. And I like it so much more than the first book, because it expands so much on the idea, concepts and caracter. Granted, there was a lot to expand from given the late 19th century science, and Stephen Baxter is also an excellent SF writer... So the question really is if Mr. Reichert is up to the task, since he's pretty much unkown. But so was Baxter, back when he wrote the The Time Ships. I guess we'll just have to wait and hope that Mr. Reichert does a good job.
Re:How about we pay the author not to write them? (Score:3, Interesting)
It is at least partially the estate's fault. They can always ask for at least a measure of creative control as part of the deal. No Ender's Game movie has been made, because Card won't give the rights to just anyone. Of course, in the case of an author's death, the inheritors usually aren't as good at this stuff as the original creator (Brian Herbert, this means you), so even if they didn't only care about cashing out, they will probably end up making a turd, anyway.
The other major problem with Hollywood is that they often have a vaguely related script kicking around somewhere, which they modify by changing some character names and adding a few lines and scenes from the book. IIRC, this is what happened to I, Robot, and is definitely what happened to Starship Troopers.
Re:How about we pay the author not to write them? (Score:1, Interesting)
this is nothing more than a ploy to keeps the rights for the i robot franchise from the public domain.
Re:Of all the people... (Score:2, Interesting)
It's always been fascinating to me that most fiction is repeating the same stories (see Joseph Campbell), but that certain writers can make the tale shine in a new way. It's what she can do with these "generic fantasy" stories that makes her either a good or bad author. Whether she can take the "I, Robot" series and make them memorable and entertaining remains to be seen.
Besides, IMHO, the "I, Robot" stories were to some extent just detective stories, with robots and some interesting speculation about robot "morality", with Asimov exploring how that morality could be circumvented. It is up to the discerning to recognize that he was really talking about human morality...as well as making a living as an author. ;)
Re:Cry, Robot... (Score:3, Interesting)
Sequels authorized by the copyright holder of the original are often considered "canonical", regardless of whether the person who authorized it was the original creator or their heir. The reader, of course, is free to accept or reject Scarlett or And Another Thing... or Return to the Hundred Acre Wood or Peter Pan in Scarlet or The Royal Book of Oz (etc) as they see fit, but the imprimatur of the copyright holder does carry some weight in making the determination.,
Re:Elitism (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re:Bullshit (Score:3, Interesting)
I would quite happily place my work in the public domain voluntarily after a period of 25 years.
But what if I place YOUR work in the public domain in 5 years?
Human-like robots no longer on the horizon (Score:2, Interesting)
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.
Re:How about we pay the author not to write them? (Score:1, Interesting)
The Foundation Trilogy is not a Trilogy. I first read Foundation. Then Foundation and Empire. Then Second Foundation. Then Foundations Edge. Then Foundation and Earth. Then Prelude to Foundation. Then Forward the Foundation. Then there are the I Robot series, and the Galactic Empire Series (all tied in). Also, Pebble in the Sky, Nightfall, Robot Dreams and other books of collected, connected short stories. Its all a big gigantic galactic mess, which only Hari Seldon can work out. And Hollywood can't, which is why they haven't done any movies based on the series.
It is a little late (Score:5, Interesting)
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 [wikipedia.org].
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 [matthey.com]
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?
Re:How about we pay the author not to write them? (Score:4, Interesting)
I just put down Anathem from Neal Stephenson. I got through 250+ pages of this nearly 1000 page tome, and it's just plainly awful. It's Stephenson boorishly showing off his obvious intelligence in yet another fantasy parallel universe world. His seemingly brilliant descriptions may fit the needs of a very small audience, but for a fan of 'hard' sci fi, it's waterboarding.
And it's not the first, but perhaps the 100th time this has happened. The D&D world has altered sci fi forever. I wish it would fork..... and solidly. I don't mind the fantasy world for other consumers. But it's not my diet at all.
Re:0th law of famous sci fi writers' estates (Score:3, Interesting)
More accurately, "if the robot is convinced that not killing hitler will lead to millions of lives being lost, yep."
An important, but subtle, difference in my restatement is that its not enough to know that killing hitler would stop the war. After all perhaps merely locking him in a closet for a year would also stop the war...point is, if they had a reasonable alternative to killing him they would take it, even if they were certain killing him would work.
Re:How about we pay the author not to write them? (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Idle thoughts: (Score:3, Interesting)
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.
Foundation == Al Qaeda in Arabic (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:How about we pay the author not to write them? (Score:3, Interesting)
Well there's really no debate about Verhoeven's goals. Now, unlike you I do like this movie, probably because I love this cheesy side. Totall Recall and Robocop were quite similar in this regard.
Now why did he decided to adapt the book instead of coming up with his very own story? I don't know. I mean, Starship Trooper is no Harry Potter, it was not a strong franchise. I think that Verhoeven started reading the book, liked the basic idea and bought the rights on the cheap instead of taking the risk of being accused of plagiarism. He also probably loved the idea of Heinlein fans being lured in a movie theater to endure a two-hour long assault on militarism.
Now if you want to watch a really bad movie, locate a copy of Starship Troopers 2. And while I was researching this post, I discovered that there is a Starship Troopers 3. God help us all.
Re:How about we pay the author not to write them? (Score:4, Interesting)
Because it's about that fine line between copyrights and trademarks. You could easily write a set of stories about robots and even include some aspects like Asimov's three laws without violating copyright. But when you want to claim that they are sequels to Asimov's work, you are getting an endorsement from the Asimov estate, diluting Asimov's brand. Trademarks are perpetual (as long as they don't become generic) and few people have any objection to this. I wouldn't mind my work falling into the public domain after 10-15 years (maybe even less for some of it), but I would strongly object to other people being allowed to create modified versions of it and claim that I wrote them, without any editorial input on my part and I would object to people using my name to sell their own products.
The Asimov estate has already authorised the New Law Robot series (which were mediocre, and didn't really gain much beyond brand recognition from being in the Asimov universe, but did benefit by having Isaac Asimov in big letters on the cover and the real author's name in small letters) and the Second Foundaton Trilogy. The only one of the Second Foundation Trilogy that felt like it was written by someone who had actually read Asimov's other works and could work on the same level of scale was the one by David Brin.
Re:How about we pay the author not to write them? (Score:4, Interesting)
Really? I quite enjoyed the first one, although I missed Tom Bombadil, who was my favourite part of the book and found the characterisation of Gollum awful. I actually fell asleep in the middle of the second one in the cinema (something I have never done before, nor since), and woke up just in time to see the appalling changes that they'd made to Farimir's character. I didn't see the third one, so maybe it was less bad.
When I reread the books, I realised that much of the reason that I couldn't stand the film was that it was, in some aspects, a very close adaptation of the book. Where the book had chapters of descriptions without much plot advancement, the film had ten minute segments of CGI without much plot advancement. I can easily read chapters of Tolkien's descriptive passages, but watching half an hour of 'let's show off the Massive Engine again' is just dull.
Re:Sigh (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re:How about we pay the author not to write them? (Score:3, Interesting)
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?
For me the worst scene in the movies one is when aragorn gets dragged down the ravine by the were-thingy and everyone thinks he's dead, and no-one in the audience who is more than 2 years old believes it for a moment. Phoney. Legolas skateboarding on a shield comes a close second. And Gimly being the village idiot throughout the 3 movies is funny at times but it gets really annoying in the end.
Overall, I really liked the first 2 movies, and was extremely bored by the third one except for the Frodo-sam-and-Gollum parts.