Gibson’s problem is that, like a lot of SF writers, he is more interested in things than people. This is why, as with all his novels, I gave up on Idoru half way through. Gibson is continually stopping to admire the view - the sheen on a metallic surface, the spires and landing pads of the skyline, the sumptuous tablespread of technical do-dahs. This isn’t too much of a problem for short stories (here in fact, Gibson is a master) but over the span of 300-odd pages, it soon becomes a drudgery. It feels like being led around the schematics of an architect's City of the Future, with the characters appearing every now and then as belligerent interruptions.
As for the story line, only a few months has been enough to render it vague in my mind. I think the essence of it was that a man whose job it is to analyse behavioural data has realised that the person whose life he’s been assigned to analyse is going to die. Then, as competing interests and head hunters swirl around, the usual file-swapping and private dick shenanigans ensue. Revolvers and shady businessmen in lobbies. This is the other problem with Gibson's work: once you strip away the prescient Future Shock ruminations, what you're left with is straightforward middlebrow noir, or perhaps even worse - for there's no suspense in the action, and none of the revelations are particularly strong.
What Gibson is best at, and what I wish he'd stuck to, is high-concept ideas, sparsely rendered as highly compressed reorderings of technology and instinct gone awry. Here, drama and suspense are no longer dependent on technique. They form naturally from the shortening of the plot. Gibson's futurescapes are rendered, not so much worlds, but pressured localisations, tightly wound overspills of roguish intent, human desire led astray, escalated to powers by voguish technologies and delinquent gadgets. It is, as has often been pointed out, the best of H P Lovecraft, rebooted for the internet age.
This book, coming out in 1996, comes quite a bit before the mass adoption of the net, but half the power of Gibson is in the prescience, the subtle intimations of future norms. In a world where celebs are just as likely to be SEO managed as stage managed, this book does at least get the future right (rare for any SF work, particularly one written pre-millennium). Though now we’re already there, without good characters and story, what's the use now of returning to the future as it was anticipated over 20 years ago?