The 4th book and beyond were definitely that way, so much so that it was painfully obvious to teenaged me. The 4th book was bad enough that I stopped part-way.Weetabix wrote:That's how I recalled it from my youth, too, but now it seems to be relatively slender books that are fairly dull reads with lots of meandering description that doesn't contribute. Excluding the first, that is.Greg wrote:Weird, I remember the original Foundation trilogy as being relatively slender books that were fairly brisk reads, kind of like the three precurser novels. It was the 4th book in the 'trilogy' and beyond, where he went off the rails.Weetabix wrote:I picked up Second Foundation, read just a bit, and when warding off a cat, dropped it on the floor. I don't have enough time in my life already. I think I'll leave it there.
From reading his introduction, it seems that he wrote the first book as a series of short stories in the pulps. His editor wanted a book, so they put the stories together and he wrote the necessary links to make it a book. Fans wanted more, so the editor pushed him into writing books he didn't really want to write. I'm guessing that's what made the second two less enjoyable. Perhaps the fans back then were starved for entertainment and didn't notice?
'Foundation and ... Pants'
'Foundation and ... Um, My Earlier Robot Stories, Somehow'
'Foundation and ... Continued Royalty Checks, Because I Need the Money'
etc
etc