Video summary
The speaker begins by sharing a personal update about starting the new year with a cold, which delayed their content creation schedule, but they are now ready to proceed with their planned "end of year" reviews. The main focus of this video is a book that completely defied expectations: *Foundation* by Isaac Asimov. Despite warnings from friends and even herself that she would hate it due to its lack of traditional storytelling elements, the speaker found it to be one of her favorite books of the year. She read it twice within two months, once while hungover and once sober, and loved it both times. The book's ability to surprise her so thoroughly makes it a unique and enjoyable topic for discussion, especially since she had originally planned to read it as an academic exercise rather than purely for entertainment.
*Foundation* is described as a classic science fiction novel written in the 1940s by a young scientist who was pioneering the genre without established tropes or guidelines. The story opens in a distant future facing civilizational collapse, where a super-genius uses mathematics and probability to devise a plan to mitigate the inevitable fall of an empire over centuries. Unlike character-driven narratives, the book functions more as a massive thought experiment exploring sociological, political, and economic changes on a macro scale across different eras. The speaker compares the reading experience to watching *Yu-Gi-Oh!* as a child, where unexpected plot twists provide deep satisfaction because they feel earned within the intellectual framework of the story, rather than relying on emotional investment in specific characters.
One of the most striking aspects of the book is its deliberate lack of traditional character development and gender representation, which some might find offensive or limiting. However, the speaker argues that the characters are essentially genderless devices used to explore concepts, meaning their gender has no bearing on the plot. This allows for an all-female cast without changing the story's essence, highlighting how the narrative focuses purely on ideas rather than identity politics. The book is short, accessible, and avoids unnecessary complexity or "navel-gazing," delivering a satisfying intellectual journey that stimulates the mind without being opaque or difficult to understand. The speaker contrasts this with other books that claim excellent world-building but fail to deliver, noting that *Foundation* excels specifically in its proposed concept while not wasting time on elements it does not intend to explore.
Ultimately, the speaker concludes that *Foundation* is a rare example of a book that succeeds by doing exactly what it sets out to do, without needing to compensate for perceived weaknesses with other narrative devices. While she admits the second sequel, *Foundation and Empire*, felt slightly less pure as a concept-driven work, she still enjoyed it and plans to read the third installment next month. She encourages listeners who might be intimidated by the book's reputation or lack of traditional story elements to give it a try, emphasizing that it is short and highly rewarding for those interested in speculative ideas. The video ends with an invitation for viewers to share their own experiences with the book, whether they loved it like her or found it disappointing, before signing off with plans for future end-of-year content.
Read the full video transcript
Happy new year. The start to my new year
was not that great. I had a cold. Um, so
me who was already behind on making
videos for all of last year and I was
like so ready to start out the new year
with doing all of the end of year
content. I was like, I'm so back, baby.
And then um, New Year's Eve, I started
to feel sick and I was sick for like a
week. [laughter]
So then that meant all of the chores and
all the other things that I would
normally have been doing, could not be
doing until I got better. Anyway, long
story short, we're doing all that
content now. We're behind again.
[laughter]
Bear with me. But anyway, um so I am
going to do end of year content. Um I
know that's not that's not what this is.
However, um I'm doing this one first
because the book I'm going to talk about
in this video is going to be in my best
of the year spoilers for my best of the
year. Um so I thought it wouldn't make
sense to do this after that. Like this
should come first. I mean I ideally
wanted to do this video a while ago,
[gasps]
but I didn't. So here we are. It's
better than all the videos that I wanted
to do. and I'm just not going to do. So,
at least we're doing this one. Anyway,
um yeah, so as the thumbnail or title or
whatever would have told you, I want to
talk about a book that I really really
loved uh that no one including me
expected me to love. And I uh I really
love it. [gasps] So, I want to talk
about it one because of the whole
surprise, I actually love it [laughter]
because that's always a little bit more
fun to talk about. uh a book that like
has a wildly different results from your
expectations. And two, just because I do
love it, then I have stuff to say about
it. I want to talk about it. Okay, so
without further ado, the book that uh no
one thought that I would like and that I
liked so much that I read at the end of
last year and I've also already reread
it in January. So I've read it twice
already in two months. It's not that
long though, so that's not that
impressive. The book in question is
Foundation by Isaac Azimov. I'm reading
these books with my patrons because um
in addition to our monthly buddy read
that I throw up a poll for and we vote
for and whatever. Then also I usually
have a readalong of some kind going just
based on kind of chats in the discord if
people are feeling like a certain series
then I'll be like all right let's do a
readalong if if I also want to read it.
So after we finished our readalong of a
song of ice and fire um I was like
anyone want to read Foundation? So,
we're reading Foundation and everyone
was like, "Well, this will be a short
read along because Lena's going to hate
it. We're we're going to read the first
book and she's going to be like psych."
But that's not the case. [laughter]
I loved Foundation and we are we have
now chatted about uh Foundation and
Empire and we will chat about Second
Foundation next month. Um I haven't read
that yet. I have read Foundation and
Empire. So anyway, um Foundation by
Isaac Azimov doesn't really need any
introduction, I don't think, but I will
give an introduction of sorts. this is
an all-time classic. That's why I wanted
to read it because everyone was like,
"Oh, you're gonna hate it." And I was
like, "Well, even if that is the case,
it's still a book that I want to have
read because even if I don't enjoy it,
it has been so influential for sci-fi as
a genre, for even fantasy as a genre to
some degree cuz those genres are kind of
interconnected a bit." So, I was like,
even if I don't personally enjoy the
experience, it feels like for my
edification as a genre reader, I should
read Foundation. Anyway, so that was the
mindset I went into it with. I was like,
"It's short. It's a classic. It's super
influential. Let's just, you know, let's
see what it's all about and and regard
it as an academic exercise and get
something out of it." I loved it. I
loved it so much. [laughter]
And then I was worried that I wouldn't
like it as much the second time cuz I
wanted to reread it. One, because I
wanted to do this video. Two, I wanted
to reread it before reading Foundation
and Empire. And third, the main reason I
wanted to reread it was because the
first time I read it, I was extremely
hung over when I read it. And I still
loved it. So that I kind of should tell
you something. But also then I was like
I don't know if I like fully absorbed
it. Maybe I missed stuff because I was
quite hung over. So [gasps] So I reread
it um feeling well not feeling that
great but anyway I was not hung over
when I reread it and still loved it.
Still loved it. The if I have a
complaint it's that the ending is so
abrupt and the second time through even
I was like damn it really does just end
right there. Okay so foundation. If
you've never ever heard of Foundation,
um,
well, I welcome to science fiction as a
genre. [laughter]
Glad to have you here. This was written
a very long time ago. It was written in
the 1940s, I believe, not originally as
a novel. Um, I believe uh, Foundation
like what what is what Foundation is
composed of was published serially first
before it was actually published as a
book. Um, so the material inside was
written in the 40s and then the first
time foundation was published as a book.
I think was in the 50s. Isaac Azimov was
a scientist and he was quite young when
he wrote Foundation. I think he was in
his 20s. It being the 1940s when he
wrote this. Then again, stuff like this
wasn't around. That's why he's sort of a
grandfather of the genre, if you will.
So, it's uh in terms of uh nowadays most
books, they are in conversation with the
tropes that have come before. They stand
on the shoulders of giants such as
Foundation. But this was sort of him
taking a stab at doing this kind of a
thing. So he didn't really have any like
guidelines for how this should go. And
so really what I'd heard about this and
why people thought that I wouldn't like
it um and why you might have heard that
you might not like it or you might think
that you might not like it is that it's
not really a story that it doesn't have
characters that it's and that that's why
Lyanna the character-driven reader is
going to hate it. But even then I was
like hey but I did like threebody
problem and everyone says that about
threebody problem and I like and I do
like threebody problem. I don't love
threebody problem. I love this and this
is even less characters than threebody
problem both in terms of like number of
characters and in terms of how much
characterization is occurring. Um it's
even less of a story than threebody
problem. And I think that's why I love
it because if you aren't interested in
doing characters and you're not
interested in doing a plot, then don't
waste my time with a half-ass attempt at
it. Cuz threebody problem is twice as
long as this at least. And I feel a
little bit like it's sometimes wasting
my time cuz I'm like clearly your
interest is not in doing
characterization and a novel. Your
interest is in the concept that you're
exploring and it is an interesting
concept but like then let's just do the
concept. So that's what foundation is
doing. If you're not interested in the
concept of foundation, um, which I'll
kind of talk about, but but point you'll
what the concept is pretty quickly if
you read it. If you're not interested in
the intellectual exercise that Isaac
Azimov is exploring here, then this
won't be for you. Um, if you just like
want an entertaining adventure or an
engrossing, immersive, dramatic tale
with um, whatever, like that, that's
just not what this is doing. So, because
this is so short, I love that that it's
just like, "No, we're not we're not
doing story. We're not doing characters.
I have a really interesting concept that
I just really want to explore. Would you
like to come with me to explore it with
me?" Now, that being said, I actually do
feel really um engrossed when reading
this both times. And I I referred to
this when I was chatting with my
patients about it as um cuz this is
broken up into basically sort of five
parts and there's massive time skips in
between because again we're doing
concept we're doing exploring
societal structural stuff on the grand
scale of like you know the the macro
level with a little bit of the micro to
sort of illustrate the point at like
various sort of points um many years
apart to observe the changes that we are
trying to explore because those changes
occur over lifetimes. So each of these
sort of like five sections it explores
again a particular kind of um aspect of
civilization um and of this speculative
like uh experiment that he's doing both
experiment in terms of he himself is
doing a thought experiment and also the
characters in the story are basically
conducting a massive experiment and each
section again I referred to this as kind
of like watching Yu-Gi-Oh when I was a
kid if you ever watched it um like where
always always always there'd be this
climactic moment where it looks like
he's not he's going to get defeated but
then there would be you know slipping
he'd slip out of his back pocket this
like uno reverse trick where it's like
but actually haha I win because of
whatever and it was so satisfying as a
kid to watch that cuz like you'd be on
the edge of your seat and you'd be like
oh no he's going to lose and it'd be
like haha actually I win like [laughter]
yay so this does this multiple times in
a way that I found deeply satisfying
because it never felt uh unearned
But again, it's not like a
character-driven version of that. It's
not like you're deeply invested in this
character's journey and you really want
to see them triumph over the evil baddy.
It's just like an academically
satisfying Uno reverse where you're
watching this unfold and someone's being
quite smug about believing that they
have the upper hand in the situation.
They have the high ground. And then
through the what has been laid out as
the setup for this intellectual
exercise, the other character is like
actually in fact you lose because of
these reasons. And you're like, "Oh,
boom. You sure do." Now, this book is
old. It is dated. There are no female
characters in this, but I would argue
there are no characters in this. So, if
you I know it's been adapted. I have not
seen the show at all. I know it exists.
I know Lee Hayes is in it. That's all I
know. So this nothing nothing I have I
have no comments about the show. I don't
know. But what I was going to say is
that if you were to adapt this again I
know it has been but if just reading
this if you were like oh let me write a
screenplay for this. You could swap out
just about every character for a female
cuz it's they're they're like sexless
genderless like devices through which to
explore this story and this concept. So,
while it is again actually technically
utterly devoid of female characters,
it's not I wouldn't say it feels like
it's filled with male characters because
them being males, it's like in name
only. It has no bearing on their role in
the story. So, like in Denny Villanu's
Dune films when they swap Dr. Kind's for
or they make Dr. K's a female and it
makes no difference to the story because
gender and sex have nothing to do with
that character. You can make them either
one. It doesn't make any difference. You
could do that again. Literally every you
could be in an all female cast of
Foundation. It would change nothing. I
know it was like written at a time and
people still now at this time sort of
think of male as default. So like that's
sort of the vibe. It's just like well
they're all dudes just because like
that's the default. And so like I guess
on the face of it that's like kind of
offensive, but for it being the 1940s
like people still do it now. So like
whatever. He's he's not doing anything
offensive towards women. He's just been
like, I have a thought experiment and
all these characters are exploring this
thought experiment and without thinking
about it, I've made them all do like,
okay, whatever. So, what's it about? I
don't want to spoil it, but I do want to
talk about what it's about. I guess
that's part of why I love it so much.
So, in Foundation, like I said, it's
sort of split into parts and they're all
like many, many years apart. And I don't
want to spoil exactly sort of like the
Uno reversals that we experience because
they I I do find them extremely
satisfying and fun and it's actually
surprisingly humorous. Like there's a
character whose name is Wenus and I just
cannot read that without
like cracking up. But anyh whoies. Um so
we are we already open on the far
future. So this doesn't it's not like
the it starts in the present day and
then does the future. We open already in
the distant future. Um, and we're
actually facing civilizational collapse
or at least the prospect of it. So,
through tiny wy me math, science,
physics, projection, uh, probabilities,
um, super genius has been, uh, tinkering
away at formulas and probabilities and
been like, I have like a pretty near
100% certainty that like we're facing
fall of empire. So, what do we do about
that? What is our contingency? how do we
um if it's not preventable, then what
can we do to mitigate that? And so then
the whole book is basically just this
person setting into motion a plan that
spans centuries to in theory mitigate
what he regards as the inevitable
imminent collapse of empire. And like I
said, each sort of era that we explore
uh offers a different sort of insight
into the functioning of humans um sort
of on a sociological, political and uh
economic level and I think it's just
really well done. He hasn't thought of
everything, but it's it's a really
interesting again sort of experiment in
doing the sort of chessboard of future
civilization of like if these are the
variables you play with, what are going
to be the results if we sort of do this
little experiment. [gasps] And I just
find it so engrossing. It's not
complicated. It's not hard to read this
book. It's really short. The pros is
very approachable. It's pretty I thought
it would be like really dense and hard
to read. So like when I first started
reading it, I was like locking in like,
"Okay, focus. This is like old timey
sci-fi. It's actually very readable and
I think really fun. I wasn't that far
into it the first time when I was like,
is this book really fun? [laughter]
I'm having a great time. And the second
time, too, I had a great time again.
Yeah, I think it just like really packs
a punch cuz it delivers all these beats
that I would have said probably wouldn't
be narratively satisfying if you haven't
done a huge amount of character work
because mostly when books try to have
these moments of like, you find them
satisfying because you are invested in
the characters. And I think for the most
part that does remain true. I wouldn't
like change my position on thinking that
is largely the case in most novels. This
is just a case of I've often said uh and
I have so few examples to support me,
but now I have, you know, at least one
or two that a book um can can lack a
whole bunch of things if it's really
excelling at this thing that it's
proposing to excel at. When people will
pitch to me books that are like, okay,
so it's not got this going for it, but
it has just the most amazing magic
system. or okay, it doesn't have this,
but it has amazing world building. And I
usually give those books a chance and
then I'm always disappointed because
what I find to be the case is that no,
I'm sorry, it's just not that
impressive. The world building or the
magic or whatever it is it claims to be
doing so so well, it's not. It's like a
little bit maybe above average, but I
usually find it not good enough to then
do away with all the other pieces of a
novel that I would generally say I
require. So, you just have to be
actually that good and most people just
aren't. [gasps]
So, there are several books that I like
that are just really about an idea or a
concept or about like they have just
really excellent world building and
they're not offering something else and
people are like, "No one is going like
Leon is not going to like this and then
I do and they're like that doesn't make
any sense." I'm like, "It actually
does." All those other times when I
didn't like books that were claiming to
do that, they just weren't that good.
This is that good. So, the fact that
it's just like kept it to what it's
interested in doing, it hasn't wasted my
time. It hasn't like gone off the rails
and naval gazing. Uh it hasn't
overstated its welcome and it has
genuinely intrigued me and
intellectually stimulated me and in a
way that wasn't like needlessly opaque
and difficult to understand because the
author was like well that makes it deep.
This book was literally I mean I felt
very like a sincere connection with
Azimov who was like I just kind of want
to like think about this concept um and
let's like work through what that would
be like. Wouldn't that be fun? And I'm
like yeah I would. I had a great time.
Thank you for inviting me on this
journey with you. Foundation and Empire.
The second one I liked a little bit less
and that one is actually more of a novel
than this is. This I liked better
because it was pure concept. The second
one we do more of a novel and I still
really liked it. Four stars and I'm
going to read Second Foundation. The
fact that this isn't trying to be a
novel is fantastic. It's one of the
greatest things about it. So, if you've
not read Foundation because it
intimidates you or because you've heard
what I heard and you're like, "No chance
I will like it." If I if you listening
to this re review were like, "Still
sounds like my worst nightmare." Well,
then maybe don't read it. But if you're
willing to read something that's just
concept only and and willing to take my
word for it that it's actually a really
good version of that, it's really not a
long book. So, uh it surprised me. I
loved it a lot. It's made my favorites
of the year. again. I've already read it
twice and I will happily read it another
time because it's not very long. So
yeah, this is classic sci-fi that I
really, really, really love. So maybe
give it a go. Um or don't. You know,
it's your life. You know you best. But
yeah, I just wanted to share the good
news that I liked a book. It does
happen. But let me know your thoughts if
you have read Foundation. If this was
not your experience with it, if you were
one of the people that really got
irritated or disappointed with it, um if
you're shocked that I liked it, if you
um don't recognize if you've read it and
you don't recognize foundation, my
description of it, if you're like that
is not what I read, uh whatever you let
me know and I'll see you for my other
end of year videos. Well, I shouldn't
say other. This is not an end of your
video, but I'll see you for my end of
year videos. Bye.
>> [music]