this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2025
161 points (90.9% liked)

Books

6352 readers
129 users here now

A community for all things related to Books.

Rules

  1. Be Nice. No personal attacks or hate speech.
  2. No spam. All posts should be related to books.

Official Bingo Posts:

Related Communities

Community icon by IconsBox (from freepik.com)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Wrapped up the first book after much struggle. Am I crazy for finding it extremely poorly written? Writing aside, the characters suck, the motivations suck, and the scenario building feels like it was tossed together by a 12 year old. I don't get the hype. Everything is paper thin. The fictional science aspect is the most compelling part but as a cohesive whole it fails to land.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] adhocfungus@midwest.social 7 points 5 days ago (1 children)

The first one is a major slog, and the next two aren't significantly easier to get through. I thought the ideas were fascinating and the overall story was pretty good. But the characters are all completely flat and uninteresting. I had a tough time remembering who was who, but it really didn't affect the story at all.

Additionally the writing was not great and, especially in the second and third book, very sexist. It was worth it to read once, but I definitely won't be reading it again. My spouse keeps asking if I'll watch the show, but I'm on the fence. I heard they condensed the characters to a more streamlined cast, which would be a good start. But I still doubt I'll watch it.

[–] discosnails@lemmy.wtf 2 points 4 days ago

The American version of the show is a lot more what people would want, character wise. Not quite as flat. But not true to the book at all.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 10 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

The fictional science of the sophons was also bad.

  1. The book author thought that protons were fundamental particles. Protons are made up of quarks. So the idea of unfolding a proton when it's made up of 3 quarks doesn't make sense. Put 3 marbles next to each other. Label the 3 marbles a proton. Unfold it. ???

  2. Quantum teleportation doesn't allow for FTL communication.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Smokeydope@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (4 children)

In the middle of reading it now. Its a dual effect. One is that its natively written in chinese so a lot of its cultural stuff like the beginning will go over english readers heads not knowing that the chinese people literally had an violent orwellian book burning period of their history against academia. I imagine it was an attempt to pull readers in emotionally but Its hard to be emotionally invested in a cultural history you have no knowledge of and its paced badly.

The second is that the sci-fi genre is unfortunately nearly universally populated by nerds with good ideas pretending to be writers. This results in very interesting ideas and thought provoking settings being brought low by eye wateringly boring characters, piss poor narrative through lines, souless or confusing writing style, ect. Go ahead and try to read an Asimov book or Dune and you'll realize This was always the case for decades at least.

In fairness to the authors its hard to tell a civilization spanning futuristic world ending drama while also keeping it grounded.

As an enjoyer of sci-fi you kind of just have to power through the slog of some dead writing to get to the interesting concepts. I've never had the pleasure of reading a harcore sci-fi novel that was also an excellently written character drama. The only soft sci-fi book that pulled off the balance and stuck the landing was The Martian.

[–] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago

You did not just slander my boys Asimov and Herbert.

The Godmakers was fantastic.
Foundation is a series where the civilisation itself is the MC.

Also you have to remember at that time, they were mostly just writing short stories, especially Asimov.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 5 days ago

I read it some time ago before it was hyped up as much, saw it as a fun and interesting read but yeah a little shallow and action movie esque. It is definitely worth reading for the premise if you are a science fiction fan though, that aspect is solid, and I liked how it gives some details about Chinese culture and history that I wasn't very familiar with.

[–] troyunrau@lemmy.ca 8 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Okay, to start: not every book is for everyone and everyone is entitled to opinions. My opinion is that it is okayish. I liked the second one more (Dark Forest).

That said, the book is weird. It's like going to an art gallery and staring at paintings. Each painting is a chapter. Everything is beautifully depicted but totally static. The chapters in the book are look someone describing a painting to someone in the gallery who is blind.

And the paintings (and their descriptions) are good, but they aren't mind blowing or anything.

But, if you sit an digest it for a bit afterwards -- continuing the metaphor: you're on the train home from the gallery and it hits you -- there's themes woven between them. In my opinion, it's actually better once you step back and look at the whole book as though it was an exhibit of paintings with a theme. A few days removed from the book, you'll be returning to the ideas in it, even if all the characters and plot points blend together.

Anyway, my two protons.

[–] Yaky@slrpnk.net 3 points 4 days ago

I agree that The Dark Forest is better. The premise is so simple: Alien fleet is coming here in a few hundred years, let's see how humanity will go nuts or prepare in a myriad of ways. (And also there are no aliens in the second book - I did not like them, they were too human attitude-wise and too inconsistent tech-wise)

[–] mr_satan@lemmy.zip 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Now that you mention it, yes. The characters are quite 2 dimensional and unlikeable (not all, but definitely important to mention).

That being said I thoroughly enjoyed the books and didn't stop too much on the characters. Under unlikeable, flat, awkward characters there was an interesting premise and good thinking to be had: living in a society that has no private thoughts; dark forest theory, life in a society after the end.
So what I did was take a big sip of suspension of disbelief and enjoyed the ride. The interest to see the conclusion of the story was enough to coast through all three of the books.

Also, I read those just before the hype. I first heard of the first book a few years before from an Adam Savage podcast and the premise stuck to me. So after reading the Witcher I wanted something sci-fi'ish and this hit the spot.

I agree that the underlying ideas were interesting, but the books had so much padding. So much of the story was just "but wait, it gets worse" that I found it hard to get through at times. I feel like the books could have been half as long and still conveyed the same interesting concepts without losing much.

[–] Pringles@sopuli.xyz 8 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I enjoyed it and have recommended it, but then I reread it and yea, it's not great. But it had some interesting new concepts, for which I'm still grateful I read the books, like the dark forest theory.

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 9 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (6 children)

Except that the dark forest hypothesis completely falls apart when you examine it for more than a few minutes.

SPOILERBasically, the fundamental problem is that it applies game theory really badly, by treating the value of "survival" as functionally infinite, which is something that - if we actually applied it in reality - would make life unlivable. For example, eating a chocolate bar contains a miniscule risk to your survival. But if you multiply any minute fraction by infinity you get infinity, so the risk outweighs any possible value you could obtain. This becomes true for every decision you can possibly make. At both the individual and societal levels, treating survival as a purpose that outweighs everything else just leads to total paralysis. Any society that operated on those principles would never actually advance to the point of being capable of interacting with the wider universe. Liu even has to treat humanity itself - our only extant example of a space-faring species - as an almost impossible outlier because our own behaviour completely shatters the hypothesis. Even our studies of animal life on earth repeatedly demonstrate that curiosity and altruism are actually traits that evolution selects for, not against. Yeah, it solves Fermi's Paradox, but that's literally the only argument for it. It fails every other test possible. It's a really interesting idea for a scifi setting, but it's not remotely supported by reality.

[–] Pringles@sopuli.xyz 4 points 5 days ago

I know it falls apart quickly, but I still like it as a concept. I also like dragons, magic and immortal beings as concepts.

[–] moonlight@fedia.io 2 points 4 days ago

I'm not really sure what you mean. I don't think 'infinifte' value vs arbitrarily high value makes a difference here. Also evolutionarily, intraspecies collaboration is beneficial, not necessarily interspecies. Although we're talking about civilizations making decisions, not animal behaviour.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] sik0fewl@lemmy.ca 7 points 5 days ago

I read it nine years ago and it was a slog. I had heard good things, but it definitely wasn't for me. Needless to say, I did not read the rest of the trilogy.

[–] vzqq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 5 days ago (4 children)

It happens sometimes.

I really enjoyed the movie Arrival, so I picked up the story collection it’s based on. My, what a load of genre fiction in the worst possible meaning of the word.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] P00ptart@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago (2 children)

I tried to read the book but good God it was so bad and so boring it took me months to get about halfway, then the show came out and I was like 'yes! Maybe this will give me motivation!' and I couldn't be bothered to finish that either.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Getting6409@piefed.ee 4 points 5 days ago

I definitely found many, maybe even most of the characters bordering on comically corny. But i hadn't read anything like it regarding the core stories and concepts, and those got the hooks in me. Maybe for a bit i was holding my nose to keep moving through the story, but at some point i just didnt care and had to read all three books, and in the end they're still a dear favorite. If the underlying story isn't doing it for you, you're only crazy if you force yourself to keep reading it.

[–] MisterCurtis@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago

Yeah. I struggled with the cringy romance sections. Very much a freshman entry. But the series as a whole does work well. The Dark Forest is huge improvement. it also had a different translator and has a different structure that I feel works better than the first.

[–] HulkSmashBurgers@reddthat.com 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Yeah I thought it sucked ass too. Supposedly the second and third books are better.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›