
in radically different ways, even Ray Bradbury - and who can forget Samuel Delany's
'Triton' - these were real places to visit, really alien and challenging.
And then the people in 'White Mars' seem to be placed there in the ethnically
acceptable mix just as they were in 'Star Trek' - a pretty old scenario in present times. I
also wonder why so many utopian or alternative societies have to be built on deprived or
degraded environments. Even imagined societies I admired immensely, such as Ursula
LeGuin's anarchic society in 'The Dispossessed'. About the only way of avoiding the
difficulties of evolving a society from where we are today, seems to be by setting it vastly
in the future as in H G Wells's 'Time Machine' and W H Hudson's 'A Crystal Age.' To
me, I would be much more impressed to have a new social order develop under my nose
as I read about it, from the base of our current world and mix of societies.
I am also displeased in that an 'alien' influence seems to be required to 'help' people
develop their social skills. Humankind may not be the ideal society we would dream of,
but we have achieved enormously and I have confidence that we can keep pushing
forward, even through the dark times, into a new and better world and by our own
initiative.
In all, I was disappointed in this novel, partly because I have admired so much of Mr
Aldiss's earlier work.
White Mars, or How Flawed Beings Build Utopia, May 22, 2001
Reviewer
:
The discussion of how to build a better society is central to this book, and it is good.
Cut off from Earth by an economic disaster, several thousand Mars colonists are thrown
back on their own resources to sustain themselves. The focus is almost exclusively on the
Mars of the mind-what kind of society can be formed/should be formed in the isolation of
the Martian frontier? The characters endlessly discuss what it means to be human under
these conditions. What institutions are necessary, and which ones can be avoided? How
are we to raise children? How are we to conduct ourselves in a larger society? How are
we to cope with our variegated behaviors when freedom brings us into conflict with one
another? These questions and more are raised and raised again.
I don't agree with many of the answers White Mars seems to provide, and so I was
tempted to give the book three stars. For example, I don't agree that Mars should be set
aside as a scientific preserve. However, I believe the most important thing is that the
questions were asked and various opinions aired. White Mars is a valuable addition to the
debate on Mars and on how human beings interact with our society.
The science is really beside the point, which also tempted me to give White Mars three
stars. The discussion on physics and the quest for meaning at the sub-particle level is
half-developed and never really tied into the main story. There's also the discovery of
native life on Mars, which is more science fantasy than science fiction. The more
mundane science of maintaining a community of several thousand in total isolation on
Mars is completely ignored, which is also a disappointment. As an answer to Kim Stanley
Robinson's Mars trilogy, White Mars falls so short in this department that I can't even say
there was an effort at competition.
At its heart, however, White Mars is a discussion on values and humanity. All other
factors aside, this discussion makes the book worth reading and pondering.
white mars, April 15, 2000
Reviewer