7 ms·

I'm confused - is this complaining about the genre as a whole being less popular? Or just books? I think with one of the most hyped and games of the year being

by parsoj 6y ago

I'm confused - is this complaining about the genre as a whole being less popular? Or just books? I think with one of the most hyped and games of the year being a cyberpunk game (with "Cyberpunk" literally in the name) - its definitely premature to call the genre as a whole "dead" If this article is just lamenting the absence of Cyberpunk books - well surges in popularity in one media can always carry over to others...

keiferski 6y ago
The article isn't about either of those things. It's about the original ideas of cyberpunk (which were rooted in the 80s) being turned into cliches and repeated ad infinitum since and whether a new 2020-era genre is needed.
- whatshisface 6y ago
  >whether a new 2020-era genre is needed. The idea that a new genre could be created because critics concluded that one was "needed" is the daftest and most out-of-touch thing I've ever heard...
  - keiferski 6y ago
    Or, you know, times change, new problems arise, thus needing new solutions...
  - NineStarPoint 6y ago
    Well, generally it’s more like critics pointing out that the niche cyberpunk used to fill is now empty and that something will inevitably come to fill it. Critics definitely don’t have the power to actually create a genre like that, those come from grassroot sources, but a good critic would be able to realize that there’s a literary void that is waiting to be filled.
  - _jal 6y ago
    The idea that a random person on a message board could inspire someone to write software because someone said they needed a tool is the daftest, most out-of-touch thing I've ever read. Oh wait, that has happened multiple times. Granted, a genre is bigger than a tool. But this free-floating hatred for commentators of all stripes literally blinds people to reality. And it isn't some Critic-On-High making pronouncements and waiting for followers to act. It is observational.
    - slothtrop 6y ago
      > The idea that a random person on a message board could inspire someone to write software because someone said they needed a tool is the daftest, most out-of-touch thing I've ever read. A tool already describes a solution to a problem in mind, it's clear cut. If the analogous problem here is "I want new genre fiction", then a) that doesn't describe what's desired, and b) that already exists (qua all the "punk" suffixed derivatives among other things), it's just not as popular, and therefore we can surmise the wrong question is being asked. Stephenson once had a talk where he suggested that sci-fi writers should effectively return to optimistic stories, but he hasn't done that himself. He could literally solve the problem he described. We want what we want, and write what we want to write.
      - dgritsko 6y ago
        I've been re-reading "The Hobbit" recently, and this passage struck me as relevant to your comment. From Chapter 3, "A Short Rest": "Now it is a strange thing, but things that are good to have and days that are good to spend are soon told about, and not much to listen to; while things that are uncomfortable, palpitating, and even gruesome, may make a good tale, and take a deal of telling anyway." During the stay in Rivendell, nothing much interesting happens - so Tolkien doesn't bother with telling us about it. The exciting, interesting stuff is when our heroes are in peril or experiencing great trials and tribulations.
  - dylan604 6y ago
    It happens in music all of the time.
- pnathan 6y ago
  Cyberpunk qua the earliest novels has been increasingly a rather nerdy fantasy future since sometime in the early 2000s. Looking at the "cyberpunk" today, it's a fashion trend in a lot of ways. Futurist rooted in the way technology is today, projected forward 20-40 years, would look very different than cyberpunk.
mcv 6y ago
The headline asks the question and doesn't provide a clear answer. I guess it depends on how you look at it. The genre is definitely not as fresh and new as it was in the 1980s, but that's unavoidable when a genre is over 30 years old. One of the people in the article calls it paint-by-the-numbers Gibson. But someone also mentions that fantasy was huge back then, and that it was all trying to copy Tolkien. Paint-by-the-numbers Tolkien, I guess. I guess every genre starts with a few innovative writers breaking new ground, and then a few decades of copycats, until finally someone gets tired of all that and reinvents the genre again. The big question is whether that's possible with cyberpunk; it's already a pretty specific genre. It's really a reinvention of SciFi. Maybe transhumanism can be seen as a reinvention? Solarpunk maybe? Neither seem to have anywhere near the same impact, though. Maybe they're just riding on the coattails of cyberpunk. Those are clearly still going strong.
- scns 6y ago
  Betteridge's law of headlines is an adage that states: "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no."
- badsectoracula 6y ago
  Cyberpunk can easily be reinvented if writers take their heads out of the 80s. At its core it isn't about people with neon hair shooting lasers out of their eyes to paint fluorescent graffity with Japanese letters, but about trying to imagine all the ways that current technology can affect the human society in the near future and answering the question of 'what can even go wrong?' with 'everything'. If there is anything we have in abundance today is tech that can be horribly abused by those in power.
  - toyg 6y ago
    I think we're getting a bit too liberal with labels. "Trying to imagine all the ways that current technology can affect the human society in the near future and answering the question of 'what can even go wrong?' " is basically just "doing SciFi the way SciFi should be done". There is nothing eminently cyberpunk in the technique. Obviously "SciFi done right" will forever self-reinvent, that's how cyberpunk came to be in the first place; but it has little to do with the health of cyberpunk as a genre. We usually talk of cyberpunk specifically to restrict the argument to a subset of scifi topics and literary aesthetics common to the self-declared cyberpunk artists: the influence of networks, body augmentation, and corporate feudalism (or rejection thereof). A scifi text that does not touch on any of those items, is unlikely to be seen or defined as cyberpunk. So imho a "cyberpunk reinvention" would need to find something fresh to say on those topics. If I were to write a book on reusable rockets, for example, I would be "doing scifi right" (spaceX etc) but not really "doing cyberpunk".

by parsoj 6y ago

keiferski 6y ago

The article isn't about either of those things. It's about the original ideas of cyberpunk (which were rooted in the 80s) being turned into cliches and repeated ad infinitum since and whether a new 2020-era genre is needed.

whatshisface 6y ago
>whether a new 2020-era genre is needed. The idea that a new genre could be created because critics concluded that one was "needed" is the daftest and most out-of-touch thing I've ever heard...
- keiferski 6y ago
  Or, you know, times change, new problems arise, thus needing new solutions...
- NineStarPoint 6y ago
  Well, generally it’s more like critics pointing out that the niche cyberpunk used to fill is now empty and that something will inevitably come to fill it. Critics definitely don’t have the power to actually create a genre like that, those come from grassroot sources, but a good critic would be able to realize that there’s a literary void that is waiting to be filled.
- _jal 6y ago
  The idea that a random person on a message board could inspire someone to write software because someone said they needed a tool is the daftest, most out-of-touch thing I've ever read. Oh wait, that has happened multiple times. Granted, a genre is bigger than a tool. But this free-floating hatred for commentators of all stripes literally blinds people to reality. And it isn't some Critic-On-High making pronouncements and waiting for followers to act. It is observational.
  - slothtrop 6y ago
    > The idea that a random person on a message board could inspire someone to write software because someone said they needed a tool is the daftest, most out-of-touch thing I've ever read. A tool already describes a solution to a problem in mind, it's clear cut. If the analogous problem here is "I want new genre fiction", then a) that doesn't describe what's desired, and b) that already exists (qua all the "punk" suffixed derivatives among other things), it's just not as popular, and therefore we can surmise the wrong question is being asked. Stephenson once had a talk where he suggested that sci-fi writers should effectively return to optimistic stories, but he hasn't done that himself. He could literally solve the problem he described. We want what we want, and write what we want to write.
    - dgritsko 6y ago
      I've been re-reading "The Hobbit" recently, and this passage struck me as relevant to your comment. From Chapter 3, "A Short Rest": "Now it is a strange thing, but things that are good to have and days that are good to spend are soon told about, and not much to listen to; while things that are uncomfortable, palpitating, and even gruesome, may make a good tale, and take a deal of telling anyway." During the stay in Rivendell, nothing much interesting happens - so Tolkien doesn't bother with telling us about it. The exciting, interesting stuff is when our heroes are in peril or experiencing great trials and tribulations.
- dylan604 6y ago
  It happens in music all of the time.
pnathan 6y ago
Cyberpunk qua the earliest novels has been increasingly a rather nerdy fantasy future since sometime in the early 2000s. Looking at the "cyberpunk" today, it's a fashion trend in a lot of ways. Futurist rooted in the way technology is today, projected forward 20-40 years, would look very different than cyberpunk.

mcv 6y ago

The headline asks the question and doesn't provide a clear answer. I guess it depends on how you look at it. The genre is definitely not as fresh and new as it was in the 1980s, but that's unavoidable when a genre is over 30 years old. One of the people in the article calls it paint-by-the-numbers Gibson. But someone also mentions that fantasy was huge back then, and that it was all trying to copy Tolkien. Paint-by-the-numbers Tolkien, I guess. I guess every genre starts with a few innovative writers breaking new ground, and then a few decades of copycats, until finally someone gets tired of all that and reinvents the genre again. The big question is whether that's possible with cyberpunk; it's already a pretty specific genre. It's really a reinvention of SciFi. Maybe transhumanism can be seen as a reinvention? Solarpunk maybe? Neither seem to have anywhere near the same impact, though. Maybe they're just riding on the coattails of cyberpunk. Those are clearly still going strong.

scns 6y ago
Betteridge's law of headlines is an adage that states: "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no."
badsectoracula 6y ago
Cyberpunk can easily be reinvented if writers take their heads out of the 80s. At its core it isn't about people with neon hair shooting lasers out of their eyes to paint fluorescent graffity with Japanese letters, but about trying to imagine all the ways that current technology can affect the human society in the near future and answering the question of 'what can even go wrong?' with 'everything'. If there is anything we have in abundance today is tech that can be horribly abused by those in power.
- toyg 6y ago
  I think we're getting a bit too liberal with labels. "Trying to imagine all the ways that current technology can affect the human society in the near future and answering the question of 'what can even go wrong?' " is basically just "doing SciFi the way SciFi should be done". There is nothing eminently cyberpunk in the technique. Obviously "SciFi done right" will forever self-reinvent, that's how cyberpunk came to be in the first place; but it has little to do with the health of cyberpunk as a genre. We usually talk of cyberpunk specifically to restrict the argument to a subset of scifi topics and literary aesthetics common to the self-declared cyberpunk artists: the influence of networks, body augmentation, and corporate feudalism (or rejection thereof). A scifi text that does not touch on any of those items, is unlikely to be seen or defined as cyberpunk. So imho a "cyberpunk reinvention" would need to find something fresh to say on those topics. If I were to write a book on reusable rockets, for example, I would be "doing scifi right" (spaceX etc) but not really "doing cyberpunk".