This book is a great journey in time. Isaac Asimov teaches about the past of men and Universe naturally. Using all areas of knowledge and science he shows why things really are as we think they are. How did Mankind find out about this planet being round ? It's there. Name a scientist and look at the index, (s)he's there! It should be read by every high school student.

This is one of my favorite books for evenings when I feel like learning something in an entertaining way. Of course, if you're looking for an exhaustive treatment of any of the varied subjects covered, you'll have to turn to the many authoritative texts out there (for example, the part about vertebrate paleontology sparked my interest enough to read an old textbook that had been sitting on my shelf a long time called "Evolution of the Vertebrates" which turned out to be excellent!).

The main charm, and ultimately the main value, of this book is not however its depth but its impressive breadth. I love the sense of mystery it is infused with. Rather than take the typical approach of starting with the Big Bang and summarizing major events after that, he actually begins with a seemingly simple topic that most people feel they know enough about -- the history of human flight. This leads into another chapter about recorded history, which leads to the bigger mystery of prehistoric civilizations, then the origin of man himself... well, you get the picture!

For anyone with a fascination for science, love of a good mystery, and fondness for the Good Doctor's deceptively simple but always informative prose, look no further than this little gem. I picked it up as an afterthough because I loved Asimov's fiction, but I've now read it three times in as many years!

Azimov's Beginnings is a book every science teacher and student must read.I begin, finally, to understand all those boring highschool science classes. A masterpiece.

Having read all of Asimov's early works, it's fair to say that this is the best of the crop of the Empire novels, and is better than all the Robot novels as well. It's not quite up to the Foundation stories, hence the rating of 4 stars.

The plot is interesting, and has aged well. There is not very much that makes you snicker in the light of current scientific knowledge. He has a lot of characters for a 200 page book, but it is never confusing; they are individuals and it's easy to keep them separated in your mind. The story draws you in and keeps you interested from beginning to end.

Asimov had the tendency to throw too many cliffhangers/revelations that didn't go anywhere in his early novels (as compared to, say, Nightfall), and it feels like he's cheaply manipulating the reader. This book, while containing some of these events, are far more logical and less contrived than in the other Empire and Robot novels. This makes it a far more enjoyable read.

It is a shame that these books are out of print. I think the fact that 14 people have written reviews of this book points to the fact that there is still a following for Asimov out there, and maybe the publishers should print another edition of these early books, even in a single volume (as each Empire book is only 200 pages or so).

Of course this is science fiction and quite notable science fiction at that. But in the hands of Isaac Asimov, it's also a mystery although not in the style of the first three robot novels. Somebody used a psychic probe on an Earthman, wiping out his memory, and dumped him in a small village on the planet, Florina. The woman who takes charge of him and the village's townsman eventually team up as the man begins regaining memory, and all become embroiled in political machinations. We're introduced to the planet Trantor, the center of the Galactic Empire.

While this is the last of the Empire trilogy written by Asimov, it's the earliest in the fictional time sequence, occuring in an era much later than that era covered in the Robot novels.

This is an engaging, tightly written novel with twists which will keep the reader involved.

One day, on an agricultural colony planet run by a empire as harsh as the Roman Empire in biblical times, a local functionary finds a man whose mind has been destroyed in one of his town's fields. A peasant woman is tasked to re-raise this man from pretty much a second infancy. But now things are starting to come back, and the supervisor, although a native himself, sees the threat this poses to his masters' power. The principal crop on this world is a form of cotton that grows only this way on his planet--it's used in expensive clothing. But before his mind was "wiped", the victim was a scientist who had discovered a menace which threatened that planet. Although the story has Ludlumesque head games by people in power, its strong point is in the human factor in the form of the victim, his female protector, as well as his former boss who's concerned about what became of him. That's why I say Wouk. But this is a sci fi book, right? Well, don't let that scare you off. It's a hell of a story in a middlin' size book--you don't get the two in a single package all that often.

This book reveals a part of Isaac Asimov that I have never realized before: the Detective. His journey across the subatomic cosmos is that of a detective, whether he is analyzing electrons, light, neutrons, quasars, antimatter, neutrinos, interactions, or the universe. He presents a mystery, a problem, that stumps the experts in physics or chemistry or mathematics, and then begins eliminating the suspects one by one until the only possible solution is revealed. He has done the same thing in his science fiction, for example in his Foundation Series and Robot Series (see my Amazon.com reviews of various of his books) - in fact, the heroes of his robot series were a human detective and a robot or android detective. I grew up reading the science fiction of Asimov and/or his colleagues, and my wife Dr. Marleen Josie Doctorow used Asimov's book on psychological science fiction in her university psychology courses. Asimov, by a remarkable coincidence, was married to a psychiatrist, Dr. Janet Jeppson, and she continued his Foundation Series after his death via his Estate and the great writers Brin, Bear, and Benford. When I read the front page headlines recently in newspapers attacking psychiatrists and psychologists like Freud, I wonder whether the journalists realize that all of science and medicine and journalism involve detective stories. The greatest detectives also have something called intuition, which also goes by the name of ESP, and in theology is considered to be a quality of the Divine. Asimov had it, Saint Thomas Acquinas had it, the Old Testament Prophets and Mohammed had it, Buddha had it, Einstein had it, Field Marshall Montgomery had it. It leaves us humble and grateful for the miracles of our and their existence.

Most people probably know Isaac Asimov because of his fiction books. However, he is also a great writer of nonfiction works. "Atom" is a great example of his nonfiction work. It is also the best book on Atoms and subatomic particles I have ever read, and I have read several. Asimov takes an 'easy to understand' approach to the study of subatomic particles; starting from the beginning of the Atomic theory, all the way to quarks and neutrinos. The two best points about this book: (1) It is easy to understand (2) It is comprehensive and very detailed

i enjoyed the book. it is easy to read except for the chapter on quarks, which is difficult to comprehend. i will recommend this book to every one who wishes to learn about the subatomic world. there is only one drawback for this book. it was published in 1991 and there have been more additions to the subatomic world since then. the history of the search for atom and its constituents is splendid. I love mathematics but i am too lazy to do it. so for folks who don't like to dwell in mathematics to understand particle physics, this is the right book for you

Read The Positronic Man. It is a story that pulls you into it and makes you truly care about a robot named Andrew. This book really works your imagination. After you read the book, go see the movie "Bicentennial Man" with Robin Williams and the little girl from the Pepsi commercials. It is one of the best literature to screen adaptations I have ever seen.

The human in the book wants to live longer with the help of artifitial units Andrew provides and their body is becoming like a robot. On the other hand, Andrew (positronic robot) wants to replace his mechanical body with more human-like-body, Andorid. Even, he shortens his life in order to obtain the status of Man not Robot. His desire to be equal with human friends like Little Miss, Gerge, Paul, and others is so strong and touching. People around Andrew throughout the story are showing a special care and affection toward Andrew as a free robot and are treating him as one of their close friends

The Positronic Man is a truely sad novel, about a robot who longs to be human. It is Asimov at his best. You laugh with the main character, and I gurantee that unless you are heartless, you will actually shed tears by the end of this novel. You come off reading this novel with a better understanding of what it means to be human and how we take it for granted

Vallejo's techniqe is awe-inspiring and really very simple. He does a rough sketch, poses his models, takes pictures, and composes a finished drawing. He transfers this to a canvas, does an acrylic wash for the lights and darks, then adds colors with oils.
And that's it!
Well, he makes it look that easy, anyway. Vallejo let's you in on the medium he uses right down to the fast-drying ordorless turp used by housepainters. This book really disects the methods of an icon of fantasy artwork.

Thanks, Boris

WOW! i have been a fan of his work since 1985 . He is the greatest artist ive ever seen . I was proud to have one of his works from his 1985 calender tatood on my belly. I WANT MORE !

Boris Vallejo's renderings of the human figure are unmistakeable. The way he uses paint to depict a 3-dimensional form on a 2-dimensional surface is amazing. The work is so life-like. (And in many cases, erotic.)

I liked reading about Vallejo's humble beginnings, where we see samples of his early, unpublished work. It was also a relief to know that even this master of the figure uses photographs. Contrary to many student's belief, it is not "cheating". To make his point, Vallejo is convinced that if the Old Masters had had access to photography, they would certainly have preferred to use that rather than rely on a model who gets bored, tired, etc. Vallejo uses both the model and the photograph.

In addition to advice about colour, tone, light, and how to "see", we are also taken through some step-by-step paintings, to show how the image is gradually built. Advice about portfolios comes at the end.

I have a board game called "Hero Quest", a sword-and-sorcery type adventure. The painting on the box looks like it was done by Vallejo, but I couldn't find his signiature. The colours and brushwork looked like his. The main figure was a Conan-type character swinging his sword. If you read Vallejo's "Fantasy Art Techniques" there is a good chance you will also paint like this eventually.

creationists are not all Religious and no creationist I'v met are crazy fanatics doing all they can to destroy the Theory of Evolution by just lying. Evolution is being fought because it has no evidence and that is the only reason. Do you put your trust completly in a person because they have a PHD, no. If you do then you are extreamly niev. About transitional fossils which all creationists claim not to exist. THEY DONT. If you doubt this then why has this new theory come up-Proteins have been Discovered which fix mutated proteins produced by mutant genes however Scientists say these proteins can only fix a certain number so when a certain number of genes mutate becomes to high(after millions of years)a large change takes place ie a large evolutionary step takes place. Scientists say this theory will help explain the LACK OF TRANSITIONAL FOSSILS. But yet you say this book claims that hundreds have been found. My experience
tells me not to trust evolutionists because when ever an arguement comes up it all they allways turn it into a personnal thing. Look at the anti-evolutionist books reviews and they are full a highly personnal negative statments telling people not to read the book without when they have not done so themselfs. The coments are allways along the same line dont read this because is just a fanatic preacher talking BS and has no scientific bases at all. How can you call yourselfs Evolutionists if you don't look at the whole story. You dont buy a computer just because it looks good on the outside do you.

"Science deals with the world of nature, the discovery and ordering of the world of facts and their relations, with concepts that have been tested by the facts. What the creationists attempt to do is to measure the facts by their conformity to Genesis, and this is absurd." --Ashley Montagu, Introduction, Science and Creationism

The late Ashley Montagu (1905-99) was a British-American anthropologist who earned his Ph.D. in 1937 from Columbia University. He was also a prolific and popular science writer of over 60 books. He is well known for discrditing the notion of race in the editions of his book, Man's Most Dangerous Myth: The Fallacy of Race (1942, 6th ed. 1998). His selections of essays for Science and Creationism range from the philosophical to the legal, historical and scientifically technical. The essayists in this collection include such academic luminaries as Isaac Asimov, Stephen Jay Gould, and others. The essays highlight the opposite methodology of scientists and creationists.

Scientists collect and investigate data and then attempt to formulate explanatory theories. Those theories are always subject to revision or even replacement in the face of new data. They often publish their research in peer-reviewed scientific journals, and their data, hypotheses, and theories are subject to independent verification and replication. Crationists, on the other hand, have an entirely different methodology.

They start first from their desired dogma that the Bible must be inerrant, infallible, and then work backwards to the data. They engage in campaigns of propaganda and political lobbying to pass legislation that either censors objectionable scientific theories or mandates "equal time" for "scientific" creationsim whenever objectionable theories are taught in the science curricula of public schools. Their dogma that the Bible is inerrant and infallible is not subject to revision or replacement in the face of disconfirming data, and they neither do any real science nor publish in peer-reviewed science journals. Thus, contrary to their claims, their dogma and their agenda are religious rather than scientific.

The essays also refute many creationists' errors. For example, creationists claim that the second law of thermodynamics, the law that says systems run "downhill," proves that biological evolution is impossible. However, as explained in Asimov's essay, "The 'Threat' of Creationism," the second law applies to "closed systems." The earth, however, is an open system inundated by energy from the sun. As the sun runs "downhill," it provides the energy necessary to allow the relatively small subsystem of earth to evolve life in the "uphill" direction. Thus, evolution does not defy the second law because it is not a process running "uphill" in a closed system. Moreover, as far as we know, the only closed system is the universe as a whole.

Although this book contains an excellent collection of essays, it lacks a description of the credentials of its contributors and an index. Obviously, an index would augment the utility of this otherwise superb volume.

If you're looking for a book boasting big names and eqally big answers to the never-ending debate between rationality and dogma (namely evolution vs creationism), then you have found it. The late Ashley Montagu has assembled a force to be reckoned with in this volume containing 20 essays by some of the biggest names in Science to date. Just to name a few we have: Ken Miller (of _Finding Darwin's God_ fame), Stephen Jay Gould, Isaac Asimov, Laurie Godfrey and the list goes on. The purpose of such an assembly of genius? To refute the largest hoax in history: the movement of the "Scientific" Creationsts. At the time that this volume went to press there was a lot of controversy and heated debate surrounding creationism. Many creationists wanted to get their theory taught alongside evolution in public science classrooms. It is no surprise that this decision was overturned in a district court in 1982. This volume contains the landmark decision by Judge William Overton as well as numerous essays defining science, comparing it to creationism as well as debunking common myths perpetuated by the creationist movement. There are many books available that similarly debunk creationism _The Blind Watchmaker_, _Abusing Science_, _Sciene on Trial_ etc., however this book is a necessary volume in anyone's library as it contains insights from many brilliant minds on all aspects of the debate. It is therefore an excellent starting point for anyone who wants to get an introduction to this topic. For those who are still seeking more, each essay contains an extensive list of references to articles and books that will quench the curiosity of the most academically inclined reader.

My only complaint about this book is that Asimov gets too strong in some of his personal opinions. (Harsh opinions of Banquo, Brutus, Richard II etc.) But aside from that I value this book highly. He helps us to see some things Shakespeare's original audience would be able to pick up on WITHOUT being told. This helps one to understand Shakespeare's plays more. Also for the most part he DOES avoid the absurd marxist views that tend to over simplify the anaylisis. He is especially helpful in the history plays. Understanding Shakespeare's historical plays depends to a large extent on knowing the facts that Shakespeare does not mention (but that the original audience would have known). He also offers educated speculation that offers deep insights. While I do not agree with him on EVERYTHING, his views are interesting.

I find this book quite helpful when being introduced to an unfamiliar Shakespearean play. The plot summaries, character descriptions, and surrounding histories--liberally sprinkled with explanatory quotes--are of great use in placing me in the correct frame of mind. I would recommend this to anyone looking to acquaint themselves with Shakespeare's works--especially the lesser-known plays--but are feeling daunted by what is perceived as high-brow content.

Asimov writes as if he were speaking directly to the reader. This not only makes the book easy to read, but lends a feeling of comfort to the experience. One feels as if a friend has taken their time out to give a helping hand.

This book makes me much more comfortable giving the extra effort that it takes, given the time--and sometimes language--barrier. Without it, it is doubtful I would have introduced myself to the minor plays, some of which I have come to like better than the more popular ones.

...is too concise, it pleases me not.*

Asimov presents, for each of the plays, a well-researched and fascinating social, political and historical background of their production along with a plot analysis with direct quotes (and etymologies). Many of the details presented appear either to have escaped the notice of standard Shakespearean commentators, or to be buried away.

His synopsis of KING LEAR is characteristic...

"Shakespeare wrote fifteen plays which, in one way or another, involve English history. Four of these are laid in the relatively dim time prior to the Norman conquest in 1066, and the one which deals with the oldest and the most purely legendary events is KING LEAR."

Asimov then traces the original Celtic tale to Geoffrey of Monmouth's "Historia Regum Britanniae" (1135), then through "The Faerie Queene", Holinshed's "Chronicles of England, Scotland and Ireland", (1577), Edmund Spenser's play "The True Chronicle of King Lear", (1594), and finally to Shakespeare's version, first performed on 26th December, 1606.

1. Good example: Asimov describes why the name "Gloucester" may have been chosen for the father of the hero and villain, (Edgar and Edmund):

"The first Earl of Gloucester in actual history was Robert, a son of King Henry I of England. He lived from 1090 to 1145 and played a prominent role in the civil war that followed the death of Henry I. He was the chief supporter of Henry's daughter, Matilda, against the claims of Henry's nephew, Stephen.

"But since Robert of Gloucester was Henry's son, why was he not himself the claimant of the throne? Ah, it so happens he was Henry's bastard son and therefore unqualified to succeed. The Gloucester subplot is intimately concerned with the matter of a bastard son and perhaps that is why 'Earl of Gloucester' suggested itself to Shakespeare."

2. Bad example: Asimov may have tripped up on his astrology. At least one Shakespearean pundit has suggested that Edmund's birth under Ursa Major,("the Dragon's Tail"), was taken as ill-omened because of a malign/retrograde Martial-Venusian influence which would predispose a child born under it to villainy, according to the notions of the Elizabethan masses. Apparently, the constellations themselves were understood to express planetary influences, (if you're an astrologer, help me out here!):

"-MY FATHER COMPOUNDED WITH MY MOTHER UNDER THE DRAGON'S TAIL, AND MY NATIVITY WAS UNDER URSA MAJOR, SO THAT IT FOLLOWS I AM ROUGH AND LECHEROUS. FUT! I SHOULD HAVE BEEN THAT I AM, HAD THE MAIDENLIEST STAR IN THE FIRMAMAENT TWINKLED ON MY BASTARDIZING.

"The Dragon's Tail is a reference to the constellation of Draco, a winding string of moderately bright stars in the neighborhood of the north celestial pole... Astrologically, this is meaningless, since these constellations are not part of the zodiac and it is through the zodiac that the paths of the sun, moon, and planets make their way..."

What Asimov does NOT do here is discuss possible symbolic interpretations or textual criticisms of each play, (e.g., was King Lear really mad, was he incestuous, is this simply a morality play, a Platonic-Aristotelian conflict, or the perennial youth vs. maturity conflict? etc..).

Personally, I think the book is pure gold.

Superficially, at least, Isaac Asimov's Caliban is like many of the Asimov robot novels: a human investigator working with a robot partner to solve a crime against a political background. The way the story is contructed is somewhat similar, as is the restrained use of language and the "feel". But I found this book far superior to any of Asimov's novels.
A crime is committed at Leving Laboratories on the planet of Inferno. The planet's best roboticist has been assaulted, and unbelievably, the attacker seems to have been - a robot. The Sheriff of Hades, Alvar Kresh, is called in to investigate with his robot assistant, Donald. Meanwhile, the presence of Settlers on the planet, called in to assist with Inferno's failing terraforming, complicates matters . . . and the robot Caliban is awake and on the loose, with only a limited understanding of what is around him.
Allen just writes so well, and so much better than Asimov ever did. His characters, both human and robot, leap out at you as real. Alvar Kresh and Fredda Leving, the roboticist, have genuine depth and engage our sympathies. The setting of Inferno is really brought to life, both its geography and people, and we are thus given something that Asimov never gave us: a solid picture of Spacer society. In Caliban, we have the naive observer, who both drives the action and provides a useful commentary on what he sees around him. That commentary links in to the central issues of the novel: why are things the way they are between humans and robots? Is the status quo harmful to both? Fredda's responses to these questions, the actions they lead her into, and what results from them, are really at the heart of this story.
I always really enjoyed Asimov's classic robot novels, but reading Allen's has shown me how limited they are. With his superior characterisation and writing abilities, and the way he takes fresh ideas about robots to their logical conclusion, Allen gives us a more enjoyable and thought-provoking read than Asimov ever did.

Let me start by saying that I have read all of Asimov's Robot series and enjoyed them tremendously. To me, this book represents a major achievement in the understanding of robots in Asimov's Universe. I completely enjoyed this book from cover to cover, reading it in one night. But the most important part (I think), was how Caliban developed. Never before have we had a look into a robots mind like this, regardless of the Three Laws. The way Allen described the development of the robot was amazing. I hope to see more of his development in Inferno, which I will definitely purchase. In addition, I thank Mr. Allen for leaving Asimov's Universe intact, not changing any of his fundamentals (Except for the Three Laws obviously), and for helping to fill a blank in Asimov's future history between the Spacer and Settler era, and Trantor's rise.

Asimov's robot novels are my favorite novels by any author. Therefore Allen had a tough road ahead of him in my mind when writing additional material for that universe and he succeed completely. I very much enjoyed Caliban. It faithfully followed the "historical" course started in Asimov's books. Something I consider essential when writing in another author's universe. It provided a wonderful example of the Spacer/Settler struggle and how it may have played out through the centuries until the complete decline of the Spacer worlds. It was very interesting to witness a Spacer world in decline, not just culturally but also in the enviromental sense given that the idea of the Spacer worlds degenerating enviromentally was a theme touched on by Asimov in Foundation and Earth. Also, the idea that at least some of the Spacer worlds may have been adbandonned due to enviromental neglect as opposed to the neglect setting in after they had left is thought provoking. The spirit of cooperation represented by the Spacer/Settler union was also a nice theme. It could have only been better if Gladia Delmarre had made an appearance as liaison between Inferno and the Settlers but you can't have everything now that the Master himself has gone. I highly recommend this book.

I give this book 5 stars because it is classic Asimov. However, there are points in this book that are inconsistent with Asimov's later novels. For example, in Robots and Empire the Earth's radioactivity was caused by Dr. Amadiro and Mandamus at Three-Mile Island. However, in the Empire novels, the Earth's radioactivity is caused by nuclear wars. Also, the timeline seems a bit confused. The Empire novels are supposed to take place before the Foundation novels. However, here, Asimov says they are 50,000 years into our future. Yet, in Foundation, I believe it was more like 20,000 years into the future. So, this is a great novel, but it does not seem to truly fit into Asimov's later Foundation and Robot novels (they are supposed to).

Pebble In The Sky is probably the reigning titleholder of "Undiscovered Classic" in Isaac Asimov's impressive lexicon. It may take a little searching to locate this book, but believe me, it's well worth it.

Dr. Asimov constructed a huge universe that traces humanity from the near future (the Robot stories) to its first creaking footsteps into the unknown (the Robot novels), to the founding of a Galactic Empire (the Empire novels), and finally to the ultimate destination of mankind (the Foundation novels), although this was not his original intention - the Robot universe and Empire/Foundation universe were knotted together by later books. Anyway, of these four categories, the Empire novels are easiest the weakest. This is partly because it is very early Asimov (but Foundation and I, Robot, both classics, are equally early), and partly because the idea behind it all maybe isn't as inspired as the others.

However, Pebble in the Sky is a true work of literary genius. It is set on Earth in the year 827 of the Galactic Era. A man called Joseph Schwarz is found by a farming family, who find that he cannot communicate. They take him to a doctor at the city of Chica, Dr. Shekt, who uses his new Synapsifier to increase intelligence. Soon, they discover that Schwarz is in fact from the year 1949 AD, an era thousands of years back. Schwarz is equally amazed to find himself thousands of years in the future. And what a future he finds waiting for him...

I will not give any further information because it may well spoil the plot for you. It is a well-written enjoyable book. It showcases Dr. Asimov's incredible ability to render cultures, as his portrayal of Earth is one of the most haunting things I have ever seen. It is only a shame that he never wrote later Empire novels (maybe team Schwarz and R. Daneel Olivaw together!) to add to this forgotten chapter in his works.

Finally, a quick word about the contradictions. This work was written in 1949 and published in 1950, and so Dr. Asimov's knowledge of nuclear physics was a little rudimentary, as was anyone else's. Only four years removed from Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the idea of a fullscale nuclear war seemed a very real possibility, and this was the reason that the Earth was radioactive. However, when Asimov wrote a later book entitled Robots And Empire, he realized that this was impossible and devised a more scientific solution. Everyone's belief in the story that it is because of a nuclear war can be put down to folklore - after all, the book does seem to say that much of our knowledge has been forgotten.

Read Pebble In The Sky and enjoy it as the classic that it truly is. You won't be disappointed.

5 out of 5 stars.

My enthuziasm for "Peeble in the Sky" comes from reading this book when I was 14. It was a Romanian translation (apologies for subtleties lost), but when I finished it, I thought I was a Galactic citizen! In case you wonder, I started with Gerard Klein's "Les seigneurs de la Guerre" -- a classic French Sci-Fi that's missing from Amazon.com ... Fifteen years later, I re-read "Peeble..." (found it at an antiquariat in University City, St. Louis MO) and by this time, I had already covered the Foundation trilogy, Foundation's Edge and Foundation and Earth. By comparison I think "Peeble..." stands as an equal to the original Foundation Trilogy -- at least in tempo and characters, if not in concepts. Even Isaac cannot easily surpass Psychohistory, a true peak in Sci-Fi literature... "Peeble..." has tempo, and will absorb you in genuine Asimov style. So, from someone who read this book twice, in two languages, a well-deserved five-stars for "Peeble in the Sky"!

When a prolific and profitable author like Isaac Asimov dies, his publishers do not believe that his death ought to mark the end of the publishing gravy train. After Asimov's death, his Foundation and Robot universes were novelized again by several writers, most notably David Brin, Gregory Benford, Roger MacBride Allen, and now most recently with Mark Tiedemann with MIRAGE. It is not overly difficult to duplicate the style of Asimov; it is his substance that remains elusive. Tiedemann writes of the robotic future of earth that had not yet morphed into a galactic empire. This empire is staunchly anti-robotic, with much opposition coming from decadent Spacer worlds that require robots to maintain their own self-loathing existences. On earth, a number of humans and Spacers are assassinated by unknown assailants, throwing into jeopardy a major treaty between earth and the Spacer worlds. The problem with Tiedemann is that his characters speak with the Asimovian twang but lack its inner emotional resonance. Tiedemann seems unclear as to who his protagonist should be. Instead he divides center stage between Special Agent Mia Daventri and roboticist Derec Avery, neither of whom is sufficiently interesting to involve the reader. Nowhere in MIRAGE does Tiedemann cause the reader to care about an increasingly volatile symbiotic relationship between man and robot. Roger MacBride Allen was far more successfull in his trilogy of Asimov inspired robot novels. If the reader wants to get further involved in a post Asimovian universe of conflict between man and robot, then this reader has little choice but to hope that writers like Tiedemann learn their craft well enough to make him care about how humans interact with both altered humans and robots. The real test of any novel lies in its ability to cause the reader to think of it long after he closes the flyleaf. Sadly, MIRAGE failed to deliver.

The Asimov universe has been respectfully added to since his untimely death - first there were the Robot City novels, then came the new Robot novels by Allen and then the Second Foundation Trilogy. And now this, a new Robot novel. In truth, while there have been some dissappointments, most of the new novels set in Asimov's universe have been fairly good. As is this offering.

In Mirage, the author does a very good job capturing the sense of mystery Asimov used in his own novels. He also shows a good grasp of Asimov's ideas and universe.

What is surprising to me is the fact that no history is mentioned about the main characters who spent 6 novels together in the Robot City chronicles. Nor is any indication given as to when this story fits into the Asimov timeline - while the reader can certainly guess, the author could have thrown the reader some sort of lifeline from the original Asimov books to let us know what else was going on.

At any rate, its an interesting read. Very nice to see that the spirit of Asimov is well remembered and appreciated.

I read Mark Tiedemann's COMPASS REACH and was blown away by his ability to do terrific characterization in the context of a full-blown space adventure. I was almost disappointed to discover that he had written books in someone else's universe, but I gave MIRAGE a shot and I'm glad I did! All his strengths are here, breathing life into what I'd come to see as a dry, been-there-done-that franchise. Proves that a good idea can always be done a bit better if a good writer is given a chance to reimagine the whole thing.

MIRAGE is an espionage thriller that toys with a frankenstein idea. When the climax comes, teh possibility of a really cliche ending is avoided by following logic--like Asimov would have done!--and sticking to the possibilities in the characters themselves.

Great characters (he even made Derec Avery and Ariel Burgess more interesting!) and a great plot, with impressive speculation to boot. What more can you want from a science fiction novel?

Tiedemann's "original" novels are better, but MIRAGE turned out to be a really good introduction to a fine writer. FIVE STARS!