A review by insertsthwitty
The Man in the High Castle by Philip K. Dick

4.0

But we cannot do it all at once; it is a sequence. An unfolding process. We can only control the end by making a choice at each step.

I have read this interesting article exploring Philip K. Dick’s fascination with I Ching, the oracle that is part of an Eastern Asia influence in the Japan-controlled part of America. About how it controlled the plot of The Man in the High Castle, something that should not surprise me since the plot is scattered and he does not deliver one (1) idea in fullness. But there are good things about this book that make it stand out from the crowd.

The thing with Philip K. Dick is, I can usually rely on him to capture people’s internal struggles and ruminations in a cohesive and empathetic way; just like Ursula K. le Guin said that science fiction does not capture future but rather present, The Man in the High Castle is a great commentary on the issues that were so important then. Incidentally, they are incredibly important now too.

The book is more like an assembly of ideas and thoughts about people’s identity in a totalitarian state; what happens to a suppressed culture, how it is fetishised and modified. Philip K. Dick’s America is just a vehicle for him to bring it to people, to confront them with the current (or the 1960s) American identity of freedom. The theme of the oppressed attempting to gain value by oppressing others and internalising the prejudices with the sense of their own unworthiness is not something new - but it was really evocative and reminded me of For Two Thousand Years. It all ties quite well with the recurrent theme of material culture, how it’s only being given meaning by the people who interpret it (and who has the right to interpret it and give it value?).

Coming back to the actual plot, it is a bit incoherent. Philip K. Dick keeps offering plot points and then never mentioning them again, steers in one direction and then the other. Particularly low point is the somewhat pretentious meta discussion between a couple discussing a book of speculative fiction (reimagining WWII ending differently…) and how it can be categorised. It was quite clearly a ham fisted attempt to make us categorise this book a certain way, which made me chuckle but also wonder why those few pages could not be spent at developing a plot. There is also a blink and you’ll miss it glimpse into an alternate dimension by Mr Tagomi. It lasts a page which is a pity.

Regardless of that, the ideas are there and they are alive; it’s not a run of the mill book and it is worth reading. Coming back to the quote I put above, it could be argued that the larger ideas (like the alternate reality) are mentioned only in passing because he wants to show the drudgery of everyday life as opposed to easy showy heroics of most novels. It could be argued quite successfully at that, but still, I missed a larger plot tying the story together.

(NB For people getting confused by the nomenclature and keep saying it’s too science fiction-y - the nomenclature is actually historic… Nazi Germany’s institutions can get confusing but just google them and you’ll be fine.)