 |
| Neuromancer tells a tale of Cyberspace and a hacker |
 |
| Sword Art Online is currently an ongoing light novel series spawning over 14 volumes at approx. 250 pages each |
Neuromancer focuses on the reality portion of its universe and the scarred adults that rule it, where people exploit the Matrix for their personal gain, get high off of cocaine, and lose themselves immersed in the fanciful temptations of cyberspace. As William Gibson describes, Neuromancer was also a novel that was to make room for anti-heroes compared to stereotypical 'good guys' like the protagonist Kazuto Kirigaya is SAO. The main character of Neuromancer, Henry Case, is selfish and seeks nothing but personal gain in order to seclude himself in an Eden of drugs and guilty pleasures, as seen when he easily discards the heroine of the novel to pursue his cocaine addiction. Neuromancer seems to take influence from and add commentary to the self destructive nature of the counter culture.
SAO focuses on way that cyberspace has transformed our relationships with our peers, the meaningless yet quintessential aspects of gaming and the trending teen culture towards gaming as a form of accomplishment, social education/development, and medium for building complex relationships between one another through set goals and artificial adversity. Neuromancer discusses the implications such an internet centered lifestyle has on reality, where harsh truths must be forcibly accepted and naive ideals cannot survive. William Gibson promotes the anti-hero as a wake-up call to escapism and the self-destructive nature of man in the face of overwhelming convenience, perhaps countered by SAO's game-completionist aspect which states that people must overcome problems in order to become stronger?
Do both stories have similar themes perhaps due to their similar genres despite being divergent from one another?
ReplyDeleteWhich did you personally enjoy better and why?
I think you bring up a good point that cyberspace really has transformed our relationships with people. It has taken away the actually physical contact so deeply intertwined with communication. Like right now, I can't see you, you can't hear me, but we are still talking to each other through keyboards and computer monitors. Is this for the better or worse? And do you, personally, see gaming as a form of accomplishment?
ReplyDeleteI think your question would be better asked of the homogenity of modern culture.
DeleteGaming is a form of accomplishment. It's mentally stimulating (in the case of good games) and recognized as a sport. Victory and progression are moral values that not all humans can achieve, simply because there must be losers. It's a shame that an aspiring construction worker who wants to become a famous singer may never realize this dream.
I would not underestimate the power of "small victories" as they are present in video games. Obviously, I would prefer to talk to you in person, read your lips, hear your intonation, and interpret your gestures; that is an aspect of human interaction that should never disappear. But if this is thought of more as an augmentation to our communication in the real world, is this not for the better?
The important thing is to never use the internet as a barrier, but as a gateway.