COMPARISON OF PICARO AND ANTI-HERO IN DEFOE’S ROBINSON CRUSOE AND NEUROMANCER BY WILLIAM GIBSON

Abstract

The current study is a comparative exploration of the figures of the picaro and the anti-hero in Daniel Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe (1719) and William Gibson’s Neuromancer (1984), two landmark novels separated by over two centuries yet united by their engagement with survival, individuality, and the negotiation of unstable social orders. Through an exploratory research design, the analysis employs Deconstruction Theory to unravel the complex construction of both protagonists as products and critics of their respective worlds. Defoe’s Crusoe, embodying the traits of the picaro, navigates exile and adversity with resilience and self-interest, mirroring the rise of capitalist modernity, colonial ambition, and the ideological roots of Western individualism. Conversely, Gibson’s Case, the quintessential cyberpunk anti-hero, operates within a fragmented, technologically dominated landscape where agency is fractured and rebellion is existential rather than material. By juxtaposing Crusoe’s colonial mastery with Case’s digital alienation, the study interrogates how both figures represent evolving notions of autonomy, morality, and power in response to their historical and cultural conditions. The comparative analysis reveals that while the picaro’s cunning and adaptability persist in the anti-heroic mode, the direction of survival has shifted from mastering the external world to navigating the internal void of disconnection and disillusionment. Ultimately, the research argues that Gibson’s anti-hero inherits and subverts the picaresque lineage, transforming the traditional quest for self-definition into a postmodern struggle against systemic control. In bridging early modern realism and postmodern cyberpunk, the study highlights the enduring significance of the outsider as a narrative and philosophical device for exposing the tensions between freedom, identity, and the forces that seek to contain them.