a well regulated militia

[MaggieL]

Originally posted by jaguar
Interpreting what an author meant is never a precise art

Especially when he is misquoted, as you are fond of pointing out. :-)

While it was classified this reluctance suggests maybe it was hypocritical or at least something he was not entirely comfortable with talking about

How about it just suggesting that he took his secrecy oath seriously...which is a vastly simpler explanation than inventing some mythical embarassment? My point isn't that he wouldn't talk about it, but rather that he was working on weapons systems while writing the series, which casts some doubt on this "Asimov was a pacifist" theory. Henlein was just as stubborn about not talking about his work there, and I can <b>promise</B> you <i><b>he</b></i> had no qualms about the work he was doing.

Besides being a better SF author. :-)

The fictional nature of the text does not take away from the value of the message.

Yes, but the message may be "If you can predict the future, you can afford to be snide about all those 'incompetents'." "Not a precise art", you know. :-) Still, life in the real world is a bit trickier without Seldon's quite fictional crystal ball.