Cyberpunk and Frye's Theory of Literature
Morality, Divinity, Wealth: The Three Axes on Frye's Chart
There are, however, even more substantial reasons for the placement of cyberpunk between the "Ironic" and the "Divine" on Frye's scale . Looking at the chart as having six equal pieces, we can derive from them 3 lines, or axes, which divide the circle in that fashion. For example, a horizontal line would divide the circle into an upper half containing the "Cyberpunk" (hereafter "Neuromantic"), "Divine," and "Heroic, or Romantic Hero" and a lower half with "Anti-hero," "Low Mimetic," and "High Mimetic". Interestingly, there are characteristics shared by the types which fall within each half of the circle. These similarities lend validity to such an axis being drawn.
For example, each of the categories above the horizontal axis contains a protagonist who is, in some way, superior to his environment. We have: the Romantic hero, who uses magic and enchanted swords, and has superhuman abilities; the God, who is well beyond the limitations of the environment and who, in fact, lives well above it; and the Neuromantic, who has subjugated and polluted the natural environment, and who has actually created a new one - cyberspace. Frye also tells us that one of the organizing ideas of romance is "magic" (153), the ability to control the environment through one's own will. Certainly gods have something like this ability, for they create the environment. The Neuromantic, too, possesses a sort of magical power: the title Neuromancer not only alludes to romance, but is also a play on the word "necromancer," a type of sorcerer or a person who can speak magically with the dead. Indeed, Gibson's main character in that novel, Case, has been called "the magician who knows which spells will open the crypt and keep the electronic 'curses' at bay" (Grant 44).
Below this axis, we see three types who are not superior to their environments, and who in fact appear to be victims of it. Though neither the Romantic hero nor the Neuromantic are truly, wholly divine, I believe that we can label this axis the "Divinity axis," allowing that the categories above somehow approach divinity or are divine, based on their ability to subjugate and control the environment. This subjugation, as I have demonstrated, is usually through some form of magic or secret ability resembling magic: Arthur C. Clarke is oft quoted as saying "The technology of any sufficiently advanced society is indistinguishable from magic". Such technology certainly applies to cyberpunk fiction.
But what of the other two axes? If we draw a diagonal line from upper left to lower right, we divide the circle into one half of "Divine," "Heroic," and "High Mimetic," and another half containing "Neuromantic," "Anti-hero," and "Low Mimetic". Here, the distinction is between the settings of the characters. To the right of this axis, the settings include "Heaven," "Paradise," and "Castle". To the left, settings include "House," "Slum," and "Hell". The words may be strong, but the notion is obvious: this axis evidently divides according to wealth or status. Each of the "Divine," "Heroic," and "High Mimetic" characters live in pleasure and opulence, whether that be due to the glories of heaven, the pastoral beauty of Paradise, or the sheer luxury afforded by being of noble rank. On the other hand, the Low Mimetic hero, the common man, lacks the social standing and wealth of the others, and the anti-hero lacks yet more than he. Is it any wonder that we should find the outcast punk representing the Neuromantic, without a definite home or sense of security, living by the credo "The future is disposable" (Moss 48) from day-to-day and moment-to-moment? "Think rootless and mobile," the Cyberpunk 2.0.2.0 game advises would-be cyberpunks as they equip themselves. "You don't know where you're sleeping tonight, and you don't care" (Moss 48).
The final axis, a line drawn from lower left to upper right, divides according to something less tangible: Morality. On the left hand side of this axis we have the Neuromantic, the anti-hero, and the Divine. To the right are the Heroic, the High Mimetic, and the Low Mimetic. Those characters who fall into one of the left hand categories are all in some way above or beyond morality. The anti-hero, for example, is portrayed by Frye as existing in an amoral world, in which the writer suppresses all "explicit moral judgments" (40). Morality is, quite simply, not a part of ironic fiction for the main character, according to Frye. The Neuromantic, as has been stated before, exists in a world where expedience has replaced morality; in the cyberpunk world, God is dead. Without a God, there can be no religion or morality. For the Divine hero, who is at least half-god, there is no need for morality either. Here the stories of the Greek gods raping women and drinking wine all day attests to the debauchery and amorality of these characters. Certainly, when one is a god, and is responsible for creating moral rules for the humans on earth below, one is by nature above morality. This is not to say that all divine characters are absolutely immoral; rather, they are all in some way above morality, and the restrictions which would be necessary in a moral world are not present.
On the right hand side of the axis, there are three types of characters who are, indeed, subject to morality in some way. The Romantic hero exists in a world of magic and witchcraft, and deals with the conflicts between good and evil. In works such as Morte d'Arthur, The Song of Roland, and Beowulf, we get a great dichotomy between the good, shining hero and the evil monster/black knight/dragon figure. These knights and heroes live in a world full of moral choices, and cannot escape them.
The High Mimetic hero, too, lives in a world full of moral decisions; kings and princes are not immune to the limitations of moral choices. Shakespeare is a good source of examples: Macbeth knows he will be doing wrong to kill the king in his story, despite his decision to go through with it; Hamlet, too, knows that killing someone at the "wrong time" has a different moral consequence than killing them at the "right time". Here, he has seen his uncle, the new king, praying in a chapel. Having been instructed by the ghost of his father, the king, to avenge his (the king's) murder, Hamlet watches his uncle pray in a chapel in the castle, and wonders whether or not the time is right to kill him.
Now might I do it pat, now 'a is a-praying; And now I'll do't - and so 'a goes to heaven, And so am I reveng'd. That would be scann'd: A villain kills my father, and for that I, his sole son, do this same villain send to heaven... (Hamlet III:III, 73-78)If Hamlet kills his uncle as he is praying, then his uncle's soul will go to heaven; this is not what he wants. He continues his soliloquy, and comes to the conclusion that by waiting until his uncle is guilty of sin, he can be assured that his uncle will go to hell instead of heaven:
Up, sword, and know thou a more horrid hent: When he is drunk asleep, or in his rage,... Then trip him, that his heels may kick at heaven, And that his soul may be damn'd and black As hell, whereto it goes. (Hamlet III:III, 91-95)Hamlet obviously associates a certain moral result from his actions, be they for good or evil. The linking of the act of killing with moral consequences is totally absent in the world of the Neuromantic, replaced by expedience and survival of the fittest: the distinction from the above example is obvious.
Like the High Mimetic character, the Low Mimetic hero lives in a world of moral choices and decisions. He, too, is a normal man or woman, and it should not surprise us that these characters go to church, worship God,and hold base activities as immoral, "contrasted with some kind of delicate virtue"(Frye 39). Undoubtedly, they have to deal with the "impact of inflexible morality on experience" (Frye 39). Again, this is not to imply that all of these characters are morally upright; rather, they simply live in a moral world, and have to deal with its influences. The stories of Charles Dickens, for example, are filled with moral choices and consequences: A Christmas Carol, with Scrooge's sins and the three visiting ghosts forcing his repentance, or Oliver Twist's adventures and dealings with various thieves, prostitutes, and murderers portray this moral landscape explicitly.