Question

[james_davis_nicoll]

Noticed because this mentions me and the review I am going to link to in the next sentence.

This raises an interesting question: what is the worst Nebula-winning novel that you've read?

A list of winners and nominees.

I wonder if we could get Jo Walton to do for the Nebulas what she did for the Hugos?

Comments

[eagle]

It gets better. Not sufficiently so that I would recommend that you read it, but it turns into a relatively decent technological thriller and becomes somewhat less in love with its atmosphere.

[mishalak]

I suppose that is good to know, though I will keep on disliking it for inspiring movies like Hackers. I recognize that this is unfair of me and I am going to do it anyway. Someone has to pay for it and it might as well be Neuromancer.

[eagle]

Yeah, I know what you mean. Although after re-reading it, I was surprised that there was a lot less of that than I had expected. The computers are a bit hand-wavy, but most of the handwaving is actually in other places, and apart from some stupidity around not having decent feedback controls on the neural interfaces, many of the abuses of cyberpunk aren't actually in Neuromancer. For example, programs don't randomly wander around the net as if they were bears in a forest, a pet peeve of mine.