Neuromancer discussion

Why not call that era from 1980 to 1999 the Cyberpunk era? There are many cyberpunk novels out there besides the William Gibson novels. Contrary to what’s being said about Cyberpunk being dead. Far from it. It kept popping up from time to time. The books being crap? You know Sturgeon’s Law; If 90% of Cyberpunk are crap, then 90% of everything’s crap. There are writers who quibble over the label. Let them be. Not everything they write is Cyberpunk. Not should be assumed as such. But still, why not discuss it?

Cyberpunk has been my favorite genre ever since I read Neuromancer. I just reread it for maybe the fourth time, and for some reason, I didn't enjoy it as much. I guess I want new stuff, but its hard to find. I'm reading Blindsight by Peter Watts now in an attempt to find something more hard science. I'm almost ready to try fantasy, but I'd rather find something different. The only thing that's really hit me is The Thief by Hannu Rajeniemi. Nothing else has come close. That trilogy kind of spoiled me.

Brian wrote: "Cyberpunk has been my favorite genre ever since I read Neuromancer. I just reread it for maybe the fourth time, and for some reason, I didn't enjoy it as much. I guess I want new stuff, but its har..."

Have you tried reading Neal Stephenson's book Snow Crash?

Hey Steven, I get it! Your ideas passionately defend cyberpunk as a vibrant and enduring literary genre, rightly highlighting by the period from 1980 to 1999 as a potential "Cyberpunk era" marked by seminal works beyond just William Gibson's, such as those by Bruce Sterling, Pat Cadigan, or Rudy Rucker, which captured the zeitgeist of technological dystopias and human-machine interfaces.
This counters the notion of the genre's demise by noting its periodic resurgences in literature, film, and games. Like Neal Stephenson's later novels or the ongoing influence in modern sci-fi. wisely invoking Sturgeon's Law to argue that quality issues aren't unique to cyberpunk, though a more apt analogy might be sifting gold from a riverbed: in any creative field, the true nuggets of brilliance emerge from vast sediments of lesser material, rewarding those who prospect deeply.
Furthermore, the call to overlook label-quibbling writers and embrace discussion is spot on, as it fosters a broader appreciation of how cyberpunk's themes of corporate overreach, digital surveillance, and identity fragmentation not only persist but evolve in today's AI-driven world, inspiring new subgenres like solarpunk or biopunk that build on its foundations to address contemporary crises like climate change and biotech ethics.
I am reading a novel right now by a debut author called David Bearclaw his book Shadows of Consensus chimes in on our argument here that the Genre is far from over. Ultimately, we need more discussion. Like the idea you put forth about the Golden Age of Cyber Punk. (To steal the Hollywood phrasing.) Why does a book like Snow Crash do so well in the Genre. Because it’s punk man! Cover to cover. I digress I am getting away from the response to your post. Cyber Fiction – Cyber Punk – Crossover Sci Fi Punk, engaging with it keeps the genre alive as a mirror to our accelerating future. Which is more messed up than any novel could be!