Difference between revisions of "Antimancer: Cybernetics and Art in Gibson's Count Zero"
From Clockworks2
Jump to navigationJump to search| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | [[Csicsery-Ronay, Istvan, Jr.]] "Antimancer: Cybernetics and Art in Gibson's Count Zero." ''SFS'' #65 = 22.1 (March 1995): 63-86. | + | '''[[Csicsery-Ronay, Istvan, Jr.]] "Antimancer: Cybernetics and Art in Gibson's Count Zero."''' ''SFS'' #65 = 22.1 (March 1995): 63-86. |
Second essay in a trilogy of essays beginning with IC-R's "[[Sentimental Futurist]]" essay (with the third essay on ''[[Mona Lisa Overdrive]]''). Claims that ''[[Count Zero]]'' fails as a "penance" or "antimancer" to [[Gibson, William|Gibson]]'s ''[[Neuromancer]]'', because "Gibson's counterforce is too abstract and theoretical to affect the language of power that drives the action of both novels." (RDE, 15/08/02) | Second essay in a trilogy of essays beginning with IC-R's "[[Sentimental Futurist]]" essay (with the third essay on ''[[Mona Lisa Overdrive]]''). Claims that ''[[Count Zero]]'' fails as a "penance" or "antimancer" to [[Gibson, William|Gibson]]'s ''[[Neuromancer]]'', because "Gibson's counterforce is too abstract and theoretical to affect the language of power that drives the action of both novels." (RDE, 15/08/02) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ============================ | ||
| + | EXPANSION: | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
[[Category:Csicsery-Ronay, Istvan, Jr.]] | [[Category:Csicsery-Ronay, Istvan, Jr.]] | ||
[[Category:Literary Criticism]] | [[Category:Literary Criticism]] | ||
Revision as of 22:27, 20 May 2019
Csicsery-Ronay, Istvan, Jr. "Antimancer: Cybernetics and Art in Gibson's Count Zero." SFS #65 = 22.1 (March 1995): 63-86.
Second essay in a trilogy of essays beginning with IC-R's "Sentimental Futurist" essay (with the third essay on Mona Lisa Overdrive). Claims that Count Zero fails as a "penance" or "antimancer" to Gibson's Neuromancer, because "Gibson's counterforce is too abstract and theoretical to affect the language of power that drives the action of both novels." (RDE, 15/08/02)
================
EXPANSION:
