I can’t see it. I just can’t.
It doesn’t matter how many people tell me “It isn’t all that bad.” I can’t see it. I won’t see it. Why?

Because the title is wrong. This is NOT I, Robot. This is NOT Isaac Asmiov’s collection of short stories based on the premise of working, living robots and the impact they have on our society and ourselves.

I, Robot is a book of tremendous genius. Asimov was one of the great minds of the twentieth century. Contrary to popular belief, Asimov was not a science fiction writer, he was A WRITER. He may have been the most influential writer of the modern age. He wrote books about science, about history, about Shakespeare, about… well, about EVERYTHING. He is the single most prolific and profound author in the library. He wrote over 400 books about plant life, microbiology, astronomy, de-bunking pseudo-science. Books of fantasy, science fiction, mystery, horror. He wrote EVERYTHING. And he did it with a charm so unique, so witty, so crafty and skillful, he was dubbed “The Good Doctor” by his peers and was one of the first men called “Grand Master” by the Science Fiction Writers of America. His other awards are too numerous to list in any fashion. His contributions to science are incalculable. But, the one thing he will always be remembered for, the one thing he will always be adored for, are his robots.

Asimov’s robot stories are not about robots. They have robots in the plot, but in the end, Asimov’s robot stories are about US. About how we turn science into technology, how we confront the technology we create, and how that technology changes us. It sounds boring, but it isn’t. It’s utterly fascinating.

The OUTER LIMITS once did a story about a robot who killed its creator. (Sound familiar?) The daughter of that creator seeks out a legendary lawyer to defend the robot. No, not defend the robot, but to prove in court that the robot has the right to stand trial. JUST THAT HE HAS THE RIGHT TO STAND TRIAL. The story — and the episode — are brilliant. The legal arguments presented match the drama of LAW AND ORDER and WEST WING and trump them with ease. And that’s the brilliance of Asimov: he knows how to turn the most simple, most mundane questions into something profound and prophetic. His ability to show us how our assumptions lead us astray was one of the things that led me to philosophy. We must ALWAYS challenge the things we think we know. That could be the best way to sum up Asimov’s work, I think. The world will always be a puzzle; an unsolvable puzzle. But we must try.

WE MUST TRY.

This is the theme of Asimov’s work. There is always something to be discovered, always something we’re overlooking, always something that will catch us off-guard, because we are proud, vain little creatures who let our certainty shout out our curiosity. We cannot do that. We MUST not do that. The Good Doctor is still shouting that from his grave.

WE MUST NOT DO THAT.

The reason I cannot see I, ROBOT is very simple. People tell me, “Well, it isn’t the book, but it’s still pretty good.”

No. That movie shares the name of one of the greatest works of scienc– one of the GREATEST BOOKS OF ALL TIME. An important, powerful book about individuality, about science, about presumption, about pride, about WHO WE ARE. AND WHAT WE COULD BE.

That movie is about popcorn. And special effects. It doesn’t question anything. It’s comfort food, re-assuring us in our certainties. It has NOTHING to do with what the book is REALLY about.

Because it isn’t about robots.
It’s about US.
What we are, what we were, and what — if we aren’t careful — what we may become.

I can’t see it because I’ve read the book. And the book made me weep. And think.
And if you keep telling me, “Get over it. It isn’t the book,” all I’ll do is stand silent…

and point at THE FUCKING TITLE.

That is all.