Isaac Asimov 
List of books in alphabetical order
List of books in the order of categories from I. Asimov: A Memoir
List of books in chronological order
List of books in order of their ratings
List of important series
Stories listed alphabetically
Stories listed by category
Stories listed by publication date
Stories listed by rating
Go to the Asimov home page
Go to my home page
I’ve been writing reviews of all of Asimov’s books and short fiction. So far, I’ve reviewed all of his books which I’ve read (and even the four I haven’t), all of his anthologized science fiction and fantasy, and a few bits and pieces of unanthologized material. As time permits, I will continue the work.
Each review is about a page long (sometimes longer) and is intended to touch on the main reasons why I do or do not like a particular book. I don’t consider my position as an Asimov fan to obligate me to like his poorer work. On the other hand, there’s an awful lot by Asimov which I really, really like—which is why I’m an Asimov fan in the first place.
The reviews are often highly personal; their goal is to explain why I like a particular book, not why it’s a good book or a bad book. I have no training in literary criticism; I can only evaluate my own reaction.
The reviews, moreover, are not synopses. I feel no obligation to summarize plots or contents. On the other hand, if a particular plot point is relevant to how I feel about a book, I will discuss it without hesitation and without spoiler protection, so be warned!
I don’t apologize for my feelings regarding particular books, but I know that some people will disagree with me. Feel free to write me at jenkins@mac.com to correct factual errors or to try to convince me that my own feelings regarding a book are wrong. If you can get me to enjoy a book in my Asimov collection more than I already do—more power to you; I certainly won’t mind. Comments and suggestions are also welcome.
In the end, however, there’s no accounting for taste, and sometimes I simply don’t like a book, so don’t be surprised if your take is different from mine.
Each title is also rated on a scale of 0-3. There are two ratings: the first is for the Asimov fan, and the other is for the intended audience. 0 is bad, 3 is good.
I opted for two ratings because very often how a book is evaluated depends on how it is approached, and someone who reads the book primarily because it is by Asimov will evaluate it differently from someone who reads it because of the general class of book to which it belongs.
For example, take the Norby books. I don’t particularly care for them, and I don’t think they reveal anything particularly interesting about Asimov or his fictional universe—mainly because the bulk of the writing was done by his collaborator, Janet Asimov, and he did very little actual work on them. The result is that I consistently rate them very low (around 0, in fact) so far as the Asimov fan is concerned.
On the other hand, I’m not a member of the target audience for the Norby books. When my oldest daughter was eight, she was someone for whom the books were intended and loved them. The rating for the target audience is higher, then, for the Norby books than for the Asimov fan.
Similarly, there are books which are of more interest for the Asimov fan than for the target audience (such as the weaker Empire novels).
One additional wrinkle is that there are a number of books where I have trouble rating them for the target audience. Books like the Norby volumes or various science juveniles are books that would have been targeted at me when I was younger, or to my children now that I’m not as younger as I used to be. I can handle those. Books in genres which I myself rarely read are harder to evaluate: mystery anthologies, bawdy limericks, and so on. If you are a fan of such a genre and can give me a better basis for judging a book’s merits, I’m more than happy to be educated.
Stories, unlike books, have only one rating. There is less diversity of intended audience (and, besides, it’s a real pain to think up two ratings for each title).
The scale of 0-3 is chosen because it makes it easier for me to remember what the numbers mean. Each rating is illustrated with an appropriate symbol from Asimov’s works. Basically,
0 (
) means “avoid this book or story” or “I would personally rather never re-read this book again”
1 (
) means “there’s no real reason not to read this book or story” or “I don’t mind re-reading it if I have to”
2 (
) means “read this book or story” or “I enjoy re-reading it”
3 (
) means “you’ve got to read this book or story” or “I am ever thrilled to re-read it”
Naturally, the ratings (and reviews) can be skewed by a number of things; I don’t claim complete objectivity.
As a rule, “golden age syndrome” is the biggest single skewing factor. In his introduction to Before the Golden Age, Asimov mentions that the books one read when first discovering science fiction—typically when a pre-teenager—tend to gain a luster thereby that nothing can ever match. This is definitely true in my case, and so I tend to like the books I read for the first time prior to the mid-1970’s much better than the ones I’ve read since.
Non-fiction books tend to be rated, in part, by how badly dated they are. In particular, when Asimov counted multiple editions of a book separately (as he did with the Biographical Encyclopedia and Guide to Science), the earlier editions tend to get 0’s. Why read an earlier edition when a later one is available?
Anthologies of Asimov’s stories are often influenced by whether or not the worthwhile material in them is readily available elsewhere. This isn’t absolute: Books like I, Robot or Nine Tomorrows, all of whose contents are available in later books, are still rated highly.
And, of course, there are other factors—whether or not I was in a good mood on a particular day, how distracted I was by other things, and so on. In particular, the ratings and reviews were not done all at once, so don’t be surprised if they tend to give slightly different impressions.
Starting with Opus 100, Asimov numbered his books. Official lists with numbers through about book number 300 have appeared in print. Ed Seiler (ejseiler@earthlink.net), one of the FAQ maintainers for alt.books.isaac-asimov on USENET, wrote Asimov before he died and obtained numbers for several dozen more. Ed and Rich Hatcher have done a fair amount of detective work and estimated book numbers for the remainder. (They occasionally revise their numbering as they get more information, so my numbers may differ slightly from the current ones available on the net, although I hope the listings themselves are the same. The main differences are, so far, that I count Asimov’s doctoral dissertation and I, Robot: The Illustrated Screenplay, and Ed and Rich don’t.)
The alt.books.isaac -asimov FAQ discusses in more detail the problem of numbering and listing Asimov’s books.
I like the book numbers because it gives me an order-of-publication to use for reading purposes. Take all of the ones above 300 with a grain of salt, however, and take all the ones above about 350 with a shaker or two of salt.
So what gets included? The general rules I follow are:
The catalogue in I. Asimov is taken as completely authoritative up to the date that it was prepared (spring 1990). Anything it lists is officially counted; anything it fails to list is definitely rejected.
Anything published after the spring of 1990, the text of which was actually composed or prepared to a substantial extent by Asimov himself, counts.
Examples: Forward the Foundation, Asimov Laughs Again, I. Asimov: A Memoir, Frontiers II, A History of Chemistry (chart).
Books which are somebody else’s revision of an earlier book by Asimov are rejected.
Anything else published after the spring of 1990 has to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, using precedents set by Asimov himself as illustrated by the catalogue in I. Asimov.
Anything published after the spring of 1990 whose text consists entirely of Asimov’s writing, selected and edited by other people, counts. (This is based on the precedent set by Other Worlds of Isaac Asimov and The Asimov Chronicles, both of which were edited entirely by Martin Harry Greenberg.) Examples: Yours, Isaac Asimov, Gold, Magic.
Anything published after the spring of 1990 which is just an omnibus edition of one or more of Asimov’s earlier books does not count. (This is based on the precedent set by Tringle and other omnibus works.)
Books that are a completion of a series count if all the other books in the series do. (The precedent is obvious.) Examples: Isaac Asimov Presents the Great sf Stories 25, The Positronic Man.
Books that are literary transformations of Asimov’s work produced by top-flight sf writers who were Asimov’s personal friends and whose work was done with Asimov’s personal approval count. (The precedent here is Nightfall and The Ugly Little Boy.) In other words, I, Robot: The Illustrated Screenplay counts.
Books which are selections of other Asimov books are rejected if Asimov’s role in the preparation of the original book was more-or-less editorial. (This is based on the precedent of Would You Believe? and More Would You Believe?.) Example: The Best of Isaac Asimov Presents Superquiz. (Truth be told, I would have taken any excuse to reject this one.)
Asimov’s doctoral dissertation is included in my list (officially) because Asimov would have counted it himself if he’d written it in the 1960’s or 1970’s; it’s certainly more book-like than some of the things he did count. In reality, of course, I count it because I own a copy and want to count it.
The Complete Stories, volume 1 counts, even though it should be excluded by rule 4b. (It’s just an omnibus edition of Earth is Room Enough, Nine Tomorrows, and Nightfall and Other Stories with a new introduction.) However, The Complete Stories, volume 2 does count by rule 4a, and so volume 1 also counts by twisting of rule 4c.
I’ve stolen the data for the story listing from Ed Seiler’s list of stories in order of publication. I’m working, however, from an older version of Ed’s data and so the data may not be entirely complete or accurate.
The so-called “Second Foundation Trilogy” is a significant development in the world of Asimov’s fiction. Inasmuch as Asimov wasn’t personally involved in (or even aware of) this work, I really can’t in good conscience count them as official books—I’ve stretched things badly enough by counting Harlan Ellison’s I, Robot: The Illustrated Screenplay.
(I cannot help but think of the analogy to the works of the late Dr. Seuss. A huge body of subsidiary Seuss literature has appeared since Geisel’s death. This material is presumably authorized by his estate but definitely not up to the usual Seuss standard of quality, thereby cheapening the name. There are legitimate concerns regarding this scenario playing out with Asimov.)
But the books were requested by Janet Asimov and Ralph Vicinanza, whom Benford calls “the Asimov estate’s representative,” and they are written by three top-flight science fiction authors whose work I enjoy and respect, so I have reviewed them.
The three books in the “second trilogy” are:
Foundation’s Fear (1997) by Gregory Benford
Foundation and Chaos (1998) by Greg Bear
Foundation’s Triumph (1999) by David Brin
Similarly, I have reviewed the effort spearheaded by Martin Greenberg to publish a book by other writers honoring Asimov on the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of his first sale, namely:
Foundation’s Friends: In Honor of Isaac Asimov (1989)
There are also a number of books which have been written about Asimov or his works over the years which I have reviewed. Some of them are:
Trillion Year Spree: The History of Science Fiction (1986) by Brian W. Aldiss and David Wingrove
Asimov’s Foundation Trilogy and Other Works: Notes (1977) by L. David Allen
Isaac Asimov: The Foundations of Science Fiction (1982) by James Gunn
Isaac Asimov (1982) by Jean Fiedler and Jim Mele
Isaac Asimov (1974) edited by Joseph D. Olander and Martin Harry Greenberg
The Science Fiction of Isaac Asimov (1977) by Joseph F. Patrouch, Jr.
Isaac Asimov (1991) by William F. Touponce
Asimov: The Unauthorized Life (1994) by Michael White
I was asked in mid-2000 if I might not provide a picture of my collection. It must be impressive, the correspondent suggested. Lacking a digital camera, I couldn’t easily accomodate them. I do, however, have a scanner and therefore have one-by-one been scanning in the covers of my books to include with the reviews.
Some of the covers are not in good shape. My books tend to lead rough lives, and my Asimov collection has been more heavily used than most of my other books. Many of the paperbacks spent long periods of time being carted off to Boy Scout camps or riding in my back pocket. Even the hard cover books have suffered, particularly from children anxious to pull books out of Daddy’s hands. Some of the books I have lost their dust jackets long since, leaving relatively dull and unadorned material for scanning. Some of the books I got in used book stores and lost their cover art long before I got to them. In such cases I could easily have nothing worth scanning. On occasion, therefore, I have used covers other than of my own copies.
If I have more than one copy with a scannable cover, there’s more than one scan included.
At the same time, I’ve been adding the information in the publisher’s “blurb,” usually from the back cover or the flaps of a dust jacket. This is to save me the trouble of writing synopses for the book and also provides on occasion a moment or two of amusement as we see how marketing departments strove to increase sales as much as possible.
These projects are still underway in early 2002.
I also have a couple of other pages related to various aspects of Asimoviana which aren’t reviews. Notably, we have from Thrilling Wonder Stories an early timeline the Good Doctor prepared and a report on my visit to the Asimov Archive at the Boston University Library.
Ed Seiler and Rich Hatcher anybody else who has made kind comments or suggestions as I’ve been working on this (of whom there are more than I had expected)....
This material is copyright ©1995–2002 by John H. Jenkins. All rights reserved.