3 ms·

'It's not really a good book' Based on what? Thematic Motif? Lexicon and Grammar? Characterization? Use of Imagery and Metaphor? Dialogue? Plot? Worlbuilding?

'It's not really a good book' Based on what? Thematic Motif? Lexicon and Grammar? Characterization? Use of Imagery and Metaphor? Dialogue? Plot? Worlbuilding? By any objective critique Gibson is a compelling and articulate writer, with a sharp ear for one-liners and a fantastic cynical descriptive prowess. Neuromancer fulfills most of what I'd consider to be the criteria of a 'good' book. No need to condemn one of the defining pieces of 20th Century fin-de-siecle and postmodern literature, not to mention the archetype of the cyberpunk genre, to the sci-fi ghetto out of genre-cringe.

eru 2y ago
Why are you hallucinating 'genre-cringe'? The characters aren't exactly well developed, there's lots of pretty silly gratuitous sex scenes, etc. It's been about twenty years now since I've read the book; and, sorry, I have no desire to re-read the thing to give a more in-depth review. You can find critical reviews online easy enough. To be honest, the genre is the one thing that kept me going. It's ok, if you like Mr Gibson's writing. Tastes differ. No need to feel personally attacked. Not everyone is out to get 'your' genre.
- piltdownman 2y ago
  Lol, far from 'hallucinating', I am inferring your position by your regression to the common tropes used to diminish the genre - e.g. 'influential but not literature', 'unexplained techno-babble'. I even specified objective over subjective reasoning to avoid the whole goalpost shift of it being a matter of 'taste', and your best retort was to call me triggered and tell me to DYOR? Not the level of discourse I'd expect from HN tbh. I'm sorry I engaged.
  - eru 2y ago
    Huh? You are hallucinating even more now, it seems. Who said it's not 'literature'? I just said it's not good, but I never claimed it ain't literature. And I didn't complain about the unexplained techno-babble, that's actually part of its charm. (You seem to be under the impression that I dislike 'genre-fiction', and that I am a 'literary snob' or something? Far from it! Btw, just because we disagree with literary snobs, doesn't mean that all their critiques are always all wrong. To give a crass analogy: did you know that the Nazis passed some of the first animal protection laws and were some of the first administrations to take the health risks of smoking serious? We can see those two things as good, without agreeing with the National Socialists in general. I don't think your average 'literary fiction' is any better than Neuromancer, either.) > I even specified objective over subjective reasoning to avoid the whole goalpost shift of it being a matter of 'taste', and your best retort was to call me triggered and tell me to DYOR? What's DYOR? Where do you see any trigger? I'm not sure how you can measure literature 'objectively'. You suggested more subjective criteria, like judging the 'Thematic Motif'. (Subjective criteria are fine by me!) It's fine for you to like Neuromancer.
- relaxing 2y ago
  Pretty sure there’s only one sex scene in the whole book, although it is fairly gratuitous. That sort of fan service to be expected in the genre. Gibson these days agrees with your assessment of the characters. If those are your primary criteria for a novel maybe Austen is more your speed.
  - eru 2y ago
    I do happen to like Jane Austen's style. I wish she had written more science fiction. I like most of what Neal Stephenson writes (to varying degrees), and Ian M Banks and some of Charles Stross's works are also great. Of course, everyone like Terry Pratchett, too, and that includes me.

eru 2y ago

Why are you hallucinating 'genre-cringe'? The characters aren't exactly well developed, there's lots of pretty silly gratuitous sex scenes, etc. It's been about twenty years now since I've read the book; and, sorry, I have no desire to re-read the thing to give a more in-depth review. You can find critical reviews online easy enough. To be honest, the genre is the one thing that kept me going. It's ok, if you like Mr Gibson's writing. Tastes differ. No need to feel personally attacked. Not everyone is out to get 'your' genre.

piltdownman 2y ago
Lol, far from 'hallucinating', I am inferring your position by your regression to the common tropes used to diminish the genre - e.g. 'influential but not literature', 'unexplained techno-babble'. I even specified objective over subjective reasoning to avoid the whole goalpost shift of it being a matter of 'taste', and your best retort was to call me triggered and tell me to DYOR? Not the level of discourse I'd expect from HN tbh. I'm sorry I engaged.
- eru 2y ago
  Huh? You are hallucinating even more now, it seems. Who said it's not 'literature'? I just said it's not good, but I never claimed it ain't literature. And I didn't complain about the unexplained techno-babble, that's actually part of its charm. (You seem to be under the impression that I dislike 'genre-fiction', and that I am a 'literary snob' or something? Far from it! Btw, just because we disagree with literary snobs, doesn't mean that all their critiques are always all wrong. To give a crass analogy: did you know that the Nazis passed some of the first animal protection laws and were some of the first administrations to take the health risks of smoking serious? We can see those two things as good, without agreeing with the National Socialists in general. I don't think your average 'literary fiction' is any better than Neuromancer, either.) > I even specified objective over subjective reasoning to avoid the whole goalpost shift of it being a matter of 'taste', and your best retort was to call me triggered and tell me to DYOR? What's DYOR? Where do you see any trigger? I'm not sure how you can measure literature 'objectively'. You suggested more subjective criteria, like judging the 'Thematic Motif'. (Subjective criteria are fine by me!) It's fine for you to like Neuromancer.
relaxing 2y ago
Pretty sure there’s only one sex scene in the whole book, although it is fairly gratuitous. That sort of fan service to be expected in the genre. Gibson these days agrees with your assessment of the characters. If those are your primary criteria for a novel maybe Austen is more your speed.
- eru 2y ago
  I do happen to like Jane Austen's style. I wish she had written more science fiction. I like most of what Neal Stephenson writes (to varying degrees), and Ian M Banks and some of Charles Stross's works are also great. Of course, everyone like Terry Pratchett, too, and that includes me.