“The Last Question” was first published in Science Fiction Quarterly, November 1956. You can read it on Archive.org. It is story #17 of 22 for The Best SF Stories of 1956 group read. “The Last Question” was a selection for Asimov/Greenberg anthology devoted to the best SF of1956 — but I’ve got to wonder, if it was at Asimov’s request? He’s often said “The Last Question” is his favorite among his own stories. I’ve reviewed the story before, for when the group read The Big Book of Science Fiction.
We’ve had two Isaac Asimov stories from 1956 – “The Last Question” and “The Dead Past.” I thought “The Dead Past” was flawed but I was impressed with Asimov’s ambition to write an emotional story. I know other people who consider it Asimov’s best short story. Neither are my favorites.
On one hand, “The Last Question” is a famous, often loved, science fiction story. On the other hand, it’s a gimmick story without traditional story elements. It’s more of an essay disguised as a short story. I’ve gotten tired of reading gimmick stories, and I’ve gotten tired of reading “The Last Question.” Once you know it, it’s not much fun to reread. I like stories where I get behind a character who is struggling to overcome an emotional problem. And I like stories that get better on rereading. “The Last Question” isn’t that kind of story. I’m thinking that Asimov wasn’t big on writing that kind of story either. However, I need to reread “The Ugly Little Boy.” If I remember right, it does have character development and an emotional punch to the gut.
This morning, I got a text from my friend Mike about the story, he wasn’t too kind:
I think that “The Last Question” is a gimmick story with cardboard characters. But this story is beloved, so I guess that leaves me out in the cold. I don’t really want to dump on Asimov, but I don’t think much of his favorite story.
It has the repetitive plot and thin characters of “Compounded Interest.” I’ve never been a fan of gimmick stories. I need characters that I care about.
I have to say I completely agree with Mike. “The Last Question” is a gem of a story for a gimmick story, but a letdown for when you’re wanting a vicarious emotional experience. I had the same problem with “Compounded Interest” by Mack Reynolds. However, as I mentioned in my review, I found another Mack Reynolds story from 1956 that had all the elements I love in a good dramatic short story. Read: “After Some Tomorrow.”
The genre has room for all kinds of stories, but I’m getting old and sappy, and want to be moved by what I read. I must wonder if the twenty-two stories we’ve selected to read from 1956 are mostly remembered because of their ideas and gimmicks. I wonder if there are loads of emotional stories that weren’t well remembered because they had ordinary science fictional ideas, but ones I would like better for their emotional and dramatic qualities — that is, if I could find them, like I did with “After Some Tomorrow.”
James Wallace Harris, 1/4/24
Classics of Science Fiction 
I’m with you and Mike, only more so. I have been annoyed at “The Last Question” for 60-plus years, since I read it as a kid in Asimov’s 1959 collection NINE TOMORROWS shortly after it was published. Not just a gimmick, but a ponderous and obvious gimmick, stretched out to tedious length, ten pulp pages with chapter numbers, no less! (Compare Fredric Brown’s “Answer,” which uses a very similar gimmick but is little over half a page in length, too short to be tedious but much more amusing for that reason.)
LikeLike
I too think “The Last Question” is a gimmick story.
LikeLike
It was the Multivac stories, maybe particularly “The Last Question” that first gave me the desire to be a programmer. That was back in the early 1960s when there were a few mainframes. So, to me, it may not be great SF, but it has a powerful emotional appeal.
FWIW, my unqualified opinion is that Asimov was a mystery writer who dabbled in science fiction.
LikeLiked by 1 person
FWIW, my unqualified opinion is that Asimov was a mystery writer who dabbled in science fiction.
His black widower was impressive. Do you like it?
Asimov in my eyes was a master of science, suspense and mystery.
LikeLike
There’s a rather large essay lurking under the surface here: the varying mentalities of sf readers and why some seek stories of emotions and others gimmicks. On the right of the autistic spectrum for the latter? Or would those readers seek out the fictional modeling of emotions?
Alienation, according to Brian Stableford, is the bedrock of sf fandom. Do the alienated go for emotional stories (beyond Slan-type stories providing vicarious identification)? Or gimmicks?
Personally, I can go for either, but reading Linda Nagata’s Tech-Heaven a few years back made me realize how seldom sf evokes anything emotional within me.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s an interesting observation. If people were on the autistic spectrum, I think they would prefer the idea stories of SF over literary stories.
Also, classic emotional science fiction stories seem to come from less prolific writers. Think of THE EARTH ABIDES by George R. Stewart, FLOWERS FOR ALGERNON by Daniel Keyes, and THE MAN WHO FELL TO EARTH by Walter Tevis.
Asimov and Clarke never could write about people very well, but Heinlein did a much better job, and I think that’s why he was more popular. But this idea could also explain why SF books sell less well in general. Most bookworms want books they can get emotionally involved with.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think alike with you.
I think Asimov created a mythology on the alpha and omega of the universe around the problem of entropy.
The time was too short for me to relate to any character. And AC here was more like a god than a computer I understand because one of the quintessential properties of the program is its finiteness.
But the imagination of 5 future eras and the end and the reinitiation of the universe was indeed impressive at least in 1955.
For more analysis, check out my review on the article. https://animae-magnae-prodigus.github.io/blog/2025/01/14/Isaac-Asimov-The-Last-Question.html
LikeLike