KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

Byron · 2003-09-03 11:17:33

In the process of writing my own "Mars" novel (still pending,) I've gone back and studied other SF books about Mars, including Kim Stanley Robinson's famous tri-color trilogy which spans a mind-blowing 1700+ pages (which took an entire decade of his life to write.) I, for one, was highly inspired by these books...even to the point of having a desire to write my own Mars novel

I think Robinson is a wonderful literary "landscape" artist....the endless, detailed descriptions of Mars are breaktaking to say the least, especially in "Red Mars." He has certainly set the benchmark for writers following in his path at a very high level! (Although he does get some details wrong, like being able to see the Tharsis volcanos -and- Olympus Mons from a single location on the surface...this is impossible due to the curvature of the planet itself...nobody's perfect, I guess..lol.)

Another aspect of his books that I enjoyed was his "alternative" politics...and the characters' repeated attempts to shuck off the capitalistic shackles of Earth in the two major revolutions described in the three-part series...which I personally think is a realistic (at least semi-realistic) portrayal of human nature, both positive and negative. However, I've come across a number of people who thought that KSR's politics took away from what they thought were excellent books otherwise. ("It smacks of communism," "KSR is way too socialist for my taste," etc.)

Since there's been a lot of relatively new faces on this board lately, I'm curious to see what you guys (those of you who've read them) think of these momentual books. Do you think KSR was being "realistic" in the sociological aspects of his books or not? What aspects of this series inspired you the most? What parts caused disgust as a reader? If KSR was just now setting out to write these books instead of back in the late '80s, how would you suggest he do things differently (besides incorporating updated scientific data?)

Any and all comments are highly desired, as this thread is a simple quest of curiosity....

B

clark · 2003-09-03 11:21:03

I think Robinson is a wonderful literary "landscape" artist....the endless, detailed descriptions of Mars are breaktaking to say the least, especially in "Red Mars."

He does service to the landscape, but not the effect that landscape would have on people and how they live.

Echus_Chasma · 2003-09-03 13:11:15

I thought the Red Mars was the best. Green Mars was cool too, but I didn't like Blue Mars. Especially when KSR was going on about all the stuff about the old people's minds decaying. That just completely went whoosh over my head. Also I had a great hatred towards Ann and Jakie, those characters seriously got under my skin.

Overall, I thought the series was really inspring. It is the reason why I am on these forums.

Byron · 2003-09-03 14:54:22

He does service to the landscape, but not the effect that landscape would have on people and how they live.

Not that I disagree with you on that point, but care to delve a bit deeper?

Personally, I think Robinson was weak when it came to economics, which requires a leap of faith from the reader to say the least. (Who's paying for the terraforming? I kept asking that question and I never got a satisfactory answer.) Also, as was pointed out in a book I'm currently reading (Mapping Mars, by Oliver Morton, highly recommended), many of the Mars planetary scientists think that Robinson makes it "too easy" for his characters on Mars, which I do have to agree with.

Despite these flaws and others (the one that really bugs me is the space elevator doing its wiggle-dance with Phobos...I was like, uh..uh...no way, Jose.. ) I would have to say the Robinson performed an amazing feat overall in the writing of his Mars series...especially now that I know what it takes to write a novel of any kind, especially an epic like that... :;):

B

Byron · 2003-09-03 15:01:47

I thought the Red Mars was the best. Green Mars was cool too, but I didn't like Blue Mars. Especially when KSR was going on about all the stuff about the old people's minds decaying. That just completely went whoosh over my head. Also I had a great hatred towards Ann and Jakie, those characters seriously got under my skin.
Overall, I thought the series was really inspring. It is the reason why I am on these forums.

Yes, Red Mars is my favorite by far...sometimes I wonder if he should've just stopped there...lol :;): I also agree about Blue Mars...the part about gradually losing one's memories upon reaching extreme old age really depressed me, especially since that is one of my most treasured personal traits...if I can't remember my childhood when I'm 200, forget it. The characters Ann and Jackie pretty much gets under everyone's skin, I think...I wouldn't be surprised if KSR felt the same way when he was writing them..lol. But in the larger scheme of things, characters such as those two did give the books a greater human dimension than they might have otherwise.

Glad to hear these books inspired you as well...

B

clark · 2003-09-03 15:12:37

For instance:

The nomadic tribes of Beoudin peoples who caravan throughout the Martian landscape in glorified RV's.

Terran Beoudin's, sans the camels. Come on...

Secret bases where the rebels are able to hide away billions of dollars worth of heavy machinery.

The inability to track anything on Mars- hello GPS. Hello sattelite observations.

Nothing monitored- people get thrown out airlocks, but somehow nothing has a video feed.

Seems he neglected the struggle of maintaing machinery in a harsh environment. The worry about air quality (which is what the ISS people spend a lot of time on) The worry about generating enough power. The worry about having enough fuel for long range trips on Mars (hello, no gas stations).

Not to mention that all of the Martian born children somehow are totally uninterested in going to Earth.

You live in a desert, with one type of 'environment'. You think maybe, just maybe, there might be some longing for an open environment filled with diversity.

Byron · 2003-09-03 15:35:51

Man, that was one of the things that I loved the most out of those books...nomads on Mars, endlessly traveling around in those wonderful rovers...talk about sweet dreams... It made me want to go to Mars sooo bad...

Yes, there's that leap of faith again, but KSR had me hooked on that one.... :;):

As far as the montioring goes, it'd be like here on Earth...you have monitoring technology and you have your counter-monitoring technology, which to me, pretty much balances each other out. (otherwise, it gets pretty difficult to write those crucial scenes..LOL.)

The sneaking around Mars, yeah, that was a bit of a stretch, same thing with the hiding of all that military equipment. As far as the air, power, maintance of equipment, I went with the author on that one, because if we didn't have those basic kind of things down pat, we wouldn't have gone to Mars in the first place. I do think it would have been much more realistic to put the initial start date much farther in the future...when I came across that Dec 2026 date, I was like, that's WAY too early for what they were about to do. But I have a tendency to overlook and/or forgive things like that...perhaps I should examine some of the "assumptions" I've made in my own novel...

B

Echus_Chasma · 2003-09-04 13:00:06

When I came across that Dec 2026 date, I was like, that's WAY too early for what they were about to do.

That date was one of the main reasons why I liked the series. I was like "Man, *counts on fingers* I'll be 38! Sweet! Just the right age to go!!"

Palomar · 2003-09-04 14:30:05

That date was one of the main reasons why I liked the series. I was like "Man, *counts on fingers* I'll be 38! Sweet! Just the right age to go!!"

*Hey, me too! Seriously...I turned 38 a few months ago, and as it's the last birthday I'll have; well, Echus, I'll just wait for you to catch up and in 2026 we'll BOTH be blasting off for Mars as 38-year-olds!

-I wish-

Ah, I've done my own math...sad to say I'll be __ years old in 2026.

I haven't read Robinson's novels; I really don't plan to in the future, either. Sorry, but what I've read so far doesn't intrigue me.

Heresy, I know.

--Cindy

Shaun Barrett · 2003-09-04 19:50:19

Interesting thread, Byron.

I must admit, KSR's trilogy was veeery looong!! Much of the bulk came from the political detail and the cut-and-thrust of interpersonal relationships against a backdrop of revolutions and major sabotage operations.
I guess it was necessary to go into all that political stuff, since much of the money for the whole thing must have been coming from the multi-national companies which featured so prominently in the story. And once you have big companies and big money, you have corruption, control-freaks, and nature's born bolsheviks and/or anarchists rebelling against it all!
But what fascinated me was the engineering and the terraforming and the beautiful descriptive passages KSR created, which really took me as close to the surface of Mars as I'm ever going to get. I loved it!
I think I've been a Mars nut since early childhood and I've read stuff like "The Sands of Mars" by Clarke (1952 vintage stuff, reflecting over-optimism about atmospheric pressure etc.), "Mars" by Ben Bova, and "Moving Mars" by Greg Bear (brilliant concept in my view). But Kim Stanley Robinson stands alone as the author who brought Mars alive with a reality and immediacy I don't think I've ever seen from another writer.
[Mind you, I haven't seen Byron's effort yet and I'm prepared to have that summation challenged!! :;): ]

When you've read a book, it's easy to sit back and recommend that others do the same. But, Cindy, if you ever get the chance, in your busy schedule, force yourself about 150 pages into "Red Mars" and see what happens. If you still feel the same way about it, well .. what have you lost? But I think you might enjoy the story if you give it a try.

One of these days, I'm going to re-read the entire 1700 pages (or whatever it is) myself. It really is a modern-day classic.

dicktice · 2003-09-05 09:40:44

I liked the overall concept of this trilogy. The space elevator dodging Phobos seemed foolish. The crashing to Mars of said space elevator was riveting--writing I doubt will ever be topped! Since I don't condone a space elevator for Mars, beliving as I do in the invaluable assets of Phobos and Deimos as ready-made "space platforms" I applauded its destruction. I hated all the political wrangling, which could just as well have taken place on Earth, so what was the point? What I wished for was even more engineering and living-off-the-land problems and solutions unique to Mars.

dickbill · 2003-09-05 11:42:11

I liked the terraforming ideas. Everything is there, from the black powder on the poles to the mirrors in orbit. It's also a little bit like Robinson Crusoe concept: man has to reconstitute the Civisation from scratch.
The love affairs and fights within the crew, I found that a little bit silly. One of my favorite character was Sax, I didn't like much Michel, Ann, and Iroko, I find unlikely such people on Mars. The political stuff, hmmm I don't know but after all it is plausible that by the time man goes on Mars, some ecological catastrophe strike earth (global warming first) making Martians in oposition with earth interests. All in all It's a good book but I also prefered the first, Red Mars. Many stuff after that, I was in fast reading mode.
I think that the trilogy could be the base for a great movie, like Lord of the Ring, even knowing than the fan base is not so big as for LOR.
I would definitively prefer a cinema/movie rather than a TV serie, because such TV series tend to be very cheap on the long term, a lot of blabla, not much action and endless identical storylines: look at babylone5, startrek or Stargates, I don't want such crap with Red Mars.

Mark Friedenbach · 2003-09-05 20:23:07

I've only read the first one (Red Mars), and I have to say that the entire concept required a huge leap of faith. Here some of the problems I remember having with it:

---SPOILERS---

-Russia and United States spend trillions of dollars to send 100 people to Mars. WHY?

-Out of these hundred scientists, who have given up any chance of seeing Earth again, less than 15 actually care about anything Mars-related.

-Said colonists are seemingly capible of building anything they want, without any of the required infrastructure.

-Automation. You simply can't automate things to the extent described by KSR. They DID have it way too easy. "Program a robot to build a factory that will build yet more robots, all so that you can program these robots to build....." riiiight.

-The UN, which played no part in the American-Russian program, is given administrative control of Mars. ???

-Earth "runs out of resources." Which resources? Why? How are they being destroyed? Wouldn't it be cheaper to recycle old trash than to import it from Mars?

-Transnationals invest in Mars. They invest trillions without ever seeing a dollar in returns. right.

-"The Treatment." Did medical technology stop advancing after they invinted it? Why live with so many limitations? In a 1000 years they can't make a Treatment 2.0? And how was it invented on Mars? Wouldn't Mars be way behind Earth in medical tools and staff?

---END OF SPOILERS---

Anyway, overall I *did* like Red Mars, and I plan on reading the rest. But I sure hope no one is taking it as a blueprint for the colonization of Mars. If anything, it should be a list of what to avoid (face it, it's not a very happy book). I was also glad that KSR showed the ass-end of globalization, and the bad effects corporatized space could have, although strangely I think that was lost on most people.

Cobra Commander · 2003-09-05 23:52:00

About two years ago I read KSR's trilogy. Actually now that I think about it, I was reading "Blue Mars" on the flight to the 2001 Mars Society conference. I only remember because the flight was delayed and while waiting in the terminal a few of us began joking around and I pointed out a guy that looked alot like Osama bin Laden. No one knew what the hell I was talking about, I always kind of wonder if they remember. Anyway...

The series was a curious mix of detailed descriptions, interesting characters, and utterly absurd politics. But most interesting to me is how some Mars Society members have latched onto the series as almost a holy text, as though the details will be different but the basic course of colonization will follow. The points in the previous post are good ones that nagged at me as well. The colonization portion was very good, but how it happened and where it went just didn't make any sense.

Overall it's a good story and I'd recommend it, but please, don't try using it as the basis for a Martian government. These discussions of Martian Constitutions that quote the KSR novels undermine the credibilty of the whole enterprise. In my oh-so-humble opinion, of course.

Oh yeah, Free Mars!

sethmckiness · 2003-09-06 03:14:13

I Really enjoyed the first two books from KSR, I finally read the third book, and never finished. It seemed like he was trying to wrap up too many loose ends. As a whole I found the books to be incredibly colorful and descriptive. His attention to detail was impeccable. I have also read his book about Antartica which I found to be equally well written, and very intriguing. My only complaint was 'Blue Mars' I got bored and couldn't read it anymore. I will probably pick it up in a few years and read it again. I have read Red Mars and Green Mars three times. I enjoy Epic Stories like these because there is so much going on, you can reread it after a few years and you forget about the sub plots, of which there were too many to count. If done properly, I feel that this could be an Epic movie. But, I do not feel that this is possible. Maybe in 10 years, with the rate special effects are going, so that the costs would be much less. Also, the Casting would be immense, and I could see each book either making a movie 4-6 hours long or leave 2/3 of it on the cutting room floor after filming. There was just too much going on to be able to fit it in the 1 hour and 45 minutes of the standard movie today. The other possibility would be conning someone with the Ability of Tom Hanks to Make it a Mini-Series A LA Band of Brothers. But it could end up sharing the Same fate of another Sci-Fi Show I enjoyed...(Odyssey 5 RIP)

Byron · 2003-09-06 12:15:41

I haven't read Robinson's novels; I really don't plan to in the future, either. Sorry, but what I've read so far doesn't intrigue me.
Heresy, I know.
--Cindy

Exactly what doesn't "intrigue" you about the "Mars" series? Do you generally shy away from SF, or you just feel that the series would just be too much of a drag (based on reviews, etc.)?

I second Shaun's suggestion to read the 1st 150 pages of 'Red Mars' and see what you think of it....actually, I would suggest (to save time) that you skip over the first 25 pages, as that is a "flash forward" for much later in the book. Part 2 begins with the first 100 setting off to Mars in 2026 and you'll be getting into some of his best writing fairly quickly (the excitement of being on Mars, the exploration, etc.)

As for the other two books, I say don't bother if you're pressed for time, as Red Mars does very well as a stand-alone book. (Green Mars and Blue Mars can be thought of a single book split in two.)

Anyhow, give it a shot...I think you'll be surprised.. :;):

B

Palomar · 2003-09-06 13:07:33

*Hi Byron. I carried a response (of sorts) to Shaun over into the "Good Books You've Read Recently" in the "Free Chat" folder, yesterday. I felt I was going off-topic, and didn't want to "muscle in" on your thread.

I'm not much of a fiction fan. 1700 pages? Nope; takes too much time (besides, "tell-all is bore-all"; i.e., I don't care for extremely complex and lengthy fictional tales).

And as I mentioned to Shaun in the other thread, I'm very engrossed in my 18th century studies (let's just say I definitely must have a terrific love for and interest in astronomy, space exploration and Mars, for them to pull me away as much as they do from my 18th century studies...it's definitely a tug-of-war for my time and attention).

--Cindy

Spider-Man · 2003-09-06 18:51:03

Seriously...I turned 38 a few months ago, and as it's the last birthday I'll have; well, Echus, I'll just wait for you to catch up and in 2026 we'll BOTH be blasting off for Mars as 38-year-olds!

-I wish-
Ah, I've done my own math...sad to say I'll be __ years old in 2026.

Naww, you won't truly be any older than you feel, dear Cindy. By the energy and spirit and ingelligence and profound curiosity you've made readily apparent to us all here, you seem considerably younger than any number might suggest (indeed, I took you for a particularly wise undergraduate student upon my arrival here). And bearing such gloriously youthful traits, you could only grow younger and remain as infinitely lovely at heart as you already have demonstrated yourself to be.

Besides, what should numbers matter to a divinity? After all, you're eternal, heavenly Cynthia, luminary goddess of the Moon as you are.

Palomar · 2003-09-07 08:02:50

Spider-Man: "Naww, you won't truly be any older than you feel, dear Cindy. By the energy and spirit and ingelligence and profound curiosity you've made readily apparent to us all here, you seem considerably younger than any number might suggest"

*Many thanks for the compliments. Isn't this (youthfulness) a trait in common with people who (somehow, despite the rigors of life) maintain a great sense of awe, adventure, and curiosity? Yes, all of which are youthful traits.

Spider-Man: "(indeed, I took you for a particularly wise undergraduate student upon my arrival here)."

*Interesting how that works. In 1998 I joined an online philosophy discussion group (since disbanded), wherein in met and began corresponding with an extremely knowledgeable 40-something college professor. Whoops; turns out he was a 22-year-old archeology student from New York! A purely and absolutely -platonic- correspondence on our part. I learned so much from a person 11 years my junior!

Spider-Man: "And bearing such gloriously youthful traits, you could only grow younger and remain as infinitely lovely at heart as you already have demonstrated yourself to be.

Besides, what should numbers matter to a divinity? After all, you're eternal, heavenly Cynthia, luminary goddess of the Moon as you are."

*Yes; Cynthia (my real) is connected with Mt. Cynthos (or Kynthos, as in your other message, which I will respond to later today or tomorrow) and Diana. I read a lot of mythology around ages 9 to 11; fascinating stuff. Everyone should trace the origin and meaning of their names; it's so easy to do.

--Cindy

Tb0ne · 2005-04-24 19:35:00

Mark Friedenbach,

I think you are underestimating how much quality robotics will help with the construction of the first Mars Colony. While KSR might set the date a bit early, Robot's are definatly the wave of the future. Go take a look at Sony's robotics section on their website, it's still early but I'm sure you'll see the possibilities.

Also I think your complaint that many of the Colonist didn't have a massive interest in Mars, can be explained partly in that some of those people were probably weeded out in the selection process. The Space Agencies probably would take steps to avoid the first 100 being made up of Red's, which are sure to exist in the future.

-----------------------------------------------------------

As for the books, I'm like many people here in that after I read the books it greatly increased my interest in Mars. Although, that interest had been building for many years previous ever since seeing Robert Zubrin talk about Terraforming Mars on a TV Show as a youngster.

It captured my imagination, and given that main characters from Red Mars' First 100 were born in the same generation as I was I think it even had more of an impact (1984, so the 80's). Even though I've had a steady job since graduating highschool not long ago, dreams of Mars are at least part of the reason I'm thinking of going to University.

In the future, if ever given the chance to go to Mars I probably would (even if chances were I would not be able to return to Earth).

Trebuchet · 2005-04-24 23:21:35

Nice ressurection of a dead thread, Tb0ne.

Anyways, since the damage has been done, and I've never gotten to comment on it before, I bought and read 'Red Mars'. I also bought and read 'The Years of Salt and Rice', also by Kim Stanley Robinson. And, honestly, I dislike them both. I dislike them a lot - the prose is pretty, but that's about all I can say for them.

They share common faults - things aren't thought out, don't make any sense, and things transpire in a curious hazy unreality. The whole of the story in Red Mars doesn't make any logical sense from a political standpoint, as has been pointed out before, but it also doesn't make any sense from a people standpoint, either: we get all these diverse groups and oddballs wandering around Mars without any particular unifying vision or purpose and are expected to believe that (somehow) they make colonization a successful effort. Right. IMHO, the most likely consequence would be that the next expedition would explore the ruined bases and find the 21st century equivalent of CROATAN on the walls, leaving behind only a mystery of senseless loss.

As for the other book, don't get me started...

DanielCook · 2005-04-30 17:23:52

Well, my two cents:

I've read all three books of the tri-color, as well as "The years of rice and salt"

The trilogies, in my opinion, were great ... KSR used several different themes - science, religion, terraforming, economics, conservation and politics - and weaved them together in a rivetting tale. If any of these elements were left out, the story would have been the lesser for it.

As for "Years", well, it really over-abused the concept re-incarnation. Good idea, poor execution.

Shikata ga nai ...

Rxke · 2005-05-01 02:30:50

I liked KSR's stuff, and do not really ubnderstand, why people get put off by the beginning (the why 100 men to Mars)

It's, after all Fiction, there would nevver be a RGB Mars if it were based on the current NASA plans

I was absolutely in love with the 'first steps' stuff, the setting up shop, evrything getting behind sheule etc.
Then later on, the detailed eclogical stuff, from lichen to krummholtz, to real trees... to a breathable (with filtermasks) atmosphere, though the timeframe seems overly optimistic, heh
The series somewhat degrades offtopic sometimes... the spun out stuff about the memorytreatment could be left out, IMO, totally offtopic, while one could argue the geriatric treatment itself has merit as making certain stuff possible re: longterm planning...

All in all not bad, not bad at all.

clark · 2005-05-01 06:52:12

Rxke, where I'm coming from with KSR's trilogy is the charcterization. The ideas were interesting, the descriptions and prose first rate; however the characters that inhabited his stories were one dimensional and made of cardboard. They didn't feel real, and they were not interesting. What made them interesting was the fact that they were on Mars- take that away, and you have no reason to engage.

This is generally why most science fiction and fantasy genre books are regarded poorly when compared to the standard fiction genre. Characterization. Most times the charcters exsist simply to serve an idea of the author, instead of being a fundamental piece of telling the story.

RobS · 2005-05-02 23:56:36

I very much enjoyed the Robinson trilogy. The idea of sending 100 people at once I did not take seriously; it was just Robinson's literary device to get a small colony on Mars all at once. I accepted it as a literary device and enjoyed it. The main "objection" I had was terraforming Mars completely in about 200 years; I can't believe it can be done that fast. But again, Robinson was speeding it up to make it fit the lives of a set of characters, and that makes sense as a literary device. In my "Mars Frontier" novel series I speed things up immensely as well.

I did not find the revolutions so realistic. Television has changed the way revolutions work permanently, I think. The Czech "Velvet Revolution" and the Ukrainian "Orange Revolution" and the recent Kyghyz "revolution" show that a combination of demonstrations and an emphasis on the rule of law, backed up by the thought that if you massacre a lot of people, world public opinion will rebel against you, have greatly limited the violence of revolutions. Teinanmen is the exception; but then, China is a totalitarian superpower and can get away with some things. If Quebec has a third vote and comes out in favor of independence, I think we will have seen a model for how a Martian revolution could happen. Canada, Australia, and New Zealand did not need revolutions to achieve independence at all.

I was also skeptical that one could hide entire cities and rebel infrastructure on Mars. Modern spy satellite technology and advanced computers will make that just about impossible.

Robinson is very good at description; I was impressed by that aspect of his writing. But on the other hand there are times he went on for pages and pages, it seemed to me, when a shorter description of an idea would have been sufficient. Robinson's grasp of the technology or possible technology is immensely impressive; he did his homework. His grasp of religious and cultural diversity is pretty good as well, though not as good, in my opinion.

Characterization was fine for me, because I don't care too much about characters in my novels, either.

-- RobS

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2003-09-03 11:17:33

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#2 2003-09-03 11:21:03

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#3 2003-09-03 13:11:15

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#4 2003-09-03 14:54:22

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#5 2003-09-03 15:01:47

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#6 2003-09-03 15:12:37

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#7 2003-09-03 15:35:51

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#8 2003-09-04 13:00:06

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#9 2003-09-04 14:30:05

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#10 2003-09-04 19:50:19

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#11 2003-09-05 09:40:44

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#12 2003-09-05 11:42:11

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#13 2003-09-05 20:23:07

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#14 2003-09-05 23:52:00

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#15 2003-09-06 03:14:13

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#16 2003-09-06 12:15:41

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#17 2003-09-06 13:07:33

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#18 2003-09-06 18:51:03

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#19 2003-09-07 08:02:50

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#20 2005-04-24 19:35:00

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#21 2005-04-24 23:21:35

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#22 2005-04-30 17:23:52

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#23 2005-05-01 02:30:50

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#24 2005-05-01 06:52:12

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

#25 2005-05-02 23:56:36

Re: KSR's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars... - What do think of his books?

Board footer