I set the Ā鶹“«Ć½ Book Club something of a challenge in April: make your way through the 600-plus pages of Red Mars, Kim Stanley Robinsonās doorstopper of a novel, in just 30 days, and then tell us what you thought of it on our lively new channel (and do please show your working).
Iāll admit to some self-interest here: I think of Red Mars as one of my all-time favourite books, but I havenāt read it for years. So, when reviewer George Bass wrote me a great piece about how this story of the first 100 astronauts and scientists to live on Mars opens in 2026, I jumped at a reason to revisit it with our community of 25,000 avid readers. I wasnāt disappointed. Robinson brings the vast landscapes and alien beauty of Mars to life with great skill, and I enjoyed the way the story moves between viewpoints. Sometimes we hear from Ann, who is desperate to ensure that this ancient world isnāt interfered with by humans (sheās a āRedā). Sometimes we look in on Sax, who is out to terraform Mars as quickly as he can (heās a āGreenā). I particularly enjoyed the perspective of the practical and no-nonsense engineer Nadia, but I did find myself a little irritated with the drawn-out love triangle of John, Frank and Maya, all of whom very much suffer from Main Character Syndrome.
Some book club members were also rereading Red Mars, others were coming to it for the first time and yet another group had had it on their shelves for a while and were delighted to have a prompt to finally get round to reading it. First-time reader DavidC was instantly gripped: āEven on the very first page there was something about the phrase āBut all of that happened in mineral unconsciousnessā I found really captivating,ā he wrote on Discord. āIt tells me Iām in good hands for the next 600 pages.ā
Advertisement
TheGosia wasnāt convinced by the dramatic opening, however, in which a key character is murdered. āIām not loving the concept of spoiling the end with the first chapter? I think I would have preferred not to know where all this is going. Unless itās not the end but the middle? Still, not convinced so farā¦ā she wrote. Members, including me, were quick to reassure her, and she kept going.
I actually asked Robinson about his decision to start the book this way, when I chatted with him in our video interview. āItās a flash forward, which I think was a good trick,ā he told me. āWe see Frank arrange the murder of John. We donāt know why. Heās obviously wound-up, intense, angry. We still donāt know why, but we know that Johnās died. And then we go back to the beginning of the story. Building a town [on Mars] is not inherently dramatic. But if in that building of the town, you know that someoneās going to end up so angry at the end of it that they are going to arrange the murder of one of their best friends, you therefore see every little incident of building the town as having a fraught significance that you know about, but nobody else knows about.ā
Robinson reread the novel himself relatively recently, and found he was still pleased with how it turned out. āI had forgotten enough that it was a little fresh, and it seemed to me it held up pretty well,ā he said ā acknowledging that there are āhilarious gaps in my knowledge of the year 2026 and afterā. He delved further into this in an essay for the book club in which he also lambasted current āfatuousā plans to colonise Mars, something he very much also got into in our interview. āThese people arenāt thinking it through, the ones who say, like [Elon] Musk, āOh, well we need to colonise Mars in order save Earth.ā Thatās crap.ā
As for our team of readers, there was something of a mixed response, with many, like me, admiring Robinsonās nature writing about Mars: the planet is probably the bookās main character, Iād say. But quite a few readers didnāt warm so much to Robinsonās cast of characters.
āI think it was amazing in a lot of ways: the nature descriptions, the general scope, how well researched it was; I loved the scenes of vast destruction. It also has interesting ideas about running society. But ultimately I couldnāt really connect with any of the characters and a lot of the events didnāt follow any logic for me,ā said TheGosia.
Ani Greenwood made it to the end, but then had to dive straight into a relationship drama as a palate cleanser. āI needed a relationships infusion after Red Mars, where the characters, though in themselves diverse, did not feel that complex to me and where the dynamic of the book was more idea oriented,ā she wrote. āThe writing was so good, I really mourned my inability at the moment to give his story my heart. I would love to have lingered more over the nature descriptions.ā
There were also some great discussions about how quickly things break down on Mars ā would the planners on Earth not have chosen their 100 astronauts more wisely, to have included fewer revolutionaries? āI started in expecting/hoping for competence pornāa story focused on a team of scientists and engineers overcoming life-threatening challenges in an unforgiving, harsh environmentāand instead got a soap opera mix of human politics, greed, callousness, and lack of foresight. The lack of foresight in particular was what bothered me most,ā said Barbara Howe. āI did like the descriptions of the Martian landscape and some sectionsāmost of Part 7, for exampleāwere pretty compelling reading, but the love triangle was annoying, and the only characters I really found interesting were Nadia, Arkady [a Russian engineer, revolutionary and anarchist], andāsomewhat surprisingly, and late in the bookāAnn.ā
Overall, Iād say members enjoyed reading (or rereading) and dissecting this classic of science fiction; they certainly had plenty to say about it! As for me, I was pleased to discover Red Mars remains one of my all-time favourites.
Sign up here to join the Ā鶹“«Ć½ Book Club, and join the discussion on .
