Is sadness and melancholy THE defining feature of WG's writing? Reading posts on this site has made me think back at all the stories. His characters are all so tragic and damaged (I'm not complaining, just observing).

Berry Rydell is such an awsome dude, but he just can't seem to make it to the other side. At the end of Virtual Light I was full of hope for him and Chevette only to be a bit disappointed (but not suprised) in Idoru to find him back on the beat.

I guess in Hinterlands he does it to us all. Humans I mean. Stuck out there on the Highway desperately seeking answers, but only getting snippets. Enough to keep us sending humans and getting meatshots in return.

I think these characters and their sadness and stories are what keeps bringing me back to WGs writing (all to infrequently I'm afraid). The way we get to know them through their stories rather than the narrative is extremely powerful and keeps up the empathy and keeps us interested.

His writing forces you to pay attention throughout the book. Gotta learn the lingo, got to absorb the culture. Then when you are finished you gotta turn back to page 1 and read it again to pick up all the finer points of the story.

As always, SF is about people, not gadgets. Its and exploration of us and a comment on how we are really all the same, despite the setting and the technology. There will always be heroes like Berry Rydell, villans like Cody Harwood and drones like Armitage.

Cheers,
JD.

The main characters from the Bridge books are more complex than the characters in the Sprawl books. With few exceptions the characters are not larger than life, and have more complexity to them. Most of the people in Bridge books are just trying to be good people and make it to the next day, that get mixed up in extraordinary situations.

According to Chevette in "All Tomorrow's Parties" that all Rydell wanted to be a Cop or on TV.

There are "normal" people in the Sprawl series, although certainly not in Neuromancer (Marly, Bobby, Mona, Slick...). However it is true that many of his characters are caught coping with some loss, sometimes enormous, sometimes commonplace. But although that makes sometimes for grief, I do not feel it makes them sad.

These feelings of loss, and how we compensate or balance them, are an important part of most WG characters. Looking back on my life, those have been also the most interesting ones.
Just not very nice to live through.

José

I'd like to suggest that this is an overall theme of fiction itself... main characters who are not in some sort of transition from their 'normal' world or behavior are rare. There is not much interesting going on with people who are happy and complacent, with no obstacles before them. The outcome is predictable; there is no journey we, as readers, can take with them. Since there is nothing to hinder their progress, they have no growth. Gibson uses the personal tragedy of his characters as a shortcut to define them; we can all understand someone who has lost a loved one, or been down on their luck. It helps us sympathize with them, and makes them seem more like real people, in a very concise way,and can explain their behavior when confronted with extreme situations. These are people who are also ready to enter into these extreme situations, because often they've lost whatever would have held them back before, or they have nothing left to lose.

*edited for grammar and missing word

This message has been edited. Last edited by: madevilbeats,

I agree madevilbeats. It's the same reason that movies about tragedies do much better than watching some movie about a perfect person and their perfect life.

I know I can't identify with perfect, but then again the level of tragedy in my life hasn't been too huge either.

I've always loved WG's writing because when I read it I feel like he's talking to me rather than me reading, or even that I've tapped directly into his brain and inhaled his stories in a mad electric breath. Everything seems to flow really well. I don't experience that with a lot of writers, but when I do, I tend to voraciously read anything I can find by them.

Here is a bit of a reply by Richard Calder to an interview question about why he seemed to engage in "creation of a dazzling array of flawed characters, people with self-destructive tendencies, people at odds with the worlds they inhabit":

quote:

---

...it's not necessary for fictional characters to be likeable. That is a kind of backdoor way of introducing a moral argument for art. It's only necessary that they be interesting. At best, they should cast a spell on the reader and draw him or her into their world. We don't generally care to read about happiness. The Devil really does have all the best tunes. We want drama. Conflict. Blood and sweat. Art is Dionysian, and if my heroines, or muses, are rather maenad-like, then my heroes are their votaries, and so am I.

---

edit: forgot to add my why, this is a different author, but I came across this later in the evening after my initial post, and it seemed to echo what I was trying to say...

I agree with JD Shapley, Wiliam Gibson does have a very strong tone of Melancholy in his books. But I think thats what makes his books feel so realistic and really make us the readers emphatize with the characters alot. He sort of speaks to the average guy who's just trying to get by in life. Like ma boy Rydell Berry, he's definately one of my must favorite characters in the book. Or Little Bird, Slick Henry's ignorant friend who he shares Dog solitude with...the guy's a dumb ass racist but William Gibson writes about the character so well that u tend to feel some emphaty for the poor lil fella.
And last point...Greek Tragedies kinda tend to do really well. Check out the highest Grossing movie of all time and you'll see what I mean!

"Saying your looking for answers to questions you do not know..."

I think if you can identify what you know that you know... what you know that you don´t know and what you don´t know that you don´t know... then you´ll have your life figured out...

heidi
baby sleep

I think if you can identify what you know that you know... what you know that you don´t know and what you don´t know that you don´t know... then you´ll have your life figured out... 
 

Hey Lady, u think I gotta problem? I dont!! So your mental evaluation better be 4 free. Cause i'm dead low on my credit chip, and ain't gonna waste what I got on Shrinks.
Ratz, close my tab...

the only thing i know for sure is the more i learn, the less i know...

i think i agree with all of you

though JRE, neuromancer does have linda lee who fits the bill, and case is relatively ordinary. (maybe i just know too many freaks) and jd shapely, there can be effective non-human melancholic characters (think the artist in count zero)

i

Welcome back, Misty!

Poor Linda Lee becomes a tool instead of a character, considering that we see so little of her as herself.

And Case, the best student of Dixie, one of the most promising hackers of his generation, chosen to do the run that could not be done?

I did not feel sad with JD Shapely story. It may be the book mood transmitting, but it is a noble sacrifice and bad luck, but uplifting that someone like that did exist.

As always, remember I am a freak of Nature.

José

thanks JRE.

there are some things about case that do touch me, though, the self destructiveness, the fake tan on all but one foot, the memory of the wasp nest and being 17. so while he def. has almost unique skills, he's also a bit of a lost cause. there's an ache, or a chasm where the ache should be.

i think i was in a bit of a lather later in my post (and have never got the hang of quoting other posts to make my reference clear). jd shapely posted something along the lines that SF would always really be about people, i assumed to support their argument re the importance of emotion in WG's work. my tangent was that emotion (or at least the air of melancholy) for me isn't entirely limited to WG's human characters. when marly finds the artist slowly sifting through and arranging what remained of the TAs, i'm struck in the same way that i am by slick henry's endeavour.