/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17261878]

Do people seriously think this is good? The plot itself is actually pretty good and if articulated by another writer could be quite good on its own, but he's just so unclear about how certain events unfold (especially the riot they incite near the beginning) and how the technology in the book actually functions. You're left scratching your head wondering what the fuck this guy is trying to describe half the time. Yeah yeah, inb4 filtered. Sure man he's doing the purposely murky bit, except it's just shit. That's all in light of the fact that these characters are absolutely terrible 2-dimensional non-entities that are barely given personalities let alone backstories or motivations. Bro it's a novel with like three major characters and they're all just blank lmfao, HOW DO PEOPLE THINK THIS IS GOOD? Fuckin slog of a read, would not recommend. 4/10

[Anonymous No.17261887]

I'm pretty sure gibson has said he has no idea how computers work

[Anonymous No.17261911]

>>17261887
He keeps doing this bit where he purposely blurs the line the between reality and cyberspace, which just comes out as a clusterfuck because what should be pivotal plot points are covered up with gibberish. Guy was so busy trying to write a novel that references Baudrillard and Derrida that he forgot to write the novel imho

[Anonymous No.17261914]

>>17261878
How a computer works would not really add anything to the novel. Not really sure why you found it difficult to follow.

[Anonymous No.17261918]

Space Jamaicans were my favorite part of Neuromancer, and much better executed than whatever The Matrix tried to do with 'Zion.'

[Anonymous No.17261950]

>>17261914
It actually would because all the most important parts of the book involve the character using it in a way that is really poorly described. I'm not talking about accuracy of how technology works, I'm saying the prose didn't make any sense bc of this

[Anonymous No.17261986]

>>17261950
No clue, i had no issues with it, made sense to me.

[Anonymous No.17261997]

>>17261878
>so unclear about how certain events unfold (especially the riot they incite near the beginning)
lmao americans. most riots are uncertain in those regards, you're just the victim of propaganda.

[Anonymous No.17262281]

Copypasting an old post:
Neuromancer is good for its neo noir or whatever you want to call it approach to its narrative, the characters's shady agendas and their drugfiendish personalities and monologue. The only questionable part is the space rastas, which I didn't mind, but they're like an exotic token anachronistic tribe. I guess its purpose is being independent, for what the party is going to pull. They don't have to make sense though.
Its writing is unironically excellent (which is not as polished in the sequels). It's pure cynicism. If you manage to get into its rhythm, it ends up being hypnotic. Or you could listen to Gibson give his writing the "voice" it's supposed to be read in
>https://youtu.be/5DFSvbkQaD0
It does falter a bit when describing action. It takes a little effort to piece the action together, something anyone with half a brain can do.
For a self-contained seemlingly low stakes plot, it's an incredibly dense aesthetic experience. Any dark corner of its world could hold any number of similar adventures. It even has development for all those midwits who care about the "character development good" meme.
Also fuck retards who read expecting a non "dated" book, hoping for some sort of accurate or realistic future. It's supposed to be fiction.

>>17261878
No idea what's confusing about the riot. I can think of two, one when they raid the Sprawl corporate building to steal the AI, and another when they kidnap the guy who can send hallucinations.
The interfacing is fairly easy to follow. He's either "surfing", and switching to Molly's PoV (which he indicates quite clearly), or he flatlines and has those trippy dreams with the neuromancer AI.
>backstories
Filtered. Most of them get their backstories, like in a typical heist movie. The motivations are obvious. Chase needs to fix his stuff to get back to he loves doing. Molly is after the money. Armitage is just a husk of a man corrupted and manipulated by the AI, Riviera wants drugs, money, probably coopted at some point by the evil corp.
Backstories as awell. Chase's is a given, you also get the Colonel's backstory. For Molly's, you'd need to read the "Johnny Mnemonic" short story in Burning Chrome but it's unimportant since she's the mercenary card.

[Anonymous No.17262283]

You seem trustworthy OP, I removed it from my wish list. Thank you for saving me 12 mooseniggerdollars

[Anonymous No.17262303]

skip this shit, go straight to snowcrash, start with do androids dream, obviously.

[Anonymous No.17262323]

>>17261878
I liked it, reading it through the lens that it's pretty dated (payphones) but it inspired a fun and popular genre

Are there any examples of postmodern sci-fi that are earlier and better? I've read almost all of Dick

[Anonymous No.17262357]

>>17261878

I agree with you OP. I tried reading it as it was a gift for Christmas. I gave up after chapter 5. So much techno gibberish that Gibson constantly flings around. The plot was hard to follow and clearly I'm far too retarded for it, I couldn't work out what was happening in reality and what was happening in cyberspace. Probably have been filtered to be fair, but if I'm not enjoying it, why slog through it?

[Anonymous No.17263197]

>>17261911
Nothing in the novel references Baudrillard and Derrida. Later Gibson might, but not this one. He’s referencing Pynchon, Burroughs, Ballard and hard boiled detective fiction like Hammett.

[Anonymous No.17263210]

>>17261878
The funny thing is when this came out in 1984, millions of people read and understood it. Even high school students. Has literacy dropped so low?

[Anonymous No.17263224]

>>17263197
nigga there's papers relating it baudrillard
>>17263210
sweetie I understand the novel, I'm saying it's shit

[Anonymous No.17263275]

>>17262357
>I couldn't work out what was happening in reality and what was happening in cyberspace
Yeah, that was my main problem reading it. I feel it was a purposeful artistic decision and itdidn't work very well, it was just bad reading. I can see why some like it because of the gritty aesthetic and some people really sperg over AI but it just ain't for me.

[Anonymous No.17263740]

>>17261878
Remember, it was written 35 years ago. It created and defined a new sub-genre.

[Anonymous No.17263798]

i'm a tourist to this board trying to get into reading recently. started with neuromancer and i found it pretty confusing to read desu. felt retarded, like i got filtered hard.

[Anonymous No.17263827]

>>17261878
Loved it but I agree with you. His writing is so convoluted I couldn’t even make out the scene half the time.
SnowCrash is way better

[Anonymous No.17264067]

>>17261878
a lot of that trilogy was ripped off by earlier works particularly don delilo's ratner's game

[Anonymous No.17264140]

>>17261887
I heard he first used a computer years after writing Neuromancer and was pissed off that it was an buzzing, clicking analogue machine rather than some futuristic solid-state drive

anyway, I actually like how shallowly the technology is explained. it makes it seem more like a mundane part of life in the future, just like how we regularly use consumer tech like smart phones or media streaming which would be mindblowing just twenty years ago. besides, elements important to the narrative are thoroughly explained while the stuff you don't need to know about is not, sometimes being fleshed out just enough that you can piece it together from context.

[Anonymous No.17264260]

>>17261878
>You're left scratching your head wondering what the fuck this guy is trying to describe half the time
Use your fucking imagination. The technology doesn't need to be meticulously explained when the whole point is that it's ingrained into every part of life to the point of being mundane and uninteresting.

[Anonymous No.17264267]

>

[Anonymous No.17265516]

read "the gernsback continuum" it's the best thing he wrote and gives a lot of the themes in neuromancer some context. and read pynchon and Faulkner to understand a story doesn't have to be easy to follow

[Anonymous No.17266469]

>>17262281
This. Thank you.

[Anonymous No.17266483]

>>17264267
>1953
>Google
Fake and Gay

[Anonymous No.17267018]

>>17261878
You were literally filtered, I'm afraid. If this is what you got out of neuromancer, you've probably still got a good dozen years before you can catch up to modern texts.

[Anonymous No.17267539]

It's garbage

[Anonymous No.17267605]

>>17261878
I will never understand how anyone could not understand this novel. It was not difficult in the slightest to follow.

[Anonymous No.17267626]

>>17266483
Google is a word, dumb fuck