Storyline: 2/5 
 Characters: 5/5 
 Writing Style: 3/5 
 World: 5/5 
 My cover boasts a review from the Washington Post Book World that declares Red Mars, "A high-water mark in novels of earth emigration....A tremendous achievement." This time, for a change, the reviewer was right. Here I review Red Mars to detail what it achieved rather than what Kim Stanley Robinson intended. I wouldn't even hazard a guess as to the distance between those two. 
 Positives: 
 Mars. I am not familiar with the geography, topography, or composition of Mars, but Robinson persuaded me that he was. The writing and hard science fiction details gave the book an authoritative subtext to the descriptions, and I was able to enjoy this thinking that this is what life would actually be like on Mars. Robinson succeeded in conveying that ever-so-elusive vicarious experience; all the more an accomplishment as these are not experiences anyone - ever - has actually endured. The descriptions were often awe-inspiring, leaving the reader stunned, humble, and speechless as they imagined walking the colossal canyons and caps. 
 Sociology. For the first third of the book, it was clear that Robinson was the kind of author who had a point, I just wasn't sure of what that was. At times he developed the plot around political concepts such as principle-agent relations or nationalism. Somewhere in the first half there was a chunk of psychological theory. A lot of the drama focused on business practices and economics more generally: transnationalism, privatization, capitalism, socialism, alternative economics. One of the most dominant and persistent focuses was environmentalism. These often juxtaposed in traditional antagonisms (capitalism versus socialism, transnationalism versus nationalism, development versus conservation) but were occasionally set against one another in unusual (and at the time of the writing, unpopular) pairings (democracy versus capitalism). I was tempted to jump out and grab at one or more of these and pin Robinson to a single or particular point or position. That is not, I think, where the book was going. This was a character-driven and sociological book more than it was a political or economic one. It was about path dependence. In particular, the many disparate ideas worked to show us that our original 100 found themselves in a (perceived) position to make staggering changes for the future. What was so remarkable about this was that the people who found themselves in this position weren't especially qualified for it. That connects to my next point: 
 Characters. I always appreciate a book that had morally gray characters. Robinson demolished that low standard by making them intellectually gray as well. Robinson reminds us that people are never (or seldom anyway) just their profession. As opportunities arose to shape the future, each brought in their prejudices, biases, assumptions, dreams, fears, and pet projects. It was this intellectual grayness that was the real heart of the book. The scientists that were the most qualified for building reactors, for instance, were not uniquely qualified to determine if they should build them. The hydrologists, indisputably competent to search for water, were not unusually qualified to decide what they should do with the water once found. The engineers and architects, accomplished and capable, had no special endowment to enable them to determine whether function should take priority over aesthetics. This was KSR's most novel contribution and insight into colonizing another planet: we have to send scientists but in each scientist is a nationalist, a revolutionary, an environmentalist, a capitalist, a humanist(view spoiler)[, or a cult mother-of-Mars free-love hippy (hide spoiler)]. It would be these that would set the tone and trend for the colony. It would be their prejudices, biases, assumptions, dreams, fears, and pet projects that would direct the future path of civilization as much as it would be their scientific expertise. Robinson's personal inclinations were evident: eco-economics, syncretism, conservationism. The author did have the modesty, though to make the champions of his pet positions morally gray. He also resisted the temptation to make revolutionary outcomes simple, easy, natural, consistent, or worthwhile. So much of this book was about how the characters dealt with the realization that they had a choice themselves. Some of their ideas and choices were half-baked, dangerous, unrealistic, or simply wrong according to every reasonable standard available to science at the time. These were people, though, flawed throughout yet standing at a historic juncture. My book was 572 pages, and it needed those pages to accomplish its dual task: describing a futuristic and realistic Mars colonization and developing deep, realistic characters that would influence the trajectory of the colony for decades to come. 
 Negatives: 
 Perspective Balance. I loved the perspective changes. They fit with the character-driven nature of the book, and they gave the whole a complexity that would have been missing had this been done another way. I liked it so much, in fact, that I was frustrated when Robinson would depart from the orderly presentation. Most of the perspectives were long and developed (these and the contrasts between them were what showed us how the characters grew into, neglected, or fell into their historical roles). There was one, however, that was nothing less than bizarre and short, radically imbalanced with the others. Later in the book, as well, we shift back to some characters that we had already experienced. This was a lost opportunity and undermined some of the contrasts that Robinson had made between the characters. I wish each part had been devoted to a single character's perspective and that none of the characters were repeated. I have an inkling that KSR set out to do this, but the book was just getting too long and his publisher said, "Enough!" 
 The Beginning, Framing, and Pace. I don't know what Robinson was doing with that opening chapter. This was the same year as Pulp Fiction came out, was he trying to get in on the trend? I would have liked to have read this book without Frank's first chapter (either omit it entirely or put it in chronological order). It was a well-written chapter, but it set the wrong tone and pace for everything else in the book. They're already there...They made it.... Is there any better way to suck the anticipation and drama out of a colonization story? Reading about it through flashbacks and as history took a lot of fun out of the experience. The worst part is that the sacrifice wasn't for any good purpose. As far as the character and main point goes, the first chapter was a red herring. It made it a book about personal animosity and trustworthiness, about backstabbing and a particular romantic relationship. This was all wrong. I don't know if it was KSR's idea or the publisher's, but it was the single-worst decision of the book. 
 Mars Nations and Technology. Because Robinson was so realistic and attentive to detail with his flawed characters, inconsistent ideologies, and the topography of Mars, perhaps I am holding him to too high of a standard in other areas. I was less than impressed with the roving bands of coherent national and cultural groups (view spoiler)[(the Swiss roadworkers, the Bedouin miners, the Russians). I think Robinson vastly underestimated the internationalizing and secularizing conditioning inherent in scientific specialization. Traditional Bedouins do not become operators of city block-sized mining equipment. The Swiss, as a group, are not going to forsake civilization and content themselves with a Martian pastoralism. (hide spoiler)] I do think that some culture would have survived the homogenizing experience of astronautical training and advanced education, but the communities Robinson portrayed would never have made it intact to Mars. Similarly, while the technology on future Mars was fun, it was so complete and dummy-proof so as to take a lot out of the danger and sacrifice that would be required of any colonization. 
 This was a monumental work of science fiction. It was every bit as sociological as it was scientific. I have read few books that accomplished so much while simultaneously delivering such thorough enjoyment.