7 ms·

Gibson is an enigma for me and I don't necessarily look forward to his return to sci-fi. He's a good writer and Neuromancer is definitely a groundbreaking work,

Gibson is an enigma for me and I don't necessarily look forward to his return to sci-fi. He's a good writer and Neuromancer is definitely a groundbreaking work, but it doesn't age well. It reads like someone read a book about hacking and then made a story of it. Gibson himself has admitted to being a bit of technophobe and it shows in his work that he really doesn't understand computer technology. It warrants comparison to Jules Verne. It wouldn't be so bad if technology wasn't so central to his 80s and 90s sci-fi titles. I feel like I'm in the minority here, but I like Gibson's worlds, characters and stories, I just can't abide the details.

bradbeattie 12y ago
I understand your concern about Necromancer, but Gibson's essay In The Visegrips of Dr Satan provides some insights into his desire for a modern mythology, which is likely more what he was aiming for: http://www.williamgibsonbooks.com/archive/2003_01_28_archive.asp http://www.williamgibsonbooks.com/archive/2003_01_28_archive...
- stinkytaco 12y ago
  I've read that and believe I understand what he's trying to accomplish, but I'm just saying the execution takes me out of it somewhat. Much like I read Greek myths (or Jules Verne, for that matter) and wonder sometimes how anyone could believe them (though I also understand that the word "belief" is perhaps not the right word when talking about the mindset of ancient Greeks when relating to their mythology), I read Gibson and just think: "This is how my Grandmother thinks about computers". I feel the world he creates would be better suited for straight up far future sci-fi where "believability" is couched in pseudo-technical terms we all know are fake but are able to accept within the context of the story or with less focus on the explicit technologies involved and more on how the characters interact in a world where this technology is simply a given. Part of it is likely his maturity as a writer and the time he inhabited during Neuromancer, Count Zero and Mona Lisa Overdrive. A time where, much like Verne, the technology was both new and alien, yet it was becoming increasingly clear it was important and soon to be omnipresent. A world where literature dealing with this technology was necessary, but where it was still mysterious enough to have creative license. It's not bad, but it doesn't age well.
  - jacquesm 12y ago
    We really disagree on this one. I think it ages superbly well. You just have to get out of the mode that sees SF as predictive. If you see SF as a prophesy then all SF older than a few years is going to age badly. The reason for that is that the 'science' part is outdated the moment the ink is dry, good SF uses the state-of-the-art in science, changes one thing and then extrapolates from there. Lots of Gibson's work is predicated on AI and from that point of view the major element that could cause it to age badly hasn't happened or hasn't quite happened in the way that he foresaw. So it still has some aging to do in that respect and then the remaining item (the story) still holds but you're going to have to view it relative to the state of the art of the time that it was written. Otherwise you end up feeling that Da Vinci's writings and drawings have aged badly because helicopters don't use 'airscrews' the way he depicted them. http://www.scienceandinventions.com/files/2011/04/da-vinci.jpg http://www.scienceandinventions.com/files/2011/04/da-vinci.j... When the amazing thing is that he foresaw a vertical ascent airborne vehicle in the first place. So it's not so much about the details, in your words 'how your grandmother things about computers', but how society would respond if computers had the capabilities that Gibson endows them with. That changes the picture quite a bit.
    - stinkytaco 12y ago
      Where Da Vinci succeeds is where Gibson fails, I think. Da Vinci is so fantastical that you can accept it for the stylized ideas they are. Gibson, on the other hand, is close enough to reality that it seems off. I mean, there's fax machines in his world. It's not like Da Vinci where mechanical flying machines are so far off from reality that you can suspend disbelief, it's more like Verne where it's close enough to reality to make it feel silly now. After all, there are still submarines, just not like Verne's. Just like there's an Internet, but not Gibson's Internet.
      - jacquesm 12y ago
        The whole appeal of the cyberpunk genre is that weird mix of archaic and modern. Steam, computers, POTS (and faxes) as well as space residences, AI and human-AI relationships all in one mash up. That's what defines the genre!
aniro 12y ago
The thing you find irritating is actually a strength of his writing, not a fault. Imagine if he had been more particular about the tech behind VR, how poorly would the writing have aged then? Instead he chose a set of workable metaphors to encapsulate the ideas and ran with it. In the end succeeded in transmitting those ideas so thoroughly that (arguably) the entire first round of VR (and thus the nascent 2nd) was largely inspired by his writing.
- johnchristopher 12y ago
  I disagree. In the sprawl trilogy, the big black character that gives the hero his mission he's using a fax machine embedded in the seat of the cab where they first met. A fax machine. That spit out paper with ink on it. It was already old tech and weird when I first read the book 4 years after the published date. In Dune, they are reading texts on ridulian crystal. When I read it in the 90's I thought "must be some kind of indestructible paper". Herbert didn't describe the item which incidentally allowed the 2000's SciFi series to show ridulian crystal as some kind of a very thin and intelligent screen reader. Ridulian crystal will never age but FAX machine, e-mail[0], etc will and they will pull you out of that suspension of disbelief state. With that said, and for what it's worth, I prefer Gibson to Herbert and I dislike made-up name such as `ridulian system`. [0] But let's not get into __that__ debate.
  - aniro 12y ago
    I think Herbert is much better at this than Gibson. Gibson also uses proper names for everyday objects that severely date the material (ie: Porsche sunglasses ), which has the same effect. I guess we should be glad that he didn't give his characters Wireless Apple Newton's for all their communication and research and entertainment. ;)
    - johnchristopher 12y ago
      Personally I prefer Gibson's stories and writing style to Herbert but that's another story.
  - 12y ago
Blackthorn 12y ago
It might not age well but that has less to do with his lack of technical knowledge and more to do with the genre of cyberpunk as a whole. Compare Snow Crash, another foundational cyberpunk work which was written by someone who did have a lot of technical knowledge -- you read it today and it will feel a little ridiculous. Cyberpunk is essentially retro-futurism now. That's an inherent problem in something that extrapolates to the very near future. I think the only thing I've seen that comes close and ages well is Serial Experiments Lain, and that's more of a post-cyberpunk work.
- stinkytaco 12y ago
  But you seem to be defining the genre by its failures (for lack of a better term). I agree that Snow Crash seems ridiculous now, though I would argue that's less about the tech and more about the weird action/tech combo he tries to pull off (think Daemon). Is it possible for there to be cyberpunk that doesn't seem dated? I doubt a lot of people would now argue that Jane Austen seems dated.
  - Blackthorn 12y ago
    I just don't think it's possible. The genre is rooted in what we as humans believed the scary future would look like. The real scary future just wasn't what we thought.
daniel-cussen 12y ago
> Gibson himself has admitted to being a bit of technophobe and it shows in his work that he really doesn't understand computer technology. It warrants comparison to Jules Verne. From what I gather Jules Verne was actually pretty on top of the technology at the time. His books were well researched.
theoh 12y ago
It's not really about what he knew about actual technology, though. Gibson has said "And somehow I knew that the notional space behind all of the computer screens would be one single universe." It has a lot more to do with the idea of an interior and a collective unconscious, that kind of psychological stuff, rather than projecting what technology will do. With VR actually becoming practical, it feels to me that the idea of spending time in a private one-user VR experience will rapidly become something socially frowned upon and perceived as solipsistic.

bradbeattie 12y ago

I understand your concern about Necromancer, but Gibson's essay In The Visegrips of Dr Satan provides some insights into his desire for a modern mythology, which is likely more what he was aiming for: http://www.williamgibsonbooks.com/archive/2003_01_28_archive.asp http://www.williamgibsonbooks.com/archive/2003_01_28_archive...

stinkytaco 12y ago
I've read that and believe I understand what he's trying to accomplish, but I'm just saying the execution takes me out of it somewhat. Much like I read Greek myths (or Jules Verne, for that matter) and wonder sometimes how anyone could believe them (though I also understand that the word "belief" is perhaps not the right word when talking about the mindset of ancient Greeks when relating to their mythology), I read Gibson and just think: "This is how my Grandmother thinks about computers". I feel the world he creates would be better suited for straight up far future sci-fi where "believability" is couched in pseudo-technical terms we all know are fake but are able to accept within the context of the story or with less focus on the explicit technologies involved and more on how the characters interact in a world where this technology is simply a given. Part of it is likely his maturity as a writer and the time he inhabited during Neuromancer, Count Zero and Mona Lisa Overdrive. A time where, much like Verne, the technology was both new and alien, yet it was becoming increasingly clear it was important and soon to be omnipresent. A world where literature dealing with this technology was necessary, but where it was still mysterious enough to have creative license. It's not bad, but it doesn't age well.
- jacquesm 12y ago
  We really disagree on this one. I think it ages superbly well. You just have to get out of the mode that sees SF as predictive. If you see SF as a prophesy then all SF older than a few years is going to age badly. The reason for that is that the 'science' part is outdated the moment the ink is dry, good SF uses the state-of-the-art in science, changes one thing and then extrapolates from there. Lots of Gibson's work is predicated on AI and from that point of view the major element that could cause it to age badly hasn't happened or hasn't quite happened in the way that he foresaw. So it still has some aging to do in that respect and then the remaining item (the story) still holds but you're going to have to view it relative to the state of the art of the time that it was written. Otherwise you end up feeling that Da Vinci's writings and drawings have aged badly because helicopters don't use 'airscrews' the way he depicted them. http://www.scienceandinventions.com/files/2011/04/da-vinci.jpg http://www.scienceandinventions.com/files/2011/04/da-vinci.j... When the amazing thing is that he foresaw a vertical ascent airborne vehicle in the first place. So it's not so much about the details, in your words 'how your grandmother things about computers', but how society would respond if computers had the capabilities that Gibson endows them with. That changes the picture quite a bit.
  - stinkytaco 12y ago
    Where Da Vinci succeeds is where Gibson fails, I think. Da Vinci is so fantastical that you can accept it for the stylized ideas they are. Gibson, on the other hand, is close enough to reality that it seems off. I mean, there's fax machines in his world. It's not like Da Vinci where mechanical flying machines are so far off from reality that you can suspend disbelief, it's more like Verne where it's close enough to reality to make it feel silly now. After all, there are still submarines, just not like Verne's. Just like there's an Internet, but not Gibson's Internet.
    - jacquesm 12y ago
      The whole appeal of the cyberpunk genre is that weird mix of archaic and modern. Steam, computers, POTS (and faxes) as well as space residences, AI and human-AI relationships all in one mash up. That's what defines the genre!

aniro 12y ago

The thing you find irritating is actually a strength of his writing, not a fault. Imagine if he had been more particular about the tech behind VR, how poorly would the writing have aged then? Instead he chose a set of workable metaphors to encapsulate the ideas and ran with it. In the end succeeded in transmitting those ideas so thoroughly that (arguably) the entire first round of VR (and thus the nascent 2nd) was largely inspired by his writing.

johnchristopher 12y ago
I disagree. In the sprawl trilogy, the big black character that gives the hero his mission he's using a fax machine embedded in the seat of the cab where they first met. A fax machine. That spit out paper with ink on it. It was already old tech and weird when I first read the book 4 years after the published date. In Dune, they are reading texts on ridulian crystal. When I read it in the 90's I thought "must be some kind of indestructible paper". Herbert didn't describe the item which incidentally allowed the 2000's SciFi series to show ridulian crystal as some kind of a very thin and intelligent screen reader. Ridulian crystal will never age but FAX machine, e-mail[0], etc will and they will pull you out of that suspension of disbelief state. With that said, and for what it's worth, I prefer Gibson to Herbert and I dislike made-up name such as `ridulian system`. [0] But let's not get into __that__ debate.
- aniro 12y ago
  I think Herbert is much better at this than Gibson. Gibson also uses proper names for everyday objects that severely date the material (ie: Porsche sunglasses ), which has the same effect. I guess we should be glad that he didn't give his characters Wireless Apple Newton's for all their communication and research and entertainment. ;)
  - johnchristopher 12y ago
    Personally I prefer Gibson's stories and writing style to Herbert but that's another story.
- 12y ago

Blackthorn 12y ago

It might not age well but that has less to do with his lack of technical knowledge and more to do with the genre of cyberpunk as a whole. Compare Snow Crash, another foundational cyberpunk work which was written by someone who did have a lot of technical knowledge -- you read it today and it will feel a little ridiculous. Cyberpunk is essentially retro-futurism now. That's an inherent problem in something that extrapolates to the very near future. I think the only thing I've seen that comes close and ages well is Serial Experiments Lain, and that's more of a post-cyberpunk work.

stinkytaco 12y ago
But you seem to be defining the genre by its failures (for lack of a better term). I agree that Snow Crash seems ridiculous now, though I would argue that's less about the tech and more about the weird action/tech combo he tries to pull off (think Daemon). Is it possible for there to be cyberpunk that doesn't seem dated? I doubt a lot of people would now argue that Jane Austen seems dated.
- Blackthorn 12y ago
  I just don't think it's possible. The genre is rooted in what we as humans believed the scary future would look like. The real scary future just wasn't what we thought.

daniel-cussen 12y ago

> Gibson himself has admitted to being a bit of technophobe and it shows in his work that he really doesn't understand computer technology. It warrants comparison to Jules Verne. From what I gather Jules Verne was actually pretty on top of the technology at the time. His books were well researched.

theoh 12y ago

It's not really about what he knew about actual technology, though. Gibson has said "And somehow I knew that the notional space behind all of the computer screens would be one single universe." It has a lot more to do with the idea of an interior and a collective unconscious, that kind of psychological stuff, rather than projecting what technology will do. With VR actually becoming practical, it feels to me that the idea of spending time in a private one-user VR experience will rapidly become something socially frowned upon and perceived as solipsistic.