< previous page page_128 next page >

Page 128
Asimov may have intended the comparison of Christ and Balkis to point up the significant fact that he is not simply rewriting history. Balkis is not Christ, just as Pebble in the Sky is not a simple retelling of the Judea story. Earth is a Judea with special characteristics; it is a Judea with radiation poisoning and institutionalized euthanasia, and it is a Judea given an opportunity to avenge its wrongs and regain its freedom. Asimov's critics (Damon Knight among them), who dismissed his historically inspired science fiction as merely the rewriting of history, overlooked the fact that the Galactic Empire in the Foundation stories is not the Roman Empire at the time of its fall but a Galactic Empire with foresight psychohistory to shorten the Dark Ages and with the Foundations not simply to preserve knowledge, as the monasteries did, but to add to it, disseminate it, and use it as the basis for a newer and more rational Galactic civilization.
Typically, however, Asimov did not allow Judea (Earth) to get its revenge and its freedom. Such short-sighted triumphs were foreign to Asimov's philosophy. He was not religious and disliked Judaism as a form of "particularly pernicious nationalism. . . ." In Pebble in the Sky Asimov opts for civilization and sanity and understanding, which eventually may lead (though in Foundation and Earth Asimov revealed that the effort was unsuccessful) to the restoration of an Earth that was ravaged by the insanities of the little groups firmly convinced, each one, that it was better than the others.
Pebble in the Sky also has its weaknesses. The plot against the Galaxy is an isolated act intended to reverse the balance of power at one blow, unlike the more convincing context of actions in the Foundation stories, each one moving the Galaxy in some small way closer to Hari Seldon's vision. Schwartz's bombing of the missile site, which occurs offstage like the violence in the Foundation stories, is a cutting of the Gordian knot that lacks the subtlety with which Asimov unravels his better works. Balkis's insistence on perceiving complicated plots in accidental relationships may be credible considering his own machinations but seems more an authorial convenience in light of the fact that his own conniving rather than someone else's determination brings about his downfall.
In fact, weakness of motivation is the major flaw of the novel. Events happen for the novel's reasons to keep it going rather than the characters' reasons. Schwartz just happens to be projected into the future and just happens to stumble into the home of the one family that has reason to take him in. Shekt just happens to have advertised for volunteers on which to test the Synapsifier just before Schwartz arrives

 
< previous page page_128 next page >