Foundation

With a penchant for both science fiction and the classics, I decided to begin Asimov's Foundation series this summer. This is the first Asimov I've ever read, so I honestly didn't really know what to expect. Further, I've only read the first book of the multiple book series, so to say I have an incomplete picture of this work is an understatement.

Spoilers below!


The novel consists five distinct parts, each separated by several decades, advancing the timeline far enough for a new set of protagonists to deal with the historical consequences of the prior characters' actions.

Setting in a collapsing Romanesque galactic empire spanning millions of worlds, the premise is that a very gifted man, Harry Seldon, has devised a method (with the name 'Psychohistory') to scientifically with astonishing accuracy predict the future, up to thousands of years in advance, with, you know, math and stuff. Yeah, math. That's it.

Ok. The book's central conceit is psychohistory. If you have a hard time swallowing psychohistory, the underlying thread of this work begins to ravel. I love science fiction. I love fantasy. But for some reason I can divine, I had an impossible time suspending my disbelief regarding psychohistory. And that, along with numerous other issues, prevented me from truly appreciated Asimov's work.

A Very Dated Telling

Probably the biggest shock to me from the get go was the extremity to which this series dates itself. It was embarrassing, in a way, that such a revered novel could be so horribly dated through it's descriptions of technology. Perhaps some might consider this some of it's charm, but I found it extremely jarring.

The ultimate level of technology in this universe nuclear power. Ok, fine. We didn't want to invent some sort of fantastic science fiction power source that seemed contrived. (More on contrivance later...) Furthermore, nuclear power is the in the zeitgeist of this series' conception, so it makes sense that it might be a theme within the book.

All that said, however, one of the paradigms of the greats of science fiction across any medium is their ability to be prescient, to imagine a technology, culture, etc that may be magical at the point pen is put to paper, yet pans out in fact years later. Asimov himself may even be accused of this prescience in his Robot novels.

Well, whatever qualities he had in that regard seem sorely absent here. Nuclear technology, which perhaps seemed the wave of the future in the 1940's, doesn't age well. It doesn't have any magical properties described in the book, and further, radiation is quite deadly, despite the many characters tendency to bathe themselves in the stuff.

And this nuclear power is an extremely central theme. Entire civilizations lose knowledge of nuclear power, and the Foundation's knowledge of nuclear power becomes their prime means of shaping their destiny. They use this knowledge of nuclear power as a bargaining tool to ensure their continued survival, and even at times absolute control of other cultures.

All this begs the question, in my mind, how are their ships powered? These civilizations that have lost power - are we seriously suggesting that they're traveling interstellar distances with what.... coal and oil?

I suppose I shouldn't get hung up on this point, especially as I have the benefit of technological hindsight, but this point completely destroyed immersion for me as a reader. The best novels, of any genre, are timeless. The best science fiction novels are often, technologically, ambiguous. By hinging so much of this world on the use of something so specific and known (nuclear power), the novel has dated itself in the worst way possible.

Well. Maybe not the worst way.

Surprisingly Passive Sexism

There are no female characters worth mentioning in the book. In fact, I can only think of one female character in the first book. And she was greedy, spoiled, and cared only for her own vanity.

Look, I get it, it was written in a different time by a male author in a very different culture than that in which we currently live. But that aforementioned prescience many science fiction greats have been imbued with? Rarely is it confined to technology. Often they have dashes of it in their societies, norms which have evolved beyond our current culture, many of which we have later caught up and met.

Well, that is not the case here. Not only are the only primary characters male, but the only secondary characters are also male. Women just aren't worth mentioning in the narrative. I hear this changes in the later books. I hope this changes in the later books. But were I to someday have a daughter, this is not a book which I would recommend to her.

Contrivance. Contrivance Contrivance Contrivance. 

A Classic?

I'm genuinely puzzled. Why is this a classic? I can only hope the later novels offer some redemption, as I found myself forcing my way through this book, struggling to suspend disbelief (something I'm generally quite adept at) to choke down one more forced "Seldon crisis" and to hope for something of interest to happen at some point, any point, in the narrative.

A Pilgrim's Path: Freemasonry and the Religious Right - John J. Robinson

A Pilgrim's Path: Freemasonry and the Religious Right

by John J. Robinson

Received this in the mail today. I honestly don't know where I first heard of this book. Online? From a brother at lodge? I don't know know, but without hesitation I can say it's one of the best reads I've had in awhile. I sat down and read the entire thing tonight in one sitting. It was that compelling.

The book is somewhat hard to describe as it doesn't necessarily have a core focus. Essentially it is a book of apologetics defending Freemasonry against the slanderous attacks made against it by so many fundamentalist religious pundits of the modern era. It criticizes mostly Christians, but that's mainly because they tend to attack Masonry the most in America, and often from the most ridiculous, outlandish grounds. It takes many of the most common anti-Masonic arguments made by those 'Christian' leaders, and refutes them with facts, and often enough, pure reason. It was amazing to me how many arguments the author was able to deconstruct just through logic alone. He truly was a gifted writer.

Not only that, he was fair minded. When he did criticize anyone, it was through a careful examination of the [often times] outright falsehoods they proclaim as truth to those unwilling to investigate the craft for itself. 

I think, perhaps, most fascinating about the whole book is that, at the time of the writing, the author was definitively not a Freemason. He chose to undertake writing this book after earlier research into another book he wrote, Born In Blood, which discusses his theories regarding the origins of Freemasonry. After writing that book, he learned much about the fraternity, and actually had his own sort of a lecture circuit in the Masonic world. Through that, he learned about modern Freemasonry, and made friends in the craft, when caused him to learn even more about the subject at hand. At the request of many who wanted him to write another book about Freemasonry, he choose this as the topic, addressing what he considered some of the most heinous lies told about Masonry, which he encountered during his many radio show spots, discussions post lecture, etc. 

That a man, who was not a Mason, should be motivated to write a book defending Masonry is in itself an illuminating fact. And the book continues to enlighten. He does a better job of defending Freemasonry than most Freemasons themselves do.

To be fair, some of the book is a bit dated. It was written in the early 1990's, and some of the issues he discussed in a then contemporary voice are rapidly becoming old history. However, that said, the work as a whole, excepting one or two chapters, is still incredibly relevant, and I expect it to remain relevant for years to come. 

Overall, as a Freemason, I found the book both enlightening and inspiring in parts. From the standpoint of an author outside of Masonry, he had remarkable understanding and insight into what is a complex fraternity at best. I would heartily recommend this book to anyone with reservations about the fraternity, be it wives of men who just joined, or men who've always been curious but have questions they are afraid to ask.

I'd like to add that Mr. John Robinson, at the conclusion of writing this book, did join the fraternity and became Brother John Robinson. Unfortunately, only a few short years after joining the fraternity, he passed away from health issues. This saddens me, as I had hoped to be able to write him and thank him for this valuable work. Even more so, it saddens me that no new works will ever be published by him. 

For a list of all his publications, including Born in Blood, click here. (Link takes you to the Barnes and Noble website.)

Symbols of Freemasonry - Daniel Beresniak

I recently finished Symbols of Freemasonry by Daniel Beresniak. An interesting read, is perhaps the best way I can describe it. It was stumbled upon in a Hastings, used, for sale. I bought it cheap, not knowing exactly what to expect. Well, now that I've finished it, I'm rather glad I bought it on sale.

The book suffers from two problems that make it somewhat difficult to digest. The first is the background of the author. He is a French Mason, and French Masonry has a very distinct perspective and flavor to it. I dug around a bit on the internet, trying to find out which governing body in France he belongs to, the Grand Orient of France or the Grand Lodge of France, but haven't come up with an answer. (The former being irregular, the latter being recognized by the UGLE. I strongly suspect the former from the tone of the book, but can't be sure.)

Anyway, many of the organizations and symbols he references are peculiar to French/European Masonry, and wouldn't be immediately recognizable to an American Mason. If a non-Mason were to read the book, then join an American lodge, things would simply not quite be what he was expecting. For example, there are many more references to alchemical meanings in the book than you will run across in most American Freemasonry. Some things, like the references to the Chamber of Reflection, and the Rectified Scottish Rite, and almost non-existent in American Masonry. I'm only familiar with them from an extensive bit of reading on my part. And other subjects, such as the Lodge of Adoption and Co-Masonry, are almost antithetical to American Masonic traditions, and would certainly set up the wrong expectations.

Conversely, while he does discuss many traditions that are peculiar to Continental Freemasonry that American Masons wouldn't recognize, he also doesn't include any information on major Masonic Institutions in America. There is barely a mention of the York Rite at all in the book, which is one of the major appendant bodies in American Masonry. Likewise, the Allied masonic degrees, a smaller, but nevertheless ubiquitious group of degrees conferred in the United States, are conspicuously absent. While this is no sin, as he is a French Mason, perhaps a more apt title would be "Symbols of French Freemasonry." Perhaps that was the original title, and it was an editorial choice to change it when a translation was made? Either way, to paint the book as a broad overview of general Masonic symbols is inaccurate, as it's more specifically a regional title, truly.

The second major fault in the book is, frankly, some of his interpretations of the symbols. I won't harp too much on this, as one of the beauties of Freemasonry is the fact that, because it's teachings are taught through symbols, there are endless ways to interpret them, and endless connections to be made, allowing ever increasing depths of study. While most of the symbols have one generally accepted meaning, there are sometimes secondary meanings, tertiary meanings, and beyond. Symbolism, by definition, is open to interpretation, and I won't begrudge the author his own interpretation of Masonic symbols.

However, all of that said, many of his interpretations as recorded in the book are not interpretations I would reach myself in many cases. Often times, even in the explanations I found enlightening, they wouldn't necessarily be my first choice to publish in a book that could be someone's first encounter with Masonry. he often grasps at the most obscure references and connections possible in the symbolism, building a delicate house of cards on linguistic connections that are circumstantial at best. Frankly, sometimes his 'connections' weren't even that, at times. Sometimes they were just wild leaps of preference. Which, I suppose, at the end of the day, interpretation does have a good bit of generous give. But it can only be so generous.

All that said, the book isn't without worth, not even 'bad' in any sense. It's simply targeted towards a particular audience, and I think the average American, or even the average American Mason, isn't that audience. For all of its obscure connections, I will say there are some absolutely beautiful pictures and illustrations within the book of Masonic artifacts that you could have trouble finding elsewhere. Its visual impact is stunning, and it does do an excellent job of providing pictorial references, that both show the great similarities between French and American Masonry, and yet at other times highlight the differences.

So for those looking for a good, broad introduction to Masonry, particularly Masonry in America, I can confidently say this book is not for you. It's a highly intellectual study of symbolism that is often peculiar to French Masonry. There is even a warning as much in the Preface. However, if you are looking to expand your Masonic library, or perhaps are an American Mason trying to find a new, outsider perspective on Freemasonry, illuminating certain aspects of the symbolism not stressed much in American lodges, then you ought to look into this book as a valuable purchase. Its biggest strength is also its greatest detractor, that is, its perspective. Not a bad book by any means, but you need to know what you're purchasing before rushing off to buy it.