I can do that in two words:Robinson, Shmobinson.Aw, heck, no I can't. But his early stuff is much more readable than his later stuff even though his early science was flawed, flawed, and flawed. I guess better to have good writing than bad science in SF, rather than the other way around. Good that he keeps trying, though.
I really quite like Kim Stanley Robinson's work, Mars quadrilogy included. Somehow I manage to do so despite the fact that his characters act like robots, mysteriously free of affect. I even liked 2312. It's just that his prose is so...odd. And yet compelling.
His ideas are amazing. His locales are breathtaking. His dialogue is serviceable. His characters are mannequins. His plots are workmanlike. His prose IS odd. The good carries along the bad, but I find myself asking, how much more of this can I take before I go find someone who can write as well as come up with ideas. Admittedly, brilliant memorable genius-level ideas. I find Ernest K. Gann is a pretty good antidote.
This was my favorite of all his novels. I loved the characters and strongly identified with a lot of what they did. KSR's style is an acquired taste, but if you acquire it, nothing else really compares.
Post a comment