Yah, I read Neuromancer and Cryptonomicon and I recall enjoying the experience but I really can't remember just what exactly they were about. That's the funny thing- you guys are talking about the detailed imagery in Gibson and when I think back to Gibson I have read the imagery that comes to mind is the book covers. With Stephenson I get whole film clips of scenes from the novels running in my brain.

I just remembered that my best friend ordered us a pizza and then read the first chapter of Snow Crash out loud to us. I think everyone should start reading the book that way!

I have yet to read a Tad Williams novel that doesn't suffer from this problem.

I consider myself duly warned. I'm going to finish it because I want to know the what of the central plot device, but most of the personalities in it have had enough time to irritate me. Just tell me what the Other is, and if we've seen the last of Orlando (not sure why I want the answer to be no, but I've already decided how and everything). Everyone else can bite it, merrily.

More easily readable than Cryptonomicon (and without the random tangents on things such as breakfast cereal)

But those are the best parts!

Neuromancer left almost no impression on me.

The weird thing about it is that it's really hard to figure out any of the characters' motivations. Things just sort of happen, and you go along with it. And then it ends.

The weird thing about it is that it's really hard to figure out any of the characters' motivations. Things just sort of happen, and you go along with it. And then it ends.

Yep, that's Gibson.

I have a total crush on Gibson, but he possibly should have been a poet rather than a novelist. If his writing was typeset more like The Wasteland I think his word/imagery genius would come through, and his offscreen denouments would be less puzzling.

However, the "little people" protagonists getting rolled like rocks in a river is a very Cyberpunk motif.

Stephenson. I love Snow Crash and like Cryptonomicon and occasionally quote-ref bits of Quicksilver (only from the first 3000 pages or so, since I gave up halfway through and haven't read the others). However, I'm not sure he's "cyberpunk." He's only managed the "-punk" part in Zodiac (which wasn't "cyber-") and Snow Crash. Otherwise he's techi-fic. And disturbingly focused on teenage girls.

I will say, after 12 years of working for the gov't, that he nailed that experience spot-on in Snow Crash.

books you could life with one hand.

er...should have been "books you could lift" up there, obviously.

I'm the only person I know of with ovaries who doesn't love The Diamond Age. I was so bored reading it it took me three tries to get through the whole thing. I'm a Snow Crash girl all the way.

And I haven't reread any Gibson in far too long. Must fix that.

I'm the only person I know of with ovaries who doesn't love The Diamond Age.

raises hand

I found ANOTHER box of books I need to get rid of. And of course while all the "get rid of" books were out on tables and such, the DH went through and pulled back several he'd previously let go of. We just can't tolerate being parted from books.

At this point, what I want is a cave, where I can pile all the books up and lair on them, and savage anyone who tries to take them.

I was "meh" on The Diamond Age but am an unabashed Gibson fangurl. Neuromancer left deep impressions on me. I prefer his short stories but I like where he's been going with his more recent novels.

raises hand too

I love Gibson and always have. But Stephenson is Da Man, in my opinion.

Though I, too, was "meh" on The Diamond Age.

The rest of his stuff, though... Snow Crash and especially Cryptonomicon ...loved. LOVED. Read Quicksilver , but have yet to read the rest of the Baroque Cycle.

What I love about Stephenson is that he sort of assumes you know of the tech and then will tell you how it works. Gibson, I seem to recall, admitted he knew jack about computers when he wrote Neuromancer but, as was mentioned previously, was far more interested in technology's effect on society and people.

Stephenson's characters have more depth in my opinion, while Gibson's weirder explorations are more compelling in a different way.

I like Sterling a lot as an editor, but I don't enjoy his writing.

I think that's Sterling I'm thinking of.

Neuromancer was a revelation to me, but it started to seem like Gibson was continuing to write in that universe because that's what people expected. Pattern Recognition was thoroughly awesome abd made me love him again.

Snow Crash seemed like something really new and different when it came out, but The Baroque Cycle has overshadowed all other Stephenson for me.