Baraka_Guru

This is a book discussion thread for the Tilted Speculative Fiction Book Club. Discussions here are open and free, as it is assumed that those participating in the thread have read the material already. The use of spoiler tags would be cumbersome, and so they will not be used.

For more information, visit: The Tilted Speculative Fiction Book Club

The Man in the High Castle, Philip K. Dick

First, let's answer some generic questions about the book, before discussing the scientific, technological, social, and speculative aspects of the book.

1. How did you experience the book? Beyond whether you simply liked it or not, what were your initial reactions to it?
2. Are the characters convincing? Did you like all the characters? Did they grow? What about their motivations? Their actions?
3. What is the central conflict? What are the major themes running throughout?
4. Is the plot believable? Did it maintain integrity throughout?
5. Is the ending satisfying? Was it predictable? What do you make of it?

Remember, there aren't any right or wrong answers at this point. These are your opinions. Feel free to hash out your impressions of the book.

I will make my own contributions after I've thought about these questions a bit.

Most important, have fun!

Redlemon

I was really really really disappointed by this book. (It's been a while now, so I don't remember all the details, so I'm doing my best here.)

The only character I had any interest in was the Jewish jeweler.

The book itself seemed pretty aimless. Things happened, then other things happened. Then the book ended.

In a way, it seemed that it was written too close to WWII, or perhaps PKD had some really bad personal experiences with WWII. Nearly every character seemed to have a deep racial hatred going on.

Also, the book within the book seemed like an ego thing for PKD: "Hey, books can change the world! I'm so cool!"

The only good thing I have to say about this book was that it came with three other stories by PKD. I read "Ubik" after I was done with this, and it was a refreshing mind clearer.

__________________
I can't read your signature. Sorry.

Baraka_Guru

I generally liked the book, but mostly on a philosophical/speculative level.

I didn't like the writing style. The sentence fragments jarred my sensitivities. Most of the characters were a bit canned, I think. Predictable and cliche in some ways. The characters I did like were Childan and Tagomi, but mainly because of what happens between them with regard to the jewelery made by Frink.

What I did like was how Dick examined the nature of human faith and how unchanging it is at its essence, regardless of outcomes. Sure, the I Ching is a source of faith, but compare that to the alternative: Christianity/the American Dream, or what have you.

I think the most interesting aspect of the book was the examination of authenticity and historicity. I am not familiar enough with American history, or even the history of WWI, to truly appreciate this, but I think this is what Dick was most concerned with. In his alternate world, authenticity is fabricated, as is history. Even with The Grasshopper Lies Heavy, you get a sense of that. "How the world would have turned out if the Axis lost the war" is generally wrong compared to what we know in the real world.

Also, the ending was satisfying to me. The Oracle tells Juliana and the others that the reason for writing The Grasshopper is because Germany and Japan lost the war. It's a bit of a mindfuck. They didn't lose the war. So this tosses the idea of the I Ching and the Oracle into the trash for the reader, and yet, the characters in the book cling to their faith in it. Nothing is authentic, not the Americana, not the Oracle, not The Grasshopper, not The Man in the High Castle (and think of the scene with the Zippo lighter).

The only thing that had the potential for authenticity is the jewelery made by Edfrank. But what happens to that? It becomes appropriated by Childan and the idea of mass-producing it as a good luck charm.

Anyway, that's my general take-away. I'm sure I'm missing a ton. I have a problem retaining things I hear vs. what I read, which is the disadvantage of having listened to the audiobook.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

snowy

Man, I'd kinda forgotten about this until I got a notice from the library saying I hadn't yet returned it. I can't find the book anywhere in my house. Perhaps it will magically appear after this.

One of the things I found interesting about the book was the use of Eastern philosophy. I wondered, after reading it, if people not so well-versed in Eastern philosophy would find it difficult or onerous to get through, as I don't think PKD does a good job of explaining the background of the philosophical concepts he is using in the novel. Apparently, PKD used the I-Ching to write the book; perhaps that's responsible for some of the aimlessness you noticed, Redlemon.

If I were to write a college paper on the book, I'd probably write about PKD's use of illusion and the idea of maya as it presents itself in the novel. I found that concept to be interesting enough to keep deliberating on it for some days after I'd finished reading, but the way he used it at the end of the novel kind of left me unsatisfied; it almost seemed trite.

As for the writing style--I actually kind of liked the fragmentary way people spoke. To be certain, it was jarring. To me, it was as if someone had translated English into Japanese and then back again, and thus a reflection of the influence that the Japanese had had on the spoken language present in that mishmash of culture of the PSA.

Now hopefully this book magically reappears from the ether; I don't want to be up to my eyeballs in fines!

__________________
If I am not better, at least I am different. --Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Redlemon

I won't be tuning in, but thought you two might want to know...
Ridley Scott to return to work of sci-fi icon for BBC mini-series | Media | The Guardian

__________________
I can't read your signature. Sorry.