Talk:The Caves of Steel

Unsorted text

Last sentence: anyone have a better, i.e. less idiomatic or colloquial, phrase than "screen time"? (This is after all a novel, not a film). Ed Cormany 04:18 21 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Thank you, Evan, for fixing this up. Nice work. Ed Cormany 23:34 25 Jul 2003 (UTC)

below break is older talk

---

moving comment from article:

(I assume the allusion to the biblical Moses is intentional)

---

"The book's central crime is a murder. Citing his own squeamishness (and John Campbell's advice of beginning as late in the story as possible), the victim dies before the novel opens."

His, I assume, refers to Asimov. Could this be made clearer?

Acegikmo1 06:10, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Spoiler.

Should the "Spoiler" tag be further down. No plot is revealed by the "setting" portion.

In general, I don't read past a "spoiler" tag because I don't want to be told plots; that's why I read the book. But it would be nice to have as much background information as possible before the spoiler. The worlds created by sf writers are really a separate point from the plots. I hate to see an entry which has the spoiler box near the top; it implies the entry is nothing more than a book report, rather than a work of scholarship. Also: should anything else follow the plot - because I don't go there?

Does anyone agree?

I generally consider the spoiler tag to apply to the section (usually "Plot" or "Summary") in which it is placed. This way, I know it's safe to read sections like "Publication details". To that end, I'm moving the spoiler tag. (The Setting section, I think, doesn't give out much more than dust jacket material or Asimov's own autobiographical anecdotes—and he certainly wasn't worried about those hurting sales. . . .)

Anville 18:35, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Film?

A few days ago, if I remember correctly it was said that there was a film to be made of the book. Was I just seeing what I wanted, or did I miss it, or is it incorrect? The Modern Prometheus 01:59, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

The film is listed on imdb for 2014, but I didn't see any other information.66.87.0.144 (talk) 22:39, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Interpretations of the material

There are several places in the article where factual content gives way to interpretation. Such as the following, which seems to be more appropriate for a section regarding the novels themes:

• "One interesting aspect of the book is the contrast between Elijah, the human detective, and Daneel, the humanoid robot. Asimov uses the "mechanical" robot to inquire about human nature. When confronting a "Medievalist" who fears that robots will overcome humankind, Baley argues that robots are inherently deficient. Being precision-engineered calculating machines, they can have no appreciation of art, beauty, or God; robots can only understand concepts expressible in mathematics. However, in the concluding scene, R. Daneel exhibits a sense of morality. He argues that the captured murderer be treated leniently, telling his human companions that he now realizes the destruction of evil is less desirable than the conversion of evil into good. Quoting the Pericope Adulteræ, Daneel tells the murderer, "Go, and sin no more!"

And:

• "In the novel's final paragraphs, R. Daneel becomes a Christ figure."

This seems out of place and may not be agreed upon by all readers. At the very least I do not believe it belongs in the plot summary. Perhaps another section should be added for interpretations or speculations on the book.--Thehighseer23 19:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ElijahBailey.gif

Image:ElijahBailey.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 01:44, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Plot summary is a little small

The plot summary of the short stories of I, Robot are much longer for the size of their stories than this, which is attempting to describe a novel. It would be nice to get some more information like who was the murderer, how they caught him, etc. KeithCu (talk) 05:37, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Retroactive Hugo Nomination

In 2004, a retroactive Hugo was awarded for the year 1954 in which none had been given. Caves of Steel was on the short-list of titles receiving nominations, and so it is listed in the Hugo Award for Best Novel article. I'll try mentioning the honor in "reception".

Jeffryfisher (talk) 21:17, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

I added the category 1950s science fiction novels. Transcendentalist01 (talk) 16:49, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

roughly three millennia in Earth's future

the text seems to imply a 1000 years after Shakespeare, i.e. ad 2600 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:30A1:F00A:F51:6ADE (talk) 10:50, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Julius Enderby is secretly a member of the Medievalists

secretly? he is introduced as such very early on 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:30A1:F00A:F51:6ADE (talk) 10:53, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Plot summary issues

I feel that the plot summary could use some work. Firstly, it reveals all the context and the main "twist" of the book in the first paragraph, which makes it a poor plot summary. It is disjointed and events/characters are often brought up without the appropriate context. Eg., who is R Sammy? It's not made clear that he's a robot that works for the police department. 27.125.146.61 (talk) 14:48, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Agreed

I agree, it's not best. It has been years (decades, even?) since I read the book, and I too was confused by "R.Sammy" appearing out of nowhere in the plot section. I knew there was a second "R." character associated with R.Daneel Olivaw, but I'm pretty sure that was not R.Sammy (in part because said robot appears elsewhere in the series).

Guess I'll have to find the book at the library. [SIGH]

AKarley (talk) 21:02, 18 December 2024 (UTC)