Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.75 AVERAGE
3.75 AVERAGE
adventurous
informative
reflective
tense
medium-paced
adventurous
emotional
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
WOW I had no idea what was going to happen basically the entire time but it was an excellent read
adventurous
challenging
informative
inspiring
slow-paced
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
adventurous
challenging
informative
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
This book took me ages to finish because it was such a chore to read. The characters were either loathsome, one-dimensional, or both, and the plot crawled at a glacial pace. Some of the scientific ideas were interesting, but they were overshadowed by the hundreds of pages of boring description of geological features, tedious travel, etc.
I can't believe I finally finished it. I hate leaving things incomplete, but I don't plan to read the rest of the trilogy.
There were also some major (at least they seemed pretty major to me) plot lines that were started and then dropped away maybe they'll be resurrected in the sequels, but I was disappointed that the end of this volume didn't resolve more, after I forced myself through 500-something pages.
Some parts were interesting, but they were buried under tons of dirty pink snow and 100 Amazons of icy black water.
I can't believe I finally finished it. I hate leaving things incomplete, but I don't plan to read the rest of the trilogy.
There were also some major (at least they seemed pretty major to me) plot lines that were started and then dropped away maybe they'll be resurrected in the sequels, but I was disappointed that the end of this volume didn't resolve more, after I forced myself through 500-something pages.
Some parts were interesting, but they were buried under tons of dirty pink snow and 100 Amazons of icy black water.
I really wanted to like this book! I respect Kim Stanley Robinson as an author and I genuinely think the ideas in this book about the politics of Mars colonization are quite good. It’s just that the execution is SO dry, the characters are all flat and uninteresting, and never once was I really gripped by the plot. I stuck it through to the very end because I wanted to give the benefit of the doubt and see if there would be a worthwhile payoff in the end or some big, revelatory moment, but in the end the whole thing was just a slog.
Excellent beginning to what promises to be a brilliant trilogy. The last 100 pages are nothing short of catastrophically thrilling, almost wearingly alarming. Robinson at his best has this wonderful way of drawing from so many disparate aspects of human existence to make an astounding whole. The only boys which dragged for me where the extensive descriptions of the landscape, but then without them how could one possibly imagine and encompass the extraordinary scale of Mars?
I.... didn't actually finish this book. Parts were enjoyable but overall, Mars is basically pretty boring. I got most of the way through and then finished with a wikipedia plot synopsis. Turns out things get more exciting at the end but I just just done. Just not a page-turner.
There are science fiction writers, and then there are science writers. Robert A. Heinlein is known for stories that are deeply rooted in real science, and Kim Stanley Robinson is no different. Red Mars is perhaps the most well-researched, explored and studied piece of writing that I have ever found on a science fiction bookshelf -- and maybe that's the problem with it.
I love science fiction because it is unafraid to ask the big questions. What if we have perfected the technology to terraform Mars? Do we turn Mars into an Earth-like planet? How much of Mars do we keep intact? How'd the colonisation of Mars change humanity as a whole? Robinson's Red Mars is not short on these big questions. Its characters are constantly debating the validity of terraforming Mars, all while dealing with the effects of being isolated from the rest of humanity and dealing with the elements. Camps form based on beliefs; some believe that we should leave Mars as is because of what it can reveal to humanity about the universe. Others prefer to terraform Mars and change its constitution because, well, that's what they were there for in the first place. Besides, humanity has hit on a rough patch, so being able to colonise and terraform Mars becomes extremely important.
The problem arises, however, when Robinson dives into the deep end with the hard science. In a way, he tries to balance the science and science fiction aspects of the story by constantly referring back to the characters and their intellectual experiences. However, he cannot help but stray back to the hard science, as if it is a comfort zone of his. Whenever that happens, the plot grinds down to a halt, focusing instead (for pages on end sometimes) on how bioengineering will be able to terraform Mars concurrently with other methods. In the literary world, as much as I hate to say it, this is called "info dump", or a way for writers to get certain technical information out of the way before moving forward with the actual plot.
But what's the plot here anyway? Red Mars is not a plot-driven book at all. It is a book about colonisation and what happens when humans are involved. So the process of colonisation is the "plot" here, and everything else is secondary. If you are going into Red Mars, know that this will read less like a novel and more like a beginner's guide to colonisation. Parts of this book does read more like a textbook, and it even comes with graphs for you to understand certain complicated scientific concepts. Without having some fundamental knowledge in various fields, including psychology, the reader will be left out in the cold at times. Robinson doesn't slow down in terms of his explanations, and jargons and thrown around because, well, the characters are mostly experts in their respective fields. If certain theories or terminologies confuse you, then you'd have to look them up yourself. Red Mars waits for no one.
So, if it isn't plot-driven, perhaps it is character-driven, yes? Well, not quite. Even though the book starts out with the main protagonists on an already terraformed Mars, they are mere supporting characters to the scientific ideas. These characters could have been way more interesting if given to a master of the genre. Yet, over here, they are drowned out by the scientific ideas that are always battling for attention. Instead of spending time with the characters and finding out about how isolated they feel from their loved ones, they would instead try to dissect the situation and explain it with scientific theories. It made the book feel less like a story and more like a collection of case studies. If this is how doctors and scientists date in real life, it would be wise to steer clear of their conversations.
Even when we do get a glimpse of these characters' humanity, Robinson never seems to have the writing chops to pull the emotional punches. They are usually paper thin, with vague motivations and undefined characteristics. Even though a handful of the protagonists are female -- a rarity in and of itself -- Maya, the leader of the Russian team, is reduced to your typical female character with emotional problems and attachment issues. The love triangle felt shoehorned and, again, was there to tell a bigger story of how having multiple relationships in an isolated place (like Mars) can mess with our emotional stability. It is never about the characters, but about the effects of colonisation. Big concepts and ideas can only carry a book so far. It should never be the basis of a book, however, or an exciting one at that.
Admittedly, I did not finish Red Mars, which is unfortunate, because there were so many interesting concepts being introduced throughout the book. But they are few and far in between, and they tend to take up previous real estate in the book. Expect grand ideas about the future of humanity, but don't expect to find humanity within the characters. This is a textbook for future colonists.
I love science fiction because it is unafraid to ask the big questions. What if we have perfected the technology to terraform Mars? Do we turn Mars into an Earth-like planet? How much of Mars do we keep intact? How'd the colonisation of Mars change humanity as a whole? Robinson's Red Mars is not short on these big questions. Its characters are constantly debating the validity of terraforming Mars, all while dealing with the effects of being isolated from the rest of humanity and dealing with the elements. Camps form based on beliefs; some believe that we should leave Mars as is because of what it can reveal to humanity about the universe. Others prefer to terraform Mars and change its constitution because, well, that's what they were there for in the first place. Besides, humanity has hit on a rough patch, so being able to colonise and terraform Mars becomes extremely important.
The problem arises, however, when Robinson dives into the deep end with the hard science. In a way, he tries to balance the science and science fiction aspects of the story by constantly referring back to the characters and their intellectual experiences. However, he cannot help but stray back to the hard science, as if it is a comfort zone of his. Whenever that happens, the plot grinds down to a halt, focusing instead (for pages on end sometimes) on how bioengineering will be able to terraform Mars concurrently with other methods. In the literary world, as much as I hate to say it, this is called "info dump", or a way for writers to get certain technical information out of the way before moving forward with the actual plot.
But what's the plot here anyway? Red Mars is not a plot-driven book at all. It is a book about colonisation and what happens when humans are involved. So the process of colonisation is the "plot" here, and everything else is secondary. If you are going into Red Mars, know that this will read less like a novel and more like a beginner's guide to colonisation. Parts of this book does read more like a textbook, and it even comes with graphs for you to understand certain complicated scientific concepts. Without having some fundamental knowledge in various fields, including psychology, the reader will be left out in the cold at times. Robinson doesn't slow down in terms of his explanations, and jargons and thrown around because, well, the characters are mostly experts in their respective fields. If certain theories or terminologies confuse you, then you'd have to look them up yourself. Red Mars waits for no one.
So, if it isn't plot-driven, perhaps it is character-driven, yes? Well, not quite. Even though the book starts out with the main protagonists on an already terraformed Mars, they are mere supporting characters to the scientific ideas. These characters could have been way more interesting if given to a master of the genre. Yet, over here, they are drowned out by the scientific ideas that are always battling for attention. Instead of spending time with the characters and finding out about how isolated they feel from their loved ones, they would instead try to dissect the situation and explain it with scientific theories. It made the book feel less like a story and more like a collection of case studies. If this is how doctors and scientists date in real life, it would be wise to steer clear of their conversations.
Even when we do get a glimpse of these characters' humanity, Robinson never seems to have the writing chops to pull the emotional punches. They are usually paper thin, with vague motivations and undefined characteristics. Even though a handful of the protagonists are female -- a rarity in and of itself -- Maya, the leader of the Russian team, is reduced to your typical female character with emotional problems and attachment issues. The love triangle felt shoehorned and, again, was there to tell a bigger story of how having multiple relationships in an isolated place (like Mars) can mess with our emotional stability. It is never about the characters, but about the effects of colonisation. Big concepts and ideas can only carry a book so far. It should never be the basis of a book, however, or an exciting one at that.
Admittedly, I did not finish Red Mars, which is unfortunate, because there were so many interesting concepts being introduced throughout the book. But they are few and far in between, and they tend to take up previous real estate in the book. Expect grand ideas about the future of humanity, but don't expect to find humanity within the characters. This is a textbook for future colonists.
Red Mars is an audacious novel; Kim Stanley Robinson gives a tremendously detailed accounting of the early settlement and terraforming of Mars, followed by the sociopolitical machinations arising from and erasing that short-lived scientific "utopia". This level of detail (in my opinion) is both the best and worst part about Red Mars. A list of tools that a character carries in her tool box was at least half a page, as one example, but it is exactly this attention to the mundane (and almost all other aspects of the story) that makes it feel tangible and serves to give depth to the characters. I enjoyed the detail for the scientific endeavours of Red Mars but felt the same attention to some of the political maneuvering caused the novel to drag.
The story is told chronologically but from the points of view of many different characters with widely divergent personalities, thought processes, technical expertise, experiences... This gives you a more broad view of the events happening on Mars and a set of highly opinionated, sometimes unreliable narrators that encourage you to consider the opposing arguments to issues like terraforming Mars (yes or no? to what degree? what is terraformed "enough"?) or the development of a new Martian society (one amalgamated culture or development of Martian versions of the cultures of the different groups that came to Mars? eco-economics instead of capitalism? how much cooperation/communication with Earth?).
It is a pleasant change in science fiction to have women significantly represented as narrators and as named characters overall, and to not only be represented but to be given depth, to be allowed to have flaws and strengths and mistakes and triumphs.
I would recommend this book to those who like significant portions of a story to be devoted to both world-building and the minutia of that world, and within that group those who think science/engineering/going to &@$#@% MARS is the bee's knees (which is absolutely is). Also, these books go well with the board game Terraforming Mars and vice versa.
The story is told chronologically but from the points of view of many different characters with widely divergent personalities, thought processes, technical expertise, experiences... This gives you a more broad view of the events happening on Mars and a set of highly opinionated, sometimes unreliable narrators that encourage you to consider the opposing arguments to issues like terraforming Mars (yes or no? to what degree? what is terraformed "enough"?) or the development of a new Martian society (one amalgamated culture or development of Martian versions of the cultures of the different groups that came to Mars? eco-economics instead of capitalism? how much cooperation/communication with Earth?).
It is a pleasant change in science fiction to have women significantly represented as narrators and as named characters overall, and to not only be represented but to be given depth, to be allowed to have flaws and strengths and mistakes and triumphs.
I would recommend this book to those who like significant portions of a story to be devoted to both world-building and the minutia of that world, and within that group those who think science/engineering/going to &@$#@% MARS is the bee's knees (which is absolutely is). Also, these books go well with the board game Terraforming Mars and vice versa.