I’ve heard the adaptation is not faithful in the slightest, but having not read the source material I wouldn’t know. On the one hand though, I thought this might be a blessing because the series has ignited an interest in me to read the books and if they’re greatly different then they should still read pretty fresh for me but obviously on the other hand if the series is what ignited the interest then probably what I found engaging is not the same thing I’d find in those books.
What are they like and would I still get as much out of them if I hadn’t first watched the adaptation?
That’s right, the TV show has practically nothing to do with the books other than some character and place names and the general idea of a declining emprire and its emerging remote colony.
The first two books are really great, but I feel the quality starts dropping at the third, but the series is pretty good as a whole (never got to reading Forward the Foundation though). Asimov’s writing is a bit cringe sometimes, especially about women and children (although there are some strong female characters).
I decided to not watch the Foundation series because I was worried that the concept would be butchered. I watched Man in the High Castle (based on Philip K. Dick) with very high expectations. Dropped it after the first episode. The book was strange, dark and psychedelic. It was clear that the series was not made in the spirit of the book.
I guess its a good thing that I decided to skip the Foundation series.
The books and the show have very little to do with each other but both are worth consuming. I haven’t read the books in 20 years, and I love the show.