© James Pyles

If you like my work, buy me a virtual cup of coffee at Ko-Fi.

I discovered the existence is the Isaac Asimov collection Gold (named for one of the fictional stories therein) from an online source I have since forgotten. It is advertised as Asimov’s Final collection and I had never heard of it before (the usual Science Fiction fandom gatekeepers can take note and castigate me accordingly).

The book was published in 1995, three years after Asimov’s death. It is divided into three portions: Final SF Stories, Essays on Science Fiction topics, and on the matter of Writing Science Fiction.

I imagined that I’d be most interested in the stories themselves and was disappointed to find I was wrong. The stories weren’t particularly strong examples of his work, at least as I remember his work. I can’t recall the last time I read anything by Asimov, especially something I hadn’t first read in my adolescence of early adulthood, but it was certainly years if not decades ago.

I should say that several of those stories unintentionally touched on an issue we face in the current era of publishing. Asimov couldn’t have seen the advent of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the specific manner it has manifested itself in the 21st century (as the creator of a very rich universe of robotics which include The Three Laws, he had his own version of AI firmly in mind). Nevertheless, two or three stories specifically addressed the dilemma of robots or devices independently writing fiction surpassing their human owner or creator.

Also, some of the stories didn’t seem to require being taken seriously. One obviously lampooned science fiction author and astrophysicist Gregory Benford for reasons that weren’t stated.

The essays were largely or exclusively taken from various periodicals Asimov had edited and/or lent his name to. They sometimes referenced other issues of the same magazine which would have been meaningful to the original reader but not so much to someone reading this collection.

From this and the third section, I was made acquainted (or reacquainted in some cases) with Asimov’s thinking and personality. He was a very “dynamic” person to say the least.

I learned a bit of history about the genre (I love reading about where science fiction came from), how it developed, and how authors and editors who were once considered giants now have their names dragged through the proverbial mud (John W. Campbell comes to mind).

Actually, Asimov did make mention of some of Campbell’s shortcomings, especially his belief that people of northern European descent were somehow superior. However, Asimov stopped short of calling him a racist as much later Jeannette Ng did on the occasion of accepting an award once named after him. I find it especially “interesting” that a year later, she won a coveted Hugo Award for calling Campbell a racist the prior year. Go figure.

Anyway, Asimov’s thoughts, beliefs, and biases on a great many topics were put on display within these pages.

While he speaks to how he writes science fiction, that in no way will act as a guide for other writers (including me) for how to be a successful science fiction writer. For one thing, his popularity was spawned in an entirely different era (he was a fan of science fiction in the 1930s and began writing around 1940). Those influences and the popularity of certain types of stories back then won’t really translate into what would be thought of a “good science fiction” now.

In other words, if Stephen King were to begin his career now instead of in the 1970s or thereabouts, he may not be today considered such a noteworthy writer. Anything he produces now, just as anything Asimov produced in the late 1980s and up to his death in 1992 would be published and enjoyed in part because it was built on a decades long tradition of success that was founded long ago.

The other reason it cannot be considered a guide is because Asimov’s style and perspectives are totally idiosyncratic. He admitted that he took no writing classes, read no books on writing, and didn’t even know such material existed. He just wanted to start writing and did so.

Fans could have all sorts of reasons for reading Gold including simply wanting to consume anything with Asimov’s name on it.

For me, it ended up being for the history and a number of his insights as to how he viewed his own work and the works of others. I struggled with parts but am finally glad I made the effort. Now it goes back to the public library and the next book (already in my possession) gets my full attention.

Oh, Asimov hated reviews of his own books. Glad he’s not around to read this one.