| Author |
Message |
    
Jay C
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 04, 2003 - 01:28 pm: | |
I just a short time ago finished reading this. Not what I expected from Gibson at all. It's a very dense book, filled with a an observational
minutae of places and things of modern life. Much of the book is set in places I know and have spent time in -- a lot actually in London -- and Gibson gets =all= the details right. The only thing I had a real problem with was seeing a Hummer on the streets of London.
This, however, is not genre. It's mystery, it's modern-day, it's now, contemporary culture. There are interesting concepts and thoughts to
play with, but it ain't a quick read. Nor would I say that it is in any way science-fictional.
I also didn't notice until page 170 that it was all in present tense, something that usually annoys me no end. |
Jonathan Strahan
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 04, 2003 - 02:39 pm: | |
Jay - I think PR is Gibson's best book since Neuromancer, but I'm not sure it's not genre. I know it's set in the recent past (2002) and that nothing overtly sfnal happens, but there's something about it's perception and focus that makes it feel like it has an intrinsically science fictional view. - Jonathan |
Jay C
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 04, 2003 - 03:09 pm: | |
I am still torn about that. I too think it's a good book. I commented that it was as if Gibson has become 'adult' in his voice. It's mature. I'm still not convinced it's any way sfnal. I think it's just Gibson. |
Mike Jasper
| | Posted on Thursday, March 06, 2003 - 07:22 am: | |
I wonder -- does it MATTER if it's SF or not?
I mean, really?
Mike, stirring the pot... |
Jay C
| | Posted on Thursday, March 06, 2003 - 07:42 am: | |
No, it doesn't. I guess though, it's an expectation thing. It's like you pick up a Carroll novel, you expect certain things. I'm not suggesting that it's a bad thing to have those expectations disabused, but it's interesting. |
Mike Jasper
| | Posted on Monday, June 23, 2003 - 04:18 pm: | |
I'm getting ready to read this -- at last! -- and I'm looking forward to it. I'll let ya know what I think... whether you want me to or not. So there. ;)
|
Jay C
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 24, 2003 - 01:26 am: | |
Yes, I'll be interested on your take on it, Mike. |
Mike Jasper
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 25, 2003 - 09:12 am: | |
100 pages in, and I'm intrigued, more or less. Great details and wonderful style, but... I keep wondering, "Is that all?"
More later... |
Liz Williams
| | Posted on Thursday, June 26, 2003 - 06:18 am: | |
This from Paul DiFillippo:
The Op-Ed page of the NYT for 6-25-03 features an essay by William Gibson on
the surveillance society.
******
Sorry, don't have a link. Might be of interest. |
GabrielM
| | Posted on Thursday, June 26, 2003 - 08:13 am: | |
Yeah, it was this one. Requires log in.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/25/opinion/25GIBS.html
|
Mike Jasper
| | Posted on Monday, July 07, 2003 - 03:54 am: | |
Crap -- the Gibson op-ed piece is now only available for a fee.
Finished the novel, in what has to be record time for a slow-ass reader like me.
The lack of a specific SFnal setting didn't bother me at all -- I guess I'd heard enough about the book by this time to not be bothered by it. And Cayce's "allergy" was enough of a spec-fic tweak to make it all work for me, regardless of genre.
Initially I was a bit impatient, because I didn't really CARE about corporate logos and marketing meetings. But he got through that quickly enough so he didn't lose me.
For me, the connection to 9/11 was crucial, and made the book pretty intense in its emotion (for me). Having Cayce be in NYC on that day, along with her father, and the description of the falling petal, made the book for me. Kudos to Gibson for tackling this fucked-up day in history with his typical style, from an angle I'd never expected.
The detail in this book is fascinating and overwhelming. Makes me feel quite inadequate as a writer.
And the plot moved along quite nicely. The white-room scene was a bit over the top, after Cayce gets the mickey in her drink, but... No major complaints, overall. A fast, intense read. Makes me want to go back to BURNING CHROME and NEUROMANCER and read all his work again.
Sorry to take up so much of your virtual space, James.  |
Tim Akers
| | Posted on Monday, July 07, 2003 - 06:36 am: | |
The inclusion of 9/11 is a curious thing. See, the book was half done when 9/11 occurred, so it wasn't in the original intent of the story. WG had to do some rewriting, especially as summer 2002 approached, to keep the thing accurate. One early version of the thing had armored personnel carriers wandering london and armed soldiers at every intersection.
Anyway, if you want to get into a serious discussion about PR, go to www.williamgibsonbooks.com and join the discussion group there. |
Jay C
| | Posted on Monday, July 07, 2003 - 07:19 am: | |
Hmm, interesting. Actually the only real flaw I saw with the book was the existence of a hummer on London streets. |
Jay C
| | Posted on Monday, July 07, 2003 - 07:20 am: | |
Oops, already said that, didn't I? |
Mike Jasper
| | Posted on Monday, July 07, 2003 - 11:50 am: | |
The only real quibble I have about the book, really, is Dorotea. She felt a bit over the top, in an evil villainess sort of way. But nothing to take away my enjoyment of the book.
I'd read in Gibson's LOCUS interview about the revamping of the book after 9/11, and I'm glad he went the way he did with that. |
Mastadge
| | Posted on Monday, July 07, 2003 - 07:01 pm: | |
I've never read any Gibson yet, but he's on The List. I guess I'll pick this one up some time. |
Ellen Datlow
| | Posted on Monday, July 07, 2003 - 08:58 pm: | |
I'm 2/3 of the way through PR and am blown away by it. I have to tune my perception way down as I know every place he mentions in London (and Cayce's apt on 111th Street in NYC is Jack Womack's). There are also bits and pieces of friends or acquaintances of Bill's and Jack's who I recognize. And the obsession with "collecting" arcane objects is something I recognize from my friendship with Jack. It's almost too eerie. I feel I'm in Gibson's brain when I read it.
It is his most mature work. I also believe it's sf-nal, if not in fact then certainly in affect.
Anyway, I've been reading this faster than any other novel I've read in ages. I make sure I read a few chapters a night, before bed. Should be done in the next few days. |
Jay C
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 08, 2003 - 07:28 am: | |
Hmm, okay, Ellen. I will agree to the "in affect." There's a lot of stylistic tropes there that make it have the sf feel, but if you were looking for standard, classic sf, a la some of the earlier works, you wouldn't exactly find it. Good, good, book. Though I was having the conversation with Liz Williams about this and the feeling was that the book will date very rapidly. It is so pinned to contemporary culture and manifestations of technology that it becomes a signpost to the last couple of years. |
Liz Williams
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 08, 2003 - 08:40 am: | |
Just to add - I do feel that this is the trouble with a lot of very cutting-edge stuff, and it somewhat puts me off attempting it except in the occasional short story. I love Gibson's work, but I can't help feeling that some of this kind of thing has a relatively short shelf life.
Maybe that's not a real problem, I don't know. Obviously, there's value in taking a snapshot of a zeitgeist at a particular time - in more mainstream fic, Douglas Coupland (whose work I really like) has built his career on it and I can still read Microserfs, say, and find it funny. But in 20 years' time - who is to say? But also, if one takes a long enough view, maybe this applies to everything. |
Ellen Datlow
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 08, 2003 - 09:27 am: | |
Liz and Jay,
I haven't reread Bill's early work in a long time but I do feel that some of the longest lasting sf maintains its power (if not edge) even if it's just a snapshot of life at the time it's written.
Buying "classics" for SCIFICTION I often come across the dilemma: do I reprint a story that has obviously dated in certain ways--pre-feminist, pre-awareness of racism, mention of brand names that no longer exist etc--or not? I decide depending on how the story still works depite being past its "sell-by" date. Some can be read as an historical artifact but still a well-written, involving story that has something to say to contemporary readers.
I don't know if PR will date in a way that will allow it to maintain its power or not. We'll just have to wait and see.
|
Tim Akers
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 08, 2003 - 11:03 am: | |
Well, as WG has said, scifi isn't really about the future. It's always about the present. |
Mike Jasper
| | Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2003 - 12:16 pm: | |
I think PR will age well, actually, just as NEUROMANCER has aged pretty well, even if history now proves many of Gibson's "predictions" wrong as far as tech and world politics go. NEUROMANCER, in my opinion, having re-read the first 100 pages recently for "research" for a story idea, is still a cracking good read.
Gibson does things with language that I can't really figure out, other than to say that reading his stuff is like doing a crossword puzzle that's just one level harder than what my skillset as a reader is, so I'm constantly pushed and challenged. Maybe that's just because I'm usually a lazy reader, I dunno. I also tore through the book, reading it fast.
But the other key to this book's significance, which may not be as strong for non-Americans, is what he does with 9/11. The petal-dropping scene he writes about in NYC on that day is my favorite descriptive passage that I've read in a long, long time. |
Jay C
| | Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2003 - 02:11 pm: | |
See, Mike, I think that has a peculiarity to the American psyche that may not hold true to the rest of the world. I don't want to get into a debate on this here, but I did feel that that whole section felt somewhat artificially constructed, placed as an homage to historical rememberance rather than as a natural part of the work itself. |
|
