Monday, July 20, 2009

Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? - A Metaphysical Detective Story

Following the rather unexpected interest in my piece below about Dashiell's Hammett influence on the Coen brothers, I thought I'd reblog an older post I wrote about Hammett's influence on Philip K Dick, which originally appeared on Crime Always Pays.

Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? – A Metaphysical Detective Story

Like his near contemporary, the poet Philip Larkin, the science fiction writer Philip K. Dick predicted his own death, dreamed about his death and of course wrote about his death. Dick wondered what being alive really felt like and whether death would kill that state of consciousness; sometimes he believed that death was merely a transition between states and other times that it was the final destination. Perhaps he hoped it was the former but knew it was the latter. “I’d rather be a living dog, than a dead science fiction writer,” he once said. DO ANDROIDS DREAM OF ELECTRIC SHEEP? (DADES) is one of his best known novels and it was here that he explored in some depth notions of dying and consciousness and why a good, decent man was trying to track down and murder sentient creatures who just wanted to be left alone.
...
Dick’s death obsession began early. Born in Chicago in 1928, his twin sister Jane Charlotte Dick died when he was only a few weeks old. All his life Dick felt Jane’s absence and her loss is frequently referenced in his fiction. Jane was buried in a lonely grave in the bleak Colorado plains town of Fort Morgan with, morbidly, a space left on the headstone for baby Phil. The grave awaited Dick for five decades and when he died in 1982 sure enough the twins were reunited in death. In middle age, after years of amphetamine abuse, Dick even flirted with the idea that in a parallel universe he was the one that had died and Jane had survived – he was already buried in the grim Fort Morgan cemetery, next to Interstate 76, and Jane was the science fiction writer living in California.
...
In our universe, after Jane’s death, Dick and his family migrated to the San Francisco Bay Area. He went to the same high school as Ursula Le Guin and after a brief period at UC Berkeley he dropped out and quickly began selling science fiction stories to magazines and newspapers. Dick’s adult life was fragmented to say the least. He moved often, he was married five times and even though he wrote constantly he was not good at keeping money. His default paranoia was exacerbated by his experiments with drugs, his dealings with local street thugs, and his anti-government activities during the Nixon era.
...
DADES was written during the period 1966-1968, probably the two most turbulent years America has experienced since World War II. Assassinations, riots, Vietnam, hippies, drugs, counter-culture, scandals and the Cold War were the context for Dick to write his novel, which is actually a pretty straightforward detective story set in a nightmare future. Dick had read Dashiell Hammett and admired his style and it’s not a big stretch to compare DADES with THE MALTESE FALCON. The McGuffins are different but we’re in the same world: missing people, a shot partner, a femme fatale, trouble with the local cops and a bleak cynical universe from which no hope is expected and none is given. Perhaps it’s not even that big of a coincidence that when the movie version of DADES was filmed – as Blade Runner – the cameras rolled on the same set where they shot the Maltese Falcon forty years earlier. Both novels take place in San Francisco and both movies were filmed on the New York streets of Warner Brothers’ Burbank lot.
...
The plot of DADES is complex but basically we follow the story of Rick Deckard in a post-apocalyptic San Francisco as he tracks down runaway androids, deals with his Virtual Reality-addicted wife, and keeps up the pretence that his electric sheep is in fact real. The latter storyline is the most interesting thematic element of the novel. After World War Terminus, real animals are rare and caring for and protecting any kind of a real creature gives one incredible status. For someone with low self esteem in a job he hates, Deckard hopes to fool everyone, including ultimately himself, about the sheep; perhaps if he pretends hard enough that his sheep is real and that he is a good man these things might actually come true.
...
Deckard meets up with the beautiful and deceitful Rachael, who turns out to be an android and later in one extraordinary scene he is taken to a police station where he either has a mental breakdown or else he sees the world for what it really is: everyone in this precinct appears to be an android – it’s the humans that are unusual and in this place it’s Deckard himself who is the fake like his sheep. Shaking off this strange vision he pursues the final runaways, becoming more disillusioned than ever as he realizes that cracking this case will bring not happiness but only further existential crises. Where is he going? What is he doing with his life? What are any of us doing with any of our lives? Like Sam Spade at the end of THE MALTESE FALCON, Deckard has no solutions. He wonders what all of it means and comes up with nothing. Following Hammett, Philip K Dick doesn’t give us any answers either except for the vague but possibly deep idea that the meaning of life is to be found in the search for the meaning of life. The best we can do is to strive for the truth, although we are constantly reminded to be wary, for falsity is everywhere: the Maltese Falcon is a fake, the electric sheep is a fake, Deckard is a fake and maybe even brash, confident, hardnosed Sam Spade is a fake.
...
Many of Philip K Dick’s books were written hastily under the influence of speed and are of dubious quality, but the books that he took trouble over – DADES, THE MAN IN THE HIGH CASTLE, A SCANNER DARKLY, FLOW MY TEARS, THE POLICEMAN SAID – are all well-crafted mystery stories usually with a cop protagonist. Yes, he was a science fiction writer, but also a genre-busting detective novelist too.
Unfortunately (and unlike Hammett) Dick did not live long enough to see the critics lionize him as an American original. His final years were spent in an increasingly eccentric investigation of the true nature of God and the cosmos. In a March 02 1980 diary entry, Dick predicted that because he was close to uncovering the secrets of the universe, God would pull the plug on this version of Philip K Dick; two years later, on March 02 1982, the plug was literally pulled on a brain-dead Dick as he lay in a hospital after a stroke. Dick’s obituary in the New York Times was a brief three paragraphs long but since then his reputation has grown, first in France, then the UK, and then, belatedly, in the US. Almost a dozen Dick stories and books have become films and Blade Runner is regularly voted the greatest science fiction movie of all time. However, Philip K. Dick still gets a bad rap as a writer. A recent New Yorker piece described his characters as hollow and poorly crafted and his prose as pedestrian at best.
...
No one would argue that Dick was a great stylist or an inventor of an American idiom, like Hammett, but he was the purveyor of brilliant concepts and his talent was exceptional. Students of American noir will enjoy Dick’s better novels and will judge him not by his prose but by his gift for originality and his ability to convey extraordinary ideas in even more extraordinary worlds.

47 comments:

Declan Burke said...

I'm halfway through THE DIVINE INVASION, I had to put it aside to do a couple of reviews ... I'll be getting back to it tomorrow. Not the world's greatest stylist, was he? (asks the world's worst stylist). Still, a man who wasn't afraid to ask big, big questions ...

Cheers, Dec

seanag said...

Nice piece.

Funny, I'm just starting a thoughtful memoir called The Wishing Year by Nicole Oxenhandler. You wouldn't think this would have much to do with the topic at hand, but after recounting a traumatic 'tell Santa your wish' episode from childhood, (and it sounds pretty terrifying) Oxenhandler cites Mircea Eliade's The Sacred and the Profane:

"The sacred," she says, "is understood to be that which is most real, most powerful, and when it erupts within the context of ordinary, profane experience, it elicits a feeling of awe that is very close to fear.For religious man [Eliade] writes, space is not homongenous; he experiences interruptions, breaks in it; some parts of space are qualitatively different from others. 'Draw not nigh hither,' says the Lord to Moses; 'put off thy shoes from thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground.'"

Puts me in mind of Dick's existential situation a bit.

tuffy777 said...

another interesting synchronicity -- Phil dated the beginning of his visions to March 2, 1974.
~~~

tuffy777 said...

forgot to subscribe to comments -- sorry for this extra post
~~~

ian said...

very nice piece but you dont say whether Deckard is a replicant or not!!!

TotalDickHead said...

Everyone interested in PKD should watch this great BBC Arena Documentary.

seanag said...

I was hoping Adrian's post might bring you around this way again, Tessa. Nice to see you dropping by.

adrian mckinty said...

Dec

I loved the Divine Invasion. Might have been his last truly great book.

It dont think it matters if your prose is straightforward if your ideas are great. I just read that Iain Banks novel Transition which is stylistically blank but its brimming with ideas.

adrian mckinty said...

Seana

Slightly OT someone should write a monograph about the Bible's obsession with feet. Jesus was always washing people's feet, people kept pouring oil on his feet, we've got your quote about the shoes and one of my favourites from the Song of Solomon is: "Beautiful are the shoes on thy feet oh daughter of princes."

adrian mckinty said...

Tessa

Great to hear from you again. I hope you are keeping well and it's good to see that the Trust's lawyers haven't silenced your voice.

That is interesting: March 2 for the visions, March 2 for the journal entry, March 2 the day Phil died. It's enough to make even me - a total skeptic - think for a bit.

adrian mckinty said...

Ian

Well that's a can of worms. I know that in the Mark Kermode documentary Ridley Scott said that the Deckard is a replicant and if you believe the auteur theory of film making well that's case closed isnt it?

However he's not in the book or the screenplay. The writers never thought he was a replicant, PKD never thought so, Harrison Ford never thought so and I dont think it actually makes any sense that he is in the context of the story. Could Ridley Scott be wrong about his own film?

Yeah, I think he could.

adrian mckinty said...

TotalDickHead,

I had seen that documentary when it came out but I didnt know it was on YouTube. Thanks for the live link, I agree, it's very good. Great BBC production values and smart talking heads.

Matt said...

I don't think Scott originally said Deckard was a replicant, did he? Was it with the release of the new cut? It never crossed my mind, not until I heard Scott raising this point a while back - I mean, the first scene alone with M. Emmett Walsh establishes that Deckard has a long, checkered history in law enforcement.

adrian mckinty said...

Matt

Scott claims that he had in mind all along the idea that Deckard was a replicant. Supposedly the scene cut from the original and restored in the recent version of Deckard's unicorn dream proves this. How? Well, at the end Gaff leaves an oragami unicorn to show that he has been in Deckard's building and let Rachael live (but also in Scott's interpretation to show Deckard that he knows what his dreams are i.e. like Rachael's memories they are in fact implants because Deckard is a replicant.)

Harrison Ford and the screenwriters however dont buy this and its not in the book and I dont think it makes any sense at all. How come he fights like such a punk if he's a replicant? How come Gaff spares him? Why would he? Why would they let a replicant run around the city with a gun? It's a lovely conceit and adds a little to the mystery but I think Scott is just wrong about this. Kermode and the others who buy into it are, I think, just not thinking it through.

tuffy777 said...

hi again, everybody -- the point of the book was that Rachel is either a replicant or a human with no empathy -- she squashes the insect (a fly, I think) in the novel, which shows that she has no empathy
~~~

adrian mckinty said...

Tessa

Yes, its clear in the novel that Deckard is a human. There's that one really great scene in the police station where he thinks that the cops are replicants and possibly the whole city and possibly him too, but this is an existential crisis not a plot point.

Scott I think was trying to impose a thriller convention (that of the final twist) on a story that was a metaphysical exploration not a conventional thriller.

Tessa, I have read that after some initial anxiety about the script (perhaps anxiety is understating it) Phil did in fact enjoy the rushes which he saw and thought that Scott had at least captured his vision. Do you happen to know if that's true or not?

tuffy777 said...

thanx for asking, adrian
-- Phil hated the Hampton Fancher script, which was nothing more than shoot-outs and car chases, but he loved what the script doctor David Peoples did with it, esp. the origami animals
~~~

adrian mckinty said...

Tessa

Thats why I dont really buy into the auteur theory. Film is a collaborative endeavour. Peoples rewrote the script but had to fight for credit and didnt really get respect until after Unforgiven and 12 Monkeys. And of course Roy's speech at the end was written by Rutger Hauer himself.

I like to think that Phil would have enjoyed Blade Runner as a piece of art inspired by his book not necessarily as an adaptation of Do Androids Dream as such. A Scanner Darkly is the most faithful Dick to screen transference that I have seen. I know that you worked very closely with Phil on that book (or so I've read) and I wonder if you were happy with the film?

tuffy777 said...

thanx for asking

The film was literally faithful to the book, but they missed the point. A Scanner Darkly was not about the drug culture, but about the dangers of the police state.

And too many people find the animation annoying or worse. The scramble suit was not supposed to look like that. It was supposed to make Bob Arctor look like some anonymous face in the crowd, not like a kaleidoscopic slide show.

~~~

adrian mckinty said...

Tessa

I didnt mind the animation (I thought they used it really well too in last year's Waltz With Bashir) but one thing I thought was missing from the film was the sense of menace the book conveys. A Scanner Darkly is quite scary in places and is continually disturbing. The film doesnt chill you with paranoia the way the book does, although perhaps we would have needed Hitchcock or Stanley Kubrick for that.

adrian mckinty said...

Tessa

I just noticed the symmetry between the pic of you and the pic of Phil I found for this post. Pretty cute huh?

tuffy777 said...

actually, the film kind of reminded me of Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure
~~~

adrian mckinty said...

Tessa

Come on! Keanu wasnt that bad! Although perhaps he would have been better cast as Jason Taverner in Flow My Tears The Policeman Said - another one of the books from Phil's 1970's genius period.

seanag said...

Unfortunately, I have little to contribute to this discussion, though I find it very thought provoking. I've seen Bladerunner and, A Scanner Darkly, but though I read a lot of Philip's books, I didn't happen to read either of these, so I'm not sure how faithful they were. I would say that whether or not the animation works in A Scanner Darkly, as a newish technique it might be a distraction. I think it was slightly to me, but not terribly. I feel that some of the menace was conveyed, but I am no longer sure of my reactions at the time.

If the replicants and nonempathic humans are in some sense equivalent in the Philip K. Dick universe, and the test is whether or not you would kill a fly purposely or unthinkingly, a lot of people would fail that test. I wouldn't, as it happens, but then, I would fail in other ways, too numerous to count.

tuffy777 said...

Hollywood errs when they cast hunks as Phil's heroes -- they are supposed to be ordinary people, not especially handsome, not ugly either, and certainly not muscle men like Arnold Schwarzenegger.
~~~

seanag said...

Yes, I think in the books, that's pretty clear.

Sam said...

I've kind of been at a loss for what to read the last couple of weeks. This makes me want to revisit Dick and Hammet. It's been years since I've read either. Thanks for the article.

adrian mckinty said...

Tessa

I know the fanboys like it but Total Recall was a bad film.

adrian mckinty said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
tuffy777 said...

Total Recall was so bad that I had to turn around in my seat at the theatre and tell two rowdy teenage boys to shut up
-- had to tell them three times that I didn't pay six bucks to hear them, and I was going to get the manager
Note: I bet six bucks wouldn't buy the popcorn now
~~~~

adrian mckinty said...

Tessa

Ha!

I was a teenage boy when Total Recall came out and although I was pretty excited (I was one of the few I think that had read the original short story We Can Remember it for You Wholesale)I found my interest waning considerably after Sharon Stone got her clothes on. I winced considerably when there was direct communication with Mars (ie without a delay) something Phil had been very clear to show was not possible.

adrian mckinty said...

Sam

Well with Phil you've got 40 books to choose from, with Hammett it always amazes me that that he only wrote 5 novels. 5 novels in 4 years and then nothing for the next 30. Odd.

tuffy777 said...

I like Hammet, too
detective stories, murder mysteries, etc. are entertaining and sometimes enlightening
~~~

Matt said...

Keanu and I went to the same high school - even had some of the same teachers, although he attended about 12 years before me. Very decent guy, apparently, and a good hockey player, whatever people make of his acting.

Yeah, the whole replicant thing doesn't make sense. Now, MacReady as the alien at the end of the Thing - I could probably buy that, although I'd hate it.

seanag said...

Can I just say that I do find the electric sheep very poignant somehow?

adrian mckinty said...

Matt

Nobody cool went to my school.

Except me !!!

No, really, thats pretty cool.

Did you ever see Point Break? That place at the end is just down the road from me.

adrian mckinty said...

Seana

That was definitely one of the layers in the book that was completely avoided in the film.

Peter Rozovsky said...

One salutary, though incidental, effect of "Total Recall" ws a flash of humor from acolytes of Lyndon LaRouche who demanded that Californians totally recall their governor.
==============
Detectives Beyond Borders
"Because Murder Is More Fun Away From Home"
http://detectivesbeyondborders.blogspot.com/

adrian mckinty said...

Peter

Well look I still thought Sharon Stone was good in it even if the rest of the film was rubbish.

Matt said...

Point Break was fun, and it had a bit of a resurgence with Hot Fuzz last year.

There was another actor who was there the same time as me: Mia Kirshner. Very sweet girl.

seanag said...

No, I didn't think I remembered anything about the sheep in the movie, but then relying on my own memory is always dubious.

Speaking of Bladerunner, has anyone else here been to the Bradbury building in downtown L.A., which was one of the settings? It is a very beautiful building in it's own right, and it was very imaginative to think of it for a futuristic movie set.

Peter Rozovsky said...

Seana, was the Bradbury Building the location for Bladerunner's interior scenes? The screenwriter of a movie based on a David Goodis short story showed the movie at Noircon in Philadelphia last year and said scenes had been shot in the same building where Bladerunner had been filmed.
==============
Detectives Beyond Borders
"Because Murder Is More Fun Away From Home"
http://detectivesbeyondborders.blogspot.com/

adrian mckinty said...

Matt

And you know Katherine Bigelow fell off the radar for a while but I've been hearing great stuff about her Iraq war bomb disposal movie.

adrian mckinty said...

Seana

I'm slightly ashamed to admit it but on my one brief trip to LA I went to Pink's and then to the Bradbury. What a fanboy.

adrian mckinty said...

Peter

In the Bladerunner documentary I saw everyone, and I mean everyone was opposed to Scott filming in the Bradbury because it had been so overexposed in 70's cop shows, but Scott insisted, filled it with dry ice and the rest is history.

seanag said...

I think I probably even asked this before, but what is Pinks? In any case, there is absolutely nothing wrong with being a fanboy, unless of course it takes an ugly stalker turn, and that building is worth seeing for any reason.

If you click on the Bradbury building link in my comment above, Peter, you'll see that lots and lots of stuff has been shot there. Bladerunner was kind of out of the box, which is what makes it so interesting.

seanag said...

I've also been hearing great things about Bigelow's film--The Hurt Locker, but it sounds way, way too tense for me.