Is the "Mars Trilogy" by Kim Stanley Robinson worth reading?

You certainly can't fault Robinson on his research for the Mars Trilogy, a lot of the science discussed in the book I've since seen in documentaries about Mars and space travel. I also thought the political/environmental ideas were really well explored and over all I enjoyed the series a lot. Though from memory I think I'll agree with one of the previous posts in that the planet itself comes across as more of a character then many of the people, especially in the second half of the series.
 
Like ideas? Like hard SF? Read it. I loved it. I didn't love every minute of it, especially as the series wore on, but the overall scope of it was just amazing. I'm with Werthead - you won't find a better book than Red Mars about the colonisation of Mars.

The closest description I can think of is that its a little like reading a "future history" - it hasn't happened yet, but in so many cases it really could happen that way...
 
I havent read it this series but i dont think a Hard SF should only be about science. If so then any scientist who arent a writer could have done it.

I have read many good Hard SF, the best of them has good stories,characters too.

Im a fan of old school Hard SF, doesnt know how modern ones work. Gonna try this only cause i like the subgenre.
 
This was definitely a good series. I remember I either couldn't finish the 3rd book or didn't care for it as much though, but the first two were great. KSR covers the science, politics, economics and sociology of such a society and such an effort (terraforming a planet) so realistically that it feels like you're reading a true account of something that happened.
 
Yes, it's been described as a dramatised terraforming textbook, with the focus on the process rather than plot or the characters.
 
I'm with Anthony on this. It seemed to start okay, but quickly fell apart. He could not inject any life into his characters. And oh my god, what a god awful sex scene.:eek: I was disappointed cause I really wanted to read a great book about colonising Mars.
 
I have to disagree with the last posts.
This is truly the best trilogy about the planet Mars and its possible terraforming that has been written in the past (and probably future) 20 years. The science level, the synthesis of the various hypothesis as they were known in the years in which the books have ben written is astounding. KSR does not only explain the scientific facts. He understands them as such a level that he can also suggest realistic ways to implement the terraformation.

But, it is a trilogy about the PLANET MARS. Humans are there as a factor, but they are NOT the main characters. The trilogy is more on the line of Michener's generational novels. Sure, if you look for a focus on single characters or on human interplay you may be disappointed. Simply because you are mistaking side characters (humans and post humans) for the main one(s): Mars.

In any case, one of my all time favourites.
 
Is the "Mars Trilogy" by Kim Stanley Robinson worth reading?

No.

Is "Red Mars" by Kim Stanley Robinson worth reading?

Definitely.

 
I've had Green Mars sat on my book shelves for a couple of decades, but have been averse to picking it up because I hadn't realised it was the second part of a trilogy when I bought it.

My question is: does Green Mars work perfectly fine as a standalone novel? Or must I really read Red Mars to properly understand the story?
 
It's been a long time since I read it (about as long as you've had it sitting) but my recollection is that it wouldn't really work by itself. Besides, I basically agree with pyan's long-ago comment: I'm no huge fan of Red Mars but it's okay. The other two, including Green, aren't. IOW, you may not get as much out of it without Red and might not like it as much even if you did.

But there are differing opinions.
 
Hi Brian - it's been a long time as well since I've read them but I would agree with J-Sun, you probably will have to get Red first. I can't remember if they were standalone, but I don't think they were.

Personally I think it's a bit like Dante's Divine Comedy, you've picked up Purgatory but really you need Inferno and Paradise to really get the whole effect. (Plus the first one is the most fun :))
 
I've had Green Mars sat on my book shelves for a couple of decades, but have been averse to picking it up because I hadn't realised it was the second part of a trilogy when I bought it.

My question is: does Green Mars work perfectly fine as a standalone novel? Or must I really read Red Mars to properly understand the story?

Red Mars is a story about early Mars colonization, terraforming and a space elevator. The next two (Green and Blue) are about things occurring well after the planet's transformation and the transformation of its inhabitants as well. So not stand-alones. But definitely a project to get through. I read them all and enjoyed them as a conjoined unit. But Red Mars is the one that garners most of the attention with good reason, i.e., it is most familiar to those interested in the incipient expeditions to our 4th planet.
 
Just to concur, you need to read Red first - but do seek it out, it is fantastic in my view. And I loved Green too, and don't really share the reservations of others who posted on this thread some years back. I would keep hold of Green, get hold of Red and see how you get on.
 
Red Mars is the seminal Mars colonisation novel. Green Mars is a sprawling monster of revolutionary glory and independence declarations. I'm yet to get to Blue Mars. They are long, meaty books.
 
I've red them all three. In their order: Red, Green and Blue. After that I red everything that Robinson put out. I think is one of the best Sci-fi books set on Mars. I hope they will become classics.
 
I've red them all three. In their order: Red, Green and Blue. After that I red everything that Robinson put out. I think is one of the best Sci-fi books set on Mars. I hope they will become classics.

Hi @Goldenstar Kitori and welcome to the chronicles forum. :)
 

Similar threads


Back
Top