for Lippershey seems to have caught the significance
of the finding at once.
Lippershey realized that one could not expect to
stand about holding two lenses in appropriate posi-
tions, one in each hand. He therefore devised a metal
tube into which the two lenses could be fitted in the
proper place, and he had what he called (in Dutch) a
"looker," something one could look through.
It came to be called, more pretentiously, an "optic
tube" or "optic glass" or "perspective glass." In the
first book of Paradise Lost, published in 1667, John
Milton still refers to such a device as an optic glass. In
1612, however, a Greek mathematician, loannes Dimi-
siani, who was secretary to an Italian cardinal, sug-
gested the word "telescope," from Greek words mean-
ing "to see at a distance." By about 1650 this word
began to gain ground and eventually drove out all
others. We can say, then, that Lippershey had in-
vented the first telescope.
But did he? Once the instrument became famous,
other Dutchmen lay claim to having been first in the
field. This is very possible, for given a supply of len-
ses, anyone could invent it by accident One with a
particularly good case is another optician of Middel-
burg, a neighbor of Lippershey's named Zacharias
Janssen (1580-1638?). He claimed to have con-
structed a telescope in 1604, and he may have; Lip-
pershey may have borrowed the idea and made up the
story of his apprentice to cover the theft.
Nevertheless, Lippershey deserves credit whether
OPUS 200 273
he originated the telescope in the strict sense of the
word or not. All his competitors for the honor did
nothing with their telescopes, as far as we know, ex-
cept indulge in viewing for their own amusement.
Lippershey made the world conscious of the instru-
ment by offering it to the Dutch government as a war
weapon.
At that time, the Netherlands had been fighting a
bitter war of independence against Spain for forty
years, and all that was keeping the small nation alive
against the superior military power of Spain was the
Dutch navy. An instrument that would allow ships of
the Dutch fleet to see the approach of an enemy long
before that enemy could be aware of the Dutch would
place the Netherlands in a strong position.
Maurice of Nassau, the capable man who was then
stadholder of the Dutch republic, was interested in
science and saw the importance of the device at once.
He paid Lippershey 900 flonns and ordered him to
produce for the government telescopes of a binocular
variety, ones that could be looked through with both
eyes at once.
Maurice tried to keep the telescope a secret, but
that was impossible; the device was too simple. The
mere rumor that such a thing existed meant that any
ingenious man could duplicate it at once. Telescopes
were offered to Henry IV of France before 1608 was
over, but King Henry, while amused, was not inter-
ested.
The secret war weapon, then, was no secret—but
the Dutch did not lose too much. In 1609, a truce with
Spain was worked out and the Dutch were never in
real danger (from Spain, at least) thereafter. The tele-
scope could go its way, then, with not even the
sketchiest attempt to keep it secret—and it did.
274
ISAAC ASIMOV
* * •
By all odds, though, the most unusual bit of history
included in my second hundred books is fictional. In
1973, the Saturday Evening Post, aware of the coming
bicentennial, suggested that 1 write a fantasy about
Benjamin Franklin, one in which I would talk to him,
perhaps, and get the advice of the wise old sage with
respect to our contemporary problems.
I thought it was a fascinating idea, and I felt I
could handle it since I had already written The Shap-
ing of North America and The Birth of the United
States in addition to The Kite That Won the Revolu-
tion, a book specifically on Franklin, which was in-
cluded in my first hundred.
I therefore wrote a story called "The Dream" and it
was published in the January-February 1974 Saturday
Evening Post.
As so often happens, though, the publishers' appe-
tite was only whetted and they came after me again.
They wanted more dream conversations with Frank-
lin, and I wrote three more before mounting one of
my all-too-rare rebellions against such things and re-
fusing to do any more.
I called the additional stories simply "Second
Dream," "Third Dream," and "Fourth Dream," but the
Saturday Evening Post called them "Benfamin's
Dream," "Party by Satellite," and "Benjamins Bicen-
tenial Blast."
Then, in January 1976, the printers' union of New
York held its annual banquet on Franklins birthday
(he being the patron saint of American printers). It
was their Custom to put out a small booklet of Frank-
liniana, and on this occasion, with my permission they
OPUS 200 275
put out a collection of three of the Dreams. (For some
reason, they left out the third.)
It was a privately printed book, beautifully done,
and longer than some of my children's hooks. What's
more, it contained stories of mine that were not other-
wise collected in book form, so I placed it on my list as
Book 170 (with the most inconvenient name of all the
books in my entire two hiin(lred). From it, here is
"The Dream," the first in the series, in its entirety:
"The Dream" (1974)
"I'm dreaming," I said. It seemed to me that I had
said it aloud. I know that I was in bed. I was aware of
the bedclothes. I was aware of the scattered city lights
peeping through the slats of the Venetian blinds.
Yet he was tliere. As alive—as living—as real—
I could reach out and touch him, but I dared not
move.
I recognized him. I've seen enough pictures of him,
and so has everyone. He did not look quite like his
pictures, for he was old, very old. White hair fringed
his head. I recognized him. I simply knew who he
was.
He said, "I'm dreaming."
We stared at each other and all the world faded
away—the bed and the bedclothes and the room. I
said, "You're Benjamin Franklin,"
He smiled slowly and said, "It may be that this is
not a dream only. I stand close to death and perhaps
the dying may have their wishes answered, if the wish
be sufficiently earnest. Of what year are you?"
I felt panic rise. It might be a dream, but it might
be madness. "I am dreamingF I insisted wildly.
276
ISAAC ASIMOV
"Of course, you are, after a fashion, dreaming," said
Franklin—what else could I call him^ "And I as well-
How is it conceivable that you and I could speak but
by something outside reality? And how does man
transcend reality but in dreams? Of what year are
you, my good sir?"
I was silent. He waited patiently and then shook his
head.
"Then I will speak first," he said. "I am old enough
to have naught to fear. It is New Year's Eve of the
Year of our Lord 1790, in the fourteenth year of the
Independence of the United States, and in the first
year of the presidency of George Washington. And in
the last year of poor Benjamin Franklin, too. I will not
last the new year. I know that.
"I do not die prematurely. In a fortnight and a few
days I will mark my eighty-fourth birthday. A good
old age, for it has made my life long enough to see my
native land become a new nation among the nations
of the earth, and I have had something to do with
that. We have a Constitution that was hammered out,
not without pain, and will perhaps serve. And General
Washington is spared to lead us.
"Yet will our nation last? The great monarchies of
Europe remain hostile and there are dissensions
among ourselves. British forces still hold our frontier
posts; Spain threatens in the south; our trade lan-
guishes; the party spirit grows. Will our nation last?"
I managed to nod my head.
He chuckled almost noiselessly. "Is that all you can
say? A nod? I asked for two hundred years. With this
new year coining in, my last year, I asked what the
United States might be like on its two hundredth
birthday. Are these, then, the only tidings I am vouch-
safed?"
OPUS 200 277
"Almost," I managed to say. "Almost. It is almost
the bicentennial."
Franklin nodded. "For you two centuries is a long
time. It is two centuries since the first Englishmen
stepped ashore on Roanoke Island; two centuries since
Spain's invincible Armada was smashed. I fear the
many inevitable changes two more centuries will
bring."
He paused and then his voice seemed stronger, as
though (ie were prenaring to face whatever might be.
"You speak of the bicentennial as though you accept
the idea casually. The United States, then, still exists
in your time?"
"YesI"
"In what condition? Still independent? Still with the
princely domain we won from Great Britain?"
"Still independent," I said, and I felt myself grow
warm with the pleasure of bringing great news. "And
far larger. It is a land as large as all of Europe, with a
population of more than two hundred million drawn
from every nation. Fiftv states stretch from the Atlan-
tic to the Pacific, with the fiftieth leaping the sea to
the Hawaiian Islands of the mid-Pacific."
His eyes lightened with joy. "And Canada?"
"Not Canada. That remains under the British
crown."
"Great Britain is still a monarchy then?"
"Yes. Queen Elizabeth II is on the throne, but Great
Britain is our friend and lias been for a long time."
"Let the Creator be praised for that Does the na-
tion prosper?"
"The richest on earth. The strongest"
Now Franklin paused. Then: "You say that because
you think to please me, perhaps. Richer than Great
Britain? Stronger than France?"
~t'.
278
ISAAC ASIMOV
"If you asked to have the future revealed to you, f
would it be lies you would hear? The time has not
been all bliss. If we are a mighty union of states now,
under our thirty-seventh President in unbroken suc-
cession from George Washington, it is because we ''
have survived a long and bloody war between the '
states. In this present century, we have fought war
after war overseas. We have had periods of economic
disaster and periods of political corruption. It has not
been the best of all possible worlds, but we have sur-
vived, and, as we approach the bicentennial, we are
the richest and strongest nation on earth."
The old man seemed restless. He stirred in his bed
and said, "I feel that I would like to walk about. I am ^
not yet so old as to be bedridden. Yet I fear it will
break the vision. It grows stronger, do you not feel
that?"
"Yes," I said. It was as though we two alone, sepa- ^
rated by two centuries, were all that existed in a uni- ^
verse closed tightly about us. '^
Franklin said, "I feel your thoughts without asking. ^-
1 begin to grow in you, or you in me. I sense your •-'
world—the world that is to come." ^
There was a tickling in my skull—not a tickling, ei- S
ther—a sensation I could not describe and still cannot. <t
It was another mind which, even in great old age, was ^
more powerful than my own and had gently inserted t
itself into the interstices of my own. ^
Franklin said, with infinite satisfaction, "Yours is an t'
age in which natural philosophy, then, is highly ad- t
vanced, I see." a,
"We call it science now," I said, "and you are right. "A
We fly through the air and can circle the globe in less
time than it took you to go from Boston to Philadel-
phia. Our words streak at the speed of light and reach
OPUS 200 279
any comer of the globe in a fraction of a second. Our
carriages move without horses and our buildings
tower a quarter of a mile into the air."
He was silent and for a time seemed to be attempt-
ing to absorb what might have seemed like wild fan-
tasy.
I said, "Much of it stems from you. You were the
first to penetrate the nature of electricity, and it is
electricity that now powers our society. You invented
the lightning rod, the first device, based on the find-
ings of pure science, to defeat a natural calamity. It
was with the lightning rod that men first turned to
science for help against the universe."
He said, "You make it unnecessary for an old man
to praise himself. I am too old to play at the game of
modesty. I look back at my life and my eyes are not so
blind as to fail to show me something of my true
worth. Do you think, then, the lightning rod is my
greatest invention?"
"One of them, certainly," I said.
"Not at all," said Franklin seriously, "for my great-
est invention is the United States, which I see is fated
to increase so mightily in strength and wealth. But
you think I exaggerate?"
"Well," I said, "you were a member of the commit-
tee that wrote the Declaration of Independence—"
"Tom Jefferson did the writing," interupted Frank-
lin, "though I suggested a passage or two."
"And you were a member of the Constitutional
Convention—"
"Where I devoted myself to quieting tempers. None
of that. I invented the United States over a score of
years before it was born. Have you forgotten that in
your time?"
"I am not certain—"
280
ISAAC ASIMOV
"The French!" he said, impatiently. "Have the
Americans of the future forgotten the day when
France controlled Canada and Louisiana and reached
out to take the Ohio Valley, too. The day when they
would have penned us between the mountains and the
sea, to take us at their leisure later?" ,
"We remember," I said. "We remember Wolfe and
the capture of Quebec."
"But that was victory, in 1759. Cast your mind back
to 1754. The French were at Fort Duquesne, only two
hundred fifty miles from Philadelphia. Young George
Washington's mission to the French—and he was
Young George then, a lad of twenty-one—had failed.
Yet the colonies would not take action against the
menace. The Pennsylvania proprietary government
was torpid. The British were concerned with Europe,
not with us. And even the Iroquois, our old Indian
allies, were threatening to transfer their friendship to
the French. Do you remember all that?"
"Only dimly, sir."
"So Governor De Lancey of New York called a con-
gress of the colonies to meet and confer about the
common danger. On June 19, 1754, twenty-five dele-
gates from seven colonies—the four of New England,
plus New York, Pennsylvania, and Maryland-met at
Albany. We comforted the Iroquois and held them
firm, and then, on June 24, I presented my plan of
union to the Albany congress."
He paused dramatically, then said, "I suggested the
colonies be governed by a governor-general, appoint-
ed and paid by the British crown. Partner with
him was to be a grand council in which delegates
from the various colonies, in number proportional to
population, would sit. The grand council would deal
OPUS 200 281
with American affairs, and the govenor-general would
see to it that the interests of the empire were pre-
served. The congress accepted it—on July 4. It might
have saved the colonies for Great Britain."
I nodded. "It might have. Canada finally came to
much the same arrangement and is still under the
British crown, though it rules itself."
"Ah! But the colonies ignored my plan because it
gave too much power to the crown, and Parliament
ignored it because it gave too much power to the colo-
nies. But the idea of union, which was mine, did not
die. you see. And what I suggested, molded into modi-
fied form by time, came to pass, so that my intention
became the United States of America. And," he added
with deep satisfaction, "I lived to see it and to play
my small—no, my large part."
I nodded again.
"And now," he said, "you live in a great world that
has grown curiously small, a world far smaller than
my thirteen colonies of 1754. Around the world in a
day, you say? Words at the speed of light? The astron-
omer royal, Mr. Bradley, had worked that out to be
some 180,000 miles per second."
"That is right; 186,282 miles per second."
"Even to the exact mile? And yet your world is as
divided as our American states once were."
"More divided, I fear."
"I catch a dim view of devices that make war
deadly," he said.
"We have bombs that can destroy—"
But old Franklin waved his hand. "Do not tell me. I
see enough. And yet with the chance of universal de-
struction, there remains no certainty of peace?"
"The nations are armed and hostile."
282
ISAAC ASIMOV
"The United States arms also?" ^
"Certainly. It is the strongest nuclear power.** ^
*Then man does not advance in wisdom as he does ^
'y e"
m power.'' ^
I shrugged. What could I say? ||
Franklin said, "Are there no enemies against which ^
the nations can unite? We tried to unite against
France, but relied too greativ on Great Britain to feel
the absolute need. We did unite against Great Britain,
at last, when we stood alone."
I said, "There is no power against whom the nations
of the world feel the need to unite. There is no enemy
from beyond the earth to threaten us with universal
defeat and slavery."
"Are there no enemies other than those who are liv-
ing beings?" asked Franklin angrily. "Is there not ig-
norance? Is there not miserv? Is there not hunger and
disease, hatred and bigotry, and disorder and crime?
Has your world changed so much that these things do
not exist?"
"No. We have them. Not all of man's, material ad-
vance has ended the threat of those things you men-
tion. We multiply still in great number—nearly four
billion the world over—and that multiplies our prob-
lems and may even destroy us all."
"And mankind will not combine against this imma-
terial foe?"
I said, "No more than the colonies combined against
France or even against Great Britain until bloodshed
in New England brought them a clear and present
danger."
Franklin said, "Can you wait for a clear and present
danger? What you call a nuclear war would make it
too late at once. If matters advanced to the point
where your complex society broke down, then even
OPUS 200
283
in the absence of war you could not prevent catas-
trophe."
"You are correct, sir."
"Is there no way, then, to dramatize the—" His head
bent in thought. He said, "You spoke of a war be-
tween the states. Are the states still at enmity? Is the
nation still divided?"
"No, the wounds are healed."
"How? In what manner?"
"That is not easy to explain. For one thing, in the
years after that war, the nation was engaged in build-
ing the West. In this great colonizing venture, all the
states, north and south, combined. In that common
task. and in the further task of strengthening the na-
tion, smaller enmities were forgotten."
"I see," said Franklin. "And is there no great ven-
ture in which the world is engaged in your time. Is
there nothing so grand that in it all the nations may
find a common goal and, as you say, forget the
smaller enmities?"
I thought for a moment. "Space, perhaps."
"Space?"
"Both ourselves and the Soviet Union—which used
to be the Russian Empire—have sent out exploring
vessels as far as the planets Mars and Jupiter."
For a moment Franklin seemed speechless. Then he
said, "With men on board?"
"No, unmanned. But six vessels, carrying three men
each, have traveled to the moon. Twelve Americans
have walked on the moon. A seventh vessel miscarried
but brought its crew safely back to earth."
Franklin said, "And with so majestic a feat at the
disposal of mankind, the nations of the world can yet
quarrel?"
"I am sorry, but it is so."
284
ISAAC ASIMOV
"Is the venture, perhaps, merely a useless show?"
"No. Not at ail. Vessels bearing instruments circle
earth. They help in our planetary communications.
They serve as navigational aids. They report on our
cloud cover and help us predict the weather. They in-
vestigate the properties of space and help us under-
stand our universe. Through their observations we can
plot earth's resources, pinpoint earth's physical prob-
lems of pollution, understand the planet as a whole in
ways we never could before. We can add to our
knowledge in an as yet unsuspected fashion that will
help us in—"
"And still the nations quarrel?"
"Yes."
Franklin's eyes began to blaze at this. One arm
reached out tremblinglv toward me. 'Then there must
be further dramatization. Tell me, is it an American
venture only—those vessels to the moon—or are other
nations involved?"
"It is strictly American."
"Ah. And the bicentennial approaches. Then cannot
the United States establish a birthday party that will
be the greatest birthday of all time by making it a
celebration for mankind?"
"In what way, sir?"
"Launch one of your vessels on the bicentennial,"
he said energetically. "Or, if there is not time for that,
announce one to be launched by the united aid of all
the nations of the world. Let there be a celebration of
the Fourth, not as the bicentennial of a single nation,
but as a glorification of the principle of the union of
political entities against a common foe and for a com-
mon purpose.
"Let there be the largest birthday cake in the world,
if you will; the decoration of whole cities; the saluting
OPUS 200
285
'; of a thousand guns; the playing of ten thousand
bands—but let it be for mankind. Let the leaders of all
nations assemble to praise the union of mankind. Let
them all plan their own part in the launching of ves-
sels into space under the auspices of a united planet.
; Let the conquest of space be the source of pride for
nothing smaller than mankind. Let it be that in which
, all men can find a common glory, and in which all
men can forget enmities."
I said, "But the problems of mankind will remain.
They will not disappear."
Franklin's figure seemed to waver, grow less sub-
stantial. "Do you want everything at once? The Amer-
ican union did not solve all problems for Americans.
But it made it possible for solutions to be sought, and
sometimes found."
He grew dimmer still, wraithlike, and then vanished
in a fading smoke. And I woke up.
If it were a dream, it was Franklin's dream, too.
And a greater dream still—of a union beyond our Un-
ion.
But what could I do? I do not make policy.
Yet I am a writer. With help, I might make myself
heard. With help!
So I picked up the telephone and called a certain
editor, for, in addition to the lightning rod and the
United States, hadn't Benjamin Franklin also invented
the Saturday Evening Post?
PART 9
THE BIBLE
Among my first hundred books is the two-volume Asi-
mov's Guide to the Bible. What could I do for an en-
core?
One thing J could do was to write articles on bibli-
cal subjects for people who were impressed with the
Guide. Reader's Digest Books asked me to contribute
essays to an elaborate book they were compiling
about men and women in the Bible. 1 wrote articles
for them on Jacob, Ruth, and so on.
Although 1 was well paid, I didn't particularly enjoy
the task since the editors had their ideas and they
were not mine. Eventually, when the book came out, I
found that everyone who had had anything to do with
the book was carefully acknowledged—the editors,
photographers, paper cutters, office boys, garbage col-
lectors—everyone but the writers. The written words,
it could only be assumed, had been carved on Sinai
by direct revelation.
I was furious. Although I had contributed a sub-
stantial portion of the book, I refused to include it in
my list—not if my authorship were in no way acknowl-
edged. In fact, I didn't even keep the book.
It was not, however, an effort that had been en-
tirely wasted. My biography on Ruth got me to think-
ing about the subject, and for Doubleday I wrote a
290
ISAAC ASIMOV
book for young people called The Story of Ruth
(Book 127). It was published in 1972.
I repeated the thesis of this book in an F & SF es-
say, "Lost in Non-Translation" which appeared in
March 1972 and was then included in my essay collec-
tion The Tragedy of the Moon {Book 144), published
by Doubleday in 1973. The essay is included here in
full.
"Lost in Non-Translation'* (2972)
At the Noreascon (the Twenty-ninth World Science
Fiction Convention), which was held in Boston on the
Labor Day weekend of 1971, I sat on the dais, of
course, since, as the Bob Hope of science fiction, it is
my perennial duty to hand out the Hugos. On my left
was my daughter, Robyn—sixteen, blond, blue-eyed,
shapely, and beautiful. (No, that last adjective is not a
father's proud partiality. Ask anyone.)
My old friend Clifford D. Simak was guest of honor,
and he began his talk by introducing, with thoroughly
justified pride, his two children, who were in the au-
dience. A look of alarm instantly crossed Robyn's face.
"Daddy," she whispered urgently, knowing full well
my capacity for inflicting embarrassment, "are you
planning to introduce me?"
"Would that bother you, Robyn?" I asked.
"Yes, it would."
"Then I won't," I said, and patted her hand reassur-
ingly.
She thought awhile. Then she said, "Of course,
Daddy, if you have the urge to refer, in a casual sort
of way, to your beautiful daughter, that would be all
right."
OPUS 200
291
So you can bet I did fust that, while she allowed her
eyes to drop in a charmingly modest way.
But I couldn't help but think of the blond, blue-eyed
stereotype of Nordic beautv that has filled Western lit-
erature ever since the blond, blue-eyed Germanic
tribes took over the western portions of the Roman
Empire, fifteen centuries ago, and set themselves up
as an aristocracy.
. . , And of the manner in which that stereotype has
been used to subvert one of the clearest and most im-
portant lessons in the Bible—a subversion that con-
tributes its little bit to the serious crisis that today
faces the world, and the United States in particular.
In line with my penchant for beginning at the be-
ginning, come back with me to the sixth century B.C.
A party of Jews had returned from Babylonian exile to
rebuild the Temple at Jerusalem, which Nebuchad-
nezzar had destroyed seventy years before.
During the exile, under the guidance of the prophet
Ezekfel, the Jews had firmly held to their national
identity by modifving, complicating, and idealizing
their worship of Yahweh into a form tliat was directly
ancestral to the Judaism of today. (In fact Ezekiel is
sometimes called "the father of Judaism.")
This meant that when the exiles returned to Jerusa-
lem, they faced a religious problem. There were peo-
ple who, all through the period of the exile, had been
living in what had once been Judah, and who wor-
shiped Yahweh in what they considered the correct,
time-honored ritual. Because their chief city (with Je-
rusalem destroyed) was Samaria, the returning Jews
called them Samaritans.
The Samaritans rejected the newfangled modifica-
292
ISAAC ASIMOV
tions of the returning Jews, and the Jews abhorred the
old-fashioned beliefs of the Samaritans. Between them
arose an undying hostility, the kind that is exacer-
bated because the differences in belief are compara-
tively small-
In addition there were, also living in the land, those'
who worshiped other gods altogether—Ammonites,
Edomites, Philistines, and so on.
The pressures on the returning band of Jews were
not primarilv military, for the entire area was under
the more or less beneBcent rule of the Persian Em-
pire; they were social pressures, and perhaps even
stronger for that. To maintain a strict ritual in the face
of overwhelming numbers of nonbelievers is difficult,
and the tendency to relax that ritual was almost irre-
sistible. Then, too, young male returnees were at-
tracted to the women at hand and there were inter-
marriages. Naturally, to humor the wife, ritual was
further relaxed.
But then, possibly as late as about 400 B.C., a full
century after the second Temple had been built, Ezra
arrived in Jerusalem. He was a scholar of the Mosaic
law, which had been edited and put into final form in
the course of the exile. He was horrified at the back-
sliding and put through a tub-thumping revival. He
called the people together, led them in chanting the
law and expounding on it, raised their religious fervor,
and called for confession of sins and renewal of faith.
One thing he demanded most rigorously was the
abandonment of all non-Jewish wives and their chil-
dren. Only so could the holiness of strict Judaism be
maintained, in his view. To quote the Bible (and I
will use the recent New English Bible for the pur-
pose ):
"Ezra the priest stood up and said, *You have com-
OPUS 200 293
mitted an offense in marrying foreign wives and have
added to Israel's guilt. Make vour confession now to
the Lord the God of vour fathers and do his will, and
separate yourselves from the foreign population and
from vour foreign wives.' Then all the assembled peo-
ple shouted in reply, 'Yes; wte must do what vou say
. . . (Ezra 10:10-12).
From that time on, the Jews as a whole began to
practice an exclpsivi.sm, a voluntary separation from
others, a multiplication of peculiar customs that fur-
ther emphasized their separateness; and all of this
helped them maintain their identity through all the
miseries and catastrophes that were to come, through
all the crises, and through exiles and persecutions that
fragmented them over the face of the earth.
The exclusivism, to be sure, also served to make
them socially indigestible and imparted to them a
high social visibility that helped give rise to condi-
tions that made exiles and persecutions more iikely.
Not everyone among the Jews adhered to this pol-
icy of exclusivism. There were some who believed
that all men were equal in the sight of God and that
no one should be excluded from the community on
the basis of group identity alone.
One who believed this (but who is forever name-
less) attempted to present this case in the form of a
short piece of historical fiction. In this fourth-century-
B.C. tale the heroine was Ruth, a Moabite woman.
(The tale was presented as having taken place in the
time of the judges, so the traditional view was that it
was written by the prophet Samuel in the eleventh
century B.C. No modem student of the Bible believes
this.)
Why a Moabite women, by the way?
It seems that the Jews, returning from exile, had
294
ISAAC ASIMOV
traditions concerning their initial arrival at the bor-
ders of Canaan under Moses and then Joshua, nearlv a
thousand vears before. At that time, the small nation
of Moab, which lay east of the lower course of the
Jordan and of the Dead Sea, was understandably
alarmed at the incursion of tough desert raiders and
took steps to oppose them. Not only did they prevent
the Israelites from passing through their territory, but,
tradition had it, they called in a seer, Balaam, and
asked him to use his magical abilities to bring misfor-
tune and destruction upon the invaders.
That failed, and Balaam, on departing, was sup-
posed to have advised the king of Moab to let the
Moabite girls lure the desert raiders into liaisons,
which might subvert their stem dedication to then-
task. The Bible records the following:
"When the Israelites were in Shittim, the people be-
gan to have intercourse with Moabite women, who in-
vited them to the sacrifices offered to their gods; and
they ate the sacrificial food and prostrated themselves
before the gods of Moab. The Israelites joined in the
worship of the Baal of Peor, and the Lord was angry
with them" (Numbers 25:1-3).
As a result of this, "Moabite women" became the
quintessence of the type of outside influence that by
sexual attraction tried to subvert pious Jews. Indeed,
Moab and the neighboring kingdom to the north, Am-
mon, were singled out in the Mosaic code:
"No Ammonite or Moabite, even down to the tenth
generation, shall become a member of the assembly of
the Lord . . . because they did not meet you with
food and water on your way out of Egypt, and be-
cause they hired Balaam ... to revile you . . , You
shall never seek their welfare or their good all your
life long" (Deuteronomy 23:3-4, 6).
OPUS 200 295
And yet there were times in later history when
there was friendship between Moab and at least some
men of Israel, possibly because they were brought to-
gether by some common enemy.
For instance, shortly before 1000 B.C., Israel was
ruled by Saul. He had held off the Philistines, con-
quered the Amalekites, and brought Israel to its great-
est pitch of power to that point. Moab naturally
feared his expansionist policies and so befriended any-
one rebelling against Saul. Such a rebel was the Ju-
dean warrior David of Bethlehem. When David was
pressed hard by Saul and bad retired to a fortified
stronghold, he used Moab as a refuge for his family.
"David . . . said to the king of Moab, 'Let my fa-
ther and motlier come and take shelter with you until
I know what God will do for me.' So he left them at
the court of the king of Moab, and they stayed there
as long as David was in his stronghold" (1 Samuel
22:3-4).
As it happened, David eventually won out, became
king first of Judah, then of all Israel, and established
an empire that took in the entire east coast of the
Mediterranean, from Egypt to the Euphrates, with the
Phoenician cities independent but in alliance with
him. Later, Jews always looked back to the time of
David and his son Solomon as a golden age, and Da-
vid's position in Jewish legend and thought was unas-
sailable. David founded a dynasty that ruled over Ju-
dah for four centuries, and the Jews never stopped
believing that some descendant of David would yet
return to rule over them again in some idealized fu-
ture time.
Yet, on the basis of the verses describing David's
use of Moab as a refuge for his family, there may have
arisen a tale to the effect that there was a Moabite
296
ISAAC ASIMOV
strain in David's ancestry. Apparently, the author of
the Book of Ruth determined to make use of this tale
to point up the doctrine of nonexclusivism by using
the supremely hated Moabite woman as his heroine.
The Book of Ruth tells of a Judean family of Bethle-
hem—a man, his wife, and two sons—who are driven
by famine to Moab. There the two sons marry Moa-
bite girls, but after a space of time all three men die,
leaving the three women—Naomi, the mother-in-law,
and Ruth and Orpah, the two daughters-in-law—as
survivors.
Those were times when women were chattels, and
unmarried women, without a man to own them and
care for them, could subsist only on charity. (Hence
the frequent biblical injunction to care for widows
and orphans.)
Naomi determined to return to Bethlehem, where
kinsmen might possibly care for her, but urged Ruth
and Orpah to remain in Moab. She does not say, but
we might plausibly suppose she is thinking, that Moa-
bite girls would have a rough time of it in Moab-
hating Judah.
Orpah remains in Moab, but Ruth refuses to leave
Naomi, saying, "Do not urge me to go back and desert
you . . . Where you go, I will go, and where you stay,
I will stay. Your people shall be my people, and your
God my God. Where you die I will die, and there I
will be buried. I swear a solemn oath before the Lord
your God: nothing but death shall divide us" (Ruth
1:16-17).
Once in Bethlehem, the two were faced with the
direst poverty, and Ruth volunteered to support her-
self and her mother-in-law by gleaning in the fields. It
was harvest time, and it was customary to allow any
stalks of grain that fell to the ground in the process of
OPUS 200
297
gathering to remain there to be collected bv the poor.
This t^leanin^ was a kind of welfare program for those
in need. It was, however, backbreaking work, and any
young woman, particularly a Moabite, who engaged
in it underwent certain obvious risks at the hands of
the lusty young reapers. Ruth's offer was simply he-
roic.
As it happened, Ruth gleaned in the lands of a rich
Judean farmer named Boaz, who, coming to oversee
the work, noticed her working tirelessly. He asked
after her, and his reapers answered, "She is a Moabite
girl . . . who has Just come back with Naomi from
the Moabite country" (Ruth 2:6).
Boaz spoke kindly to her and Ruth said, "Why are
you so kind as to take notice of me when I am only a
foreigner?" (Ruth 2:10). Boaz explained that he had
heard how she had forsaken her own land for love of
Naomi and how hard she worked to take care of her-
As it turned out, Boaz was a relative of Naomi's
dead husband, which must be one reason why he was
touched bv Ruth's love and fidelity. Naomi, on hear-
ing the story, had an idea. In those days. if a widow
was left childless, she had the right to expect her dead
husband's brother to marry her and offer her his pro-
tection. If the dead husband had no brother, some
other relative would fulfill the task.
Naomi was past the age of childbearing, so she
could not qualify for marriage, which in those days
centered about children; but what about Ruth? To be
sure, Ruth was a Moabite woman and it might well be
that no Judean would marry her, but Boaz had proven
kind. Naomi therefore instructed Ruth how to ap-
proach Boaz at night and, without crudely seductive
intent, appeal for his protection.
Boaz, touched by Ruth's modesty and helplessness,
298
ISAAC ASIMOV
promised to do his duty, but pointed out that there
was a kinsman closer than he and that, by right, this
other kinsman had to have his chance first.
The verv next day, Boaz approached the other kins-
man and suggested that he buy some property in
Naomi's charge and, along with it, take over another
responsibility. Boaz said, "On the day when you ac-
quire the field from Naomi, you also acquire Ruth the
Moabitess, the dead man's wife . . ."(Ruth 4:5).
Perhaps Boaz carefully stressed the adjectival
phrase "the Moabitess," for the other kinsman drew
back at once. Boaz therefore married Ruth, who in
time bore him a son. The proud and happy Naomi
held the child in her bosom and her women friends
said to her, "The child will give you new life and
cherish you in your old age; for your daughter-in-law
who loves vou, who has proved better to you than
seven sons, has borne him" (Ruth 4:15).
In a society that valued sons infinitely more than
daughters, this verdict of Judean women on Ruth, a
woman of the hated land of Moab, is the author's
moral—that there is nobilitv and virtue in all groups
and that none must be excluded from consideration in
advance simply because of their group identification.
And then, to clinch the argument for any Judean so
nationalistic as to be impervious to mere idealism, the
story concludes: "Her neighbors gave him a name:
'Naomi has a son,' they said; 'we will call him Obed.'
He was the father of Jesse, the father of David" (Ruth
4:17).
Where would Israel have been, then, if there had
been an Ezra present to forbid the marriage of Boaz
with a "foreign wife"?
Where does that leave us? That the Book of Ruth is
a pleasant story, no one will deny. It is almost always
OPUS 200
299
referred to as a "delightful idyll," or words to that ef-
fect. That Ruth is a most successful characterization
of a sweet and virtuous woman is beyond dispute.
In fact everyone is so in love with the storv and
with Ruth that the whole point is lost. It is, by right, a
tale of tolerance for the despised, of love for the
hated, of the reward that comes of brotherhood. By
mixing the genes of mankind, by forming the hybrid,
great men will come.
The Jews included the Book of Ruth in the canon
partly because it is so wonderfully told a tale but
mostly (I suspect) because it gives the lineage of the
great David, a lineage that is not given beyond Da-
vid's father, Jesse, in the soberly historic books of the
Bible that anteceded Ruth. But the Jews remained, by
and large, exclusivistic and did not leam the lesson of
universalism preached by the Book of Ruth.
Nor have people taken its lesson to heart since. Why
should they, since every effort is made to wipe out
that lesson? The story of Ruth has been retold any
number of ways, from children's tales to serious nov-
els. Even movies have been made of it. Ruth herself
must have been pictured in hundreds of illustrations.
And in every illustration I have ever seen, she is pre-
sented as blond, blue-eyed, shapely, and beautiful—
the perfect Nordic stereotype I referred to at the be-
ginning of the article.
For goodness' sake, why shouldn't Boaz have fallen
in love with her? What great credit was there in
marrying her? If a girl like that had fallen at your feet
and asked you humbly to do your duty and kindly
marry her, you would probably have done it like a
shot.
Of course she was a Moabite woman, but so what?
What does the word "Moabite" mean to you? Does it
300
ISAAC ASIMOV
arouse any violent reaction? Are there many Moabites
among vour acquaintances? Have vour children been
cha-sed bv a bunch of lousv Moahites latelv? Have
thev been reducing property values in vour neighbor-
hood? When was the last time vou heard someone sav,
"Got to get those rotten Moabites out of here. They
just fill un the welfare rolls"?
In fact, judging by the way Ruth is drawn, Moa-
bites are English aristocrats and their presence would
raise property values.
The trouble is that the one word that is not trans-
lated in the Book of Ruth is the kev word "Moabite,"
and as long as it is not translated, the point is lost; it is
lost in non-translation.
The word "Moabite" reallv means "someone of a
group that receives from us and deserves from us
nothing but hatred and contempt." How should this
word be translated into a single word that means the
same thing to, sav, many modern Greeks? . . . Why,
Turk." And to manv modem Turks? . . . Why,
"Greek." And to many modern white Americans? . . .
Why, "black."
To get the proper flavor of the Book of Ruth, sup-
pose we think of Ruth not as a Moabite woman but as
a black woman.
Reread the story of Ruth and translate "Moabite" to
"black" every time you see it. Naomi (imagine) is
coming back to the United States with her two black
daughters-in-law. No wonder she urges them not to
come with her. It is a marvel that Ruth so loved her
mother-in-law that she was willing to face a society
that hated her unreasoningly and to take the risk of
gleaning in the face of leering reapers who could not
possibly suppose they need treat her with any consid-
eration whatever.
OPUS 200 301
And when Boaz asked who she was, don't read the
answer as, "She is a Moabite girl," but as, "She is a
black girl." More likely, in fact, the reapers might have
said to Boaz something that was the equivalent of (if
you'll excuse the language), "She is a nigger £?rl."
Think of it that way and you find the whole point is
found in translation and only in translation. Boaz' ac-
tion in being willing to marry Ruth because she was
virtuous (and not because she was a Nordic beauty)
takes on a kind of nobility. The neighbors' decision
that she was better to Naomi than seven sons becomes
something that could have been forced out of them
only by overwhelming evidence to that effect. And
^. the final stroke that out of this miscegenation was
I-born none other than the great David is rather breath-
k taking.
\.
; We get something similar in the New Testament. On
one occasion a student of the law asks Jesus what
^must be done to gain eternal life, and he answer? his
, own question by saying, "Love the Lord your God
^with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your
r strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor
r&s yourself (Luke 10:27).
These admonitions are taken from the Old Testa-
ment, of course. That last bit about your neighbor
• comes from a verse that says, "You shall not seek re-
-venge. or cherish anger towards your kinsfolk; you
shall love your neighbor as a man like yourself' (Leviti-
cus 19; 18).
(The New English Bible translation sounds better
to me here than the King James's: "Thou shalt love
thy neighbor as thyself." Where is the saint who can
truly feel another's pain or ecstasy precisely as he feels
own? We must not ask too much. But if we simply
302
ISAAC ASIMOV
grant that someone else is "a man like yourself," then
he can be treated with decency at least It is when we
refuse to grant even this, and talk of another as our
inferior, that contempt and cruelty come to seem nat-
ural, and even laudable.)
Jesus approves the lawyer's saying, and the lawyer
promptly asks, "And who is my neighbor?" (Luke 10:-
29). After all, the verse in Leviticus first speaks of
refraining from revenge and anger toward kinsfolk;
might not, then, the concept of "neighbor" be re-
stricted to kinsfolk, to one's own kind, only?
In response, Jesus replies with perhaps the greatest
of the parables—of a travel&r who fell in with robbers,
who was mugged and robbed and left half dead by
the road. Jesus goes on, "It so happened that a priest
was going down by the same road; but when he saw
him, he went past on the other side. So too a Levite
came to the place, and when he saw him went past on
the other side. But a Samaritan who was making the
Journey came upon him, and, wh^n he saw him, was
moved to pity. He went up and bandaged his wounds,
bathing them with oil and wifie. Then he lifted him
onto his own beast, brought Mm to an inn, and looked
after him there" (Luke 10:31-34).
Then Jesus asks who the traveler's neighbor was,
and the lawyer is forced to say, "The one who showed
him kindness" (Luke 10:37).
This is known as the Parable of the Good Samari-
tan, even though nowhere in the parable is the rescuer
called a good Samaritan, merely a Samaritan.
The force of the parable is entirely vitiated by the
common phrase "good" Samaritan, for that has cast a.
false light on who the Samaritans were. In a free-
association test, say "Samaritan" and probably every
person being tested will answer, "Good." It has be-
OPUS 200
303
come so imprinted in all our brains that Samaritans
are good that we take it for granted that a Samaritan
would act like that and wonder why Jesus is making a
point of it.
We forget who the Samaritans were, in the time of
Jesus!
To the Jews, they were not good. They were hated,
despised, contemptible heretics with whom no good
Jew would have anything to do. Again, the whole
point is lost through non-translation.
Suppose, instead, that it is a white traveler in Mis-
sissippi who has been mugged and left half dead. And
suppose it was a minister and a deacon who passed by
and refused to "become involved." And suppose it was
a black sharecropper who stopped and took care of
the man.
Now ask yourself: Who was the neighbor whom you
must love as though he were a man like yourself if
you are to be saved?
The Parable of the Good Samaritan clearly teaches
that there is nothing parochial in the concept "neigh-
bor," that you cannot confine your decency to your
own group and your own kind. All mankind, right
down to those you most despise, are your neighbors.
Well, then, we have in the Bible two examples—in the
Book of Ruth and in tlie Parable of the Good Samari-
tan—of teachings that are lost in non-translation, yet
are terribly applicable to us today.
The whole world over, there are confrontations be-
tween sections of mankind denned by a difference of
race, nationality, economic philosophy, religion, or
language, so that one is not "neighbor" to the other.
These more or less arbitrary differences among
peoples who are members of a-single biological spec-
304
ISAAC ASIMOV
ies are terribly dangerous, and nowhere more so than
here in the United States, where the most perilous
confrontation (I need not tell you) is between white
and black.
Next to the population problem generally, mankind
faces no danger greater than this confrontation, par-
ticularly in the United States.
It seems to me that more and more, each year, both
whites and blacks are turning, in anger and hatred, to
violence. I see po reasonable end to the steady escala-
tion but an actual civil war.
In such a civil war, the whites, with a preponder-
ance of numbers and an even greater preponderance
of organized power, would in all likelihood "win."
They would do so, however, at an enormous material
cost and, I suspect, at a fatal spiritual one.
And why? Is it so hard to recognize that we are all
neighbors, after all? Can we, on both sides—on both
sides—6nd no way of accepting the biblical lesson?
Or if quoting the Bible sounds too mealy-mouthed,
and if repeating the words of Jesus seems too pietistic,
let's put it another way, a practical way:
Is the privilege of feeling hatred so luxurious that it
is worth the material and spiritual hell of a white'
black civil war?
If the answer is really yes, then one can only de-
spair.
PART 10
SHORT-SHORTS
Tee always liked short-short stories.
First, since they are brief and can be read quickly,
you can get the value of one even if you only have
five minutes to spare—while waiting for a telephone
call or while drinking a cup of coffee. It can fill in. a
disregarded corner of the day.
Second, there can be no frills. Youce sot to have
the story distilled down to 1500 words or less, and ide-
ally that leaves room only for the point; and that
point, when the story is well done, can jab itself into
your mind and never be forgotten.
Third, writing one is a challenge, and I enfoy c1wl-
lenges.
In May 1973, the Saturday Evening Post asked me
to write a short-short science fiction story for them
and I did. I meant to write a lighthearted robot story
and even called it "Light Verse," intending o. pun.
Alas, the story squirmed in my hands (even short-
shorts can do that) and became rather more tragic
than I had intended,
I included it eventually in my short-story collection
Buy Jupiter and Other Stories (Book 164), which Dou-
bleday published in 1875. Here it is in full:
308 ISAAC ASIMOV
"Light Verse" (1973)
The very last person anyone would expect to be a
murderer was Mrs. Avis Lardner. Widow of the great
astronaut-martyr, she was a philanthropist, an art col-
lector, a hostess extraordinaire, and, everyone agreed;
an artistic genius. But above all, she was the gentlest
and kindest human being one could imagine.
Her husband, William J. Lardner, died, as we all
know, of the effects of radiation from a solar flare,
after he had deliberately remained in space so that a
passenger vessel might make it safely to Space
Station 5.
Mrs. Lardner had received a generous pension for
that, and she had then invested wisely and well. By
late middle age she was very wealthy.
Her house was a showplace, a veritable museum,
containing a small but extremely select collection of
extraordinarily beautiful jeweled objects. From a
dozen different cultures she had obtained relics of al-
most every conceivable artifact that could be embed-
ded with jewels and made to serve the aristocracy of
that culture. She had one of the first jeweled wrist-
watches manufactured in America, a jeweled dagger
from Cambodia, a jeweled pair of spectacles from It-
aly, and so on almost endlessly.
All was open for inspection. The artifacts were not
insured, and there were no ordinary security provi-
sions. There was no need for anything conventional,
for Mrs. Lardner maintained a large staff of robot ser-
vants, all of whom could be relied on to guard every
item with imperturbable concentration, irreproach-
able honesty, and irrevocable efficiency.
Everyone knew of the existence of those robots, and
there is no record of any attempt at theft, ever.
OPUS 200
309
And then, of course, there was her light-sculpture.
How Mrs. Lardner discovered her own genius at the
art, no guest at her many lavish entertainments could
guess. On each occasion, however, when her house
was thrown open to guests, a new symphony of light
shone throughout the rooms; three-dimensional curves
and solids in melting color, some pure and some fus-
ing in startling, crystalline effects that bathed every
guest in wonder and somehow always adjusted itself
so as to make Mrs. Lardner's blue-white hair and soft,
unlined face gently beautiful.
It was for the light-sculpture more than anything
else that the guests came. It was never the same twice
and never failed to explore new experimental avenues
of art. Many people who could afford light-consoles
prepared light-sculptures for amusement, but no one
could approach Mrs. Lardner's expertise. Not even
those who considered themselves professional artists.
She herself was charmingly, modest about it. "No,
she would protest when someone waxed lyrical.
no
'I wouldn't call it 'poetry in light.' That's far too kind.
At most, I would say it was mere light verse."" And
everyone smiled at her gentle wit
Though she was often asked, she would never cre-
ate light-sculpture for any occasion but her own par-
ties. "That would be commercialization," she said.
She had no objection, however, to the preparation
of elaborate holograms of her sculptures so that they
might be made permanent and reproduced in mu-
seums of art all over the world. Nor was there ever a
charge for any use that might be made of her light-
sculptures.
"I couldn't ask a penny," she said, spreading her
arms wide. "It's free to all. After all, I have no further
310
BAAC ASIMOV
use for it myself." It was true! She never used the
same light-sculpture twice.
When the holograms were taken, she was coopera-
tion itself. Watching benignly at every step, she was
always ready to order her robot servants to help.
"Please, Courtney," she would say, "would you be so
kind as to adjust the stepladder?"
It was her fashion. She always addressed her robots
with the most formal courtesy.
Once, years before, she had been almost scolded by
a government functionary from the Bureau of Robots
and Mechanical Men. "You can't do that," he said se-
verely. "It interferes with their efficiency. They are
constructed to follow orders, and the more clearly you
give those orders, the more efficiently they follow
them. When you ask with elaborate politeness, it is
difficult for them to understand that an order is being
given. They react more slowly."
Mrs. Lardner lifted her aristocratic head. "I do not
ask for speed and efficiency," she said. "I ask good-
will. My robots love me."
The government functionary might have explained
that robots cannot love, but he withered under her
hurt but gentle glance.
It was notorious that Mrs. Lardner never even re-
turned a robot to the factory for adjustment. Their
positronic brains are enormously complex, and once in
ten times or so the adJustment is not perfect as it
leaves the factory. Sometimes the en-or does not show
up for a period of time, but whenever it does, U.S.
Robots and Mechanical Men, Inc., always makes the
adjustment free of charge.
Mrs. Lardner shook her head. "Once a robot is in
my house," she said, "and has performed his duties,
OPUS 200
311
any minor eccentricities must be bome. I will not
have him manhandled."
It Was the worst thing possible to try to explain that
a robot was but a machine. She would -<ay very
stiffly, "Nothing that is as intelligent as a robot can
ever be but a machine. I treat them like people."
And that was thati
She kept even Max, although he was almost help-
less. He could scarcely understand what was expected
of him. Mrs. Lardner denied that strenuously, how-
ever. "Not at all," she would say firmly. "He can take
hats and coats and store them very well, indeed. He
can hold objects for me. He can do many things."
"But why not have him adjusted?" asked a friend
once.
"Oh, I couldn't He's himself. He's very lovable, you
know. After all, a positronic brain is so complex that
no one can ever tell in just what way it's off. If he
were made perfectly normal there would be no way to
adjust him back to the lovabittty he now has. I won't
give that up."
"But if he's maladjusted," said the friend, looking at
Max nervously, "might he not be dangerous?"
''Never," laughed Mrs. Lardner. "I've had him for
years. He's completely harmless and quite a dear."
Actually he looked like all the other robots—smooth,
metallic, vaguely human, but expressionless.
To the gentle Mrs. Lardner, however, they were all
individual, all sweet, all lovable. It was the kind of
woman she was.
How could she commit murder?
The very last person anyone would expect to be mur-
dered would be John Semper Travis. Introverted and
312
ISAAC ASIMOV
gentle, he was in the world but not of it. He had that
peculiar mathematical turn of mind that made it pos-
sible for him to work out in his head the complicated
tapestry of the myriad positronic brainpaths in a ro-
bots mind.
He was chief engineer of U.S. Robots and Mechani-
cal Men,Inc.
But he was also an enthusiastic amateur in light-
sculpture. He had written a book on the subject,
trying to show that the type of mathematics he used
in working out positronic brain-paths might be modi-
fied into a guide to the production of aesthetic light-
sculpture.
His attempt at putting theory into practice was a
dismal failure, however. The sculptures he himself
produced, following his mathematical principles, were
stodgy, mechanical, and uninteresting.
It was the only reason for unhappiness in his quiet,
constrained, and secure life, and yet it was reason
enough for him to be very unhappy indeed. He knew
his theories were right, yet he could not make them
work. If he could but produce one great piece of
light-sculpture—
Naturally, he knew of Mrs. Lardner^s light-
sculpture. She was universally hailed as a genius, yet
Travis knew she could not understand even the sim-
plest aspect of robotic mathematics. He had corre-
sponded with her, but she consistently refused to ex-
plain her methods, and he wondered if she had any at
all. Might it not be mere intuition? But even intuition
might be reduced to mathematics. Finally he man-
aged to receive an invitation to one of her parties. He
simply had to see her.
Mr. Travis arrived rather late. He had made one
OPUS 200 313
last attempt at a piece of light-sculpture and had
failed miserably.
He greeted Mrs. Lardner with a kind of puzzled re-
spect and said, "That was a peculiar robot who took
my hat and coat."
"That is Max," said Mrs. Lardner.
"He is quite maladjusted, and he's a fairly old
model. How is it you did not return it to the factory?"
"Oh, no," said Mrs Lardner. "It would be too much
trouble."
"None at all, Mrs. Lardner," said Travis. "You
would be surprised how simple a task it was. Since I
am with U.S. Robots, I took the liberty of adjusting
him myself. It took no time and you'll find he is now
in perfect working order."
A queer change came over Mrs. Lardner*s face.
Fury found a place on it for the first time in her gen-
tle life, and it was as though the lines did not know
how to form.
"You adjusted him?" she shrieked. "But it was he
who created my light-sculptures. It was the maladjust-
ment, the maUidjustment, which you can never re-
store, that—that—"
It was really unfortunate that she had been showing
her collection at the time and that the Jeweled dagger
from Cambodia was on the marble tabletop before
her.
Travis's face was also distorted. "You mean if I had
studied his uniquely maladjusted positronic brain-
paths I might have learned—"
She lunged with the knife too quickly for anyone to
stop her and he did not try to dodge. Some said he
came to meet it—as though he wanted to die.
314
ISAAC ASIMOV
Short-shorts need not he fiction. On occasion I am
asked to do short nonfiction articles for one outlet or
another, and I particularly enjoy doing them for TV
Guide, since there the opportunity exists for immers-
ing myself in any of a wide variety of subjects.
There was a television special on carious reputed
monsters, for instance, such as the abominable snow-
man, Bigfoot, the Loch Ness monster, and so on. 1
view reports of such objects with the deepest scepti-
cism, and when TV Guide asked for a "backgrounder"
on the program, I produced an article entitled "The
Monsters We Have Lived With," which brought me
angry letters from some readers who didn't want their
monsters taken away from them Just because they
didn't exist.
As it happens, Douhleday occasionally publishes
collections of miscellaneous essays of mine that have
appeared in places other than F & SF. My second
hundred books contain three of these collections, of
which the latest is The Beginning and the End (Book
187), published in 1977. It includes my monster back-
grounder, which is here reproduced in full.
"The Monsters We Have Lived With" (7974)
Mankind has always lived with monsters. That fact
dates back, no doubt, to the time when the early
ancestors of man moved about in constant fear of the
large predators around them. Fearful as the mam-
moths, saber-toothed tigers, and cave bears may have
been, it is the essence of the human mind that still
worse could be imagined.
The dread forces of nature were visualized as super-
animals. The Scandinavians imagined the sun and the
OPUS 200 315
moon to be pursued forever by gigantic wolves, for
instance. It was when these caught up with their prey
that eclipses took place.
Relatively harmless animals could be magniBed
into terrors. The octopuses and squids, with their writh-
ing tentacles, were elaborated into the deadly Hy-
dra, the many-headed snake destroyed by Hercules;
into Medusa with her snaky hair and her glance that
turned living things to stone; into Scylla with her six
heads, whom Ulysses encountered.
Perhaps the most feared animal was the snake.
Slithering unseen through the underbrush, it came
upon its victim unawares. Its lidless eyes, its cold and
malignant stare, its sudden strike, all served to terror-
ize human beings. Is it any wonder that the snake is
so often used as the very principle of evil—as, for in-
stance, in the tale of the Garden of Eden.
But imagination can improve even on the snake.
Snakes can be imagined who kill not by a bite, but
merely by a look, and this is the "basilisk" (from the
Greek word meaning "little king").
Or else make the snake much larger, into what the
Greeks called Python, and it can represent the original
chaos which had to be destroyed by a god before the
orderly universe could be created. It was Apollo who
killed the Python in the early days of the earth, ac-
cording to the Greek myths, and who then established
the oracle of Delphi on the spot.
Another Greek word for a large snake was "drakon,"
which has become our "dragon." To the snaky length
of the dragon were added the thicker body and
stubby legs of that other dread reptile, the crocodile.
Now we have the monster Tiamat, which the Baby-
Ionian god Marduk had to destroy in order to or-
ganize the universe.
316
ISAAC ASIMOV
Symbolize the burning bite of the venomous snake
and you have the dragon breathing fire. Dramatize
the swift and deadly strike of the snake and you have
the dragon flying through the air.
Some monsters are, of course, animals that have
been misunderstood into beauty rather than horrqr,
The one-homed rhinoceros may have contributed to
the myth of the unicorn, the beautiful one-horned
horse. And the hom of the mythical unicorn is exactly
like the tooth of the real-life narwhal.
The ugly sea cow with its flippered tail, rising half
out the sea and holding a newborn young to its breast
in the human position, may have dazzled shortsighted
sailors into telling tales of beautiful mermaids.
Throughout history, of course, man's greatest enemy
was man, so it is not surprising that man himself
served as the basis for some of the most fearful mon-
sters—the giants and cannibalistic ogres of all sorts.
It may well he that the origin of such stories lies in
the (act that various groups of human beings made
technological advances in different directions and at
different times. A tribe of warriors armed with stone
axes, meeting an army of soldiers in bronze armor and
carrying bronze-tipped spears, will be sent flying in
short order with many casualties. The Stone Age sur-
vivors may well have the feeling that they have met
an army of man-eating giants.
Thus, the primitive Israelite tribes, on first ap-
proaching Canaan and encountering walled cities and
well-armed soldiers, felt the Canaanites to be a race of
giants. Traces of that belief remain in the Bible.
Then, too, a high civilization may fall and those
who follow forget the civilization and attribute its
works to giants of one kind or another. The primitive
Greeks, coming across the huge, thick walls that encir-
OPUS 200 317
cled the cities of the earlier, highly civilized Mycen-
aeans, imagined those walls to have been built by
giant Cyclopes.
Such Cyclopes were later placed in Sicily (where
Ulysses encountered them in the tales told in the Od-
yssey) and were supposed to have but one eye. They
may have been sky gods, and the single eye may rep-
resent the sun in heaven. It may also have arisen from
the fact that elephants roamed Sicily in prehuman
times. The skull of such an elephant, occasionally
found, would show large nasal openings in front
which might be interpreted as the single eye of a
giant.
There can be giants in ways other than physical.
Thus medieval Englishmen had no notion of how or
why the huge monoliths of Stonehenge had been
erected. They blamed it on Merlin's magic. He caused
the stones to fly through the air and land in place.
(The Greeks also had tales of musicians who played
so beautifully that, captivated *by the sweet strains,
rocks moved into place and built a wall of their own
accord.)
But as man's knowledge of the world expanded, the
room available for the dread or beautiful monsters he
had invented shrank, and belief in them faded. Large
animals were discovered—giant whales, moose, Komodo
lizards, okapis, giant squids, and so on. These were,
however, merely animals and lacked the super-terror
our minds had created.
What is left then?
The giant snakes and dragons that once fought with
the gods and terrorized mankind have shrunk to a
possible sea serpent reported to be cowering at the
bottom of Loch Ness.
The giants, the ogres, the monstrous one-eyed can-
318
BAAC ASIMOV
' nibals that towered over our puny race of mortals,
have diminished to mysterious creatures that leave
footprints among the snows of the upper reaches of
Mount Everest or show their misty shapes fugitively in
the depths of our shriveling forests.
Even if these exist (which is doubtful), what a
punv remnant thev represent of the glorious hordes
man's mind and imagination have created.
"I discussed in Opus 100 my struggles to achieve a bit
of humor in my writing. 1 may have succeeded there,
for reviewers often mentioned my sense of humor (as
revealed in my writing) and seemed to do so with ap-
proval.
That may be, hut it was not till my second hundred
books that I produced volumes that dealt with humor
per se or that were specifically humorous books rather
than other kinds of books that fust happened to have a
bit of humor as seasoning.
The first book of this sort that I wrote was Isaac
Asimov's Treasury of Humor (Book 114), a large
compendium of jokes and comments on humor and
joke-telling. Houghton Mifflin published it in 1971.
How I came to write it is described in the introduc-
tion to that book, and this is given here:
from ISAAC ASIMOV*S TREASURY OF HUMOR (1971)
For nearly all my life I have been swapping jokes. At
almost every friendly gathering that I have attended,
there have been two or three people present with a
large repertoire of funny stories and the ability to tell
them with finesse, and so joke-swapping was almost
322
ISAAC ASIMOV
inevitable. Modesty compels me to refrain from saying
that of all those present I generally had the largest
repertoire of jokes and could tell them with the most
finesse, but if I weren't modest I would say so.
This has led to my having been asked, on occasion,
why someone like myself, with pretensions to intellect,
should content himself with endless Joke-telling while
shunning the ardent discussions of politics, philoso-
phy, and literature that might be proceeding in an-
other comer of the room.
To this my answer is threefold, in order of increas-
ing importance:
1) I spend most of my day being intellectual at my
typewriter, and telling jokes on an evening now and
then helps balance the situation.
2) Jokes of the proper kind, properly told, can do
more to enlighten questions of politics, philosophy,
and literature than any number of dull arguments.
3) I like to.
Then, too, as it happens, this whole business of
Joke-telling saved my life not too long ago—
In June 1969, my wife and I, along with another
couple, Howard and Muriel Hirt, were off on a motor
trip that was to end in a vacation. As it happens, vaca-
tions send me into deep melancholy and I had been
achingly apprehensive of this one for weeks. It was
only to last for a weekend but it was to be at an elab-
orate hotel of a type that I detested beyond measure.
With doom hastening closer at every turn of the
whirling wheels, I tried to fight off my gathering mis-
ery by telling Jokes in feverish succession.
Muriel was kind enough to laugh quite a bit, and
then she said, "Listen, Isaac, why don't you write a
jokebook?"
OPUS 200 323
That made it my turn to laugh.
"Who would publish it?" I asked.
She said, "I thought you said you could get someone
or other to publish anything you wrote."
I do say things like that when I am feeling more
than ordinarily megalomaniac, but that was not what
suddenly began to circle wildly through the tortuous
meshes of my mind.
A new thought arose—
Suppose that while I was ostensibly vacationing,
and while everyone around me was going through the
horrifying ritual of lying in the sun and volleyballing
and hiking and doing whatever other forms of refined
torture are supposed to be fun, I was secretly writing
down Jokes and, in that wav, working on a book.
I would then be having no vacation at alii (Oh,
magic words!)
As soon as we had registered and unpacked, there-
fore, I approached the desk and said, "I would like to
check out a typewriter for the weekend."
This hotel, you must understand, is marvelously
equipped. I do not remember the exact figures, but
the impression I have is that the hotel possesses three
swimming pools, four golf links, seventeen tennis
courts, twenty-eight miles of hiking trails, and
seventy-five thousand beach chairs in serried ranks
and files, each one laden with a vacationer slowly
frying in his own juice. It also has an enormous night-
club, fourteen buildings, and sixty miles of corridors.
With a hotel that has everything, I had no hesitation
in asking for a typewriter.
I was quickly disabused. The desk clerk said, "You
want to check out a what^9
"A typewriteri" I said.
324
ISAAC ASIMOV
He looked blank, and I could see he was wondering
if a typewriter might be anything like a set of golf
clubs.
I said, "Well, then, do you have writing paper?"
He handed me a sheet of writing paper in which
the monogram of the hotel took up half the area, leav-
ing just enough room to write a message to a friend
that might go: "Here I am at the X Hotel, dying."
I said, "Give me about fifty."
He handed them over, and for the next two and a
half days, wherever we were—tramping the corridors,
lying in the sun, sitting in the shade, waiting for food
at the table, enduring the unbelievable, dinning may-
hem at the nightclub—I quietly scribbled jokes on pa-
per while carefully maintaining a fixed smile on my
face to indicate how much I was enjoying the vaca-
tion.
Occasionally, I would overhear someone at a neigh-
boring table say, "Watch out, Sadie, and be careful
what you say. That fellow there is writing down every
word he hears."
It was undoubtedly all that kept me alive.
I finished the vacation with a sheaf of handwritten
Jokes, which I converted into typescript and brought
to Houghton Miffiin as a sample,
And eventually the book was completed and pub-
lished, and here it is!
It would scarcely be suitable to let it go at that. The
book contains 640 jokes {almost all of them quite
clean), and I include several of them here.
OPUS 200 325
from ISAAC ASIMOV'S TBEASUBY OF HUMOR (1971)
Moskowitz had bought a parrot and one morning
found the bird at the eastern side of the cage, with a
small prayer shawl over its head, rocking to and fro
and mumbling. Bending low to listen, Moskowitz was
thunderstruck to discover the parrot was intoning
prayers in the finest Hebrew.
"You're Jewish?" asked Moskowitz.
"Not only Jewish," said the parrot, "but Orthodox.
So will you take me to the synagogue on Rosh Ha-
shanah?"
Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year, was indeed
only two days off, and it would as always usher in the
high-holiday season which would end with Yom Kip-
pur, the Day of Atonement, ten days later.
Moskowitz said, "Of course, I'll take you, but can I
tell my friends about you? It isn't a secret, I hope?"
"No secret at all. Tell anyone you want to." And the
parrot returned to his praying.'
Moskowitz went to all his friends, full of the story
of his Jewish parrot. Of course no one believed him,
and in no time at all Moskowitz was taking bets. By
Rosh Hashanah, he had a hundred dollars, all told,
riding on the parrot,
Grinning, Moskowitz brought the parrot to the syn-
agogue in its cage. He put him in a prominent place
and everyone turned to watch, even as they mumbled
their prayers. Even the rabbi watched, for he had
seven dollars that said the parrot could not pray.
Moskowitz waited. Everyone waited. And the par-
rot did nothing. Moskowitz carefully arranged the
prayer shawl over the bird's head, but the parrot
ducked and the shawl fell off.
After the services, Moskowitz's friends, with much
326
ISAAC ASIMOV
mockery, collected their money. Even the rabbi snick-
ered as he took his profit of seven dollars.
Utterly humiliated, Moskowitz returned home,
turned viciously on the parrot, and said, "Perpare to
die, you little monster, for I'm going to wring your
neck. If you can pray, now's the time." '
Whereupon the parrot's voice rang out clearly:
"Hold it, you dumb jerk. In ten days it's Yom Kinpur,
when all Jews will sing the tragic, haunting Kol Nidre.
Well, bet everybody that I can sing the Kol Nidre."
"Why? You didn't do anything today."
"Exactly! So for Yom Kippur, just think of the odds
you'll getl"
A young man is reported to have approached the re-
nowned composer Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (one of
the great musical prodigies of all time) and asked,
"Herr Mozart, I have the ambition to write sympho-
nies, and perhaps you can advise me how to get
started."
Mozart said, 'The best advice I can give you is to
wait until you are older and more experienced, and
try your hand at less ambitious pieces to begin with."
The young man looked astonished. "But, Herr Moz-
art, you yourself wrote symphonies when you were
considerably younger than I."
"Ah," said Mozart, "but I did so without asking ad-
vice."
Young Leah, in the old days of eastern Europe, was
the sole support of her mother, and had been fortu-
nate enough to marry a substantial young man, despite
OPUS 200
327
the miserable state of her dowry. Leah was happy and
her mother was ecstatic.
Imagine her mother's shock, then, when, on the
morning after the wedding, Leah returned in misery
and announced she would not return to her husband.
"I love him madly," she said, "but I had to leave him."
Stubbornly, she refused to give the reason, but
from what she said, it was apparent that the young
man had made some rather sophisticated sexual de-
mands on her.
As the days passed, both mother and daughter grew
more and more miserable, the former out of frustrated
finances, the latter out of frustrated love. Finally, the
mother suggested that they visit the town rabbi, the
beloved Rabbi Joshua of Khaslavich. After all, in such
matters one needed guidance-
They were granted an audience, and when the
rabbi demanded the details and Leah hung back,
Rabbi Joshua said kindly, "Whisper it into my ear, my
daughter. No one will know" but we ourselves and
God/-
She did so, and as she whispered, the rabbi's kindly
brow furrowed, and lightning flashed from his mild
eyes.
"My daughter," he thundered, "it is not fitting for a
Jewish girl to submit to such vile indignities- It would
be a deadly sin, and because of it a curse would be
laid on our whole town."
Back went mother and daughter, disconsolate, and
after a week of continued privation, the mother said,