Posted by Terry Bramlett on November 23, 19100 at 08:34:21:

In Reply to: Re: Philcon posted by Megan on November 23, 19100 at 03:19:26:

: The convention was much fun. I've added a bit about it in the Town Crier. I'm looking forward to WorldCon next year, and looking forward to Philcon getting out of the Adam's Mark. It's a nice hotel, but the four elevators always seem to move in tandem, and ten minute waits and long lines after popular events--e.g. the Masquerade--are common.

: Vernor Vinge was an interesting speaker. I'm a fan of his stuff, and I got the impression from his speech that he'd be a fun guy to sit down and talk with.

: General question: Why was True Names essentially ignored, and why is it still treated as the poor stepchild of cyberpunk? (It seems that it's finally coming back into print, in an edition that seems to bundle it with either essays or other stories. As opposed to Neuromancer, which has been printed how many times? Not that it wasn't also a wonderful work, mind...) I've always been a fan of what has now become stereotypical cyberpunk: the dystopic (though not post-apocalyptic) future, cool toys available even to the oppressed masses, scary mega-corporations, etc., etc. But when I think about the computer geeks I know...they tend to be the folks who like role-playing, MUDs, Ren Faire, first-person-shooter-du-jour, or some combination thereof. So, much as I liked Case [insert other heroine chic, nihilistic almost-anti-hero here] as a protagonist, I had a much easier time picturing the development of present-day geeks to the folks in True Names. Was that part of the problem? Are "real" computer geeks just too boring/embarassing/unbelievable/nonsexy as protagonists?

: Thoughts, anyone?

I am a geek and work with geeks. They come in some pretty odd personalities that would fit well in SF. My second novel even deals with a few. geeks tend to make better antiheros IMO.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup