3 ms·

I read this for the first time last year. Absolutely fantastic book, apart from half the plot rests on mobile phones not existing. Which just comes across as bi

I read this for the first time last year. Absolutely fantastic book, apart from half the plot rests on mobile phones not existing. Which just comes across as bizarre now, looking back. Then again I'm reading the foundation series at the moment, and major plot points rest on how rediculously crap CPU power is and how travel is near instaneous, but somehow communication isn't. Sci-fi doesn't age well, alas. Though neuromancer is better than a lot and still well worth a read.

cstross 12y ago
Mobile phones as we know them today didn't exist when Gibson was writing Neuromancer. Pub date in 1984 means the MS was handed in in mid-1983 and he was writing it 1981-82 (on a manual typewriter: the royalties from Neuromancer bought him his first computer, an Apple IIc). While the idea of cellular comms dates to the 1950s (if not earlier), and some limited analog cellular service existed in some parts of the world (notably the Nordic countries from 1981), the UK didn't get analog cell service until roughly 1985; digital (over 2G GSM) didn't come along until roughly 1991. In Canada, cellphone service wouldn't have started until around the time the book was published, if not later. And, uninformed rumor to the contrary, SF isn't actually about prophesying the future.
- keithpeter 12y ago
  Charlie, I accept the point entirely. BUT it is interesting that a lot of people missed the possibility of personal technology in their imagining of the future (2001, Floyd using a video phone to call the kids, Gibson, Asimov et al)
  - angersock 12y ago
    Heinlen's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress and Friday especially got quite a lot right.
  - incision 12y ago
    >'BUT it is interesting that a lot of people missed the possibility of personal technology in their imagining of the future (2001, Floyd using a video phone to call the kids, Gibson, Asimov et al)' Yeah. Personally, I disagree with the notion that science fiction authors are or should mean to be making predictions with their writing. Basically, it doesn't make sense to say someone 'missed' if they weren't necessarily aiming in the first place. Though, it's probably even more common to credit an author as prescient when he 'hits' so I guess it's a wash.
TillE 12y ago
I don't think cyberpunk was ever really intended to be proper science fiction. It's more of a fantasy universe extrapolated from 1980s tech. Which is probably why it remains a popular setting today without huge changes - see for example the Netrunner card game. There was even quite a lot of vocal disappointment from fans when wireless networking got added to the fourth edition of Shadowrun. Cyberpunk works quite well as a self-consistent setting, regardless of modern technology.
jfb 12y ago
Gibson has always been amazingly prescient; so much so that it seems almost churlish to dwell on what he missed, when the breadth of what he observed is so astonishing. It's like he pulled us into the future, like a strongman pulling a battleship, overcoming the inertia with sheer force of aesthetics, and if we've veered off the precise course, well, yeah, that's human events. I think it's also important to always remember that Gibson's books are well written; the ideas shine through because of the clarity and precision of the language.

cstross 12y ago

Mobile phones as we know them today didn't exist when Gibson was writing Neuromancer. Pub date in 1984 means the MS was handed in in mid-1983 and he was writing it 1981-82 (on a manual typewriter: the royalties from Neuromancer bought him his first computer, an Apple IIc). While the idea of cellular comms dates to the 1950s (if not earlier), and some limited analog cellular service existed in some parts of the world (notably the Nordic countries from 1981), the UK didn't get analog cell service until roughly 1985; digital (over 2G GSM) didn't come along until roughly 1991. In Canada, cellphone service wouldn't have started until around the time the book was published, if not later. And, uninformed rumor to the contrary, SF isn't actually about prophesying the future.

keithpeter 12y ago
Charlie, I accept the point entirely. BUT it is interesting that a lot of people missed the possibility of personal technology in their imagining of the future (2001, Floyd using a video phone to call the kids, Gibson, Asimov et al)
- angersock 12y ago
  Heinlen's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress and Friday especially got quite a lot right.
- incision 12y ago
  >'BUT it is interesting that a lot of people missed the possibility of personal technology in their imagining of the future (2001, Floyd using a video phone to call the kids, Gibson, Asimov et al)' Yeah. Personally, I disagree with the notion that science fiction authors are or should mean to be making predictions with their writing. Basically, it doesn't make sense to say someone 'missed' if they weren't necessarily aiming in the first place. Though, it's probably even more common to credit an author as prescient when he 'hits' so I guess it's a wash.

TillE 12y ago

I don't think cyberpunk was ever really intended to be proper science fiction. It's more of a fantasy universe extrapolated from 1980s tech. Which is probably why it remains a popular setting today without huge changes - see for example the Netrunner card game. There was even quite a lot of vocal disappointment from fans when wireless networking got added to the fourth edition of Shadowrun. Cyberpunk works quite well as a self-consistent setting, regardless of modern technology.

jfb 12y ago

Gibson has always been amazingly prescient; so much so that it seems almost churlish to dwell on what he missed, when the breadth of what he observed is so astonishing. It's like he pulled us into the future, like a strongman pulling a battleship, overcoming the inertia with sheer force of aesthetics, and if we've veered off the precise course, well, yeah, that's human events. I think it's also important to always remember that Gibson's books are well written; the ideas shine through because of the clarity and precision of the language.