scrape_r_rational/data/cache/7dnvvu.md

[RT][HSF] Artemis, a new book by Andy Weir, the author of The Martian

Post:

Link to content

Comments:

• u/tonytwostep:

  As a counterpoint, check out the [AV Club's very critical review](https://www.avclub.com/the-follow-up-to-the-martian-should-be-shot-into-space-1820231886) of the book.
  
  I haven't read the book yet, so I can't speak to the accuracy of the review, but if it rings true it certainly moves the book from a "buy and read now" (based on how much I enjoyed *The Martian*) to a "borrow later and/or read once I've finished some other stuff on my list" category for me.
  

  • u/Aretii:

    I'm about 1/3 of the way through the book, and this review feels on point. The character is annoying and her relationship with sexuality and femininity is uncomfortable.
    
    I'm also just kind of *bored*. At this point, I know that the character wants a lot of money, which is why she's doing what she's doing, but it's not clear to me *why*. The stakes are unclear, so I'm not invested, and that's the biggest strike against of all.
    

    • u/tonytwostep:

      Honestly, it sounds like he should have stuck with another "man with (and/or vs.) technology vs. nature" story. I'm guessing he doesn't want to be shoehorned into that genre, but there's something to be said for sticking to your core competency - at least until you have more than one published book to your name.
      
      Writing a *good* crime thriller is not easy, and it's certainly not in the same wheelhouse as writing speculative survival fiction.
      

      • u/sicutumbo:

        I agree. The Martian didn't actually have great writing, at least in my opinion. For one thing, the descriptions of the location just weren't that great. And Mark Wattney never *really* seemed to suffer from his months of total isolation. Things like that. The concept and execution of a man stuck on Mars was just so well done that the lackluster writing didn't hamper it. Moving away from what Weir is really good at seems premature. For me, I liked the world building in that interview posted in this sub a few days ago, but the genre and description of the plot didn't interest me.
        

      • u/derefr:

        Authors don’t necessarily want to write books that sell, if they’ve made “enough” money to get by for a while. Weir might just be exploring his own competencies (you’ll never know what you *can’t* do until you try), or trying to expand them.
        
        Consider: a sci-if story written by an author with *experience* writing a crime thriller, will probably be better than a sci-fi story written by someone who has only ever written sci-fi stories.
        

  • u/jplewicke:

    I just read it, and I’d say it rings partially true. I liked it, but I wouldn’t run out and recommend reading it immediately the way I would with the Martian. The hypercompetent character thing is a bit more annoying when they’re in a social context with other people instead of stranded on Mars.
    

  • u/CouteauBleu:

    From the review:
    
    > “I giggled like a little girl. Hey, I’m a girl, so I’m allowed.”
    
    I'm guessing this is representative of the writing's issues. So, probably never reading this book.
    

  • u/daydev:

    Yeah, I've seen a number of negative reviews on Goodreads, and the core of many of them, as well as the review you linked seems to be that Weir did his woman wrong. And I'll grant you, there were annoying places where a supposedly straight female narrator seemed to channel Male Gaze a little bit. And maybe there's some shades of Mary Sue with how hyper-intelligent she is. None of that was a deal breaker for me. As I said in another comment, I like Mark Watney's "voice", and I don't mind that it's chanelled by a woman.
    

• u/daydev:

  I don't think Andy Wier requires much introduction in this sub. For me personally, *The Martian* is one of my favorite books. My impression is that *Artemis* is very good, although possibly a little bit less interesting since the plot is pretty mundane, just transplanted into an exotic setting. It has the same unique tone of the narration, the protagonist is basically a transplant of Mark Watney, I for one consider it a good thing.
  

  • u/cysghost:

    Well, you've sold me. I'll be picking it up.
    

• u/SoylentRox:

  I read it as well.  I'm a huge fan of the Martian, so I wanted to like it.
  
  Pros : He mostly thinks through the technical details of his proposed colony and all the details of the setting fairly well.  Some of the solutions the colonists use are dumb - 100% pure oxygen, open loop?  Really?  - but it mostly feels plausible.  
  
  Cons : Yes, the character is annoying.  It's the same character from The Martian with a gender change, and certain scenes just don't feel appropriate to the gravitas of the situation.  Moreover, the ending is not a plausible outcome and a certain negative consequence doesn't happen, despite it being basically guaranteed in any reasonable scenario.  
  
  If the Martian is a 10/10 for me, this book is maybe a 6/10.
  

• u/wtrnl:

  Lesser known: he also wrote [this comic](http://www.galactanet.com/comic/)
  

  • u/cysghost:

    I had work I was going to be doing today...
    
    damnit.
    

• u/Tenobrus:

  Honestly, I sort of dislike the Martian. I think taken purely on its own, I would love it, but I read it right after finishing up quite a bit of Neal Stephenson, including Anathem, the Baroque Cycle, and Seveneves. And while it was definitely enjoyable, the quality of writing and number/magnitude of interesting ideas was just so much worse in comparison. It felt like (and effectively was) a young adult adaptation of books like that. And yet it got hilariously more popular.
  
  Not that "less than stellar writing" disqualifies a written work from being good, there's plenty of stuff posted here with pretty poor writing skill but which is nonetheless very enjoyable. But when both are in the specific genre of "humans in the mostly-normal human world working out problems with occasional science/history info dumps", and one is just of so much higher quality, I can't help but feel like the Martian isn't deserving of so much praise.
  
  (It doesn't help that I always hated The Egg)
  
  Somewhat off topic, but what do you guys think? Am I wrong about the quality disparity? Should that be irrelevant when evaluating The Martian?
  

---