this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2025
145 points (91.0% liked)

Books

6325 readers
360 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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 2 points 2 hours ago

The sequels went on forever, to the point that I figured out what the Dark Forest theory was early on and had to finish that book just to find out I was right. Characterisation is pretty non-existent, it’s true.

[–] frozenpopsicle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 4 hours ago

I read all three. I thought they excelled at creating new plot devices. Sentient particles, Thought as light, dimensional weapons. Its really hard to come up with new sci fi tropes! And Liu casually comes up with a dozen new ones. I thought the characters and plot were... unsatisfying. But I believe that is mostly intended as a portrayal of people's failings. I'd say it's a worth it read for real sci fi junkies though. Definitely disagree that it is "Not good", but taste is subjective. They seemed longer than they needed to be... I dunno.

[–] Profligate_parasite@lemmy.world 3 points 6 hours ago

I also did not love it. The premise is fascinating and is relatively unique as far as 'first contact' stories go. At the end of the day, though, the first book is much more about Chinese history than aliens, and the 'science' part of the science fiction is so garbage that I had a hard time getting through it. I recommend "Blindsight" by Peter Watts if you're looking for a really cool first-contact story.

[–] MaddestMax@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

I was very happy to stumble upon this post. I’ve been struggling through The Dark Forest for what feels like forever. I’m usually a pretty voracious reader, but this series is like quicksand to me. It’s really really boring. I just keep hoping it will get interesting. It threatens to…and then starts sucking again. I never DNF books, but I’m so SO tempted here. Glad there are others out there!

[–] Sagan_Wept@lemmynsfw.com 5 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

The three body problem is the ONLY SciFi series to repeatedly blow my mind. I read a lot of scifi, it's always the same stuff.

[–] Lazhward@lemmy.world 1 points 15 minutes ago

I read a lot of scifi, it's always the same stuff.

As someone who enjoys sci-fi this sounds like a very odd statement from someone who reads a lot of it. I wouldn't say I've read that much sci-fi but I could quite easily name some books that could hardly be any more different. Sci-fi seems incredibly diverse to me.

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 8 points 14 hours ago

That's because it's great!

OK maybe it's not like objectively great, like in a literary sense, but me and my friends really enjoyed it for its unique voice and fun mystery.

It also spawned so many great conversations between the other programmers I know.

[–] timeghost@lemmy.world 14 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Not to mention the entire premise is invalidated by a cursory review of the Alpha Centauri system.

[–] roscoe@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Thank you. It was so annoying reading that constantly thinking "that's not how the three-body problem works, and even if it was, that sure as hell doesn't describe Alpha Centauri."

And that's just the beginning. People calling this shit hard sci-fi is crazy.

[–] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I mean, the first part of the book is kinda exactly how it works. Well 4 body, anyways.

Tap for spoilerThey're trying to find an equation to know when their planet will pass out of the habitable zone. Every equation fails to describe the orbits. So they try to simulate it, and it seems effective, but eventually the errors accumulate and the simulation fails to describe the orbits.

But yeah, we have been able to tell for a long time the Alpha Centauri isn't like that.

[–] roscoe@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

No, they're not just trying to find an equation, which may not be possible. They say it's impossible to predict where the objects will be in the near term, which is nonsense.

The three-body problem doesn't say it's unpredictable, just that there is no universal equation to describe it. You can still determine where things will be with a high degree of probability with iteration. The earth, sun, and moon are a three-body problem but we know where they will be tomorrow, next year, next century, next millennium, etc. The error bars increase with time but the moon isn't suddenly going to be ejected beyond the orbit of Pluto in an unpredictable way due to some bullshit from the chaos of the three-body problem. The entire solar system is a (very large number)-body problem, but we know where every major body is going to be with a large degree of certainty for a long time.

Whether or not they could have found a way to preserve their civilisation thorough the periods inimical to life is also beside the point. They claim they couldn't predict the occurrences, which is bullshit. You don't need a computer for that, even a biological computer (which I admit was actually kind of a cool concept), you just need paper and pen.

You can't have pretentions to hard sci-fi and just talk nonsense. Either be hand-wavy soft sci-fi or make your explanations conform to our best current understanding. You can't try to explain shit and also get the most basic concepts wrong.

[–] mr_satan@lemmy.zip 3 points 12 hours 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.

[–] UnrepentantAlgebra@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago

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.

[–] Wolf314159@startrek.website -1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

This is a failure of the reader, not the literature. It's science fiction space opera written from the cultural perspective completely alien to most western sci-fi literature. It's absolutely nothing like H.G. Wells, Asimov, Clarke, Vinge, Herbert, Heinlein, or Niven. The Three Body Problem is almost the antithesis of all of those manifest destiny individual heroes. All of those authors have much more alike amongst themselves than they do with the narrative history we read through The Three Body Problem. Of course a lot of western readers don't like it, it wasn't written for their perspective. I don't even think I could really get into it enough to REALLY enjoy it as much as my "comfort food" sci-fi. But, I could tell their was something there, and it was my own limitation of understanding, not a failure of the literature or the translation.

[–] BiteSizedZeitGeist@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

So.... what you're saying is "skill issue"

[–] Wolf314159@startrek.website 2 points 6 hours ago

Not skill, just perspective. Everyone has a right to like (or dislike) what they like, but that's as much about them as it is about the art.

[–] HulkSmashBurgers@reddthat.com 0 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

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

[–] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 hours ago

Absolutely not.

I loved the first book. The second book is all set up, it's only good if the third book pays off. It didn't. Big let down imo. Cool ideas, but not satisfying narratively or emotionally

[–] inb4_FoundTheVegan@lemmy.world 6 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

Love the books but completely agree. I devoured the trilogy but all of the charcters felt like cardboard cut outs. I liked the concept and the story, but hated all of the charcters and the writing in general.

[–] Wabbitsmiles@lemmy.world 2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

This. I absolutely loved the concept especially how book 2 and 3 turned out, not a typical sequel in a linear fashion, that blew my mind.

[–] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 hours ago

I hated book 3, which tainted book 2 retroactively. It was just so unsatisfying.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 2 points 16 hours ago

Bingo, good concept but probably loses something in translation I can't quite put my finger on but find a little grating.

[–] OhStopYellingAtMe@lemmy.world 6 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

I’m glad you said it. I read so many great reviews for it. It was recommended to me. I tried to read it. Couldn’t get past the first few chapters.

I’m an avid sci-fi reader. I’ve read hundreds of sci-fi books of all sorts; from goofy pulp to sci-fi-smut to high stakes epic novels. But I simply could not get into Three Body Problem.

I thought maybe it was that something was lost in translation.

[–] Smokeydope@lemmy.world 5 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (2 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.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 6 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

I'm not sure why The Cultural Revolution is supposed to be an alien concept to English readers that goes over their heads but otherwise I tend to agree.

[–] Smokeydope@lemmy.world 4 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

Chinese people presumably know what the cultural revolution was about and the subtext is ingrained in social memory. To an English reader with no knowledge of what the cultural revolution was about the books opening has zero context. It begins with a revolutionary girl getting killed and some people lining up to denounce math and science like a public humiliation court but more violent. Theres no subtext as to why these things are happening or what its about. A quick Wikipedia article fixes that context up of it being about the current regime believing academic knowledge would undermine political power and economic worker capability, but thats never explained in the book its expected implicit knowledge your expected to know going in.

Western atrocities and cultural revolutions usually aren't over literal knowledge. For English speakering countries all revolutions and dictatorship genocides are usually about persecution of nationality, race, or religion. Take the american civil war and the Holocaust to example. revolution and state sanctioned violence aren't usually directly over nerd shit like knowledge, theyre fought over ideaology, race, resources. Instead of directly spilling blood and literally burning libraries governments prefer to play the long game of defunding public education and quietly banning controversial books to make the populace stupid and submissive, not literally book burning. 1984 is supposed to be metaphorical extremist dystopian satire warning us about PRISM, five eyes and the survailance state, not a literal instruction manual.

The idea of a book burning society with extreme censorship in such an in-your-face way is presented as fictional because the concept is so ridiculous. No half-stable government in their right mind would be so violently audacious over something so trivial, not even the run of the mill dictatorships. Asian culture is just very different.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 2 points 16 hours ago

Personally I don't think books should be held accountable for the possibility of their reader being both ignorant and too lazy to look up common knowledge historical events.

[–] Blueberrydreamer@lemmynsfw.com 2 points 17 hours ago

Out of curiosity, have you read Stranger in a Strange Land? I won't say the character work is amazing, and it does feel a bit dated, but I find it to stand out in the genre.

[–] Yaky@slrpnk.net 39 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Three Body Problem is what I call "big ideas" sci-fi. Large-scale problems, global crisis, often detailed world-building, sometimes decent plot, but boring characters, who often act simply as reader's eyes / observers.

Many of Alastair Reynolds' novels are like that, so was Red Mars, and even Blindsight and Rosewater.

Not everyone's cup of tea, and I completely understand why.

[–] MyBrainHurts@lemmy.ca 31 points 1 day ago (1 children)

To each their own!

I didn't super care about the characters but the sci fi problems, solutions and ideas of the whole series were a blast.

That being said, I grew up reading a lot of classic/"hard" sci fi so I'm pretty used to characters taking a back seat to fun/cool ideas.

[–] rbos@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

Yeah, I felt it was largely a throwback to 1940s and 1950s western SF. Liu feels a lot like Asimov or early Heinlein. I was thinking it was like the kind of thing that a rapidly industrializing society would write as part of the cultural zeitgeist.

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 3 points 14 hours ago

Yeah that's the context I came at it from as well. It feels like a very Chinese perspective, which is novel compared to what I usually read.

I got a lot out of the excellent English translation, but it absolutely reads differently than a novel written from an English speaking/thinking person, or even when compared to English translated from a Romance or Germanic language.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 46 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

You are correct. And it's not a translation problem, I've heard native speakers that read the original say it's precisely as awkward there.

It's the most over-rated trash I've ever encountered, it's like it's written by someone that discovered the genre but never read a single SF book and just assumed everyone that reads it is a teenager. There's more handwaving going on than a David Blaine performance.

And the later books show plotholes you could throw a truck through, when you get to the deus-ex-machina plot device that invalidates the whole marianne. And the character development never improves, it's just, I have to use the word again, awkward.

I wanted my money back.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 day 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.

[–] 332@feddit.nu 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Thank you.

I read them all, hated them, and spent a good week finding negative reviews so I could fume at them in company.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

So here was my experience: finished Project Hail Mary, Google for books similar to it, was recommended 3 Body Problem. Cool. Start listening to it on audible while running errands, a LOT of stuff about the cultural revolution in China, and a very depressed smart young woman and a satellite dish that does weird stuff... a few chapters in and no humor, no science, nothing even remotely like Project Hail Mary or Andy Weir's other writing. So I dropped it.

A year or two later and Netflix adapted the novels into a TV show. Gave it a watch and got pretty bought in. Definitely some cool mystery, intrigue, done if it a bit cheesy, but raised a lot of cool challenges and questions. Also I could see that there was actually some science coming in my science fiction story. So I went back and gave the book a go.

I finished all the books and... it's a bit of a mess narratively. I felt like the author was REALLY good at coming up with creative problems that seemed insurmountable. And many of the solutions to those problem (many, not all) were equally clever and creative. He also came up with the (as far as I'm aware) completely novel concepts of alien biology, culture, and psychology and fictional technologies. But the story very often yadda yadda'd over complex narratives and geopolitical events with time jumps after making them seem like they were incredibly important before hand. He also comes up with some very cool concepts like the Wall Facers and the massive ramifications of having a handful of people that are unquestionable and work in complete secret and will have the highest levels of machinations in the works to save humanity, including one that DOES NOT WANT THE JOB. Such a good setup for so many possibilities... And then they almost immediately backpedal and undermine that with political oversight, borderline cartoon supervillain plans from some of them, and revocation of all of their statuses. There's other stuff too that's just disappointing from a narrative perspective.

But I kept going. I think because the technology was cool, the stakes were massive, the challenge was interesting, some of the mystery was really compelling, and I enjoyed the uniqueness of it all. It could have definitely been better. I think a lot of the ideas could have been explored more thoroughly and more cleanly. But, I don't regret reading it. I think it was pretty cool for the things it did well.

load more comments
view more: next ›