Just read Neuromancer, by William Gibson, and I'm disappointed.

[Artisan]

Disclaimer - the following is the text of my amazon.com and bn.com reviews for this book.

---

The book I was reading came to an end more quickly than I'd anticipated, and I found myself sitting in the airport, searching desperately for something to read. As a big fan of the sci-fi, futuristic genre, I read the myriad rave reviews for Neuromancer and bought it on the spot.

Being captive on a plane for about 3.5 hours, I got through a good portion of the book, but in the coming days, and then weeks, I discovered that I was forcing myself to continue reading (sometimes a page at a time, one or two pages per day), until over a month later, I finally finished.

Now this is a bad sign, when you finish reading a book and your first thought is "finally!" rather than "wow!"

Ultimately, I think the book is plagued by three major problems:

1. The "action" takes a VERY long time to get underway. The entire beginning of the book is dedicated to a back-story that is neither interesting or particularly relevant to rest of the story.

2. The author seems overly preoccupied with describing every miniscule detail of every environment and every character, almost entirely without purpose other than to impress the reader. For instance, instead of describing an office as sparsely decorated, with a few colourful adjectives, the description consists of paragraphs minutiae about the texture on the walls and floors and desk and the things on the desk and the flickering lighting the creak in the door and the smell and the guy's face and his mannerisms and what the main character thinks of him and then some longwinded back-story about the guy that we've just meet and ... I found myself constantly thinking "ENOUGH ALREADY, JUST TELL ME WHAT HAPPENS NEXT!" I'd say at least 70 percent of this book is descriptions that I could have done without.

3. The only character even mildly compelling is a tertiary character who's appearances don't seem to serve the story at all. I had no interest in the affairs of any of these people.

To put it succinctly, I was pretty much just reading to find out what happens at the end. In that regard, I was again let down.

I am disappointed that I was disappointed by this book, considering all of the critical acclaim. I really wanted to like it. I tried.

I guess in the end I still don't really know what the "Sprawl" is, and sadly, that's fine by me.

---

So I see by the reviews and mentions here that I'm in the minority - so, is it something that I'm just not getting or are there others that agree with my review?

[TheLongshot]

Yeah, I think I made it halfway through the book before putting it down. I just didn't find it compelling.

[Zetmolm]

I agree. I started reading this a couple of weeks ago but gave up after about one quarter through the book. I've read and enjoyed lots of SF but this apparently is not my thing.

[DiapDealer]

Fantastic book! Sorry you didn't love it as much as I did.... twenty-seven years ago.

[carpetmojo]

Originally Posted by TheLongshot

Yeah, I think I made it halfway through the book before putting it down. I just didn't find it compelling.

Beat me....

[kcmay]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Fantastic book! Sorry you didn't love it as much as I did.... twenty-seven years ago.

I read it more recently than that, but not a lot more, maybe 15 years ago. I can't remember much about the story, but I remember loving it.

[montsnmags]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Fantastic book! Sorry you didn't love it as much as I did.... twenty-seven years ago.

A timeframe which could highlight some significant statistical division between the likes/don't likes, considering the currency or otherwise of the subject matter, not to mention changes in personal preferences. (BTW, I'm with you, in my opinion of it, and the time in which it was read )

Cheers,
Marc

[carld]

Originally Posted by Artisan

1. The "action" takes a VERY long time to get underway. The entire beginning of the book is dedicated to a back-story that is neither interesting or particularly relevant to rest of the story.

I confess, I started the book with high hopes, but I never got past this part.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by montsnmags

A timeframe which could highlight some significant statistical division between the likes/don't likes, considering the currency or otherwise of the subject matter, not to mention changes in personal preferences.

Of that I have no doubt.

I don't even know if I would love it--if I were reading it for the first time today. I like to think I would, but I'm a different person now. The books I've read since then would surely affect my perceptions of it. When you read something is almost as critical as what you're reading!

[gollu]

I feel very much like the OP. Went through the book and felt "I finally finished it" at the end. Maybe the problem with it lays in the high expectations from all the awards it has.
Anyways, won't read it again and won't touch anything by the author.

[Penforhire]

I enjoyed the extended characterization of scenery. To me that was part of the flavor of dystopian cyberpunk. I can see where someone might be disappointed by slow pacing but I savored it.

The content itself is part of the foundation of the genre. Charlie Stross and Vernor Vinge might not have succeeded with some of their more radical texts if this book (and others) hadn't laid some groundwork. That makes some details in Neuromancer seem simple to any reader already steeped in the genre.

[JeremyR]

Originally Posted by Artisan

Disclaimer - the following is the text of my amazon.com and bn.com reviews for this book.

---

The book I was reading came to an end more quickly than I'd anticipated, and I found myself sitting in the airport, searching desperately for something to read. As a big fan of the sci-fi, futuristic genre, I read the myriad rave reviews for Neuromancer and bought it on the spot.

Being captive on a plane for about 3.5 hours, I got through a good portion of the book, but in the coming days, and then weeks, I discovered that I was forcing myself to continue reading (sometimes a page at a time, one or two pages per day), until over a month later, I finally finished.

Now this is a bad sign, when you finish reading a book and your first thought is "finally!" rather than "wow!"

Ultimately, I think the book is plagued by three major problems:

1. The "action" takes a VERY long time to get underway. The entire beginning of the book is dedicated to a back-story that is neither interesting or particularly relevant to rest of the story.

2. The author seems overly preoccupied with describing every miniscule detail of every environment and every character, almost entirely without purpose other than to impress the reader. For instance, instead of describing an office as sparsely decorated, with a few colourful adjectives, the description consists of paragraphs minutiae about the texture on the walls and floors and desk and the things on the desk and the flickering lighting the creak in the door and the smell and the guy's face and his mannerisms and what the main character thinks of him and then some longwinded back-story about the guy that we've just meet and ... I found myself constantly thinking "ENOUGH ALREADY, JUST TELL ME WHAT HAPPENS NEXT!" I'd say at least 70 percent of this book is descriptions that I could have done without.

3. The only character even mildly compelling is a tertiary character who's appearances don't seem to serve the story at all. I had no interest in the affairs of any of these people.

To put it succinctly, I was pretty much just reading to find out what happens at the end. In that regard, I was again let down.

I am disappointed that I was disappointed by this book, considering all of the critical acclaim. I really wanted to like it. I tried.

I guess in the end I still don't really know what the "Sprawl" is, and sadly, that's fine by me.

---

So I see by the reviews and mentions here that I'm in the minority - so, is it something that I'm just not getting or are there others that agree with my review?

You're not getting it. #2 is exactly why it's a great novel.

It's not unlike Chandler's first few Marlowe novels. They don't make a lick of sense, because he cobbled together several unrelated short stories, combing the plots into an incoherent mess.

But it's the way he wrote that that is what counts. He basically fleshed out every scene and description.

Gibson is the same with Neuromancer. He vividly created and described a very (at the time) believable glimpse of the near future, because of his descriptions.

And indeed, part of the whole cyberpunk ethos was "style before substance"

[Greg Anos]

If you want to read a more "traditional" S/F take on much of the same subject, I recommend John Brunner's The Shockwave Rider from 1975. Much more of "what comes next", but in many ways equally disturbing....

[caleb72]

I remember liking it although I did like Snow Crash more which I placed on a similar plane.

I read it a few years back and I think it's fair to say that I found it fascinating rather than gripping. But I did like it and wouldn't object to reading more of his novels.

[ekster]

I read it twice. First time, I found it okay. Second time, maybe five years later, I loved it, but I also kept in mind the year in which the book was written when I read it.

And like mentioned above, #2 is also the reason why I loved it. I wanted a break from fast action world to a slow one filled with details. On the second read, I slowed down to pay attention to the world and every detail in it, and that's what made me love it.