Neuromancer

Is Neuromancer good/patrician?

Its good and uniquely written but its not patrician.

It's got more ninjas and weboos than /a/. I was honestly disappointed.

Fucking amazing speculative scifi if you're into wondering about the nature of consciousness in relation to technology, and the future of digital society.

There's no getting around the fact that the "prose" is just Gibson dropping a bunch of techno-babble like "neurofiber" or "luminescent polyhedron" or whatever.

It's really good imo. But the prose is pretty wack.

GRRM tier

You'll love it and it will give you a lot to think about, but it isn't very artful or important

Maybe I came to this book late but having read/watched a lot of great cyberpunk stuff, the book gave me nothing to think about. I also felt that it was really dated and some of the writing choices (prose, how characters speak) were downright obnoxious.

That's pretty fair. The book has definitely aged (as many speculative scifi do) and the dialogue can be a bit over the top.
The prose in that book is frustrating as hell to read. Missing more than two sentences makes you lose all coherency on what's happening and you have to start the whole page over.

>having read/watched a lot of great cyberpunk stuff
Suggest some, user

>read
The Golden Oecumene
Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep
Snow Crash
Transmetropolitan
Akira
Eden: It's an Endless World
Blame!
>watch
Blade Runner
The Zero Theorem
RoboCop
Dredd 2012
Ghost in The Shell 1995 (as well as anything Mamoru Oshii has made in animated form)
Texhnolyze
Ergo Proxy
Blame! 2017 (it's different enough from the manga)

Bunch of pseuds trying too hard to be critics in this thread

>Missing more than two sentences
Why would you do this?

>I have nothing to offer to the conversation because someone insulted my favourite shitty book

Your appreciation of neuromancer pretty much entirely depends upon your predilection towards technoir-babble and space rastas. Personally I love the stuff.

watch Akira as well

>I'm not bad reader, you're a bad poster!

To thoroughly enjoy necromancer you have to immerse yourself in it's absurdity. I agree that the prose can be stilted at times but if you can overlook that you'll find a thought provoking, entertaining, and groundbreaking work of science fiction. The sheer number of character archetypes it created alone make it worth the read. All in all one of my favorite science fiction books. Also, I'd say that it's a better written, more accessible, and more influential book than snow crash, which I also love.

I read the summary of the book on the internet after finishing it and boy did I misread the last 100 or so pages

no/no

Burning Chrome was more like what I wanted when looking for cyber books. Virtual Light (and ATP) was a better read too, but probably not exactly what you're looking for. (more big city feeling than sprawl city feeling, however there are homeless rigger goons and mercenary Russians)

Neuromancer kinda sucks. Maybe it's better to find out and judge for yourself. Apparently some people love it, but I think those are geezers who didn't have much choice at the time.

Nice, thanks man.

This

Yeah but he was the first to do it when no one else had a clue.

>It's got more ninjas and weboos than /a/. I was honestly disappointed.


it's got one ninja. ONE. if you don't like weeb shit, then go back to /k/ and start an argument with some other chad while stroking it to pics of guns.

OP: Neuromancer is patrician simply because he didn't follow the obvious ending.

all that 80s stuff written like japan was going to be relevant in the future didn't age well

>There's no getting around the fact that the "prose" is just Gibson's homage to Burroughs

fixed that for ya. What kinda creep joint you running here, Sy? I been gang-fucked!

> I haven't read the book and I don't understand any of the replies but I want attention