Asimov varied the formula in the later books by introducing the Mule and the Second Foundation, presumably because you can only write so many stories where the protagonists are pre-destined to win before it gets boring. But in the first book, the heroes really are locked in, there isn’t any Mule and there isn’t really a variety of potential futures, Seldon planned his Foundation so that it would stay on a pretty narrow set of rails, and just to make sure they don’t fuck up, records messages telling them what to do in any given crisis.
The only thing the protagonists do is keep the Foundation from making any really irrational or obviously self-destructive choices since Seldon assumes that the civilizations in his calculations will act to advance there own self-interest…
So I guess the teachers question boils down to whether someone can be a hero if all they need to do to save the day is show up and not be willfully self-destructive.
It was only the dissolution of the Galaxy that was inevitable, not the eventual recovery specifically via the Foundation. They were battling to survive against the inexorable. They weren’t locked into anything.
I read that to mean: you can choose your path, but given the fact that we set you up as a foundation that has tech and knowledge to trade with the now-outskirts-primitive feudal societies around you (now that the Empire has frayed), in order to survive, you will be forced to exploit your advantages only in a way that keeps you on a path to New Empire. The actions of the “heroes” are to have the courage to act in the one direction they’ve been equipped with strategically - ahead of time by Seldon - for survival. That’s *the whole point *to the Foundation. **StGermain **- is your niece getting all this? ;)
It was setting in motion the articulation of a strategy that could navigate the future best as mapped by p-history. Not predestination in the religious/philosophical sense…
“Only one possible future” is a bit of hyperbole, though. At each Selden crisis, Selden’s hologram says just how likely it was that history would still be on the right track by that point, and for the later ones, it was down in the vicinity of 80%. Over the entire thousand-year trajectory needed for the Second Empire, I’d guess that it probably wasn’t much better than a coin flip-- It’s just that that’s the best Selden was able to do. Of course, any individual deviation was highly improbable, but there were many opportunities for deviations.
You might make an interesting argument that Bel Riose was a tragic hero who was doomed to fail. He was obviously modeled on the Byzantine general Belisarius.
Yes, but he also mitigated that risk by setting up
The Second Foundatin, to avoid small perturbations from getting out of hand, and bring the overall sweep of history back into line with the Greater Plan ™.
Unless, of course, you are referring solely to events revealed to us in the first book.
Long time since I read them but I always had a problem with the whole idea of the pre-ordained Seldon Crisis with its inevitable (or at least probabilistically predictable) outcome. As I remember it there is always an individual or group opposed to the action being taken by our ‘hero’ - Hardin etc. How does p-history, that only works on the scale of millions of people, determine the prabability that the individual with the correct solution to the crisis will prevail?
Surely all it takes is one blaster bolt from a disgruntled member of the opposition and the hero is smoke and so is the future of Seldon’s plan!
OK, is anyone else blanking on the 4th lead male character in parts 2-5? Seldon himself is only in part 1 (physically), so I don’t think he counts. Parts 2 & 3 are Salvor Hardin, 4 is Limmar Ponyets, and 5 is Hober Mallow. You could maybe make a case that Gorev is also a lead in part 4, but given that’s by far the shortest section of the whole book, I’m not buying it.
Wait, correcting a minor error, and preventing it from getting out of hand? You’re not posting from the other end of the Galaxy, are you, Devoran? I’m on to you!
To expand just a little. The traditional romantic type hero would save the girl even at the expense of risking harm to the whole of humanity (and then find some way to save the whole of humanity), whereas the heroes of Foundation take a more reasoned approach with logic and mathematics - in some sense, you might even say that logic and mathematics are the heroes of the story.
Speaking from memory here (I haven’t read the “Foundation” series in years), but I have a question about the guidance given by the simulacrum.
Was it a prerecorded message, or was there a master computer somewhere that generated the message, given at the time of a “Selden Crisis”?
Hari (when he was alive) knew that the Second Foundation would evenutally prevail-so were these lectures more of a “pep talk”, like a football coach delvers to his team?
Or was the plan a dynamic one, which would generate the lecture that the simulacrum delivered?
