I got Neuromancer out of the library yesterday. So far I've read the first chapter. Looking at the page count, it seems awfully far into the book for the story to be just starting.

I've heard the prose praised (there's a phrase I would never say out loud) for being very impactful and high energy. And that it is. I'm just concerned that if it is nothing but that it will detract from the energy of the book. I understand the intent of trying to make the whole world a frenzied madhouse from start to finish. But even something like Transmetropolitan still allows quite moments.

Anyway... this is all fairly meaningless, since it's just first impressions and has little to do with how I'll probably view the book after completion. Just ramblin'.

I had to read Neuromancer a few times before I actually got it...

He's quite good at description... I'm just hoping that the things he describes become more relevant as I get further in.

What do you mean it's long into the book for the story to just have gotten started?

It's chapter one, yeah?

You've been corrupted by the television, says I.

Neuromancer is much quicker paced than, say, American Gods is. That book meandered quite a book, which was good, considering its On the Road, in search of the American ideal, structure.

Transmetrolpolitan, I don't remember any quiet moments in that, just a lot of over-the-top satire and a thin veneer of meaning.

I never got past book 4 or 5.

quote:

Originally posted by ContritePuppy:
You've been corrupted by the television, says I.

Have I? Impressive. I didn't know it had that kind of power to corrupt me when I haven't watched it in three years...

Anyway.

1) I'm not talking about chapter numbers. I'm talking about the fact that it's more than a tenth of the way through the book and he's done nothing but describe the world. Even the character interactions are describing the nature of the world more than the nature of the characters themselves.

The fact is that he's very good at that. He is fleshing out his universe quite well. It's just difficult to fit the description of a world AND a good story into a book that short. I don't doubt his ability to do that. But I haven't seen it yet.

Yeah, it's clearly a lot more BAM BAM BAM than AG. AG is what it is. I think it succeeds remarkably at what it intends, which is a completely different thing than this.

As for Transmet... you dropped out right before the story started. Whether you would have liked the story, I couldn't say. And certainly it is the fault of the story that it didn't keep you interested long enough to get you to where the plot started getting involved. But about book 5 or 6 was where it turned from "I AM WARREN ELLIS AND I WILL RANT ABOUT SHIT THAT I DON'T LIKE" to a genuine cohesive narrative (which managed rather impressively to tie in the plots of the prior rants... I find that books 2-4 are much better when read the second time, against the backdrop of knowledge of what is to come).

It's because of things like that that I will stick with a novel even though the pacing of the first tenth of it concerns me. Am I corrupted by TV? I don't think so. I think it's much more likely that my judgment is corrupted by the fact that I haven't finished the book, and am just making observations on impressions as I have them, rather than waiting until the end.

Like I said... if the book were to continue in the way it's going, I don't think I would like it. In fact, I think very few people would like it. It's because of that belief, combined with the fact that clearly many people do like it, that I assume it does not continue in the same manner, and will likely turn into something I enjoy a great deal. To believe that I had a fully formed opinion would be silly. About as silly as saying "I don't remember that" in a story and then saying you only read half of it.

One final note, per your mention of American Gods' meandering quality... my concern about Neuromancer isn't really that it is slow getting started. My main issue was that it is non-stop high energy, and I can't really picture it ratcheting up at all for a climax, unless it at some point pulls the throttle back a bit. So far there's been no ebb, only flow.

And on that note, I'm off to read the rest of the novel. I'll be back when I have a real opinion.

Is Gaiman your favorite author?

Discounting comics for a moment, my favorite novelist is in flux, but is generally somewhere in the Gaiman/Vonnegut/GRRM triad these days.

As I recall, Neuromancer does tend to be pretty high energy all the way through, although it does build towards a climax. I didn't think the rhythm was bad, though. There certainly is a rhythm, the pieces of action are separated by more sedate sections, but sedate may be a relative thing.

Another thing about Neuromancer is that it was, basically, introducing a new genre. The world needed explaining (although there is relatively little info-dumping, thankfully) for a new audience. I don't know if WG was deliberately thinking about that, or if it was just unconscious, but it seemed to me to have an effect on the novel one way or another.

Yeah, he definitely does a great job of describing the world through experience rather than exposition.

I'm about a third of the way through now, and it's grown on me a lot. I don't think that the high energy style works as well when thinks aren't really moving forward, but now that things are steadily rolling forward story-wise, it meshes a lot more smoothly.

The first chapter is the only bit I really like about Neuromancer!

Read it again for the first time!

quote:

Originally posted by colin:
Another thing about Neuromancer is that it was, basically, introducing a new genre. The world needed explaining (although there is relatively little info-dumping, thankfully) for a new audience. I don't know if WG was deliberately thinking about that, or if it was just unconscious, but it seemed to me to have an effect on the novel one way or another.

I think, sometimes, it's hard to come at a work that is basically hyped as a classic (as Neuromancer, rightly or wrongly, is). From what I can tell about the development of the Cyberpunk aesthetic in the early 80s (through Sterling's "Cheap Truth" 'zine, etc.) is that the "info dump" was reviled. All of the good examples of cyberpunk lit. (and this is a very wide-ranging genre, being more a group of authors overhauling SF than a set of cliches that role-playing games and lesser imitators have reduced cyberpunk to) basically throw you in the deep end. Throwaway lines about relevant history without explanation, etc.

Here's the thing: Neuromancer is a first novel, born, according to Gibson, out of terror and desperation, and fear of boring the reader. Once he gets over that, he manages to hone his style and sense of pacing quite a bit over subsequent novels, to the point that I think Pattern Recognition and Spook Country are probably his best balanced, structurally.

Yeah, I think that's true of anything that sets an initial standard for a genre and is then built upon. 1) It doesn't catch you by surprise in the same way it would if the idea were fresh, and 2) people (including the same author) have generally learned from that first try and done better with later attempts.

Did distaste for the info-dump really come in with Cyberpunk? I had the impression that it was regarded as bad form across SF (if not literature) in general, and since earlier than the 80s. RAH and friends may have gotten away with it (and the ever-popular "as you know Bob" dialogs), but even then, was it regarded as OK?

I do agree that Cyberpunk may have been more enthusiastic about throwing the reader in at the deep end than other sub-genres. I suspect this may have had to do with creating a sense of future shock and information overload, as well as WG's fear of boring the reader mentioned above (and subsequent adoption of the style).

Blah blah blah. Not like I actually know anything about it.

i don't think gibson was ever entirely satisfied with neuromancer as a novel either. not only was it a new genre, it was his first attempt at writing a novel. if i recall correctly, in london he indicated it was actually count zero where he felt he had actually managed to write a novel, having learnt from neuro.

Offhand I'd say that posting about story after finishing the first chapter to be a bit like talking about fucking when you just got her bra off. All the same though welcome and when you get to the bridge trilogy I think you will see that he got a lot better at describing setting, working it into the storyline rather than falling into the sci-fi crutch of Asimovian over-description.

'Tis true. I just like to get impressions down as I have them.

You managed to post some 130 posts without having read any of WG books? Amazing!

I did indeed. Came over in the NGBer refugee invasion. Thought I'd stick around a bit.

quote:

Originally posted by editengine:
Offhand I'd say that posting about story after finishing the first chapter to be a bit like talking about fucking when you just got her bra off. All the same though welcome and when you get to the bridge trilogy I think you will see that he got a lot better at describing setting, working it into the storyline rather than falling into the sci-fi crutch of Asimovian over-description.

Yeah, you can definitely see that ability come through in the beginning... he did a good job of explaining the world as action occurred, but it still felt so much like an introduction. Which it was, certainly. But... some part of me was feeling like if he was going to jump into the prose with that kind of energy the plot should be moving forward just as much.

Anyway... finished now. Definitely enjoyable. I like the dynamic shown in the balance between Wintermute and Neuromancer, even though you never really see them together, for obvious reasons. I'm also glad that he didn't fall back on any sort of happy ending stereotypes. Everyone's life falls back to the same place that it was. Not necessarily a bad thing... Case is back to working, Molly returns to her world. Some authors would be silly enough to have them live happily ever after, but that could never work. It's not her style.

Overall, the book seems largely an exercise breaking stereotypes, breaking sci-fi molds. But he does it well, and manages to keep up an engaging story through the course of it. It would have been pretty easy for him to slip and have it fall into a giant pile of confusing. But that didn't happen. I'm sure if I go back and read it again it will make even more sense, fall together more, but that's true of most novels. I didn't feel that I missed anything fundamental.

Anyway. Just jabbering at this point. Good book. Looking forward to reading his later stuff. What should be next? Or should I just roll through them all chronologically?