Slashdot Mirror
Antarctica
The situation described at the outset of Antarctica, set a few decades into the future, is a natural progression from the current day. Antarctica is already a home to scientific communities and is becoming a playground for adventurers and the rich. The most remote continent is attracting increasing interest as money and technology bring it within reach. The nature of the Antarctic environment is being affected by human activity in the rest of the world. This, in turn, may also affect us profoundly. These topics are as relevant in Michigan and Melbourne as at McMurdo Station. From these present realities the author attempts to build a gentle plot of science, tourism, ecoterrorism and the value of the last continent to the future of our planet.
KSR seems more interested, however, in the continent itself and its effects on those who spend time there. The novel exhibits in all its characters the profound effect that Antarctica has on those who fall into it's grasp. Wherever else in the world they might go, they are drawn back. Whether they wish to exploit it's wealth or preserve it's austere beauty they are under a spell where simply being in Antarctica makes life more real. Whether shepherding idiot tourists or measuring the compass orienation of random pebbles, these are merely the price paid to be truly alive.
Much of the novel is a travelogue. Sweeping descriptions - the view from above what is now McMurdo Station, the arrival at the South Pole - are reminiscent of Sara Wheeler's travel book Terra Incognita. There are parallels between one protagonist's activities in the Dry Valleys and KSR's own visit as part of the US Antarctic Program's Artists and Writers Program. It is the descriptive aspect of his writing which makes the book worth reading. In fact, KSR writes so convincingly that it can be difficult determine whether what is described is literally true, literally fiction or simply has not yet occurred. Like the Mars trilogy, the writing is such that, looking back, much of what has been read feels like profound personal experience. This is the greatest success of KSR's 'maximalist' style of writing. However, at times the plot slows visibly in order to accommodate the detail. The plot is a servant of exposition and discussion rather than an animator.
An example of this is lengthy discussion of early explorers, principally Scott, Shackleton, and Amundsen who, KSR suggests, form the only shared culture of the continent. It is hardly surprising that this is so: many of the familiar Antarctic places are named by them or for them; they managed several of the final big 'firsts' possible on this planet; they are from the last age of heroes and their stories, though debated and rewritten, are powerful. One protaganist's journey across the ice is a metaphor for coming to terms with both the myth and the reality of the "old boys".
There is a temptation to attempt to fit KSR's works into a single future history. Antarctic science is used in the Mars program. This is as true in the real world as it is in KSR's writing. Antarctica is thematically in accord with the Mars trilogy: there is the intense interest in science and concern for ecological questions; there is a warm, human perspective; there is a cold and unforgiving world. However, this need only mean that this is the work of the same man. He didn't actually visit Antarctica until after the Mars trilogy was virtually finished but, like many of his characters, he wants to go back. This may explain why the novel fits better into the genre of Antarctic writing than into the science fiction genre. There is a danger in this book that the reader may be similarly mesmerised by the ice. Antarctica is a continent that almost no-one initially experiences first-hand and this taste is as honest as any. In a certain sense the novel has been a success if it leads the reader on to Apsley Cherry-Garrard's The Worst Journey in the World and the many books, good and bad, lined up behind that masterpiece.
Pick this book up at Amazon.
I didn't consider Red Mars *sad*, just sober. I don't believe you can focus on the "unhappiness and senseless destruction" without considering the heroism and selfless attempts of other characters to create the utopian Mars they believe in.
... or Earth. It's the kind of thing that a highly evolved society tends to forget, being divorced from the real effects of their actions (e.g. the gradual lowering of the Ogalalla Water Table, or the hard choice between nasty DDT or widespread malaria).
The only problem is that everyone believes in a different utopian Mars.
As I've said, the trilogy is a roman à clef for the ecological debates on Earth today. On Earth, you make a small change and it may take years to see an effect. On Mars, you make that change and almost immediately you can judge it. It's both laboratory and metaphor.
While Robinson is no dystopic sf writer, he's clearly telling us that we take ourselves with us when we travel to other places/planets, and taht our motivations for simple actions can be deep and complex, with wide-ranging unforeseen consequences. This is a truth about life, and a lesson in living with a coherent ecosystem like Mars
----
Lake Effect, a weblog
lake effect weblog
{Network engineer in Chicago--looking for work!}
Loved the Mars trilogy, though book three got kind of slow.
I have to agree that while Antarctica is a good read, it has too much similarity to the Mars series.
If you liked Mars, you'll like the style of Antarctica. He captures the essence of life on The Ice, including amusing real-world anecdotes. I chuckled greatly over "The Snowmobile Incident", which ocurred while I was in McMurdo.
He's right on the money -- if you've ever been there, it will forever beckon you. Something Zen about the beauty of emptyness.
Summary: Typical KSR style. Very similar to Mars. You'll like it if you liked Mars. You might like it more if you _didn't_ read Mars.
-- There is no truth. There is only Perception. To Percieve is to Exist.
Disclaimer: I'm only 80% through the book so far.
The Mars trilogy has its fans and its anti-fans. Still, it was a downhill slope: If you didn't really like _Red Mars_, you were not likely to enjoy Green and Blue at all. I enjoyed the deep politics, but even I -- an admitted political junkie -- found it tedious by the end of the trilogy. Still, there was enough character development, travelogue, and hard-sf detail to keep me reading.
Antarctica is both tighter and lighter than the Mars books. KSR has clearly worked to insert more fun and tone down the political theory. The characters are less complex and more accessible, while not losing their personality or individual motivations. The storyline moves along at a much faster pace, clearly inspired by the recent trend of high-altitude/low-temperature adventure stories (Into Thin Air, Endurance, Across the Top of the World, et al.). I've read a lot of those, and so I was well-versed in the early history of Antarctica to which KSR frequently refers. It's good to read this book with a map and a couple of reference works close at hand, ideally with a photographic work to ground you to the experience. I looked up a LOT of Antarctic web pages in the process (start with The Ice), and I even looked at the _Lonely Planet_ guide to the continent -- yes, an Antarctic travel book.
Even if you didn't like Red Mars much, this book touches on many of the same themes in a much more immediate, action-oriented adventure context. In the same way that the Mars trilogy was really a roman à clef for the ecological arguments currently swirling about how to manage the Earth*, Antarctica contains thoughtful lessons to absorb for our very near future.
In short, this is basically _Red Mars_ aimed at a wider audience, successfully. It's not as deep as the trilogy, but that's a good thing. Whereas the trilogy is, in any practical sense, unfilmable (cf. LoTR), this would make a really fun 2-hour movie.
* and if you didn't read that into it, try thinking that one over and picking the books up again -- especially if you were bored!
[GETTING REALLY PISSED OFF as I hit "Preview" three times in a row and got "Error" three times in a row. Slashdot and proxy servers simply do not mix.]
----
Lake Effect, a weblog
lake effect weblog
{Network engineer in Chicago--looking for work!}
I liked Antartica, rereading it right after I finished reading it the first time, but I found too many plot elements derivative of the Mars Trilogy (which I also reread right after finishing it).
/., it's a near future science fiction that doesn't even mention cyberspace.
The Ferals: Ok, we got people living low impact close to the environment lives on Mars, we get them in Antartica. Cute, but not sustainable for huge amounts of populations.
The "cut off from authority for x hours" device. In Mars, they blow the elevator to cut themselves off from Earth's authority. In Antartica, a convenient storm keeps the US Navy away until the NSF, eco-tuers and contract workers can all hammer out an agreement.
The "we're too busy too sleep, we'll work for 100 hours straight". Granted that it is science fiction, but I've been up for about 60 hours straight and was pretty nonfunctional by the 60 hours. I have trouble believing all these people (X, Wade, Frank, Nadia) would be perky, and skillfully handling heavy equipment after after being up so long. Then again, I didn't try amphetamines.
The "wacky Russian". In Mars, it was Arkady, who was very entertaining, KSR shouldn't have killed him off. In Antartica, it was the Russian ice sailing dude.
The "long dangerous trek in a harsh environment". In Mars, it was Ann, Frank, Maya, et all escaping from the dome in the stealth rover, in Antartica it was Wade, Val, X et all escaping in the hovercraft.
All in all, a good read, but I wonder if KSR used too much sed to write it.
I'm also finding KSR's characterizations not as good as they used to be, I found the characters in "The Gold Coast" a lot more human.
Hey, I should write a review of "The Gold Coast", though it's not very
George
This is a great book about the experience of being in Antarctica, and a convincing look at how the various interesting characters react to it. The tour guide who loves working in this environment but is held back and frustrated by the limitations of her clients, the ferals who are trying to make a home on this strange continent, the eco-terrorists who want to protect the wilderness no matter what the cost, and the underdog grunt worker who is frustrated by a lack of respect from the scientists he supports, but finally discovers his own way to exist here:it is all great stuff.
Where it falls down, though, is in the plot department: this just isn't a good piece of fiction. The conflicts are interesting enough (commercial exploitation vs. scientific research vs. environmentalists vs. politics vs. some very odd people indeed), but none of these things are fully explored. Instead it just sort of fizzles out with a totally unsatisfying "but then we had enough pages written, so they all decided that none of the problems were really problems at all,
and lived happily ever after". Ah well, this book works as a description of places and people rather than events. I just wish he could have backed off enough to admit that and leave out the convoluted now-we-will-change-the-world elements altogether.
In the end, the success of this book is as a wonderful visualisation of what Antarctica is like, and it made me want to go there myself...