entertainment

This entry was prompted by a comment by Daniel Wilson about how he considered William Gibson a better writer than Neal Stephenson based on Snow Crash.

First, a little disclaimer: I am no book critic. I also don’t have strong opinions either way as far as which writer is better than the other. I originally thought about answering in the comments directly but then thought that I had enough to say about this to justify a new entry. So bear with me while I indulge in ranting over a subject that might just be way over my head… and feel free to set me straight in the comments! Finally, this post should not be construed as an attack on Daniel’s opinion, but rather as a light-hearted Saturday divagation!

First, I’d like to point that Snow Crash is one of Stephenson’s earlier books. I don’t know which of Gibson’s book did Daniel read: I personally have read Neuromancer, Count Zero, Mona Lisa’s Overdrive, Virtual Light and the short story collection, Burning Chrome. To be fair, Snow Crash should be compared to Neuromancer or Count Zero which are Gibson’s first two books. Then again, Gibson’s Neuromancer is so widely considered as the book that defined the cyberpunk genre that it is difficult to consider the book original unless you put yourself back in its publication context. I would, myself, consider John Brunner‘s Stand on Zanzibar or The Shockwave Rider or even Philip K. Dick‘s work as even earlier precursors of the genre. There’s a point to be made that Stephenson was probably inspired by Gibson’s work, which in turn was probably inspired by previous authors. Art feeds on itself…

I have to admit that by the time I read Neuromancer, I was already rather familiar with the cyberpunk thematic and I had read so many things about how the book was groundbreaking that I was rather underwhelmed when I finally got to read it. I guess this is a tribute to its seminal influence: it so defined the cyberpunk genre that it became stereotypical to me. That very characteristic, though, made it less attractive to me and I found Snow Crash, which I read much later, to be more interesting.

To be clear, I don’t dispute Gibson’s originality (as opposed to Stephenson’s at least) based on the objective criterium that Gibson came first and inspired many cyberpunk writer. This truly makes him more original than Stephenson in an objective context. However, the statement I made is to be understood from my subjective point of view: I read Neuromancer after having read other cyberpunk novels and was therefore less impressed by it than I could have been had I read it when it came out because I was already exposed to the ideas that it helped propagate. Because of that, I found Neuromancer less original than Snow Crash. Again, this very fact is a testimony to the impact that Neuromancer had on the cyberpunk genre: for someone knowing the thematic of the genre well, Neuromancer will look completely un-original (if one didn’t know about the chronology of the writing) because it inspired so many others. However, for the purpose of this subjective rant, timing of my readings made Gibson’s work appear less original (because archetypical of the genre it helped create) than Stephenson’s.

Snow Crash deals with out of genre subjects such as memes and Sumerian mythology. Of the Gibson’s book I read, only Count Zero and its very interesting reference to Voodoo, if I remember correctly, deals with out of genre topics. I guess what prompted me to answer to Daniel’s comment was the fact that I found Snow Crash more original than Gibson’s work and therefore considered Stephenson a better writer than Gibson.

I however realize writing this that this isn’t fair to Gibson not only because the influence he had on the cyberpunk genre made him appear, at least to me, less original but also because, in reacting to Daniel’s comment, I didn’t even consider style, narration, construction, etc… but I am even less qualified to discuss theses aspects than I am on the topic of originality. I would say though that Snow Crash precipitated the intrigue at the end and that was not the most satisfying experience as far as construction goes. On the other hand, Stephenson has matured since Snow Crash (as can be seen in Cryptonomicon). I still think that his books have a broader scope than Gibson’s (this is especially true with Quicksilver which, despite being only the first tome of a trilogy, is already monumental in scope)…

In summary: I am not qualified to answer the question of which author is the best writer. I only considered one aspect: which author had the most impact on me, which is leaves lots to be desired as far as judging writers goes. Maybe I could have spared you a long rant by just telling Daniel to give Stephenson a chance! I’ll shut up now.

Daniel has further comments on the same subject. Lots of good points. Nothing beats a good discussion! Now for another irrational point in disfavor of Gibson: he admitted in his (now closed) webblog that Philip K. Dick’s work never had much of an impact on him. For those who know my partiality towards this author will know why I consider that a major flaw!

One Million Miles Away from the album J. Ralph Presents the Illusionary Movements of Geraldine & Nazu by J. Ralph