Science Fiction: The Short Stuff discussion

"Nightfall" is a 1941 science fiction novelette by the American writer Isaac Asimov about the coming of darkness to the people of a planet ordinarily illuminated by sunlight at all times. It was adapted into a novel with Robert Silverberg in 1990, but we don't care. We are reading the novelette, which has appeared in many anthologies and six collections of Asimov stories.

In 1968, the Science Fiction Writers of America voted "Nightfall" the best science fiction short story written prior to the 1965 establishment of the Nebula Awards and included it in The Science Fiction Hall of Fame, Volume One, 1929-1964. I don't know why they called it that though. This "short story" is about 12,000 words long making it unambiguously a novelette. Volume 1 included both short stories and novelettes, but Asimov's story should have been called a novelette.

Who's down for another Asimov read this month. I know I am. I read this story when I was about 12 and it didn't impress me much then. How will I feel about it now, fifty years later?

It is possible to pull up the September 1941 issue of Astounding Science Fiction and read "Nightfall" there for free. However, I am not certain that is Asimov's preferred version. It is unarguably the one he wrote at the age of 21 that garnered him such fame, but I believe he revised it slightly when older.

I'm obtaining the story through a Kindle book for $5.99 titled Nightfall and Other Stories that features the "definitive" version, whatever that means, along with 19 other Asimov stories. I read "Nightfall" as a teenager in the book I mentioned and linked to in my previous message this thread, but I didn't much care for the story when I was fourteen. I remember it being about the sun going out for no reason and a cult being involved for no apparent benefit to the story. I had no idea why the story was considered such a big deal. I wonder if I will like it more now almost fifty years later since I will no doubt be able to understand it better.

I am halfway through the story and find myself wondering why it's such a classic. The starting premise is that people become irrationally fearful of complete darkness, that a day or two of it, even if they know it's coming, would drive them permanently and irrevocably insane? Really? Why not just turn a light on? Sounds like a good chance to catch up on some reading to me.

I'm not getting this.

Dan wrote: "Really? Why not just turn a light on? Sounds like a good chance to catch up on some reading to me."

Haha, sounds good to me, too.

I haven't started yet, will be doing so later in the week.

I've just finished the story-maybe the light bulb was never invented because it never got dark?

I read the novel version a few years ago and don't remember that much about it, but it was an okay read.

This story was also an okay read, but the premise itself is interesting.

I read it today, partway through I switched to an audiobook. I agree that the reactions to the eclipse don't make much sense. Maybe a few people would lose their minds, but I'm sure the majority would just share light sources and find some enjoyable things to do. I'm surprised there wasn't an eager, overprepared sort of character to balance out the gloom/fear of the others.

I also didn't care for the chunks of exposition that led up to the eclipse. Asimov should've started with the eclipse already in effect--would've made for a more immersive story. It's hard to see why this was voted as "the best science fiction short story written prior to the 1965."