The Three-Body Problem
The inspiration for the Netflix series 3 Body Problem!
WINNER OF THE HUGO AWARD FOR BEST NOVEL
Over 1 million copies sold in North America
“A mind-bending epic.”—The New York Times • “War of the Worlds for the 21st century.”—The Wall Street Journal • “Fascinating.”—TIME • “Extraordinary.”—The New Yorker • “Wildly imaginative.”—Barack Obama • “Provocative.”—Slate • “A breakthrough book.”—George R. R. Martin • “Impossible to put down.”—GQ • “Absolutely mind-unfolding.”—NPR • “You should be reading Liu Cixin.”—The Washington Post
The Three-Body Problem is the first novel in the groundbreaking, Hugo Award-winning series from China's most beloved science fiction author, Cixin Liu.
Set against the backdrop of China's Cultural Revolution, a secret military project sends signals into space to establish contact with aliens. An alien civilization on the brink of destruction captures the signal and plans to invade Earth. Meanwhile, on Earth, different camps start forming, planning to either welcome the superior beings and help them take over a world seen as corrupt, or to fight against the invasion. The result is a science fiction masterpiece of enormous scope and vision.
The Three-Body Problem Series
The Three-Body Problem
The Dark Forest
Death's End
Other Books by Cixin Liu
Ball Lightning
Supernova Era
To Hold Up the Sky
The Wandering Earth
A View from the Stars
BUY THE BOOK
Community Reviews
What Bookclubbers are saying about this book
✨ Summarized by Bookclubs AI
Readers say *The Three-Body Problem* impresses with its detailed science, realistic Chinese setting, and exploration of complex ideas like alien civil...
I just couldn't' get into this book. I did manage to finish it, but near the end it was more out of sheer stubbornness. I don't like to spend too much time on reviews that aren't positive. So just a few quick points. (There are probably some spoilers.)
• I picked it up because it was a Hugo Award winner. And now I'm confused.
• I have been focusing on sci fi and fantasy from different voices. I keep coming back to the Octavia Butler quote "There is nothing new under the sun, but there are new suns". And for me this was a new sun.
• In so many other reviews I see comments along the lines of "maybe hard sci fi isn't for me...". I thought I knew what hard sci fi was, but I checked wiki to be sure. Per wikipedia "Hard science fiction is a category of science fiction characterized by concern for scientific accuracy and logic.
...neither term is part of a rigorous taxonomy; instead they are approximate ways of characterizing stories that reviewers and commentators have found useful." Given that definition I was going to make a case that this isn't really hard sci fi. But that's just arguing about categories that have a lot of grey area, and not helpful. So I'm not going there... Also, wikipedia itself lists Three Body Problem as an example of hard sci fi, so there's that. I will say this instead, when the expanse series goes into orbital mechanics and gravity wells and thrust gravity, I love those parts. And right after finishing Three Body Problem I jumped into The Calculating Stars . In the opening chapter there is discussion about how ejecta plumes from a meteor and the differing speeds of light, sound and shock waves. And I was immediately hooked. But in Three Body Problem I didn't get that. The giant computer made from millions of people was interesting - sort of. But the aliens felt magical, more like supernatural creatures than aliens. And the 2 photon and information folding bit felt about as much like real science as a lightsaber, maybe less. The worst for me was the indestructible monofilament wire. I'm not a physicist, but I could see some significant issues with that. And yes, there's the Clarke quote “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” But then just call it magic. Don't try to hide behind hard science and "it's magic" at the same time.
• I liked Da Shi. He was the closest to a rounded character in the book. I probably should have started with this... I need characters and character development, at least to some degree, to enjoy a book. There isn't much of that here.
• The artificial reality game within the book was interesting. But Snowcrash has my heart, and it just wasn't anywhere near that level. (or Ready Player One if you haven't read Snowcrash, and you should)
Overall, it left me feeling unsatisfied. I'm glad I read it. There were some interesting insights into they way science and scientists are viewed in other cultures. That was probably the part I'll remember the longest. But it didn't do anything new, or tell a story that I haven't heard some version of already.
• I picked it up because it was a Hugo Award winner. And now I'm confused.
• I have been focusing on sci fi and fantasy from different voices. I keep coming back to the Octavia Butler quote "There is nothing new under the sun, but there are new suns". And for me this was a new sun.
• In so many other reviews I see comments along the lines of "maybe hard sci fi isn't for me...". I thought I knew what hard sci fi was, but I checked wiki to be sure. Per wikipedia "Hard science fiction is a category of science fiction characterized by concern for scientific accuracy and logic.
...neither term is part of a rigorous taxonomy; instead they are approximate ways of characterizing stories that reviewers and commentators have found useful." Given that definition I was going to make a case that this isn't really hard sci fi. But that's just arguing about categories that have a lot of grey area, and not helpful. So I'm not going there... Also, wikipedia itself lists Three Body Problem as an example of hard sci fi, so there's that. I will say this instead, when the expanse series goes into orbital mechanics and gravity wells and thrust gravity, I love those parts. And right after finishing Three Body Problem I jumped into The Calculating Stars . In the opening chapter there is discussion about how ejecta plumes from a meteor and the differing speeds of light, sound and shock waves. And I was immediately hooked. But in Three Body Problem I didn't get that. The giant computer made from millions of people was interesting - sort of. But the aliens felt magical, more like supernatural creatures than aliens. And the 2 photon and information folding bit felt about as much like real science as a lightsaber, maybe less. The worst for me was the indestructible monofilament wire. I'm not a physicist, but I could see some significant issues with that. And yes, there's the Clarke quote “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” But then just call it magic. Don't try to hide behind hard science and "it's magic" at the same time.
• I liked Da Shi. He was the closest to a rounded character in the book. I probably should have started with this... I need characters and character development, at least to some degree, to enjoy a book. There isn't much of that here.
• The artificial reality game within the book was interesting. But Snowcrash has my heart, and it just wasn't anywhere near that level. (or Ready Player One if you haven't read Snowcrash, and you should)
Overall, it left me feeling unsatisfied. I'm glad I read it. There were some interesting insights into they way science and scientists are viewed in other cultures. That was probably the part I'll remember the longest. But it didn't do anything new, or tell a story that I haven't heard some version of already.
See why thousands of readers are using Bookclubs to stay connected.