In the seventies Asimov was the writer that all Spanish publishers wanted to publish, or so it seemed. Bruguera, Plaza & Janes, Alianza Editorial, Vertex, Edhasa ... Bruguera was the one who took the cat to water, at least in regard to his work of science fiction, closely followed, surely, for Alliance, not took to specialize in their popular books.
Thus, during that decade, Asimov was an author who seemed to be everywhere in the Spanish libraries. And in the eighties, this trend appeared to decrease. It was the science fiction writer who published that publishers do not even have the slightest interest in publishing science fiction. And it was the science fiction writer known even by readers who did not have the slightest interest in reading science fiction.
For over twenty years in Spain Asimov was synonymous with science fiction. Insurance genre fans who saw him otherwise (although I think a bit, how many were started in science fiction by Asimov's work in the sixties, seventies and much of the eighties?), But in the wide world that lies beyond the fandom, things were otherwise. If a layman in case you'd say science fiction, had a good chance that their reaction was "Isaac Asimov" or, if it was a little more to the parrot, "Isaac Asimov and Arthur C. Clarke. "
Time passed and soon the situation to reverse. Reversal that began in the mid-eighties and that helped, no doubt, questionable quality and little to Asimov's novels published from those years.
And, as the Spanish tend to be creatures of extremes, Asimov did not take long to go from being the author of science fiction, the man who by his mere presence defined the genre, a literary void whose importance for the development of CF had been all but irrelevant. And that was not enough. No it was not enough, there was also that hate him, as if we had done something personal.
Because the arguments that were used to revile Asimov ranging from the purely literary (which would make sense, no doubt) to direct pilgrims. Refute its importance as a writer focusing on his shortcomings as a writer was a defensible and arguable position, but deny the bread and salt with the reasoning that the "preponderance public" to call it had somehow obscured the authors really relevant was so stupid and pointless. As if Asimov was responsible for the publishers (and we also assume that readers, because I can not believe that an employer will pull twenty years selling a product that the public not to buy) publish it again and again, or more popular beyond gender would be the product of a conspiracy on his part to any others.
If the editors considered a safe bet to Asimov and preferred to publish it to him rather than try his luck with others ... Asimov's fault was it? Need I really ask that question?
I confess that right now I'm not sure what Asimov status among fans of the genre. If we had a minimally logical behavior would have reached the place he really belongs: a figure of undeniable historical value for understanding the evolution of science fiction and a competent writer with interesting work and a remarkable milestone. Neither giant that some worship or the nullity others wanted to see, anyway.
Although I suspect that we have a minimally logical behavior and Spanish fans continue to oscillate between these two foci, adoration and contempt.
Fan, finally, after all, comes from fanatic, do not forget. In fact, for many years there has been a few people with some intellectual relevance-favorite of fans, who have insisted that we should forget.
As never insisted, however, was the obvious fact that so many fans among the sector more nerdy of science fiction fans as the most gafapasta. But that is another story, I fear, and I'm not even sure it told another time.



