We have moved to new forum software and posting here is closed!

PLEASE BOOKMARK THE NEW FORUMS

Posted By: Darkglass Mar 07, 2000 - 08:26 pm

I've read Neuromancer twice now, and I'll perhaps be collecting some of his other books. I love Gibson's language and the culture he creates in this book (which I suppose helped spark the cyber punk style of writing/art/film that's been going on now).... Great characters, interesting story. I'm wondering if anyone's else here have any opinions about Neuromancer and his other books.

Posted By: Anonymous Jan 27, 2001 - 01:18 pm

I hated Neuromancer. I could barely stomach his **** characters. DON'T READ IT

Posted By: Lazarus Sep 25, 2001 - 08:57 am

Neuromancer made my head hurt.(no pun intended)
I personally found the book hard work.

Posted By: Lamasu Sep 26, 2001 - 06:57 am

It is certainly a book that gets into your head. The first time I read it I couldn't understand anything but was swept away by the style and dark atmosphere. I got the grip of the plot the next time I read it and loved it, though it is not an easy read and does not involve loveable characters.
It is amazing how much it influenced the whole genre. Even more escapist novels and books borrow from it sometimes.

Posted By: BRider Oct 12, 2001 - 05:20 pm

When I first read anything of Gibson's, I started with his third in a series: Mona Lisa Overdrive. It didn't make much sense for the obvious reason. When I read Neuromancer, I was blown away by the depth of the world he could weave. The texture of his cyber-punk is so gritty that at first most people choke on the granules. It takes a fare amount of surrender to his poetry. Bar none he is my favorite author, and each book is a dramatic twist on anything he has written before. It took several reads through the first trilogy to realize the implication of the story, of what Bill was shooting to communicate about the nature of the information world. If I had any complaint about his work, it would be that he has a repetitious character. Not that it is the same person, but that he (the character) is a type, with very similar traits to the lead character in all his books. Never the less, he is a master at painting the scene.

Posted By: 20megmachine Feb 26, 2002 - 02:23 pm

You think he uses weird jargon... Try Jeff Noon.

Posted By: meow Aug 26, 2002 - 07:02 am

I read all of William Gibson's books, and I appreciate him for the tech world he dares imagine for the day after tomorrow, not 5,000 years in the future. Dark, bitter, and wired, his vision of the near future is far more credible to me than most of the earlier sci-fi featuring intergalactic space wars (and stuff).

If you like William Gibson you have to try out Neal Stephenson, who far surpasses Gibson in his imagination, superbly woven & intricate plots, and impressive erudition.

Posted By: Sagethai Feb 13, 2003 - 12:19 pm

Just read the New Gibson, an dI love it. I like how he mentions the saturation of media in the modern age, and how advertising is a tricky and desceptive organism. Wondering how setting the story in present times has affected the style of his writing, I think that his writing seems limited in description because the familiarity with the present that the reader maintains.

Sidenote: I also agree with meow that Neal Stephenson is very similar to Gibson. They share the same descriptive techniques and ideas of "cool". But I think that Gibson has more of a speculative approach than Stephenson. BTW, Crytonomicon is not lke Gibson, but Snowcrash is.

Posted By: Neuromancer Jun 21, 2003 - 03:54 pm

So.... Neuromancer whats that about then!!!!!
Gibson seems to be a writer who provokes very strong opinions from the reader: personally i really like all of his books ive read, although i didnt think 'Idoru' was as good as the rest. However my brother started reading it and decided he really hated the book! I really love his style of writing with the poetic twist: in books like (cant remember the name: the one after neuromancer in the same series!) : where he describes waking up after a night drinking and the vague hazyness of memory and the groggy tender feeling in his word choice and description of basic things like walking: the fact that he talks about it at all signifys how you basically are trying to re-find you feet in a hangover state: sheer brilliance in my opinion!