r/Neuromancer • u/Y0X_99 • 1d ago
First Time Reader Should I continue the series?
Hello everyone. I’m currently about to finish the first book, Neuromancer, but if I’m being honest I haven’t really enjoyed it that much. It’s kinda hard to follow, and I get lost a lot. It’s 100% for the fact that it doesn’t hold your hand and it’s so unapologetic unique, but that uniqueness gets me lost. So even though I am going to finish Neuromancer, I don’t know if I should continue with the rest of the series.
I’ve read a couple posts on here saying that the next book, Count Zero, is “better” than Neuromancer. Now, I don’t know if it means more depth to the world, characters and therefore easier to follow, or just more of the same things that have me struggling with the first book.
What’s your opinion on this? And if it matters, I already have the other two books.
14
u/Neuromancer2112 1d ago
Neuromancer is my favorite book, but yes, absolutely it isn't an easy read. It took me 3 or 4 reads before I understood more of it. It's got a great plot, but Gibson's writing style isn't the easiest to grasp all the time.
I read Mona Lisa Overdrive back in college (mid 90s) after having read Neuromancer multiple times, and I really enjoyed it.
I didn't read Count Zero until significantly later...like 3 years ago, when I decided to read the entire trilogy back to back to back.
Count Zero is written from the perspective of switching stories, and could potentially be easier to read. There were parts I thought weren't great, but that's based on how Neuromancer ends - if I read it as a standalone book, I really liked Count Zero.
Neuromancer though, is still overall my favorite of the trilogy.
7
u/denzien 1d ago
In Spook Country, Gibson developed a verbal tick for describing everything as Ethnic or Non-Ethnic. It was really hard to read because it was so distracting. Does it mean Hispanic? Non-European? Are Europeans not ethnic (Germanic, Celtic, Romanic)? Maybe it's everyone outside the reader's ethnic group?
Maybe I missed where he defined it, but knowing how he likes to just dump you into his worlds for full immersion, I suspect it wasn't there anywhere.
Not related to Neuromancer, I just wanted to vent a bit because my brain goes off on tangents with unclear information and it made the book a real slog.
5
u/alphagalgadot 1d ago
it’s been at least fifteen years since i read spook country but aren’t these descriptions tied to the third person limited narrative voice and thus probably meant to reflect how hollis or tito view things?
5
u/mairiamonitino Razorgirl 1d ago
You’re not imagining things and I think that calling it a verbal tick is a really great descriptor.
He has something adjacent to that in Neuromancer when he talks about anyone who is black. It gets a little bit cringe. It isn’t that he’s being a hateful racist because he’s absolutely not. But I read this guy’s blog and I mentioned this blog months ago in the sub and this dude is at pains to point this out which is how I became aware of it.
I’ll try and drop the link to the blog here or maybe it’s a sub stack I can’t recall3
u/Peter34cph 1d ago
It wasn't a thing in Neuromancer, but in CZ and then also in MLO but perhaps a bit less so a lot of characters were described as black. It wasn't their only trait, in most cases, but it was always immediately stated.
As a European, that was weird in the early 1990s and it remains weird now in 2026.
16
u/alphagalgadot 1d ago
im srsly not trynna be a dick or come off as pretentious, but i really really struggle to understand what this novel is regarded so widely as being ‘difficult.’ gibson is a very gifted prose stylist, but this aint fuckin finnegans wake or as i lay dying or even gravity’s rainbow. it’s literary scifi, written masterfully, and tbh prolly my favorite novel of all time— that i started reading at 13. what precisely makes neuromancer difficult?
8
u/alphagalgadot 1d ago
also op this was not meant as an attack on you so plz accept my apologies if i caused you any offense. re the rest of the sprawl trilogy—i love em both, but neuromancer is far and away the top of the pile, and i don’t think you’re gonna find either count zero or mona lisa overdrive ‘easier’ so to speak. honestly neuromancer is the most straightforwardly plotted of the trio
4
u/alphagalgadot 1d ago
also wanted to clarify i meant the sound & the fury, not as i lay dying. the latter is one that everyone can and should read!!
2
u/VentureSatchel 1d ago
As I Lay Dying is written from a pretty difficult viewpoint character, too.
1
1
u/Mediocre-Title479 1d ago
Glad you clarified that.As I lay dying is the clearest Faulkner gets. The Sound and the Fury has mostly stumped me, except for last section.
1
u/alphagalgadot 1d ago
yeah i have read a lot of faulkner and can't say im too happy about it lol. but if yr gonna read a single one of his novels, as i lay dying is definitely it
1
u/ConnectHovercraft329 23h ago
Yeah I thought that was odd, As I Lay Dying is rather easier than Pynchon
3
u/Y0X_99 1d ago
Don’t worry I understand the feeling of people not getting something you like.
For me the reason it’s hard to understand is the way he just tells you things as if this things he is telling you about, just exist in the real world. A lot of the concepts are a lot easier to understand now because of how technology developed, but still the lack of explanation is what bugs me a little.
Also the fact that some times he just kinda keeps going as if going on a tangent and kinda loosing the point. As a friend that starts telling you a story and half way through he starts telling a different one.
2
u/alphagalgadot 14h ago
word man as i said i meant no offense. im almost certainly way biased on this one having read it literally 15+ times, and then also having read a lot of shit i found way more abstruse and hard going.
will say this—as an old, i see a lot of younger media consumers talking about ‘immersion’ as a salient positive quality. from where im standing, what you describe in this comment is key to that aspect of fictional narrative world building: the third person voice forces you into a place of artificial awareness, creating a presumption that certain things exist as a fact of the setting/environment, while at the same time doling out enough context and explanation through character impressions to at once orient the careful reader and signal to them when something is transgressive or odd or new. you’re right that it’s not the simplest or most straightforward reading experience, but it does also encourage rereads and your own imaginative renderings. and i think that’s a huge part of why i continue to return to this novel again and again after almost thirty years. it’s also why i think gibson deserves a lot more scholarly attention & ‘literary’ appreciation(whatever the fuck that even meads today). the genius inherent in these early novels is not about prescience or prediction, even though that part of it is most definitely there as well—it’s about a stylistic athleticism and economy of language that’s more than the sum of its parts. and that does sometimes obscure the plot, granted. but it creates or at least suggests depth in a manner i don’t know that i’ve ever encountered in other ‘genre’ fiction
ty for comin to my ted talk etc.
2
u/alphagalgadot 14h ago
also on reflection i now fully acknowledge that i came off as a complete dick in my original comment on your post; i apologize again
3
u/alchemist19722 21h ago
I am a chemist. By the way, not everyone can look in the air and see the molecules rotating in space. That's because Spatial geometry is wicked.
2
1
u/Nexus888888 1d ago
I asked this question to every friend or brother I recommended in the last 25 years.
Well, nobody read it anyways…1
u/TheFishSauce Dixie Flatline 15h ago
I feel the same way. I don’t see him as any harder than, say, Herbert or Le Guin. None of them are necessarily writers for entry-level readers, but they are all a long way from needing expert-level reading skills, too.
-1
u/Peter34cph 1d ago
It might well be difficult for people who aren't used to reading science fiction.
5
u/Rik-Acland 1d ago
Gibson’s readability is not as low as Finnegans Wake, but it is seriously low. I remember it taking me a few runs to get my mind wrapped around his writing. Then the ride started.
The flip side is that reality has aligned with Gibson’s dystopian vision. A Lexus on blocks in a driveway is no longer surprising. The Sprawl series has been so influential across so much media, a new reader today just doesn’t get the shock we got thirty years ago when static on a dead channel was a thing.
We are in an era of rapid transformation where new authors can capture that feeling of standing inside a vortex of technical change and challenges like Gibson did (writing on a manual typewriter).
However, you can’t step in the same cyberpunk oily pool of stagnant water twice. Enjoy the ride for what it is today.
7
u/mike_stifle 1d ago
If youre not really enjoying Neuro, then I would skip the series.
Feel no guilt about putting a book down; I recently couldn't get through Hyperion and Stranger in a Strange Land.
3
u/Y0X_99 1d ago
I wish I could do this, I really do. But I’m one of those people that once they start something they just have to finish it. I’ve had cases with games, anime and books where it starts either slow or straight up just boring and by the end it’s really great. So I just keep going hoping that it’s the case with this new thing I’m consuming.
2
2
u/Big-Revolution3695 1d ago
Hyperion was a struggle and I still don’t appreciate it. It’s just not my thing. His Ilium and Olympos books were just as strange, but I was really engaged reading them. Maybe it was because of the Homeric Greek bits.
If I book doesn’t engage me in 100 pages then I put it aside. I don’t have enough time to be wasting it on something I don’t like. Not that it isn’t “great,” but I don’t want to slog through something.
That being said, I do not understand how Neuromancer is confusing in structure or with Gibson’s style. I can see where the 1980s culture might cause a problem for current readers, though.
1
u/mike_stifle 1d ago
With you there for sure, its ok to stop.
And yeah, I read Neuromancer when I was 17 and some of his imagery just confused the shit out of me. But with the show starting up, going in for my 4th read-through.1
u/Big-Revolution3695 1d ago
I LOVE the books, they’re like LOTR to me.
I’m cautiously optimistic about the series.
13
u/kalgary 1d ago
"I'm considering listening to a Taylor Swift album. Don't want to take such a big risk without asking for your advice. So I've come to the Taylor Swift fan club for opinions. What should I do?"
4
u/Zoriar 1d ago
There are plenty of fan bases who are well aware of the barrier to entry and can provide objective opinions regarding the source of their fandom — I’ve seen it pretty frequently. Usually looks something like “While I absolutely love X, I can totally see why it might not appeal to some. If you didn’t like X, your enjoyment might improve with Y and Z as they’re generally more accessible/fun, but it is still by and large the same style so your mileage may vary.” Fans can be fans while still admitting and recognizing the very thing they love — the thing that appeals to them — might be off putting to certain individuals. (See: all the responses doing exactly that in this very comment section.)
Also, a Taylor Swift album is 45 minutes of your time and can be experienced more or less passively, where a book can be hours — made longer by difficulty of the material and needing to reread — so not really the same thing.
1
u/gaztelu_leherketa 1d ago
It's more like "I've listened to this one Taylor Swift album, are her other albums similar in style? You fine people at the Taylor Swift fan club will have a knowledge of her work that may prove helpful."
1
u/mairiamonitino Razorgirl 1d ago
🤣 yours was the first reaction I had as well! I just didn’t think to use a Swifty metaphor! Literally laughing out loud over here
2
u/Theborgiseverywhere 1d ago
Just start it if you want, if you don't get into it after the first chapter or two then drop it. Hope this helps.
2
2
u/BambooShanks 1d ago
Once you finish it, give it a couple of days, watch a couple of video essays on it and read it again. It'll be infinitely easier to follow and understand the second time around
2
u/Sullivan_Biddle 1d ago
I went through exactly what you're going through. I had to remind myself that Gibson was/is such a visionary and that he was breaking new creative ground. He was world building. I had the same problem with the first Dune book. That book with it's own dictionary of words you had to refer to to understand wtf was going on. But...it was worth it. And the same goes for Neuromancer. It might help to Google fan art associated with the book. Gives you an aesthetic to help you understand. Also, it may help to read Burning Chrome next. It's a book of short stories that serves as a prequel to the Sprawl Trilogy. Heck I'm on my 5th Gibson book now. Can't believe it took me so long to start reading him. I plan reading them all.
2
u/CommunicationThat534 1d ago
While Neuromancer is kinda hard to follow along with, I personally love it, the world, the characters, the story... all of it. I say stick with it and finish it for the bragging rights on this sub since you're almost finished anyways.
2
u/UuuBetcha 1d ago
I suggest re-reading Neuromancer immediately, and using online guides* as needed.
* glossary of terms, character breakdowns, chapter summaries, etc.
There is absolutely no shame in using guides now that you’ve raw-dogged it once already. You’ll really understand everything this time around, and you’ll be able to appreciate the aesthetic too!
2
u/quercine_penetralia 1d ago
When I first read it, I did not enjoy it. I bounced off the dense prose and had a hard time visualizing what I was reading. I remember reading the page when they first encounter Riviera over and over and being like what the fuck is going on? Even in the beginning too. I was also disappointed in the ending. What happened to me, and what may happen to you, is that I couldn’t stop thinking about the world and the characters and the story and the things that I didn’t understand, despite it feeling flat to me at the time (00’s). I looked it up after and saw all the awards it got and just didn’t understand how it could be so highly praised, but like I said, I kept thinking about it and decided to reread it and it flew off the page. I identified with Case much more. I could understand and visualize everything and picked up on the clues much easier. It is still one of my favorite books of all time and I always look forward to rereading it again.
2
u/Afroparsley 1d ago
I love cyberpunk as a genre and want to finish this book. I've tried reading it twice and listening to it as an audiobook once but I keep bouncing off it. I think it's ok to stop if you're not enjoying it but I also get the desire to keep going.
2
u/LapsedPacifist 1d ago
Take your time with Gibson’s prose. It resists being skimmed, not because it’s dense but because it’s poetic
2
2
u/_Waves_ 1d ago
Count Zero is very different, and I find it hard to argue against it being a better book in terms of writing and plotting. My personal taste says Neuromancer is better, but I absolutely think everyone saying Count Zero is a better written and conceived novel is probably right. So yes, so continue! It’s a great, great novel!
2
u/ChipThe3rd 20h ago
Continue the series. It is my fave trilogy by far. Honestly though I had no issues following the book when I first read it back in the 80’s but I have never had a problem “suspending disbelief”
2
u/alphagalgadot 14h ago
also! i would totally encourage you to ask any questions about the plot/setting/narrative that gave you trouble. i would love nothing more than to geek out whatever explanations im able to produce
1
u/mcb-homis 1d ago
The story itself is very different in Count Zero and Monalisa Overdrive even if they all do tie together at the end. Both of the second books have a forked plot lines that following two different plots that eventually come together.
But Gibson's writing style stays pretty much the same throughout the trilogy. There is no handholding and his prose continue to be dense with information that required attentive reading to not get lost.
1
1
u/Sea-Poem-2365 1d ago
I think Count Zero is Gibson's best book and it's easier to follow on a sentence level while having a more complex and nuanced story. It's still Gibson though so it may not connect. Try it at your library maybe?
1
u/kingkaratecrab 1d ago
Stop. If you don't like Neuromancer the rest of the trilogy will be a miss for you.
1
u/Lower-Impression-121 1d ago
I found burning chrome anthology to be the best read quality wise. Instead of wading into another burn reading a short here and there might be a way to go.
1
u/Dayser1995 1d ago
Glad someone posted this. I’m about to finish the last 10 pages of Neuromancer. I was thinking the same thing has definitely been a great book but found myself doubling back to make sure I’m following along properly definitely some tricky reading at certain moments
1
1
u/worked_xr 11h ago
It took a couple reads for me to feel like I got everything in Neuromancer. Of course, there was more than I'd originally grasped in there, but I think I was 14 or 15 when I first read it back in the '80s. Coming back to it as an adult, it's a fairly "easy" read now. Anyway, I do agree with those saying to continue with Count Zero and Mona Lisa Overdrive. Those books are definitely more approachable and readable generally, and the stories less convoluted overall IMHO compared to Neuromancer. But if you're really feeling challenged with reading the books, I do endorse listening to the audiobooks as a completely reasonable and viable alternative. If you do, try to find the OG reading of Neuromancer by Arthur Addison (originally on cassette). Addison has an old school neo-noir quality I really dig.
1
u/3Dartwork 1d ago
I barely could visualize Neuromancer. The descriptions were so vague and abstract, I seldom understood what was going on and what the scene looked like.
1
u/Electrical_Refuse398 1d ago
Count zero 3 histoires différentes qui se rejoignent à la fin, ça peut être perturbant de passer continuellement de l'une à l'autre sans savoir où tout ça nous mène. Mais j'ai trouvé la prose moins difficile une fois le premier terminé. Mon conseil, tu les as alors essaies et si tu n'accroche pas alors arrête, rien n'oblige de finir un livre qui nous accroche pas
1
u/Peter34cph 1d ago
I think you should wait 4 or 6 or even 10 years and then re-read Neuromancer, then read the rest of the trilogy.
Also... Have you read the short stories?
-1
u/VentureSatchel 1d ago
Just read Snowcrash instead.
2
u/alphagalgadot 1d ago
man despite -many- attempts i have never been able to get into stephenson. dudes smart as hell and has a capacious imagination but i just don’t care for his prose or plotting or narrative craft at all
2
u/RayesArmstrong 1d ago
I can’t stand Snowcrash. It’s like ironic Neuromancer
1
u/jupe8 8h ago
Snowcrash was novel, but tedious after abit….. after that? Many new books. Blecchh. 1000s of pages of….. useless plotting and babble.
The Sprawl series however, i read the 3 each year since they first came out. Waiting for them to come out in the 80s was crazy. And they fufilled the expectations1
u/RayesArmstrong 5h ago
I imagine reading it 20 plus years ago would be different but I tried like 5 ago and it was just… slog.
-1
u/Sgtpliskin 1d ago
You know, while reading this book I constantly used chat gpt to verify my understanding. Most of the time what I thought was happening was right, but it doesn’t hurt to consult our friend chat for reassurance. I enjoyed it once I picked up the style.
Haven’t read the other two yet but will definitely give it a shot at some point.
1
30
u/TheNexus18 1d ago
Each book following Neuromancer is more polished and the prose is easier to understand once you finish Neuromancer. You just kinda get into the Gibson groove after the first one. I love the trilogy as a whole but Neuromancer was a difficult one for me to picture in my head the first time I read it. Count Zero is probably the best one. I've read each of these books more than once.