Forwarded msgs: 1 of 4

[John M. Krafft]

From:	MIAVX2::JMKRAFFT     "John M. Krafft" 21-MAR-1992 11:38:11.40
To:	
CC:	JMKRAFFT    
Subj:	Re: Pynchon and Gibson again (was <none>)

X-News: miavx2 alt.cyberpunk:759
From: chmilar at Apple.COM (Michael Chmilar)
Subject:Re: Pynchon and Gibson again (was <none>)
Date: 19 Mar 92 07:46:15 GMT
Message-ID:<64027 at apple.Apple.COM>

TRINGHAM at usmv01.usm.uni-muenchen.de (Tringham, Neal) writes:

>In <1992Mar03.141123.7332 at zds.com> rjdm at zds.com writes:
>> Obviously I missed the original article about Gibson and Pynchon.  
>> Somebody (Neil Tringham) thought Vineland was similar to Gibson's 
>> novels and wondered whether:  [...]
>If you can find strong `cyberpunk' themes in Rushdie, Carter, Amis
>fils et al I'll be impressed. 

I always find it interesting when "movements" attempt to rope in authors
and other artists who haven proven to be "talented".  It adds a certain
legitimacy to "cyberpunk" when it can claim some lineage from Pynchon,
Burroughs, The Marquis de Sade, Marshall McLuhan, etc.  After, their work
has stood the tests of time and criticism.  (As a note, I have seen de
Sade drafted into Dada, surrealism, anarchist movements, and existentialism.
Burroughs is more closely associated with the Beat movement.  They have
probably all been sucked into hundreds of other small-time movements
that no one has ever heard of, or paid attention to.  They all get mentioned
in virtually every article published in Mondo 2000, to allow the writer
to exhibit his/her icon-dropping skills.)

Whether the enlistment of these artists is appropriate is a matter of
debate.  I am certainly not aware that any of those mentioned above have
agreed to be labelled "cyberpunk", and I recall reading that even William
Gibson was not keen to have his name and novels placed at the prow of
this supposed movement.  If I were him, I would rather be known as William
Gibson, author of Neuromancer, than as William Gibson, cyberpunk author.
Considering that many lesser writers and, worse, Hollywood hacks, ad men,
and counter-culture pundits, are clawing to get a piece of the cyberpunk
pie, it cheapens Gibson's work to be lumped in with their spewings.

Truly innovative and trend-setting work can only be superficially lumped
into a literary and artistic movement.  It tends to stand completely alone
on its own merits, and has no need to be "propped up" by the works of
others.

The correlation of Pynchon and Gibson based on the "themes" of ninjas,
large and scary corporations, government "dirty tricks" departments, etc.
is superficial.  If this is the criteria for being "cyberpunk" then we may
as well drag in Akira Kurosawa, Kafka, some large portion of SF writers,
all CIA conspiracy theorizers, the Teenage Mutant Turtles (tm), all kung-fu
movies and who knows what else.

Now if you can relate Gibson to Pynchon on Pynchon's "real" themes of
entropy, paranoia, isolation, loss of individual control, etc. or Pynchon
to Gibson on Gibson's themes of escapism, conspiracy, etc. then you are
getting somewhere.  (And I mean on a specific level of how these themes
are developed and explored, how they relate to characters in the novels,
how they propel the action etc. not "gee, they both have individuals
fighting against big business" which is like saying "both Star Trek and
Star Wars have spaceships and laser-like weapons - they must be the same".)

There is already too much cyber-mush circulating in the media.  Let's not
contribute any more to it.

Mike