DUNE DISCUSSION FORUM FOR ORTHODOX HERBERTARIANS
http://www.jacurutu.com/
I don't think I subscribe to your classification of fictionLord Nightstalker wrote:I am under no illusions about Kingsbury's book.It is fanfiction, albeit by a competent author. It is certainly not canon.
Naïve mind wrote:I don't think I subscribe to your classification of fictionLord Nightstalker wrote:I am under no illusions about Kingsbury's book.It is fanfiction, albeit by a competent author. It is certainly not canon.
Sorry, I wasn't responding to your comment about whether it is canon; I was responding to Naive Mind's description of Psychohistorical Crisis as "an unofficial continuation of Foundation". It isn't. It's not set in Asimov's universe, but Kingsbury's universe based on some of the same premises, for the purposes of exploring some of the implications of Asimov's ideas.Lord Nightstalker wrote:I did not say it was canon, just that it does not contradict canon.Hunchback Jack wrote:Psychohistorical Crisis is very good, but I don't think it's meant to be a continuation of Asimov's universe. Rather, it takes the basic premise of that universe and explores some of its ideas and ramifications in a universe very much like Asimov's. That's why the names - and some important aspects of the history - are different, and why it would never be considered canon.
... I would respond the same way. It's can't tie those two Asimov creations together, because it is set in the universe of neither.I was talking about Psychohistorical Crisis, which supposedly ties Nightfall into the Foundation Timeline.
FF is well worth it, if you can find a copy. The fiction pieces set in Asimov's universe are generally very well done, with a few exceptions, and the two or three stories done for laughs are really quite funny - the Effinger story among them. Connie Willis's "Dilemma" is great, too.Freakzilla wrote:I've read Nightfall but not Foundation's Friends, so I can't say.
You can still assume (as I did) that "Cloun the Stubborn" (the Mule-equivalent) 's mental powers have been edited out of history through careful manipulation by the Gaians.Hunchback Jack wrote: Incidentally, it does contradict canon. Apart from the numerous changes in name and role of the main characters, the Mule-analogue in Kingbury's universe doesn't defeat the Foundation-analogue by mental powers, but by a new technology that has a similar effect. This technology is an important plot point of Psychohistorical Crisis, and one which could not occur in Asimov's timeline. As far as I recall, there are no mental powers akin to those held by the Second Foundation in Kingbury's universe.
“Moreover, some even now accuse me of faking the entire phenomenon of human mentalics! They claim that it would be all too easy to contrive the appearance of this new mutation, by hiding micro-thought amplifiers nearby and keeping them constantly focused on the supposed human telepath.”
Hari noted that his friend did not explicitly deny the rumor. In fact, he recalled a certain jeweled pendant that Wanda had never been without, ever since childhood…but that was off the subject.
The 3 Bees novels are forgettable. Joan D'arc and her boyfriend are the main characters. Good doorstops though.Lord Nightstalker wrote:Hi
New member here, and first time poster.
Has anyone read the Second Foundation Trilogy by Gregory Benford, Greg Bear and David Brin?
They do a great job of continuing the Foundation series, and explains a lot of unresolved issues like-
Why there are no non-human intelligences
Why robots have not been reinvented in 20,000 years.
Why technology has remained stagnant for so many millenia and has regressed by the time of the original trilogy.
They also tell us Asimov's intended ending.
If you have read it, do you feel that is the right way to go about it, or are you opposed to continuing Frank's work in any manner whatsoever?