This is a well-known book of a Golden Age of SF, so I waited something classical and well-done. Unfortunately, it is nothing like that. In fact, thisThis is a well-known book of a Golden Age of SF, so I waited something classical and well-done. Unfortunately, it is nothing like that. In fact, this book is a collection of linked stories exploring some unobvious and peculiar consequences of the three rules of Robotics. Good attempt, but no more. These rules are meant to make robots safe for humanity. But if we look at the consequences, the rules don’t seem to be so reliable anymore, even with the Asimov’s assumption, very vague and doubtful one, that robots know exactly, what can cause harm to a human being. A godlike ability of the machine! As a result, only some of these consequences are interesting, but the majority is either strange or unrealistic or inconsistent. Robot as a prophet of a reactor, catatonic robots, robot working as a perfect attorney… I can’t find better word to characterize this besides crap. Then it turns out to be that a robot CAN HARM a human being, only in order to protect other human beings. The worse thing is that Asimov didn’t understand that this particular moment destroys his entire scheme.
So, ideas are mostly crap. The realization isn’t better. The situations depicted in the book are childish and farfetched, the characters, being adult people, act and react as teenagers in their early teens or even as children.
CONCLUSION Very unconvincing book that shows a utopia where people are governed by robots. I can only hope that this utopia won’t ever come to existence. Recommended only for quick scan-reading to get the notion about the ideas presented in the book. ...more
This book deserves more than 4 points, but because of not very strong literary aspect i gave 4. Very interesting and informative part of the book is tThis book deserves more than 4 points, but because of not very strong literary aspect i gave 4. Very interesting and informative part of the book is the description of the late XIX century society, educated clas' Weltanschauung, it's views on social, cultural, biological, and physical development. The best thing is a future dystopia that resulted from a utopia. This ambiguous futurism, based on positivism, Marxism, Darwinism and other dominating in the late XIX century doctrines, makes The Time Machine a very profound, clever, and insightful book....more
Perfect, swift and captivating novel! Dick is just great! The story develops dynamically, it often surprises with its unexpectedness and realism. The noPerfect, swift and captivating novel! Dick is just great! The story develops dynamically, it often surprises with its unexpectedness and realism. The novel describes two societies: first is Earth, it's normal; second came to existence from the psychiatric hospital and consists, of course, from psychotics. But Dick subtly shows that it isn't so obvious, which one is normal and which is insane. What is sanity and what is madness? Quid est veritas? What is treason? The book offers to think about this and other profound questions in its unobtrusive, hilarious (but also serious) and easy-going way. And characters are very vivid and realistic. They evoke empathy, hatred, compassion, astonishment etc So, it's just great pleasure to read P.K. Dick!...more
It's such a pleasure to read that real classics of SF! During the reading i was struck by a thought - could contemporary authors write so interestingIt's such a pleasure to read that real classics of SF! During the reading i was struck by a thought - could contemporary authors write so interesting and enjoyable book without elaborating shooting, sex, pursuits, last moment resques, last moment insights and other action stuff? I am not saying that there shouldn't be such things, but it's a very easy way to make people read the text. Easy way and too trite!
So, Solaris is a good exploration sci-fi with a profound development of some important issues. What are the borders and limits of a humanity and human being? Is it possible to remain a human in an a-human conditions and, what is more tricky, is it necessary? Is a contact with a completely alien creature possible? Could we extend a notion of consciousness for a whole-planet ocean? Or maybe we are those who cannot be described intelligent comparing to it?...more
A sort of dubious book. A conversation between a wolf-vegetarian and a bear-vegetarian seemed weird. I was really ROTFL!
City is an example of applicatiA sort of dubious book. A conversation between a wolf-vegetarian and a bear-vegetarian seemed weird. I was really ROTFL!
City is an example of application of a linear history model (characterized by two main concepts of eschatology and progress and formulated by christianity and western civilization) to the nature with it's native cyclic model. What a result? Too sad and poor result, i may say. Book is very idealistic, but mostly i didn't like those ideals. The world, where death was totally eliminated... An achievement? I doubt. It's rather a world without a life, it's a dying world, how strange it may sound.
Anyway, this book is very useful to read and to think of the ideas stated and described - real classics, must to read....more
This book was published in 1960. The author describes future world with some striking and marvelous moments - compare them with reality.
1. by Dick: NeaThis book was published in 1960. The author describes future world with some striking and marvelous moments - compare them with reality.
1. by Dick: Near Geneva, underground, functions Vulcan-3, a supercomputer that rules the humanity - in reality: Near Geneva, underground, functions Large Hadron Collider, one of the largest and most powerful achievement of human thought and technology.
2. by Dick: in 1993 were adopted The Lisbon Laws, which established the rule of the supranational government headed by Vulcan 3 - in reality: in 1992 was signed and came into force Maastricht Treaty, establishing European Union, a supranational unit, in 2007 was signed and in 2009 entered in force Lisbon Treaty, an agreement that strengthened supranational level of European Union.
There is also one prophecy moment in Dr. Futurity. OMG, who was Philip K. Dick???!!! I don't believe in prophets, BUT also i do not believe in coincidences... i do not know what to think....more
Great novel by great author. Very good description of the idea of a disparity between subjective and objective reality. Reasonable structure of a bookGreat novel by great author. Very good description of the idea of a disparity between subjective and objective reality. Reasonable structure of a book - it starts in a rather normal world, then it became more and more surreal, at the end it became normal once more. I liked this very much. Vivid characters, they are best at the moments of twisted reality - analyzing, fearing, not believing, confident. And, some interesting and clever ideas are present here....more
Wonderful weird and quirky novel, dynamic but not only plot-oriented. It differs from the majority of other books. There are some weak moments and assuWonderful weird and quirky novel, dynamic but not only plot-oriented. It differs from the majority of other books. There are some weak moments and assumptions, but in the whole they are not significant. I liked how Bester depicted the society. Many very interesting ideas: regarding death penalty etc; and especially regarding espers - one of the first analysis of this topic. I enjoyed the description of their way of communication. Despite the happy end part (trivial and trite), i liked the denouement of this novel. It's unusual and fascinating!...more
This book is better than I, Robot, but only slightly. The problems are mostly the same:
1. Characters are strange, acting not as adults, but childishlyThis book is better than I, Robot, but only slightly. The problems are mostly the same:
1. Characters are strange, acting not as adults, but childishly and incomprehensibly. I want to see normal people in books.
2. The story is detective, but what struck me is that there is nothing like a normal investigation. I didn’t work in police or as detective, but even i can say that investigation couldn’t be conducted like this. The main hero, detective, was just speculating about possible culprit and made accusations relying only on his speculations. He did it THREE times and only by luck it turned to be the case the last time. I still don’t understand, to whom Asimov has written these books.
3. The robot aspect is no better. There are many discrepancies between I, Robot and Caves of Steel. Just one example: in the first book, a single person was able to construct and produce the robot, perfectly mimicking the human being; no one could prove its robot nature. The second book, depicting the reality 1000 year later, states that to do this in an industrial way is very difficult, in fact “It would be terribly expensive. I doubt that the return could be profitable,” – states the roboticist in a book. Asimov also described an interesting discussion between functionalist and anti-functionalist approach in robotics, but he defended the former in a couple of sentences, it was weak and unconvincing. Another disappointment.
4. Finally, Asimov made many predictions in this book. Let me not spend much time and just qualify them as false. 8 billion people will soon be on Earth and i don’t see a catastrophe behind the door.
CONCLUSION Another weak book on robots. And if i recommended the first one from the historical-scientific perspective, i don’t recommend this at all. Reading I, Robot is enough. Better to read something by Daniel H. Wilson, for example....more