I have always seen cyberpunk this way:

Beth, I think I love you. Your explanation made it the furthest over my moat of non-understanding.

Well, I think that they are -- I mean, mostly we're talking a small(ish) circle of people who believe similar things and strongly enough that they decide to codify it. But it's really that gang that all goes to the same pub/cafe after spending the day at the studio.

I don't think manifestos succeed as persuasion. It's not a matter of preaching to anybody.

I think they just clarify points of divergence. It's a kind of mapping - the argument isn't happening on the level of individual discourse. By positing a movement you're creating an alternate institution to the ones you dislike.

Early British punk crystalized around things like Malcolm McLaren's t-shirt which articulated one aesthetic against an older aesthetic. Pink Floyd - Out. Eddie Cochran - In. etc.

Also, they usually don't happen unless the art under attack is as dull as the French academic painting which preceded the Impressionists. (Who did not have a manifesto, but did cause a few riots.)

Thank you, Steph. It is nice to know when you've been able to help

I love Nutty and her spicy brains and well-aimed foot.

9/11 in its planning, execution and politics seemed like it came straight out of a Bruce Sterling novel to me.

I agree, and this is another reason why we should get those evil-doers. No one deserves Bruce Sterling! No one!

No one deserves Bruce Sterling! No one!

Awww, man, why you gotta hate on Bruce? He even answered one of my emails once.

Well, that's cool of him. But I have never enjoyed one of his books, and tend to finish them only when trapped on a trans-Atlantic flight. I find him a bit pompous.

If you're hearing a manifesto as if you're being hectored in a bar at a sci-fi con then a combative tone is going to feel boorish.

You speak as if I haven't had this happen. Even when it happens along lines I vaguely agree with, it's still boorish.

I don't think manifestos succeed as persuasion. It's not a matter of preaching to anybody. I think they just clarify points of divergence.

Clarifying points of divergence -- analyzing a situation -- is easily done without boorishness! I do it all the fricken time! I just somehow fail to sneer, and it works!

You speak as if I haven't had this happen.

Actually, I chose that example specifically because I figured you had experienced that.

Clarifying points of divergence -- analyzing a situation -- is easily done without boorishness! I do it all the fricken time! I just somehow fail to sneer, and it works!

I'm not pro-boorish. And some things are sneer worthy.

Late to the conversation, but...

Looking at the "punk" part of the phrase, focus more on the Do-It-Yourself ethic of American Hardcore and Indie Rock than say the comic dopeyness of the Ramones.

My favorite example is how William Gibson set it up in Johnny Mnemonic:

I put the shotgun in an Adidas bag and padded it out with four pairs of tennis socks, not my style at all, but that was what I was aiming for: If they think you're crude, go technical; if they think you're technical, go crude. I'm a very technical boy. So I decided to get as crude as possible. These days, thought, you have to be pretty technical before you can even aspire to crudeness. I'd had to turn both those twelve-gauge shells from brass stock, on the lathe, and then load then myself; I'd had to dig up an old microfiche with instructions for hand-loading cartridges; I'd had to build a lever-action press to seat the primers--all very tricky. But I knew they'd work.