Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.88 AVERAGE
3.88 AVERAGE
Purtroppo non mi è piaciuta, e ho anzi trovato leggermente confusionaria, la terza parte come le prime due, ma ho apprezzato molto il mio primo Asimov.
I really enjoy these older classic novels that are quick reads with big ideas. A lot of the stuff I pick up now wants to be epic or edgy, but frequently just feels interminable. This book is divided into three sections of different characters telling aspects of a story about mining parallel universes for energy, with the human sections book-ending a middle section of freaky-deaky Alien sex. Damn Isaac, you nasty. ;)
The first two parts were absolutely amazing, but I was not a fan of the third
I found this book at my campus library when I was in community college. Asimov was hard for me to get into but I wasn't disappointed with this title. Suffice to say, this book blew my mind. And I continue to recommend it twenty years later.
Rare DNF for me. Only had around 40 pages left, too. I've really enjoyed a couple of Asimov's books, but this isn't first novel of his I've read that begins with an intriguing opening act, only for things to get drier and drier until the book is such a slog that I can't be bothered to finish. RIP to finding out what happens with the Electron Pump. Who cares
It took me a little longer to read this book because of wanting to understand the physics in it (as best I could having never taken a physics class), but the ideas were very interesting. It was also amusing that the book was written in 1972 and set in the year 2070, which must have seemed so far away that we would have been able to make these amazing scientific and technological advances. Reading the book in 2020, it seems pretty clear we aren't even close to achieving any ideas mentioned.
adventurous
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Isaac Asimov is a writer who needs no introduction, unless, of course, you're new to sci-fi, in which case, consider this your introduction. His ability to convey vast, mind-expanding ideas in crystal-clear prose is what makes him one of the greats. The Gods Themselves is no exception(mostly).
First Impressions (41% Through)
At about 9% though the novel, I was already impressed, as expected. Asimov has a way of describing characters with an economy of words that somehow delivers precisely what you need to know about them.
Take this gem:
_"You are Dr. Peter Lamont and you've done good work, I'm told, on para-theory. I recall your paper. On para-fusion, wasn't it?"
"Yes, sir."
"Well, refresh my memory. Tell me about it. Informally, of course, as though you were talking to a layman. After all," and he chuckled here, "in a way, I am a layman. I'm just a radiochemist, you know; and no great theoretician, unless you want to count a few concepts now and then."
Lament accepted this, at the time, as a straightforward statement, and, indeed, the speech may not have been as obscenely condescending as he later insisted on remembering it to have been. It was typical, though, as Lament later found out, or at least maintained, of Hallam's method of grasping the essentials of the work done by others. He could talk briskly about the subject thereafter without being over particular, or particular at all, in assigning credit."
One sentence, and you instantly know Hallam is that guy, the one who leeches off the brilliance of others while maintaining just enough plausible deniability to avoid blame. The kind who hears a joke, and then later tells it at a party, and passes it off as his own. Many of us have met a Hallam in real life, and Asimov described him with surgical precision.
And Asimov doesn’t just do this with people. His descriptions in general are sharp, and vivid:
"It must be proved and the fact of it forced down the throat of Hallam; sideways, if possible, and with all the sharp corners exposed."
Another thing I love about Asimov is his approach to the title of his stories. He rarely gives you an obvious name like that tells you what the story is about. Instead, his titles are often phrases lifted from the story itself, subtly intertwined with its themes. The title of this novel The Gods Themselves comes from the passage:
"Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain. I'm no god, and I'll contend no longer."
It’s a fitting reference because, as you’ll see, stupidity (in the form of blind obstinacy) plays a significant role in the novel’s conflicts.
Final Thoughts: The Great, the Confusing, and the Scientifically Impossible
1. The Incomplete Storylines
The novel introduces three different storylines, all connected to the overarching plot. However, only one of them is concluded in a satisfying way.
- The first storyline? Abruptly cut off.
- The second storyline? Ends on a cliffhanger.
- The third storyline? Finally, a proper ending.
If this were the first book in a series, I’d be fine with that. But it’s a standalone novel, which makes the unfinished threads frustrating. This seems to be a recurring issue with shorter sci-fi novels, amazing ideas get introduced but aren’t given the space to fully develop.
2. The Moon’s Great Escape (A Scientific Blunder)
Asimov is a science fiction writer, meaning the "science" part of his books usually holds up. Usually. At least to my feeble understanding of science.
However, in this novel, Asimov presents an idea so scientifically absurd that it took me out of the story.
He suggests that the Moon could leave Earth’s orbit and float away into space with no catastrophic effects on either body. No mention of the fact that the Moon is kind of responsible for things like tides, axial stability, and, you know, basic planetary balance.
If this were a Star Wars-style soft sci-fi book, I’d let it slide. But I think Asimov typically aims for scientific plausibility, which makes this mistake stand out like a sore thumb. I’m no astrophysicist, but even I know this is nonsense. It’s disappointing, especially coming from my favorite sci-fi writer.
The Best Parts
Despite these issues, The Gods Themselves has some fantastic moments.
- The writing is sharp, humorous, and engaging.
- The dialogue is stimulating and intelligent.
- The alien worldbuilding is unique and progressive for its time.
Some of my favorite passages:
"We were clever enough to take advantage of their initiative."
"Yes, as cows are clever enough to eat the hay we provide for them."
Chef's Kiss.
And this one:
"Lamont’s solution is to force abandonment of the Pump, but you can't just move backward. You can't push the chicken back into the egg, wine back into the grape, the boy back into the womb. If you want the baby to let go of your watch, you don't just try to explain that he ought to do it—you offer him something he would rather have."
Brilliant analogy.
Numerical Rating Breakdown
1. Writing Quality (25%) – 1.10
- Clarity: 4.8 – Asimov’s is clear and sharp per usual.
- Engagement: 4.3 – The writing is strong but not his absolute best.
- Poetic Quality: 4.0 – Concise but with flair.
- Relevance: 4.5 – Hardly a wasted word.
- Language, Imagery, Dialogue: 4.5 – Fantastic use of dialogue.
- Pedantry: 4.5 – No pretentiousness.
Total: 26.6/6=4.33x0.25=1.10833
2. Story/Plot (25%) – 0.93
- Intricacy: 3.5 – Some threads left hanging.
- Emotional Impact: 3.8 – More intellectual than emotional.
- Novelty/Unpredictability: 4.0 – Fresh ideas throughout.
- Resolution: 3.0 – Some unresolved arcs.
- Pacing: 4.3 – Generally well-paced.
Total: 18.6/5=3.72x0.25=0.93
3. Characters (10%) – 0.36
- Logic: 3.8 – Characters act believably.
- Intelligence: 3.5 – Thought-provoking but not deeply complex.
- Depth: 3.7 – Well-developed but not his strongest cast.
- Relatability: 3.5 – More intellectual than personal.
Total: 14.5/4=3.625x0.10=0.3625
4. Themes/Impact (10%) – 0.34
- Conveyance: 4.5 – Themes are well-conveyed.
- Challenge: 3.0 – Not especially thought-provoking.
- Profoundness: 3.7 – Some deep concepts.
- Significance: 2.7 – It didn't feel particularly impactful to me.
Total: 13.9/4=3.475x0.10=0.3475
5. Personal Enjoyment (30%) – 1.16
- Engagement: 4.5 – Kept my interest with almost zero lulls.
- Re-read Value: 3.6 – Worth revisiting.
- Recommendability: 3.7 – Not Asimov’s best, but still pretty good.
- Relatability: 3.7 – Interesting themes.
**Total: 15.5/4=3.875x0.30=1.1625
Final Score: 3.91 / 5
Final Verdict
The Gods Themselves is an ambitious, clever, and entertaining novel with Asimov’s characteristically sharp writing. However, its unresolved storylines and scientific blunder hold it back from being one of his best. Still, it’s a fascinating read, especially for those who enjoy Asimov’s signature wit and intellectual storytelling.
Would I recommend it? Yes, but not as his finest work. I do not feel that it is deserving of it's sweep of the Hugo, Nebula, & Locus awards.
challenging
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Asimov himself identified this as his favorite science fiction novel from amongst his works. Best book I've read in a while.