fil@me.UUCP (10/12/87)
[...to line-eat or not to line-eat. That is the quest---MUNCH!]
NOTE: Our mailer died while I was posting this article,
so I'm posting it again. I had to retype it, and I like
this version better. But feel free to ignore it if you
like. Sorry about the confusion.
And now I'm posting it yet again. Flame me if you like, but
it's the damned software. REALLY!
I've noticed alot of talk in this group dealing with
whether cyberpunk depicts "low life and high tech" or
not, so I thought I'd contribute to the game.
It seems that most of the discussion is centering
around the "low life" part, so that's what I'll deal
with here. Certainly, no one doubts that cyberpunk is "high
tech".
If somebody were to ask you to describe cyberpunk,
you'd probably use words like "gritty" or
"street-wise". And these are good words. I myself prefer the
phrase "a damp, drug-hazed stare through the grime-streaked
window of some poor slobs eyes". Sounds like something Chandler
might have written.
But it is *really* low life? In Count Zero, Gibson's
pseudo-sequel to Neuromancer, Andrea (was that her
name?) was an art dealer who'd been shafted by a wormy
boyfriend, and yet most of her adventures occurred in very
high-class, very high *life* surroundings. And in Neuromancer,
there was evidence of opulence and extravagance. Certainly,
then, there must have been a plesant middle road, unexplored by
Gibson, but present nontheless by necessity to his fictional
world.
Both Case and Andrea (and the other adult protagonist
of Count Zero whose name I've also forgotten) seemed to
have had been reasonably successful at one time and had only
recently run out of luck. But by the end of Count Zero, Andrea
was back on track again, and in Neuromancer, though it's left
hanging, I think Case's life had picked up again: with the
adventures he'd had, I'm sure he could have made a name for
himself.
Whether any of these personages went on to fame or not
is not the point. The point is that this terrible life
was not so terrible as to not *give them a chance*. The concept
here is of the individual beating the odds and coming out with
the chance to *hope*. And that is about as much a true victory
as anyone can achieve in the real world. With hope, you can
face anything and do your best. And if you're worth something,
you'll get what you want. Without hope, you're finished.
Another thought: ever notice how the antagonists seem
"evil" only in the sense that they've been made that
way by the society they're a part of? Case's boss was like
that. Andrea's employer was like that.
A theme in cyberpunk, I think, is the plight, and the
fight, of the individual against a somehow warped
society, as represented by the primary antagonist of the
piece.
There is evidence of this theme in other cyberpunk
work: HardWired, by Walter Jon Williams, The Glass
Hammer by K.W. Jeter and even Blade Runner. In each of these
works, the protagonist has had something beat out of him before
the story starts, and during the course of the story, he
regains it, whatever it was. Rick Dekard (sp?) found faith in
himself via Rachel. Case regained the most essential part of
his being---the ability to jack in. Andrea won back her
self-esteem and lost her despair.
I loved all the works I've mentioned because they
showed people at their worst and at their best, because
they reaffirmed themselves as capable (in whatever manner
mattered to them), potent human beings.
Low life? Nah. If anything, cyberpunk is about the
High Life.
Fil Salustri
fil@me.toronto.edu.......