Symbolism, Imagery, Allegory - Analysis, I Robot | I, Robot by Isaac Asimov- Summary, Themes & Characters - Novels PDF Download

The Three Laws Of Robotics

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

We're quoting these laws again because they're so important. Asimov himself noted (in his book Robot Visions), "If all that I have written is someday to be forgotten, the Three Laws of Robotics will surely be the last to go." And that seems to be a pretty fair statement since the Three Laws can be found all over the place in other works of fiction. (For more examples than you can shake a stick at, check out this list.)

But the reason we're talking about the Three Laws here is that they are all over the place in I, Robot. Mr. Weston hints at the First Law in "Robbie," Speedy is caught in a dilemma between the Second and Third Laws in "Runaround," and in "Reason," Cutie disobeys orders (which is against the Second Law) but mostly in order to uphold the First Law, etc. Not every story focuses on the Three Laws, but every story includes them. In fact, Asimov expects the reader to be so familiar with the Three Laws that by the end of the book, he doesn't need to repeat them. When Calvin is talking to Byerley in "The Evitable Conflict," she talks about the laws without ever telling the reader what those laws are (53).

OK, so let's assume that we're all familiar with what the laws say. What do they mean? Well, we know what the Three Laws mean to Susan Calvin since she tells us explicitly:

The three Rules of Robotics are the essential guiding principles of a good many of the world's ethical systems. (Evidence.138)

So the Three Laws are what makes sure that we have good robots.

But there's something about the Laws that almost everyone gets wrong: people think of the Three Laws as software that's just programmed in to the robot's brain—you could program the Laws and have a good robot or not program the Laws and have an evil robot. But check out when Calvin and Peter Bogert discuss the issue in "Little Lost Robot": if you modify the Three Laws, you'd be left with "complete instability, with no nonimaginary solutions to the positronic Field Equations" (64). The Laws aren't just programs; they're a necessary part of how you build a positronic brain. Calvin says so even more clearly in "Evidence": "A positronic brain can not be constructed without" the laws (133). So if you leave the Laws out, you don't get an evil and intelligent robot, but rather a crazy robot, or just a pile of scrap metal.

So, in Asimov's robot stories, the Three Laws are not just a guarantee that the robots are good. They seem to indicate that there's some connection between goodness and stability/sanity—or even between goodness and intelligence. That is, it's impossible to be truly intelligent unless you're truly good.

Atomic

When Asimov was writing his robot stories, the technology that people were really interested in wasn't robots, but atomic power. And you can see this in Asimov's stories with the way that he uses "atomic" and "hyperatomic." For instance, the robot's energy system is a "tiny spark of atomic energy" (Runaround.38) and Powell and Donovan build a robot in "Reason" with "atomic flare" tools (Reason.156). So the robots are clearly connected to atomic energy because, in some ways, they're standing in for atomic energy. The characters in the stories worry about robots, whereas people who were reading the stories around the time they were published were worried about atomic power—and weapons.

There are a few other times that Asimov uses "atomic" and "hyperatomic" that might make us think about atomic energy and the atomic bomb. For instance, in "Little Lost Robot," Major-General Kallner is in charge of the Hyperatomic Drive program, which should remind us of Brigadier-General Leslie Groves, the man who was in charge of the Manhattan Project. For another example, US Robots is racing against Consolidated to build a Hyperatomic Drive in "Escape!"—and that might make us think about the US and Germany racing to build an atomic bomb.

But here's one thing to keep in mind: although we often think of atomic energy as dangerous (it can be used in bombs and nuclear energy plants may have problems, like what happened at Fukushima), in the 1940s, a lot of people were a lot more optimistic about atomic power. For instance, check out this picture from the Atomic History Museum of products that are marketed as "atomic" or "nuclear." Atomic energy used to be really cool—people even used to have parties to celebrate atomic tests. So when Asimov uses the word "atomic," we should remember that atomic energy in the 1940s was new and exciting. While it could be used to create weapons, it could also be used to make life better. So in that way, atomic energy really does seem related to the issue of robots: everyone is worried that they'll be dangerous, but they also might just make our lives a bit better.

Fire

The Three Laws of Robotics and "atomic" are two symbols that seem to go throughout the book, but are there any symbols that are specific to one or two stories? We think there are, and as an example, we want to look at "fire" and "flames" in "The Evitable Conflict."

Why? Well, first, we noticed that fire comes up a few times in this story, including the beginning and the end of the story. (And if something pops up at the beginning and the end of the story, you probably want to pay attention to it.) The story starts with three paragraphs on Stephen Byerley's fireplace: the fireplace is a "medieval curiosity" (1), but it's also totally modern, "a thoroughly domesticated fireplace" (2) that you can only hear through speakers (3). The fire gets mentioned once or twice during Byerley and Calvin's conversation (35) and it reflects Stephen Byerley's mood (182). And at the end of the story, the fire goes out (228)—and that's the very last line of the story (before we're returned to the frame of the interviewer and Calvin). So, sure, there's a lot of fire here; but what does it mean?

On one hand, fire tends to be associated with heat, light, activity, passion, love—all those good things about life. So if you read a story about how the Machines might be taking over and at the end of the story, a fire goes out, you might think, "Oh, that fire is a symbol for human activity and life. And since it went out, that means that human life is kind of over—so it's a sad ending."

On the other hand, fire may be associated with life, but let's be serious here: fire is a dangerous thing. And it's also represented as old-fashioned, "medieval," in this story. (And this is a good reminder to us: we might know what some symbols mean because that's part of our culture—fire is related to heat and light and love and warmth; but at the same time, sometimes a story will tell us just what a symbol means in the story.) So Byerley might be passionate at that moment, but notice how his passion is leading him in the wrong direction: he's becoming paranoid about the Society for Humanity. Passion, like fire, can be dangerous. So maybe fire is a symbol for our dangerous past; and when the fire goes out at the end of the story, this means that it's actually a happy ending—we've progressed beyond such a dangerous tool and have found safer ways to heat and light our lives.

On the third hand (how many hands do we have?), maybe it's a bit of both: fire is a symbol of something special about humans (we're passionate) but it's also a symbol of how we can be dangerous (we're passionate, sometimes about the wrong things). So maybe this ending isn't totally sad or totally happy, but a mix of both.

So if someone wanted to look at a symbol in one particular story, we might discuss fire in "The Evitable Conflict." Can you think of any symbols in the other stories?