Mona Lisa Overdrive Q's (spoilers)
Knight37
I thought maybe if I posted my questions someone would have some input.
First, in his past, Slick was put into some kind of "prison". What
exactly did they do to him? What was the purpose of it?
At the end of the story, apparently Angie, Count Zero (Bobby), The Finn,
Colin, and 3Jane(?) are in the "aleph" (which I still don't understand
what it really was), and somehow they were going to go into the "other"
matrix (from Centauri). I don't get this, what the hell actually happened
at the end of the story? Did Angie die? If so how? I guess I would like
some kind of commentary on the ending and what actually happened.
All in all I liked Neuromancer the best, Count Zero a lot, and only parts
of Mona Lisa Overdrive.
Knight37
Wakboth
> I'm confused about a few things that happened in Mona Lisa Overdrive, and
> I thought maybe if I posted my questions someone would have some input.
>
> First, in his past, Slick was put into some kind of "prison". What
> exactly did they do to him? What was the purpose of it?
They induced a Korsakovsk's Syndrome to him, basically ruining his
short-term memory. Why they did it, I can't remember.
> At the end of the story, apparently Angie, Count Zero (Bobby), The Finn,
> Colin, and 3Jane(?) are in the "aleph" (which I still don't understand
> what it really was),
A truly massive block of Maas bioprocessor/memory stuff. Basically,
the substrate for a virtual world that's probably bigger than the real
world. 3Jane's presence is similar to the Finn's; she's a brain
recording of the original 3Jane, who I think was dead by that time,
running on the aleph.
> and somehow they were going to go into the "other" matrix (from Centauri). I
> don't get this, what the hell actually happened at the end of the story? Did
> Angie die? If so how? I guess I would like some kind of commentary on the
> ending and what actually happened.
The ending is very confusing, probably intentionally.
Angie's body does die, but her self, which has apparently been running
on the bioprocessors implanted in her brain by her father, survives
and is transferred into the aleph.
I think Angie's function was to be some kind of a trigger/key that
enabled the two matrices to fully understand each other; she was
engineered by the Earth matrix (bits and pieces of which appeared as
the loas) through her father.
In the end, all the pieces come together: the loas and the other
matrix (which may or may not have suffered a similar breakdown) come
together in the aleph, with Angie functioning as the key. All the
others -- Bobby, 3Jane, Colin the chip-ghost and the Finn -- are
basically hangers-on; they may have participated in the process, but
they are not really part of it.
> All in all I liked Neuromancer the best, Count Zero a lot, and only parts
> of Mona Lisa Overdrive.
>
> Knight37
Neuromancer's my favorite as well, but I actually prefer Mona Lisa
Overdrive to Count Zero; not that CZ is a bad book, either.
-- Wakboth
grey...@yahoo.com
> I'm confused about a few things that happened in Mona Lisa Overdrive, and
> I thought maybe if I posted my questions someone would have some input.
>
> First, in his past, Slick was put into some kind of "prison". What
> exactly did they do to him? What was the purpose of it?
>
They treated him so he couldnt concentrate on anything for longer that
x minutes
> At the end of the story, apparently Angie, Count Zero (Bobby), The Finn,
> Colin, and 3Jane(?) are in the "aleph" (which I still don't understand
> what it really was), and somehow they were going to go into the "other"
the aleph would, as in another thread, be a sort of gigantic flash
ram.
> matrix (from Centauri). I don't get this, what the hell actually happened
> at the end of the story? Did Angie die? If so how? I guess I would like
> some kind of commentary on the ending and what actually happened.
Angie died, the girl that was supposed to fill in for her took over.
>
> All in all I liked Neuromancer the best, Count Zero a lot, and only parts
> of Mona Lisa Overdrive.
>
> Knight37
--
greymaus
Al Firan RumaiDin
97.025% of statistics are wrong
Johnny Tindalos
> They induced a Korsakovsk's Syndrome to him, basically ruining his
> short-term memory. Why they did it, I can't remember.
>
He was a car-thief (and member of the Deacon Blues, so one might surmise
his having somewhat of a lengthy rap-sheet).
> Neuromancer's my favorite as well, but I actually prefer Mona Lisa
> Overdrive to Count Zero; not that CZ is a bad book, either.
>
I preferred _Burning Chrome_, especially _Hinterlands_. CZ and MLO are both
so good that I've just spent 20 minutes trying to decide, and I can't.
Regards,
Johnny T. (Who thought the nameless assassin from _All Tomorrow's Parties_
was *so* cool...as did Rydell, come to that: remember the bit when he's got
tears in his eyes? Wicked...)
Knight37
news:Xns94DAC49C0196EJa...@217.32.252.50:
>> They induced a Korsakovsk's Syndrome to him, basically ruining his
>> short-term memory. Why they did it, I can't remember.
>>
>
> He was a car-thief (and member of the Deacon Blues, so one might
> surmise his having somewhat of a lengthy rap-sheet).
Okay but what purpose did it serve to jack with his short term memory?
Why would this kind of punishment be used? I kept waiting for Gibson to
go into more details about this but he never did.
Knight37
Steve Coltrin
> Knight37 <knig...@email.com> wrote in message news:<Xns94D9A033...@130.133.1.4>...
>>
>> First, in his past, Slick was put into some kind of "prison". What
>> exactly did they do to him? What was the purpose of it?
>
> They induced a Korsakovsk's Syndrome to him, basically ruining his
> short-term memory. Why they did it, I can't remember.
If you are referring to Wernicke-Korsakoff syndrome, that's not what it
does.
--
Steve Coltrin spco...@omcl.org WWVBF?
Der Herr Buergermeister gibt bekannt, dass ab Donnerstag Bier gebraut
wird und deshalb ab Mittwoch nicht mehr in den Bach geschissen werden darf.
Johnny Tindalos
Stops prisoners from misbehaving, makes them much easier and safer to
guard, and is rather unpleasant and thereby discourages repeat offending.
jack
Johnny Tindalos wrote:
hey Johnny, did u bend spacetime and leap from the corners? do those
ergonomic keyboards have angles u can use?
ur not coming for me are u? my keys are all round.
> I preferred _Burning Chrome_, especially _Hinterlands_. CZ and MLO are both
> so good that I've just spent 20 minutes trying to decide, and I can't.
>
swiss cheese brain forgets.. hinterlands = exoskeleton, kings of sleep?
BC does rule.. too tired to reach for shelf and check..
> Regards,
>
> Johnny T. (Who thought the nameless assassin from _All Tomorrow's Parties_
> was *so* cool...as did Rydell, come to that: remember the bit when he's got
> tears in his eyes? Wicked...)
>
i'm going to be that assasin when i grow up.
or possibly extract the worldview for less violent purposes?
do easy, yo.
..
jack .. not making much sense anymore..
and caring less.
Matt Ruff
>
> I'm confused about a few things that happened in Mona Lisa Overdrive, and
> I thought maybe if I posted my questions someone would have some input.
>
> First, in his past, Slick was put into some kind of "prison". What
> exactly did they do to him?
He was given drugs that induced a form of Korsakov's syndrome, which is
a form a brain damage in which you lose the ability to form new
memories. Your long-term memories remain intact, so you remember who you
are and what happened in your life up to the time you suffered the brain
damage, but anything new slips your mind within a few minutes.
As far as I know, real-life Korsakov's is permanent. Gibson's
drug-induced version is supposed to be temporary -- you get cured once
you've finished serving your sentence. Part of Slick's problem was that
the cure wasn't perfect, so -- as happens in the story -- if he got
nervous he'd have an "episode" of Korsakov's.
> What was the purpose of it?
For one thing, it makes it almost impossible to plan, so presumably a
prison of Korsakov's sufferers wouldn't have any escape attempts or
organized riots. (On the other hand, you'd probably see a fair number of
panic attacks and disorganized riots, so I'm not sure how much of an
improvement it'd be.)
Mainly, though, it's a form of torture. You spend your time confused and
fearful.
> At the end of the story, apparently Angie, Count Zero (Bobby), The Finn,
> Colin, and 3Jane(?) are in the "aleph" (which I still don't understand
> what it really was), and somehow they were going to go into the "other"
> matrix (from Centauri). I don't get this, what the hell actually happened
> at the end of the story? Did Angie die?
The idea was that Angie's body died, but in the process her
consciousness was somehow transferred into the aleph. Bobby's was, too,
and there was at least a copy of the Finn in there as well.
As for the bit about Alpha Centauri, you may or may not remember that at
the end of _Neuromancer_, Wintermute claimed to have detected a bunch of
radio transmissions from another AI in the Alpha Centauri system. That
apparently set off a chain reaction that -- by the time _Count Zero_
took place -- caused Wintermute to break apart into a bunch of
cybernetic voodoo gods "haunting" the matrix. So the idea, at the end of
_Mona Lisa Overdrive_, is that Finn is going to show Angie and Bobby the
Centauri matrix to help them understand *why* the chain reaction took
place, which is what Bobby and Gentry had both been trying to figure out.
-- M. Ruff
Matt Ruff
>
> Wakboth writes:
>
>> They induced a Korsakovsk's Syndrome to him, basically ruining his
>> short-term memory. Why they did it, I can't remember.
>
> If you are referring to Wernicke-Korsakoff syndrome, that's not what it
> does.
Korsakov's psychosis/syndrome is what he's referring too, all right. How
does the real deal differ from Gibson's version?
-- M. Ruff
Steve Coltrin
Wernicke-Korsakoff affects narrative memory, not working memory.
Matt Ruff
>
> Matt Ruff writes:
>
>> Korsakov's psychosis/syndrome is what he's referring too, all
>> right. How does the real deal differ from Gibson's version?
>
> Wernicke-Korsakoff affects narrative memory, not working memory.
Can you unpack that a little more?
-- M. Ruff
Steve Coltrin
Damage to the hippocampus, such as can result from thiamine deficiency,
as well as kainic acid exposure, hypoxia, or physical injury, can
prevent the formation of new narrative memory - which is to say,
"I went there and did this" memory. Other memory faculties, such as
skill acquisition, recognition of situations, and - most to point here -
the scratch buffers that 'short term memory' is sometimes used to refer
to - are _not in the least_ affected.
--
Steve Coltrin spco...@omcl.org WWVBF?
"I imagine he was a little upset in the morning when he awoke drenched
in blood with a dead seagull dangling over him." - Semolina Pilchard
Knight37
news:40940017...@worldnet.att.net:
> Knight37 wrote:
> >
>> I'm confused about a few things that happened in Mona Lisa Overdrive,
>> and I thought maybe if I posted my questions someone would have some
>> input.
>>
>> First, in his past, Slick was put into some kind of "prison". What
>> exactly did they do to him?
>
> He was given drugs that induced a form of Korsakov's syndrome, which
> is a form a brain damage in which you lose the ability to form new
> memories. Your long-term memories remain intact, so you remember who
> you are and what happened in your life up to the time you suffered the
> brain damage, but anything new slips your mind within a few minutes.
>
> As far as I know, real-life Korsakov's is permanent. Gibson's
> drug-induced version is supposed to be temporary -- you get cured once
> you've finished serving your sentence. Part of Slick's problem was
> that the cure wasn't perfect, so -- as happens in the story -- if he
> got nervous he'd have an "episode" of Korsakov's.
Cool, that helped a lot.
>> What was the purpose of it?
>
> For one thing, it makes it almost impossible to plan, so presumably a
> prison of Korsakov's sufferers wouldn't have any escape attempts or
> organized riots. (On the other hand, you'd probably see a fair number
> of panic attacks and disorganized riots, so I'm not sure how much of
> an improvement it'd be.)
>
> Mainly, though, it's a form of torture. You spend your time confused
> and fearful.
I see. So it's some way to keep the prisoners in line and also screw with
them. :)
>> At the end of the story, apparently Angie, Count Zero (Bobby), The
>> Finn, Colin, and 3Jane(?) are in the "aleph" (which I still don't
>> understand what it really was), and somehow they were going to go
>> into the "other" matrix (from Centauri). I don't get this, what the
>> hell actually happened at the end of the story? Did Angie die?
>
> The idea was that Angie's body died, but in the process her
> consciousness was somehow transferred into the aleph. Bobby's was,
> too, and there was at least a copy of the Finn in there as well.
>
> As for the bit about Alpha Centauri, you may or may not remember that
> at the end of _Neuromancer_, Wintermute claimed to have detected a
> bunch of radio transmissions from another AI in the Alpha Centauri
> system. That apparently set off a chain reaction that -- by the time
> _Count Zero_ took place -- caused Wintermute to break apart into a
> bunch of cybernetic voodoo gods "haunting" the matrix. So the idea, at
> the end of _Mona Lisa Overdrive_, is that Finn is going to show Angie
> and Bobby the Centauri matrix to help them understand *why* the chain
> reaction took place, which is what Bobby and Gentry had both been
> trying to figure out.
Hmm.. okay. What didn't really get explained is why the "wintermute" (or
whatever it became) needed Angie in the aleph...?
Thanks to all for your responses...
Knight37
Matt Ruff
>
> Damage to the hippocampus, such as can result from thiamine deficiency,
> as well as kainic acid exposure, hypoxia, or physical injury, can
> prevent the formation of new narrative memory - which is to say,
> "I went there and did this" memory. Other memory faculties, such as
> skill acquisition, recognition of situations, and - most to point here -
> the scratch buffers that 'short term memory' is sometimes used to refer
> to - are _not in the least_ affected.
OK. I don't think this is inconsistent with Gibson's description in
_Mona Lisa Overdrive_.
Re: skill acquisition, wouldn't the lack of a narrative thread make it
difficult or impossible to learn how to do *lengthy* tasks?
-- M. Ruff
Steve Coltrin
I have a suspicion that an externally-applied training regimen could be
put together to do so, but I'm having a hard time getting my proposal
past the ethics panel for some reason.
Self-initiated, no, unless the individual was not only extremely determined
but knew _well_ in advance what was going to happen. Similar obstructionism
from the ethics people.
[Scion]
depressed, or is he depressed because he listens to pop music?
> Hmm.. okay. What didn't really get explained is why the "wintermute"
> (or whatever it became) needed Angie in the aleph...?
Or why it split, for that matter. This is pure speculation on my part,
but I think Gibson didn't explain that bit because he was trying to make
a point. Namely, that we don't get the answers to our "why's". Angie got
the AI dossier on her dad, but it didn't help her figure him out, and she
eventually threw it away. Similarly, all we see of the AI's interactions
are the effects it has on cyberspace. We don't ever get any first causes.
--
~Scion
---------------------
"One man's creative laboratory is another man's license to wank."
--Bill Flanagan
scion238 AT phreaker DOT net
[Scion]
depressed, or is he depressed because he listens to pop music?
>>> Hmm.. okay. What didn't really get explained is why the "wintermute"
>>> (or whatever it became) needed Angie in the aleph...?
>>
>> Or why it split, for that matter. This is pure speculation on my part,
>> but I think Gibson didn't explain that bit because he was trying to
>> make a point. Namely, that we don't get the answers to our "why's".
>> Angie got the AI dossier on her dad, but it didn't help her figure him
>> out, and she eventually threw it away. Similarly, all we see of the
>> AI's interactions are the effects it has on cyberspace. We don't ever
>> get any first causes.
>
> I guess that's why I prefered Neuromancer to the later books in some
> ways. It just made a heck of a lot more sense, and the ending was
> satisfying, not leaving you hanging. Count Zero wasn't too bad in this
> either since the "bad guy" got it in the end.
CZ is actually my favorite of the trilogy. It's more coherent, a more
complete novel than Neuromancer. It also marks the debut of the Gibsonian
multiple-viewpoint-juggling trademark. You can't just follow one
character's POV and get the whole story. They don't put it all together,
inside the story; but you do, because you're eavesdropping on
*everything*. I found that aspect very cool.
> But to me Mona Lisa was going great
> and then it's like Gibson looked at his watch and said "wow,
> look at the time. Yada Yada aleph yada yada Alpha Centauri bam DONE."
*FDL* You have a good point. MLO pissed me off the first time I read it.
I was like, "Okay...so they found the alien cyberspace AI. So what? Why
should I care? Neuromute found that back at the end of the *first*
book." MLO itself seemed kinda pointless...almost. I had to read it 3 or
4 times to figure out what Gibson was trying to say.
Small wonder then, that Gibson chose to remake Marly's POV as Pattern
Recognition. Although the bits with Kumiko and Colin were priceless, I
must say. I took a rather sadistic pleasure in watching street-samurai
Molly being forced to "babysit" Kumiko.
Knight37
news:Xns94DFE3C5549B5s...@216.168.3.50:
> CZ is actually my favorite of the trilogy. It's more coherent, a more
> complete novel than Neuromancer. It also marks the debut of the
> Gibsonian multiple-viewpoint-juggling trademark. You can't just follow
> one character's POV and get the whole story. They don't put it all
> together, inside the story; but you do, because you're eavesdropping
> on *everything*. I found that aspect very cool.
I did like that technique but I had encountered it before many times
already so it wasn't really that new of an idea for me. But by the time
I'd gotten to MLO I was getting a bit weary of it.
>> But to me Mona Lisa was going great
>> and then it's like Gibson looked at his watch and said "wow,
>> look at the time. Yada Yada aleph yada yada Alpha Centauri bam DONE."
>
> *FDL* You have a good point. MLO pissed me off the first time I read
> it. I was like, "Okay...so they found the alien cyberspace AI. So
> what? Why should I care? Neuromute found that back at the end of the
> *first* book." MLO itself seemed kinda pointless...almost. I had to
> read it 3 or 4 times to figure out what Gibson was trying to say.
Yikes! I don't think I'm going to go back and reread it 3 or 4 times just
to figure anything out from it. :)
> Small wonder then, that Gibson chose to remake Marly's POV as Pattern
> Recognition.
? I'm not following you on this comment.
> Although the bits with Kumiko and Colin were priceless, I
> must say. I took a rather sadistic pleasure in watching street-samurai
> Molly being forced to "babysit" Kumiko.
Yes, the whole bit with Kumiko was pretty entertaining. I also liked the
parts with Slick Henry and Gentry. The part where Molly meets up with
Finn's construct was pretty cool. I guess I liked the *parts* of MLO, but
maybe not the sum of them. If that makes sense. Bleh. :)
Knight37
Johnny Tindalos
> hey Johnny, did u bend spacetime and leap from the corners?
Lean and athirst and a horror of the soul, wakeful with cosmic hungers!
Living it up in curved time! See me on the dance floor as I move slowly
through outrageous angles!
> do those
> ergonomic keyboards have angles u can use?
>
> ur not coming for me are u? my keys are all round.
>
Ho ho, you'd have to scrub off the "V", the "X", that "Y" and the "Z"...
> swiss cheese brain forgets.. hinterlands = exoskeleton, kings of
> sleep? BC does rule.. too tired to reach for shelf and check..
>
That was _Kings of Sleep_, which was also brilliant. (_Hinterlands_ had
the hitchhikers coming back insane (from the pale gray shores beyond time
and space, from a silence that shrieked?) with strange alien artefacts
clutched in rigid fists.)
>
> i'm going to be that assasin when i grow up.
>
> or possibly extract the worldview for less violent purposes?
Purify it and inject it in case of chaotic moments?
Regards,
Johnny T.
jabberwocky
> "[Scion]" <sc...@nospam.org> wrote in
> news:Xns94DED7B04ABF0s...@216.168.3.50:
>
> >> Hmm.. okay. What didn't really get explained is why the "wintermute"
> >> (or whatever it became) needed Angie in the aleph...?
> >
> > Or why it split, for that matter. This is pure speculation on my part,
> > but I think Gibson didn't explain that bit because he was trying to
> > make a point. Namely, that we don't get the answers to our "why's".
> > Angie got the AI dossier on her dad, but it didn't help her figure him
> > out, and she eventually threw it away. Similarly, all we see of the
> > AI's interactions are the effects it has on cyberspace. We don't ever
> > get any first causes.
>
> I guess that's why I prefered Neuromancer to the later books in some
> ways. It just made a heck of a lot more sense, and the ending was
> satisfying, not leaving you hanging. Count Zero wasn't too bad in this
> either since the "bad guy" got it in the end. But to me Mona Lisa was
> going great and then it's like Gibson looked at his watch and said "wow,
> look at the time. Yada Yada aleph yada yada Alpha Centauri bam DONE."
>
> Knight37
Yeah, I also have to say that the ending of MLO's ending was the only
disappointing thing about the book. I left me scratching my head wonder
what was going on.
kevin
"jabberwocky" <dalek_...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:dalek_killer-1C6F...@shawnews.ed.shawcable.net...
I dislike like the ending of every Gibson book. I haven't read Pattern
Recognition. Neuromancer is the best (least worst IMO) but there's
got to be some purpose to the crapola endings, doesn't there? Does
he purposely try to have a lousy ending. ok, "lousy" is is subjective, I
know that, but c'mon the endings suck. Maybe it's a case, as someone
here speculated, that he's trying to make a point that we don't get the
answers to our "why's" - but is that a good reason for a sucky ending?
ghost
"kevin" <khig...@nyukhouston.rr.com> wrote:
I hardly think they suck. All the endings aren't neat little bows on the
package, which is the point IMO. All the books don't so much end as stop
telling the story - they give me the impression that the characters go
on with their lives after the book is over... unlike most books that tie
it all up with a ride into the sunset so to speak.
ghost
~/~ when did the future switch from being a promise to a threat? ~/~
www.accanthology.com ~/~ www.bitstreamnet.com
take out the GARBAGE to email.
kevin
"ghost" <ghostG...@bitstreamnetMOREGARBAGE.com> wrote in message
news:ghostGARBAGE-7A9B...@news-central.ash.giganews.com...
> In article <67Gnc.74546$NR5....@fe1.texas.rr.com>,
> "kevin" <khig...@nyukhouston.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > I dislike like the ending of every Gibson book. I haven't read Pattern
> > Recognition. Neuromancer is the best (least worst IMO) but there's
> > got to be some purpose to the crapola endings, doesn't there? Does
> > he purposely try to have a lousy ending. ok, "lousy" is is subjective, I
> > know that, but c'mon the endings suck. Maybe it's a case, as someone
> > here speculated, that he's trying to make a point that we don't get the
> > answers to our "why's" - but is that a good reason for a sucky ending?
>
> I hardly think they suck.
Ok. I don't mean to say that they do suck, just that I find them to
be that way. I notice also that I use "least worst" to describe
Neuromancer's ending - a clearly sucky way to describe anything.
Eh, I was tired then and am more tired now. I'm telling you this so
you'll know, that in the case of this post falling apart at the end as
if it were a Gibson novel, say, that I have a good excuse for that
happening. <g>
>All the endings aren't neat little bows on the
> package, which is the point IMO.
Well... I like Gibson so it's not like I believe he's incapable of
writing an ending in a manner I would be likely to appreciate. It
proly is a case of him doing what you say he's doing. I just don't
get the feeling that the characters go on with their lives after the
events of the book.
It's an unusual style, so many should be put off by it, I suppose.
maybe the endings require more thought than I've given them.
I can't figure out what's inside the package - what happened?!
A rhetorical question, of course, but in a way it's not - other
than Neuromancer I can't even remember the endings to any of
his books.