I’ve heard the adaptation is not faithful in the slightest, but having not read the source material I wouldn’t know. On the one hand though, I thought this might be a blessing because the series has ignited an interest in me to read the books and if they’re greatly different then they should still read pretty fresh for me but obviously on the other hand if the series is what ignited the interest then probably what I found engaging is not the same thing I’d find in those books.
What are they like and would I still get as much out of them if I hadn’t first watched the adaptation?
I gave up towards the end of the first season of Foundation. It is radically different than the book series in really fundamental ways. I think it was a bad sign that the parts of the show I was most invested in are completely invented for the show, while the parts supposedly adapting the book plots were really terribly bad both as adaptions and taken on their own.
The books are great. I read them in middle school, and they aren’t nearly as intimidating as they seem. They deal with some big concepts, but are much more manageable to get through than something like Dune. I would describe each book has having a central thesis, with each sequel book being a twist on the previous book’s. I consider the original three books to be the “real” books, with the later being written years later under duress from fans and publishers. Still good, but I don’t think they were part of the original vision.