Foundation Trilogy - Isaac Asimov

The Foundation Trilogy was...intriguing. Covering 500 years and half a galaxy, the books show key moments in the progression the Hari Seldon Plan. The Galactic Empire is failing, and Seldon, using the mathematics of "psychohistory," sets events in motion that will allow the early formation of a new, second empire, limiting the "barbarous" intervening years to 1000 rather than the 30,000 it would otherwise take for things to settle.

What Asimov accomplishes in a literary sense is, in itself, quite interesting. The snippets of life story, the narration seeming quite intimate as it follows the perspective of a series of characters, although always third person. In the first book, you see the Plan start to unfold, how Hari Seldon has set things up to progress in certain ways. In the second book, even larger obstacles arise, and it becomes apparent that one of them is something Hari Seldon could not have included in his calculations. The solution to that problem introduces another, largely unknown element of the Plan earlier than was intended, which leads to the third book, in which things looks like they're about to implode, with one faction of Hari's set-up trying to locate and destroy another faction. In short, the author manages to draw the reader into a series of protagonists while covering an immense expanse of time and flipping the plot around and turning it end over end, just when you think you know what to expect. It works, for the most part.

What I was most disturbed by was that I was firmly pro-Seldon throughout the book - he knows what he's doing, he's leading the galaxy in a better path, good of the people, and all that. In the end, though, it turns out that what he was really doing was preparing the galaxy to accept a new, mind-manipulating ruling class that he had formed in secret. At the end of the trilogy, everything seems to have worked out well for the Seldon Plan, and things are on track for the formation of the new empire on schedule. Having been born and raised with democracy as one of the highest ideals, I found the end of the book rather chilling, although I'm not sure that was the author's intent. To put it casually: sure, the ruling class means well NOW, but if they ever decide to exploit the people of the empire, there is absolutely nothing left stop them. It's the old AP English credo, "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

That said, I also started thinking about it practically in context of the upcoming election. With the vacillation we're seeing on the virtues of experience vs. being "refreshingly free from the stain of politics" and the discussion on whether either of the privileged, millionaire candidates can really understand the situation of the majority of Americans, it makes you wonder. Do we want officials we can identify with, and who we can easily believe could identify with us? Or do we want to be led by the brightest and the best our country has to offer? Regardless, what I like about our system of government, and what the near caste-system proposed by Asimov lacks, is that the people have just enough power to try their options, and make changes if things get too bad either way. Let's hear it for checks and balances!