Neuromancer

Rating:
Summary: Required Reading for Internet and Cyberpunk Junkies
Review: In Neuromancer, Gibson paints a picture of a society connected by the "Matrix", a vast web of interconnected computer systems. Outside of the computer network, there are areas known as the "Sprawl," areas close to the sprawl and backwoods areas. We meet Case in a bar in one of these backwoods areas.

Case is a hacker (referred to as a cowboy in the novel) who has lost his ability to connect to the matrix as the result of a deal-gone-bad. He is all but down and out, running drugs and other particularly risky transactions; he appears to have a death wish.

Just as he almost bottoms out, he meets Molly and Armitage who claim to be able to restore his ability to access the matrix ... In exchange for doing "a run" for them and their artificial intelligence boss.

The story meticulously weaves scenes from both the real world (as perceived by both Case and Molly) and the Matrix together to form a cohesive story. Though confusing and slow occasionally, Gibson does a masterful job of pulling us into the story. Though you must have some familiarity with computers and sci-fi to completely appreciate the story, it is presented in such a way that it is accessible to techie and neophyte alike.

Neuromancer is all but required reading for anyone interested in the future of the internet or the Cyberpunk genre.

Rating:
Summary: Meh
Review: Neuromancer was revolutionary for its time but the writing style is too chunky and showy and the plot boring. It didn't age well. I much preferred the sequels (Count Zero, Mona Lisa Overdrive) which have better flow. And the 'Bridge Trilogy' (minus All Tomorrow's Parties) is great fun, far superior to the first trilogy.

Rating:
Summary: Decent, but not great.
Review: Wow, what a disappointment this book turned out to be. Don't get me wrong, it's a solid book but not near the amazing piece of literature I was expecting. I suppose this book started the cyberpunk revolution, but I didn't find him near as "cutting edge" as everyone made him out to be - even taking into account the year it was published.

First, the plot felt like it was "tacked" on so Gibson could show us his, admittedly, good use of imagery (the main character is hired by someone to do a job, but his employer is not quite what he seems - original eh?). Imagery does not a novel make, though, and I've read earlier stuff from many authors (e.g. Harlan Ellison) that had better imagery and even seemed more "punk".

Secondly, although the style was strong, it masked a lack of depth to the characters. The style was reminiscent of dark mystery writing, without the personality of some of the characters in those novels.

Finally, I was surprised how the computer stuff wasn't even that original - even in the year it was published. I believe, however, it did coin some phrases including "matrix".

So why did it sweep all those awards? I suppose because at the time it was published it was viewed as "prophetic" - probably the fact that it got a lot of mainstream attention helped too.

Rating:
Summary: Groundbreaking cyberpunk, wild ride, shallow characters
Review: It won both the Hugo and the Nebula awards, and if I had've read it in '84 I would have been blown away too. As it is I've read enough stuff influenced by what I imagine must have been Gibson's ground breaking style for it not to have been so surprising.

It would have been a double for originality: playing with Artificial Intelligence, virtual reality, bio-technological implants - bodies as open slather for drug and neurological tampering ... PLUS ... post-modern characters, not exactly sure what's going on, detached from relationships, not particularly noble, set in a future that's the antithesis to the stereotyped antiseptic, uniform, civilised ones of 50s TV. 'The Matrix', for example, is straight out of this.

So, sure, a B+. He's clever and (was) original.

But it didn't take me right away because I didn't really like any of the pretty much shallow characters. They didn't make me laugh or feel - they don't go any deeper than a novel video game ('Say, watch this cool stunt'). Take away the novelty and there's not a lot there that I enjoyed.

Rating:
Summary: The Birth of Cyberpunk and Cyberspace
Review: Sometime in Earth's future, Case was a computer cowboy who plugged his mind into cyberspace and navigated the vast network of the world's computers, penetrating any computer's security system for a price. But when he double-crossed his employer, the revenge inflicted robbed Case of his ability to "jack in" to cyberspace ever again. Case went to Chiba City, a center of urban decay where anything could be bought or sold, and acquired a drug habit to replace his addiction to cyberspace. One day a woman named Molly turns up in his "coffin" with a proposition. Molly is a technologically enhanced human with reflective night vision glasses implanted over her eyes and lethal blades beneath her fingernails. She is the muscle for a man named Armitage who wants the use of Case's previous cyber-skills. In return, he will correct Case's neural damage so that he can do the job. First they have to steal a construct of a deceased computer jockey. Then they fly to Istanbul to forcibly collect another member of their team, Peter Riviera, a sleazy character whose neural implants allow him to project subliminal messages into the minds of whomever he chooses. Then the team is off to a space station called Freeside where they will carry out their mission. The plan is to infiltrate the home of the secretive Tessier-Ashpool family, who own one of the world's largest and oldest conglomerates. Tessier-Ashpool is governed by its original family members who rotate in and out of cryogenic state, and by two artificial intelligences. But the purpose of the mission and the identity of their employer are mysterious and may have epic repercussions.

Published in 1984, William Gibson's "Neuromancer" may not have been the first "cyberpunk" novel, but it defined the genre and gave birth to the term. At its most basic, the story of "Neuromancer" is a classic caper plot: a mysterious and imposing character assembles a team of individuals, each with his own talent, to break into a target structure. The characters of "Neuromancer" are, in fact, stock characters in a stock plot. But so are fiction's greatest stories. "Neuromancer"'s choppy, brooding style that tells the story through the experiences of one person, Case, owes a lot to noir detective novels. Dashiell Hammett comes to mind. It is interesting to note that Dashiell Hammett's style was born of alcoholism and urban violence and corruption in the 1930's. "Neuromancer" was born of the urban decay and violence of the 1980's, which was to reach a post-War high within a few years of the novel's publication. And many of "Neuromancer"'s characters are drug addicts. History repeats itself, and it is those qualities that put the "punk" in cyberpunk. As for the "cyber" part, "Neuromancer" introduced us to "cyberspace" and was the first to describe a computer network in terms of a geometric "matrix". Although the technology to "jack in" to computer networks has not yet come to fruition, and who knows if it ever will, the interconnectedness and interdependency of "Neuromancer"'s computers is strikingly similar to the Internet today. I think that "Neuromancer"'s instant cult appeal can be attributed to two things: It makes technology sexy. Molly was one of the first cyberbabes. And she is immediately attracted to Case, who is a geeky, pallid computer hacker. And "Neuromancer" describes a future on the fringes of society where urban alienation and technological alienation have combined to create a sort of existential hell, an idea that reflected the experiences and expectations of a disillusioned Generation X. "Neuromancer" is a science fiction novel that is still appealing and thought-provoking 20 years after it was published. And it's influence on our language and on science fiction in film and print is beyond measure.

Rating:
Summary: Great book a must read
Review: Neuromancer is one of those books that after you finish, you are tempted to go back to page one and start reading again. Absolutely fantastic, Gibson takes you on this thrilling adventure in the future with hackers, street samurai, AI, constructs and more. The story grips you from the very start and you will find yourself hard pressed to put it down.

The story in short is about this computer hacker, "cowboy", Case, who is now unable to access the matrix. Having done himself in by messing with the wrong people he can no longer go into cyberspace. As he has desperately looked for a cure for his aliments, he winds up out of money and drugged up, throwing his life away on the rough streets of Night City. Then by chance, comes an opportunity to be cured, having only to perform this one job as payment.

Being new to the Sci-fi genre of books, I was left thoroughly impressed and awed by Gibson's world. He makes the future out to be totally believable. If you are new to Gibson, enjoy Sci-fi, or just looking for a good read, I highly recommend this book.

Rating:
Summary: Before "The Matrix", there was... Neuromancer
Review: I am not an expert on Science Fiction. I cannot tell you who started the cyberpunk genre, or just how long such thoughts about the ultimate convergence of man and machine have been around.

However, I can tell you that William Gibson, in "Neuromancer", is the Picasso of his age: taking a known form of literature, twisting it about, and arriving at a wholly new art form. Neuromancer is slick writing and great story telling in a world heretofore not imagined (or, perhaps, imagined like this).

I've read other Gibson work -- Count Zero, Mona Lisa Overdrive, Virtual Light, The Difference Engine, and his short stories (Johnny Mnemonic and Fragments of a Hologram Rose). I regret to inform you none of them approaches Neuromancer.

Read this one and put it on your shelf. You will be attracted time and time again to reopen it to your favorite passages and relive the imagery. Gibson paints an unforgettable picture.

Rating:
Summary: Style over substance
Review: The story is disjointed and weird. Go read George R.R. Martin instead.

Rating:
Summary: A bit confusing
Review: I thought Neuromancer was interesting, and that's why I didn't give up on this book after the first 20 pages or so. I have to admit though, that for a good share of this book I had no clue what was going on.
The style was definitely not something I enjoy--a bit too high tech for me. The story would have been better for me if it had been written in a different style.

Rating:
Summary: Confusing Style for Substance
Review: From a brief survey of the reviews on this site, people either love this book or hate it. It's a work that leaves little room for ambivalence. Yet that is the reaction that it provokes in me.

Gibson's world is imaginative, his prose taut, his imagery vivid, his attitude a cocky swagger shoved in your face. So what's not to like?

Its very surfeit of style, is what. In fact, there's so much style that it overwhelms the substance. This, I suspect, is what his detractors can't stand. This book is smothered in style, from the various settings all reeking of decay to the punk fashion in the characters' dress to the throw-away jargon and mannered ennui that inform their speech to the staccato fragments that comprise Gibson's prose. Gibson's decision to enthrone style turns this book into the literary equivalent of a high fashion strut. Those who love it admire its flaunt, its poise, its very excess. Those who hate it despise it for the same reasons. Shouldn't science fiction be more intellectual fare?

I suppose it depends on your tolerance for excess. While Gibson overdoses on style, he doesn't vacate substance. His dystopian vision is as disturbing as Brave New World or 1984 (the very year this book was published). Neuromancer cautions us against corporatism, rampant consumerism, the seduction of immortality and the hive mind. It also speculates about artificial intelligence, bio-techno symbiosis, universal information matrices and the nature of reality. Such a substantive collection of themes is nothing to sneer at. But this book doesn't deserve the boatload of awards that it garnered either.

Personally, I have little tolerance for excess. I value restraint over indulgence, introspection over flamboyance. Brilliance shines brightest when freed from artifice. There is brilliance in this book, but it is buried under the mass of all that cool posturing.

Ultimately, this book is worth reading, not least for its numerous firsts. But discerning readers must steel themselves against its cynical, oh-so-hip nihilism.