1.
In 1992 Neil Esterbrook wrote “cyberpunk is dead,” stating that most cyberpunk authors had moved back into mainstream science fiction. Cyberpunk exists as a subgenre of science fiction literature, a subversive exploration of a ruling technocratic corporate culture. Indulging in both a fascination with, and fear of technology, cyberpunk often blurs the lines between what is natural and what is completely artificial, sometimes even reversing the two.
Cyberpunk was born in the 1980s and offered a glimpse into the not-too-distant future. Building on then-current technologies, the subgenre followed their development and applications to one possible, horrific conclusion: that technological enrichment does not equal societal enlightenment. Although grounded in tech, cyberpunk dealt with changes to human consciousness and behaviour—changes brought about by technological advancement.
As a film subgenre, again couched within sci-fi, cyberpunk is less strict in its temporal element, as some “cyberpunk” films are set in the present. As a result, cyberpunk movies aren’t necessarily steeped in the technological and amoral decadence that characterizes the books. But there is still a subversive undercurrent to the proceedings, and some commentary on the nature of technology, humanity, and society.
Bruce Bethke, father of cyberpunk, makes it clear that he did not invent the subgenre’s tropes—that was largely the work of William Gibson. What Bethke did create was both the word, cyberpunk, and the type: “a young, technologically facile, ethically vacuous, computer-adept vandal or criminal.” As Bethke’s creation took on a life of its own, cyberpunks morphed into anti-heroes, rebelling against a corrupt corporate ruling class. In the books and films that came after Bethke and Gibson, cyberpunk grew into a subculture with its own aesthetics and guiding principles.
