Three-Body Problem Critiques

> These are good books with some flaws. You should read them.Counter view-point: These are bad books with a few thought provoking ideas that are never explored, left behind to explore a ridiculous plot full of nonsensical actions taken by paper cutout characters chasing a political goals that also make no sense.Granted I didn't read the third book, but that's because I gave up not halfway through book 2. When I got to the end of book 1, I had no emotional attachment to any of

Characterization is not one of Stephenson's strong points.Try an experiment: skip to 2/3 through the book, where it says "Five thousand years later..." and pick it up as though it were a new book. I think you might be happier.

Interesting they mention and get quotes from the author of the Three Body Problem series. I just finished reading that series, and the whole time I had the feeling that it was written more to convince people of something than to actually entertain the reader.The ideas in the books were pretty amazing, unique, and imaginative; but the story and writing itself was quite sub-par.edit: I listened (audio books) to the English versions. I thought the translation was excellent. I don't wa

Maybe I should read the book again making notes like the author did. I finished it understanding how novel this would have been when it was released and impressed with how much worldbuilding was fit into a relatively short book, but ultimately pretty disappointed by the plot itself. Without giving away too much, I feel that there were a few segments that fell pretty flat for me (to be specific, with minor spoilers: the new recruit around the middle of the book and the hacking subplot towards the

The ideas in the book were good, but I found the characters and the style of writing to be _awful_. It was _tiring_ to read. I think atombender explains it better. The whole style of the book was different (and in a bad way for me).The way people/groups of people/organisations/societies acted was also not realistic. They all had the same way of reacting.Still worth a read if you can stomach the writing.

My problem was with the books is the lack of depths of characters as the story moves forward - at the end they become mere tools to tell the impossible future. But there are astoundig amounts of fascinating ideas and theories in the books it's well worth the read - it became one of my favourite sci-fi next to Solaris.If you can, read it without any previous info - there are big spoilers in almost every description of the book.

What are you talking about lol, the prose, characters, and themes are all extremely flat. I would say the sci-fi things are what make it good.

> But also yes, it's an amazing piece of literature.I think you are overselling. It's worth a read, but the writing is often stilted and repetitive, the central conceit interesting but tired by the end. It's not a long book, but probably would have been better as a shorter form.

I wonder if you read the same books as me.. it was pulpy trash rehashing of overused concepts with poorly thought out Deus ex machina contrivances and cardboard characters.Started off strong with the cultural revolution chapters though.

Although the concepts in his books are original and interesting, I think the writing is overly-descriptive and pretty dry.I think both books would have been far better as novellas, and not dragged out into 800 pages, with a lot of frankly pointless meandering storylines.But I suppose for modern sci-fi it's better than nothing.