> "Case, the hapless protagonist, stumbles between crises, barely knowing what’s going on, at risk from a femme fatale and being made offers he cannot refuse from mysterious Mr. Bigs.” Again, you don’t read William Gibson for the plot.
I think this misses one of the most striking aspects of the novel, that Gibson was talking about the singularity and the possibility, or inevitability, of AI. The glossy cool and limited character arcs were in service of a broader statement about society and culture. Gibson was making statements about class difference and what kind of effect the rapid change of technology had on society.
It's like saying the "The Wire"'s characters are two dimensional because they get buffeted by a system that's deeply flawed. The point is that the system is effectively a character in it's own right.
The article notably also doesn't mention Borges, who I believe is a very strong influence to Gibson (though maybe not for Neuromancer?) [0].
> "Case, the hapless protagonist, stumbles between crises, barely knowing what’s going on, at risk from a femme fatale and being made offers he cannot refuse from mysterious Mr. Bigs.” Again, you don’t read William Gibson for the plot.
I think this misses one of the most striking aspects of the novel, that Gibson was talking about the singularity and the possibility, or inevitability, of AI. The glossy cool and limited character arcs were in service of a broader statement about society and culture. Gibson was making statements about class difference and what kind of effect the rapid change of technology had on society.
It's like saying the "The Wire"'s characters are two dimensional because they get buffeted by a system that's deeply flawed. The point is that the system is effectively a character in it's own right.
The article notably also doesn't mention Borges, who I believe is a very strong influence to Gibson (though maybe not for Neuromancer?) [0].
[0] https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20140902-the-20th-centur...