The people of Earth develop nuclear power. Naron, a long-lived Rigellian who serves as the Keeper of galactic records, notes this achievement and records humanity as having reached maturity. Until he discovers something else... Despite the seriousness of the subject, Asimov keeps a light touch in this very short story.


A 1-minute read.

Naron of the long-lived Rigellian race was the fourth of his line to keep the Galactic records.

He had the large book which contained the list of the numerous races throughout the Galaxies that had developed intelligence, and the much smaller book listing those races that had reached maturity and had qualified for the Galactic Federation. In the first book, a number of those listed were crossed out; those that, for one reason or another, had failed. Misfortune; biochemical or biophysical shortcomings; social maladjustment, etc., took their toll. In the smaller book, however, no member listed had yet blanked out.

And now Naron, large and incredibly ancient, looked up as a messenger approached.

“Naron,” said the messenger. “Great One!”

“Well, well, what is it? Less ceremony.”

“Another group of organisms has attained maturity.”

“Excellent. Excellent. They are coming up quickly now. Scarcely a year passes without a new one. And who are these?”

The messenger gave the code number of the Galaxy and the coordinates of the world within it.

“Ah, yes,” said Naron. “I know the world.” And in flowing script, he noted it in the first book and transferred its name into the second—using, as was customary, the name by which the planet was known to the largest fraction of its populace. He wrote: Earth.

He said, “These new creatures have set a record. No other group has passed from intelligence to maturity so quickly. No mistake, I hope.”

“None, sir,” said the messenger.

“They have attained to thermonuclear power, have they?”

“Yes, sir.”

“Well, that’s the criterion.” Naron chuckled. “And soon their ships will probe out and contact the Federation.”

“Actually, Great One,” said the messenger, reluctantly, “the Observers tell us they have not yet penetrated space.”

Naron was astonished. “Not at all? Not even a space station?”

“Not yet, sir.”

“But if they have thermonuclear power, where then do they conduct their tests and detonations?”

“On their own planet, sir.”

Naron rose to his full twenty feet of hight and thundered, “On their own planet?”

“Yes, sir.”

Slowly, Naron drew out his stylus and passed a line through the latest addition in the smaller book. It was an unprecedented act, but, then, Naron was very wise and could see the inevitable as well as anyone in the Galaxy.

“Silly asses,” he muttered.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 23 points 1 day ago (10 children)

That's a super short/efficient text.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 day ago (9 children)

    Asimov was known for this, I think it was Arthur C. Clarke who said he was the best in writing short stories, which prompted Asimov to write a story on the back of a post card and send it to Clarke.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] [S] 12 points 1 day ago* (8 children)

    Didn't know that, amazing trivia! Found the story on Stackexchange.

    As for Asimov's long-form writing: I tried to read Foundation, but I couldn't get into the first book (it bore me to death). I might try again in the future, maybe Ive tried reading it too young.

    Idk. Any Asimov fan here?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 16 hours ago

    Huge Asimov fan here.

    The prose is as dry as can be. And it’s okay if that completely puts you off, it’s not getting any better.

    I think Foundation is to be read more like a (series of) theater piece(s) than like a novel, only the most important elements are discussed and usually in dialog form. He also concentrate almost exclusively on logical deductions. Each character comes to the same situation with either partial knowledge or preconceived ideas, and you explore what the result of the setup could be.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 19 hours ago

    Everyone has different tastes, I'd imagine. While Asimov is not the greatest with people, especially not women, I think of most of his work with fondness, but maybe because I read them as a child. I am, after all, an Isaac, and named after him (in that my parents had been waffling between Jacob and Isaac for me, and dad came down on the side of Isaac because of Asimov). They apparently found me when I was around 2 years old or so (maybe closer to three but not yet that age) with a pile of Asimov books around me, with me saying "My books!"

    So I did read his works from an early age. And it may have set me up for fondness for them as they were some of my first adventures, along with Narnia, the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings, and a bunch of 19th century (and some 18th century) British fiction, giving me a wild vocabulary that caused me trouble from time to time (the connotations of "ejactulation" and "erection", for example, have changed over the past 200 or so years).

    I always found Foundation to be a nice story, or interconnected series of stories. The idea of an epic tale over a great span piqued my interest. I was always disappointed because I wanted more of the story inbetween; but the best stories often leave many gaps for the imagination, and are often ruined with too many details (q.v. Star Wars explaining every tiny little thing in incrediblye contradictory detail - not that I don't like Star Wars, mind).

    So I'm not sure if a modern reader can appreciate them the way I did. Certainly they are quite archaic on so many fronts. We have a lot of the technology that was imagined, although we probably mostly think that much of what we don't have is impossible, like jumping through hyperspace, or the positronic brain. And certainly his predictions for computing and robotics were way off the mark. A lot feels off the mark. Contrasted with something like The Expanse, which is much more modern and so its futurism feels more likely. lol

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 day ago* (1 child)

    Yeah, I loved foundation as a kid.

    It was originally a serial in an SF magazine, so each chapter was a self contained story. So you'd be champing at the bit to read the next chapter in next month's issue.

    It didn't quite transpose well into a novel. It is far less boring if you consider it an anthology of short stories set in the same epic.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    I find that younger people have difficulty reading older books or watching older movies. I loved the Foundation series (not the TV show) and the 2001 Space Odyssey movie, but most young people find them long and boring. I guess social media destroyed the attention span.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 4 points 1 day ago

    My attention span has been really harmed by my phone usage, but at the time I first read it, I was able to read 400 pages a day (same nowadays). I have focus problems watching videos or movies, but reading is just in my blood. I think the explanation lies in the fact that reading, if you think about it, is non-stop action/interaction, contrary to videos. I guess that's why I can read so much without difficulty.

    So the attention-span probably wasn't the reason it bored me.

    I'll maybe try again in the future.

  • source
  • parent