Isaac Asimov's "The Mule": Intergalactic Demagogue

I'm almost finished with my re-read of Isaac Asimov's Foundation Trilogy. I realize now that I prefer the first book to the latter two. The first book is more widely historical in range. It doesn't feel to me to be a sustained, novel-length narrative, which these days I have less patience for. In my own writing, I try to maximize narrative potential with as little words as possible. The first book, The Foundation, feels to me more a collection of loosely knit short stories than two serialized novels, which is what I think the latter two novels are: two longer narratives sutured together.

Don't get me wrong. I still appreciate Foundation and Empire and Second Foundation. I'm particularly intrigued by the character of "The Mule," the mutant military dictator who is able to manipulate emotions. I'm going to focus on him in this post.

It's intriguing to me, this idea that one person can influence history drastically. "The Mule" is a kind of wild card, a variable not accounted for in Hari Seldon's plan for the establishment of a Second Empire. I love the symbolism derived from The Mule's incognito persona, the court clown "Magnifico Giganticus." "The Mule" is wearing motley and is parading around as a clown. He is literally the joker thrown into the deck of playing cards that is history.

I think Asimov's portrayal of The Mule syncs with some very genuine fears that Americans had about political leaders in the late 40s and early 50s: hyper-charismatic demagogues who had set themselves up over the masses had whipped whole populations into an emotional ecstasy/frenzy. Some were eager to interpret such large personalities as the cause of WWII, a horror that the world was still very much recovering from when Asimov was writing his story.

I wonder if The Mule can be seen as an allegory for interwar political leaders--deadly speakers, deadly showman--like Mussolini, Stalin, FDR, Hitler, Churchill, Huey Long, and so forth.

But strangely, the ability of The Mule to manipulate the emotions of large swaths of humanity is a power that is not necessarily evil in and of itself. The true evil, rather, is the Mule's psychological problems. These make his ability to manipulate others dangerous. Because of his childhood, his experiences connected with his deformities, his alienation from the rest of humanity, he becomes an antagonizing ego-maniac who resents the rest of humanity. The Second Foundationers change his mind so that he becomes, in the end, a benevolent dictator. But this plot point carries with it an implication: the ability of a leader to manipulate whole groups of people is not intrinsically evil or suspicious; rather, it's this rare ability married with a the wrong psychological makeup.

In any case, The Mule is an interesting imaginary version of a category of political leader--the charismatic great leader who seems to be able to channel history--that intrigues us, disturbs us, frightens us, and enchants us.