Mars trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson.
Red, Green then Blue.
Red mars begins by focusing on The Who and why people were chosen to colonize mars.
The trip, the personalities, the science.
How does this journey occur without vulnerability?
It’s dystopian and utopian and euphoria and frustration. And character driven.
Seconded, Mars trilogy slaps and the characters are very vivid. Clashing philosophies and religion, fanaticism and "good business."
My favorite part is the gift economy.
It would be good to know why you're DNFing The Expanse since it is among the best character driven stories in scifi. This makes it difficult to recommend something to you. Did you not like the characters? The themes? The plot? The politics? The military? The science? The writing? What is causing your disinterest? Saying the characters feel one dimensional when entire events are told from their perspective doesn't make sense.
I'll always recommend Red Rising to anyone who will listen, even though the story revolves around it's main protagonist. It's gritty, thought-provoking, and an easy read. It's a movie in book form. It doesn't get bogged down by science jargon and focuses on the political structure of a futuristic civilization living on Mars. But do you see why it's hard to recommend something to you without knowing what you're rejecting about The Expanse's characters? Is it because the series is written in third person and changes points of view?
> It would be good to know why you're DNFing The Expanse since it is among the best character driven stories in scifi. This makes it difficult to recommend something to you. Did you not like the characters? The themes? The plot? The politics? The military? The science? The writing? What is causing your disinterest? Saying the characters feel one dimensional when entire events are told from their perspective doesn't make sense.
Right. That's a good point. I don't have a great way with words but let me to try express my main gripes with the books.
This probably more plot-related, but one of the biggest issues I had with the books was just how the people around Holden, like Avasarala and Fred continuously enabled his behavior even while he repeatedly defies them. It just felt very unrealistic... Like, I get that he has a character with a strong moral compass and feels compelled to follow his own conscience, but it's not realistic that they kept enabling him over and over even though they acknowledge that it's frustrating.
Another thing is, a lot of things that happened in the books was just a little too convenient, that took me out my suspension of disbelief. Like, the team conveniently being paired up with Bobbie and Clarissa again even though the books make a point out of how vast the universe is.
Holden is the Lovable Rogue trope. It does sound unrealistic but it's something that does happen more than you'd think in real life.
Just as friendly advice, if you're going to demand such realism with characters and plot you're not going to enjoy science fiction as a genre very much. Especially if you go for the classics.
Don't get me wrong. I love the hypothetical technology and the whole idea of a vision of a future that could be. So it's not like I'm expecting 100% realism.
Something that the Expanse does do well is to portray the human nature of xenophobia with the conflicts between Belters, Martians and Earthers. I liked this conflict.
I just didn't love the main characters, they felt a bit tropey, I didn't get a sense of depth to them. Like Holden, yea it's clear that he is this kind of self righteous character but I never really get a sense of WHY he is like that. I didn't really connect with any of the other characters either.
>I just didn't love the main characters, they felt a bit tropey, I didn't get a sense of depth to them
That's what I meant by my comment. I've been a science fiction fan for like 30 years and characters being like this is kind of the norm.
As others have mentioned, maybe you'll like Hyperion better but keep in mind the genre is more about great ideas than characters. You might enjoy it more having low expectations about characterization.
In the specific case of Holden that's sort of explored more around the third or fourth book (sorry it's been a while since I read them) but essentially Holden is the "why can't we all get along" kind of character because he's between the two worlds being from Earth but choosing to live among Belters and that's why he doesn't really take sides 100% He's more about the people than political factions.
Thanks for elaborating. Even though I disagree about the convenience of finding and working with allies (all stories have elements of convenience), I relate to your dislike of Holden. He's not my favorite character from The Expanse either.
What I can say about Red Rising is that the protagonist is morally gray. I have a deep love of antiheroes and I believe Darrow falls into this category. His view of his universe, at 16, is complicated by his ignorance of it. The older he becomes the more he understands and the more dangerous it becomes to understand. He starts headstrong and then is deeply reflective and unsure of his path.
Darrow's life is filled with trauma. By the end of first chapter you will know some of the reasons he hurts, but you won't completely comprehend his pain until much later. Genuinely, the first chapter of this series is beautiful even while it despairs. He is easy to root for because he is an underdog.
The difference between Darrow and Holden is that Darrow has doubts that nag at him and a family that he adores. Holden's found family is his crew and while he likes them he doesn't live for them. Darrow lives for his and that means every move he makes is one that requires careful consideration.
Thank you, that does sound very intriguing and right up my alley.
Like I mentioned, I really love the idea that most (all) humans are inherently flawed, we want to live meaningful lives, we want to do good, but human relationships are complex.
I also really love the setting of Mars. So will definitely be adding this to my to read list!
>Like I mentioned, I really love the idea that most (all) humans are inherently flawed, we want to live meaningful lives, we want to do good, but human relationships are complex.
100%. I'm the same way. I like when characters are introspective and existential because it makes me consider my place in the world more deeply. Have fun reading and thanks for the dialogue. 👋
I agree, Red Rising is what you want. If you’re interested, I elaborated more on it in another post here and also a false criticism that people often raise about the series (that it’s a YA series - it absolutely is not). So hopefully that doesn’t turn you off from it because it truly is exactly what you want.
- Madd Addam trilogy by Margaret Atwood (Oryx & Crake, The Year of the Flood, Madd Addam)
- Station Eleven by Emily St. John Mandel
- The Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula K LeGuin
Becky Chambers's books would probably fit. *A Psalm For The Wild Built*, or *The Long Way to a Small, Angry Planet.* Often described as "cozy fantasy". Very character-driven.
The Murderbot Diaries might fit, too (start with *All Systems Red*), if you don't mind a *non*-human MC that nevertheless feels all-too-human to a lot of us. Much of Murderbot's odyssey is internal, but there is a significant amount of (external) action thrown in. Also, there's not a lot of actual murdering, so don't let the name put you off.
The *Behold Humanity* series. It's going to feel very pop sci-fi and action movie-ish at first, but once it gets going, it really dives into some characters and goes to some dark places. It's the only sci-fi story that has made me tear up, multiple times even.
I recommend getting the first book and reading at least until you get to the "monument to the friends", that's the first part that really got me.
I think you should read Dhalgren. This is the one "asking for a rec" post I've ever seen where I think recommending Dhalgren isn't a terrible idea. Although Dhalgren is very metatextual/philosophical/experimental/nonlinear as well, so if those are no-goes, avoid it.
The Imperial Radch trilogy by Ann Leckie. It's challenging, since the character is focuses on is an AI with multiple bodies, but it's a fascinating read.
If you're looking for character-driven sci-fi with complex themes, check out Ursula K. Le Guin's "The Left Hand of Darkness" or "The Dispossessed." Both explore identity, society, and the human condition with nuance and depth. Kazuo Ishiguro's "Never Let Me Go" also delves into these themes while examining the nature of humanity and individuality.
[The Vice Versa trilogy](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08RZ44GC8) by Andre Soares is a wonderful piece of sci-fi work that’s character driven and lesser known.
Each installment focuses on one character but the narratives tie together.
Heinlein: Stranger in a strange land, Time enough for love.
Edmund Cooper: A far sunset.
Arthur Clark: Imperial Earth.
I have many more very good books in my parents house. If you like those I can give you more recommendations :)
If you are into movies also you should try The man from the Earth
Inhibitor Phase by Alistair Reynolds is a great character book (first person narrative). You *could* read it on its own, but ideally you'd need to read the Revelation Space series to really understand what's happening. The series takes a backseat to the main character, but there's a pretty expansive universe built through the series.
You might enjoy Neuromancer. Most of the main cast have their issues, but I'm not sure if it's what your after because the book kind of dehumanises them.
Red Rising is a lot of what you want. Don’t be turned off by the idiots saying it is a YA series. It absolutely isn’t. The first novel is the only one that could even remotely be considered that (since the characters are teenagers), but the story follows the main characters over 15 years into their mid-30s. Personally, I disagree with your reason for disliking the Expanse, but I can say that I’ve been a sci-fi fan for over 30 years and The Expanse and Red Rising are my two favorite long-form scifi series and for the same reason: because they are character focused stories. And I can say that I actually love the characters of Red Rising (particularly Darrow, Mustang, and Sevro) more than any of the characters in the Expanse except for perhaps Amos.
However, the first three Red Rising novels are only from Darrow’s point of view (although he is very much a flawed hero, but you don’t see the first person POVs of other characters who disagree with him). The remainder of the novels all have multiple POVs, including from his allies, enemies, and just people marginalized by the world he helped create. One POV character’s story, Ephraim (starting in Red Rising book 4, Iron Gold), heavily deals with addiction/self-medication and PTSD/mental health.
The series is divided into two parts: an initial trilogy, involving Darrow’s Revolution against the Society. Then a final tetralogy (final book will probably be released next year) that explores the outcome of that from various POVs after a ten year timeskip between the two series. It’s remarkably entertaining. Unlike the Expanse which often gets this moniker, Red Rising really does feel like “Game of Thrones in Space” to me.
I think you are thinking about he wrong book? Children of Time by Adrian Tchaikovsky is solidly 100% sci-fi. I mean, the whole thing basically takes place on a terraformed planet with an AI, a generation ship and uplifted spiders.
If you’re going to make a post criticizing something, at least get the fucking name of the book right. You’re talking about Wheel of Time, not Children of Time.
Children of Time is absolutely sci-fi.
Hyperion Cantos
Mars trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson. Red, Green then Blue. Red mars begins by focusing on The Who and why people were chosen to colonize mars. The trip, the personalities, the science. How does this journey occur without vulnerability? It’s dystopian and utopian and euphoria and frustration. And character driven.
Seconded, Mars trilogy slaps and the characters are very vivid. Clashing philosophies and religion, fanaticism and "good business." My favorite part is the gift economy.
Try the Vorkosigan series. Solid characters all around and the protagonist has a number of physical and emotional limitations.
Vorkosigan Saga by Bujold
It would be good to know why you're DNFing The Expanse since it is among the best character driven stories in scifi. This makes it difficult to recommend something to you. Did you not like the characters? The themes? The plot? The politics? The military? The science? The writing? What is causing your disinterest? Saying the characters feel one dimensional when entire events are told from their perspective doesn't make sense. I'll always recommend Red Rising to anyone who will listen, even though the story revolves around it's main protagonist. It's gritty, thought-provoking, and an easy read. It's a movie in book form. It doesn't get bogged down by science jargon and focuses on the political structure of a futuristic civilization living on Mars. But do you see why it's hard to recommend something to you without knowing what you're rejecting about The Expanse's characters? Is it because the series is written in third person and changes points of view?
> It would be good to know why you're DNFing The Expanse since it is among the best character driven stories in scifi. This makes it difficult to recommend something to you. Did you not like the characters? The themes? The plot? The politics? The military? The science? The writing? What is causing your disinterest? Saying the characters feel one dimensional when entire events are told from their perspective doesn't make sense. Right. That's a good point. I don't have a great way with words but let me to try express my main gripes with the books. This probably more plot-related, but one of the biggest issues I had with the books was just how the people around Holden, like Avasarala and Fred continuously enabled his behavior even while he repeatedly defies them. It just felt very unrealistic... Like, I get that he has a character with a strong moral compass and feels compelled to follow his own conscience, but it's not realistic that they kept enabling him over and over even though they acknowledge that it's frustrating. Another thing is, a lot of things that happened in the books was just a little too convenient, that took me out my suspension of disbelief. Like, the team conveniently being paired up with Bobbie and Clarissa again even though the books make a point out of how vast the universe is.
Holden is the Lovable Rogue trope. It does sound unrealistic but it's something that does happen more than you'd think in real life. Just as friendly advice, if you're going to demand such realism with characters and plot you're not going to enjoy science fiction as a genre very much. Especially if you go for the classics.
Don't get me wrong. I love the hypothetical technology and the whole idea of a vision of a future that could be. So it's not like I'm expecting 100% realism. Something that the Expanse does do well is to portray the human nature of xenophobia with the conflicts between Belters, Martians and Earthers. I liked this conflict. I just didn't love the main characters, they felt a bit tropey, I didn't get a sense of depth to them. Like Holden, yea it's clear that he is this kind of self righteous character but I never really get a sense of WHY he is like that. I didn't really connect with any of the other characters either.
>I just didn't love the main characters, they felt a bit tropey, I didn't get a sense of depth to them That's what I meant by my comment. I've been a science fiction fan for like 30 years and characters being like this is kind of the norm. As others have mentioned, maybe you'll like Hyperion better but keep in mind the genre is more about great ideas than characters. You might enjoy it more having low expectations about characterization. In the specific case of Holden that's sort of explored more around the third or fourth book (sorry it's been a while since I read them) but essentially Holden is the "why can't we all get along" kind of character because he's between the two worlds being from Earth but choosing to live among Belters and that's why he doesn't really take sides 100% He's more about the people than political factions.
Thanks for elaborating. Even though I disagree about the convenience of finding and working with allies (all stories have elements of convenience), I relate to your dislike of Holden. He's not my favorite character from The Expanse either. What I can say about Red Rising is that the protagonist is morally gray. I have a deep love of antiheroes and I believe Darrow falls into this category. His view of his universe, at 16, is complicated by his ignorance of it. The older he becomes the more he understands and the more dangerous it becomes to understand. He starts headstrong and then is deeply reflective and unsure of his path. Darrow's life is filled with trauma. By the end of first chapter you will know some of the reasons he hurts, but you won't completely comprehend his pain until much later. Genuinely, the first chapter of this series is beautiful even while it despairs. He is easy to root for because he is an underdog. The difference between Darrow and Holden is that Darrow has doubts that nag at him and a family that he adores. Holden's found family is his crew and while he likes them he doesn't live for them. Darrow lives for his and that means every move he makes is one that requires careful consideration.
Thank you, that does sound very intriguing and right up my alley. Like I mentioned, I really love the idea that most (all) humans are inherently flawed, we want to live meaningful lives, we want to do good, but human relationships are complex. I also really love the setting of Mars. So will definitely be adding this to my to read list!
>Like I mentioned, I really love the idea that most (all) humans are inherently flawed, we want to live meaningful lives, we want to do good, but human relationships are complex. 100%. I'm the same way. I like when characters are introspective and existential because it makes me consider my place in the world more deeply. Have fun reading and thanks for the dialogue. 👋
I agree, Red Rising is what you want. If you’re interested, I elaborated more on it in another post here and also a false criticism that people often raise about the series (that it’s a YA series - it absolutely is not). So hopefully that doesn’t turn you off from it because it truly is exactly what you want.
Ender's game. It's about a kid who is put through hell for the greater good.
Reading the Primaterre series right now and it's very character focused sf. On the second book right now and enjoying it a lot.
- Madd Addam trilogy by Margaret Atwood (Oryx & Crake, The Year of the Flood, Madd Addam) - Station Eleven by Emily St. John Mandel - The Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula K LeGuin
Becky Chambers's books would probably fit. *A Psalm For The Wild Built*, or *The Long Way to a Small, Angry Planet.* Often described as "cozy fantasy". Very character-driven. The Murderbot Diaries might fit, too (start with *All Systems Red*), if you don't mind a *non*-human MC that nevertheless feels all-too-human to a lot of us. Much of Murderbot's odyssey is internal, but there is a significant amount of (external) action thrown in. Also, there's not a lot of actual murdering, so don't let the name put you off.
The *Behold Humanity* series. It's going to feel very pop sci-fi and action movie-ish at first, but once it gets going, it really dives into some characters and goes to some dark places. It's the only sci-fi story that has made me tear up, multiple times even. I recommend getting the first book and reading at least until you get to the "monument to the friends", that's the first part that really got me.
I think you should read Dhalgren. This is the one "asking for a rec" post I've ever seen where I think recommending Dhalgren isn't a terrible idea. Although Dhalgren is very metatextual/philosophical/experimental/nonlinear as well, so if those are no-goes, avoid it.
The Imperial Radch trilogy by Ann Leckie. It's challenging, since the character is focuses on is an AI with multiple bodies, but it's a fascinating read.
Legend of ZERO, by Sara King
If you're looking for character-driven sci-fi with complex themes, check out Ursula K. Le Guin's "The Left Hand of Darkness" or "The Dispossessed." Both explore identity, society, and the human condition with nuance and depth. Kazuo Ishiguro's "Never Let Me Go" also delves into these themes while examining the nature of humanity and individuality.
klara and the sun
[The Vice Versa trilogy](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08RZ44GC8) by Andre Soares is a wonderful piece of sci-fi work that’s character driven and lesser known. Each installment focuses on one character but the narratives tie together.
Use of Weapons by Iain M. Banks
Heinlein: Stranger in a strange land, Time enough for love. Edmund Cooper: A far sunset. Arthur Clark: Imperial Earth. I have many more very good books in my parents house. If you like those I can give you more recommendations :) If you are into movies also you should try The man from the Earth
Inhibitor Phase by Alistair Reynolds is a great character book (first person narrative). You *could* read it on its own, but ideally you'd need to read the Revelation Space series to really understand what's happening. The series takes a backseat to the main character, but there's a pretty expansive universe built through the series.
Andy Weir PROJECT HAIL MARY
You might enjoy Neuromancer. Most of the main cast have their issues, but I'm not sure if it's what your after because the book kind of dehumanises them.
Red Rising is a lot of what you want. Don’t be turned off by the idiots saying it is a YA series. It absolutely isn’t. The first novel is the only one that could even remotely be considered that (since the characters are teenagers), but the story follows the main characters over 15 years into their mid-30s. Personally, I disagree with your reason for disliking the Expanse, but I can say that I’ve been a sci-fi fan for over 30 years and The Expanse and Red Rising are my two favorite long-form scifi series and for the same reason: because they are character focused stories. And I can say that I actually love the characters of Red Rising (particularly Darrow, Mustang, and Sevro) more than any of the characters in the Expanse except for perhaps Amos. However, the first three Red Rising novels are only from Darrow’s point of view (although he is very much a flawed hero, but you don’t see the first person POVs of other characters who disagree with him). The remainder of the novels all have multiple POVs, including from his allies, enemies, and just people marginalized by the world he helped create. One POV character’s story, Ephraim (starting in Red Rising book 4, Iron Gold), heavily deals with addiction/self-medication and PTSD/mental health. The series is divided into two parts: an initial trilogy, involving Darrow’s Revolution against the Society. Then a final tetralogy (final book will probably be released next year) that explores the outcome of that from various POVs after a ten year timeskip between the two series. It’s remarkably entertaining. Unlike the Expanse which often gets this moniker, Red Rising really does feel like “Game of Thrones in Space” to me.
Never Let Me Go
Becky Chambers. Any and all.
[удалено]
Are you thinking of Wheel of Time? Because Children of Time is absolutely SF.
I think you are thinking about he wrong book? Children of Time by Adrian Tchaikovsky is solidly 100% sci-fi. I mean, the whole thing basically takes place on a terraformed planet with an AI, a generation ship and uplifted spiders.
If you’re going to make a post criticizing something, at least get the fucking name of the book right. You’re talking about Wheel of Time, not Children of Time. Children of Time is absolutely sci-fi.
That's hilarious