Foundation – the _

[2981] Reading, listening and watching The Three-Body Problem

There have been several science-fiction novels adapted to the screens in recent years. Apple TV+’s Foundation is one. Denis Villeneuve’s Dune is the name. And the most recent is Netflix’s 3 Body Problem. In that immature adolescent pride that still exists inside of me, I am proud to say I have read all of them long before I have watched these three. So, I can understand criticisms some have about how unfaithful these screen adaptations could be.

I am not too fanatic about source fidelity. I can understand and accept different medium may require tweaks. What works in written form might not work on the screen. Foundation is the guiltiest in this sense. Despite its liberal interpretation of the books, I still enjoyed the series. Dune is also guilty but not by much. And it is not just science-fiction adaptations suffering from such criticisms. Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings has details left out but the trilogy is just incredible. In contrast, Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit appears to have added unnecessary draggy pages to make the movie series unbearable and an insult to J.R.R. Tolkien’s short book, and Jackson’s own adaptation of The Lord of the Rings.

3 Body Problem appears quite faithful to Liu Cixin’s original work The Three-Body Problem. Yes, there are some divergences as far as I can remember: the main scenes have been shifted from China to the UK and Europe (making the series whiter than it should) and several scenes including the multiplayer mode are new. But the storylines are intact as I far as I could tell.

Still, I have not watched all the episodes yet. 3 Body Problem was after all released on March 21, just three days earlier and I am not about to binge watch it. But I can say I recommend it (and the novel too, which I enjoyed thoroughly).

This brings me to a question I have in my head for some time now while watching all these adaptions. Does it matter if you either read or watch it? In fact, with the rise of audiobook, does reading, listening or watching something truly matter?

Does the medium matter?

I know different sensory approaches offer different experiences. Reading offers the greatest details but it can be a laborious exercise. Try reading The Wheel of Time from start to finish. Listening arguably offers the same level of details but, at least for me who I think processes information best through sights, the level of focus is just not there. Moving pictures losses the details but makes the material easier to understand (assuming it is not Tenet) and oftentimes, quicker as well.

I was a snob once, and that partly why I have read all these science-fictions. But as I grow older, I am realizing that there are too many books to read out there in the world. I just do not have the time to go through all of them. And even during my snobbish period, I came to know various work through the screens instead of through pages. The BBC’s Pride and Prejudice. An adaptation of The Romance of the Three Kingdoms. The 1962 adaptation of To Kill a Mockingbird. The 1939 adaptation of Gone With the Wind. I have come to know many classics through televisions and the movies, not books.

Coming back to the question. If I were younger, I would say yes it matters. Now, upon the realization there is no time, I can no longer be a snob. Now, I will say no.

[2945] Watching Foundation

Amid the Dune hype, it is easy to miss the other classic sci-fi hitting the screen. A different screen in a different format, but screen nonetheless. Isaac Asimov’s Foundation has been adapted for Apple TV+ streaming service with 8 of 10 episodes aired. I myself found out about it after browsing Facebook.

I read Foundation a long time ago as a teenager, and the idea of psychohistory was so attractive that I was bought into its universe so deeply. I know Star Wars before Foundation, but I understand Trantor, the capital planet of the Empire in Foundation, first before Coruscant, the capital of the Empire in Star Wars.

I was not the only one loving Foundation obviously. I could not. I remember reading in an interview where Paul Krugman said he went into economics because of Foundation; the predictive power of psychohistory does have a hint of economics in it. Lots of probabilities, and possibly econometrics.

But that was a long time ago, and I admit, I do not remember all the details. My reading list meanwhile has moved on from science fiction to stuff grounded more on reality. There is only one unread sci-fi on my shelf waiting to be opened: Cixin Liu’s The Three Body Problem (okay, there is also Forward the Foundation, but I was told, it is an unjust prequel to the original trilogy).

So, I thought I must be getting old and utterly forgetful when I watched the first episode of Apple’s Foundation. While Hari Seldon was there, the details did not feel right. The Genetic Dynasty? Could I have missed something that big? The pace of the series, as I kept on watching the rest of the series, felt too fast to what I remembered it. In the novels, hundreds of years would pass. In the series, less than a human lifetime.

As it turns out, my memory is fully intact. A little internet refresher reminds me of the Foundation I know. Further research reveals that the series diverges away from the novel, adding new elements and throwing away some.

I know people who are angry at this. The deviation from the novel feels blasphemous. Foundation feels like a holy book, and the series defiles it.

At first, I felt the same way, but really, at risk of being cancelled, I enjoy the series. I really do (and I really like Jared Harris, the man playing Hari Seldon, from his Sherlock Holmes days).

And clearly this is not the first time an original work has been reimagined. Star Wars, under Disney, did that when they threw out of the window all of original storylines told by the Thrawn Trilogy and more. Marvel, under Disney too, definitely changed the background to some of its major characters. Star Trek rebooted its whole universe, rather unsuccessfully if I might add.

So, as blasphemous as it might be, the act of fiddling the original story, I have been desensitized to the idea. A retelling could be as fulfilling as the reading the original.

After all, we are living in an age where actual history is being reassessed and retold in different lights. Old understandings are being overturned. Revisionism aplenty.

Not be quite a parallel, but it seems like a zeitgeist of our time.