OT: PKD -- Overrated Author or Not?

If there's one sci-fi author Hollywood loves it's Philip Kindred Dick. Blade Runner (the first movie) is undoubtedly a classic. There's also Total Recall which is arguably a "classic" of a sort. And if you go to Wikipedia it looks like at least 12 movies based on his writing have been produced, and more are in the works. And television too! Super popular. But that said, I read a great deal of PKD short stories, and in fact I had the PKD LE collected short stories by the Folio Society, and grimaced through most of that. In my personal opinion, he is NOT a good writer. He was imaginative for sure, and he had some nice ideas, but was not anywhere near what I consider a capable writer. I think most any contemporary was much better -- Heinlein, Asimov, Farmer, Bradbury, etc. Of all the short stories I read (I think the FS basically published his complete short stories) only a handful are memorable. I personally think he is overrated. Having said that, absolutely no offense intended to anyone that enjoys his work, I simply realize after going through all those volumes that I do not want to read any more PKD. That said, in the past few years he has received some fine (or nearly fine) press treatment from excellent presses including Suntup and most recently CTP. I just can't help but feel there are much better writers out there! Again, my personal opinion. I was hoping we could have a nice civilized discussion on the topic of PKD's writing -- Agree? Disagree? Other popular writers you also feel are "overrated"?

Haven't read any of his stuff for so long, I don't remember anything about it. No help here.

He was something of a visionary, it seems to me. Not a touchstone for me, but his influence has been enormous. I think the hype's justified.

I spent most of yesterday complaining about how much I struggled with Philip K Dick and then at 3pm today I spent about one hundred and thirty of my hard-earned UK pounds on what looks like a beautiful edition of We Can Remember it Wholesale from Conversation Tree Press. I mean, what is wrong with me!?

One can be enthralled about the great ideas more than the writing (a not uncommon affliction in SF writing, IMHO). Same with being enthralled by prose stylists who have limited (or frankly boring) ideas (James, Woolf, Beckett . . .). To each their own, different strokes, one has different moods, etc.

I wouldn’t presume to judge his writing, because I don’t read enough sci-fi to have an informed opinion. However, Library of America has collected many of his novels in a 3-volume boxed set, as follows. To my knowledge, though, they have not collected his short stories.

The Man in the High Castle • The Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch • Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? • Ubik • Martian Time-Slip • Dr. Bloodmoney • Now Wait for Last Year • Flow My Tears, the Policeman Said • A Scanner Darkly • A Maze of Death • VALIS • The Divine Invasion • The Transmigration of Timothy Archer

>2 Glacierman: I would recommend to start off by reading some of his short stories. If you're like me, you'll punish yourself and slug through it. But maybe you'll enjoy it more?

>3 Shotcaller: I'm not entirely certain to be honest. Blade Runner is a phenomenal movie, and I think that alone established his "legacy" -- for lack of a better word. I feel you could also argue that Stephen King is a "visionary", but then again, you could also argue that Hollywood made King what he is. Same thing with George "Will Never Finish the Series" R.R. Martin.

>4 TheTotalLibrarian: haha! I think we've all done that :)
To be fair, it's easier to stomach a book/author you're not excited about when the book is so beautiful.

>5 dpbbooks: For sure. For what it's worth, I will say that when it comes to "great" sci-fi authors, PKD is the only one that has managed to cure my insomnia.

>6 jroger1: I have not read any of his novels. Obviously Electric Sheep being his most famous work, I would probably give it a go (might regret it later) if there was a fine press edition. I heard that VALIS is strange, to say the least.

>7 astropi: “Obviously Electric Sheep being his most famous work, I would probably give it a go (might regret it later) if there was a fine press edition.”

If we were to limit our reading to fine press editions, we would miss out on some really great literature, especially non-fiction, but also Agee, Dana, Dos Passos, Cheever. Some of these might have been published by a fine press, but many never will be. Scholars look for different qualities than collectors do.

In the '90s I read SF obsesively, and PKD was one of my most important writers, but now that I think about it, I don't remember particularly liking his short stories. There were a few that I really liked, but I never bothered to read the entire collection. I didn't like all of his novels either and I also never bothered to read them all. I still remember reading one (unfortunately, I don't remember which one) and having the strange feeling that I knew exactly how much he was struggling with writing initial chapters (at least as much as I did with reading them ;) ). But then a few of his novels hit me really hard - Ubik, The Man in the High Castle, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, Valis, Flow My Tears, The Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch. I revisit them from time to time and still enjoy them very much. Unfortunately, I cannot say the same about most of the SF I read at that time.

>1 astropi: You get into the weeds with what a good writer is, as you mention Asimov for instance as better, when he's routinely panned for cardboard characters that only exist to serve some big narrative idea that takes precedence over any other aspect of writing. "Ideas" sci fi is bigger than any one author of course, Arthur C Clarke is another famous example with the same flaws. There's a parallell discussion that always comes up with "weird fiction" (Lovecraft and friends), where much of their writing is objectively bad, strange pacing, thin characters, plots that just end abruptly. In common for many of them is also that they're not making any fortunes, and have to Always Be Closing new submissions to magazines and the occasional book contract. People like PKD and Lovecraft would probably be even more shocked to find themselves the subject of expensive fine editions so long after their passing.

Personally I think there's a reason PKD in particular has an avalanche of direct adaptations and many more direct ripoffs from TV and movies to books, and the inventiveness of his recurring theme of slippery reality is enjoyable as written for me. If anything I think the adaptations stop short of the truly weird places he goes in the VALIS trilogy, and if you read some excerpts from his Exegesis it's clear that his personal struggles with mental illness are being channeled into the fiction. Still, you can't change your likes on a whim, and if it doesn't resonate with you, what can you do? There's plenty of renowned classics that leave me cold.

>7 astropi: I'm not reading SF these days, but when I was a teenager and in my early college days, that is about all I read. I preferred Ellison to Dick. I'm on to other things now and have been for many years.

>10 A.Godhelm:
+1

PKD was brilliant, a visionary, rarely sober & is still echoing through pop culture decades after his death. Also, not a great writer. All kinds of ways to skin the literary cat I suppose.

I'm in the "phenomenal vision and often plodding writing" camp on PKD, but still love him. My favorites of his are ones you don't see many fans mention, but which contain elements that appeal strongly to me - A Maze of Death, Galactic Pot-Healer, Clans of the Alphane Moon, and The Cosmic Puppets. Dick's writing is brilliant, difficult, and sometimes over-egged in the same way that many Beat authors are, but it doesn't detract from their overall genius.

>8 jroger1: If we were to limit our reading to fine press editions, we would miss out on some really great literature
Definitely can't deny that. Of course my attitude is "lets get all this great literature into a fine press publication" :)

>9 tallchief: Could very well be his novels are much "better", but I really just can't recommend his short stories.

>10 A.Godhelm: I read CTP House on the Borderland when I received it last year, and in my opinion comparing the writing of Hodgson versus PKD is like comparing Shakespeare to that high school student who has a cool idea and is trying to put something together. Of course I realize most any author has "flaws" but of all the sci-fi and weird tale authors I have read only PKD really felt unpalatable because of the poor writing. >11 Glacierman: Ellison always struck me as an angry individual, but his writing was much better than PKD.

>12 kcshankd: No doubt he's a pop culture icon today thanks to movies/shows. I know you could argue most any work/author has flaws, but PKD is a great example in my mind that most anyone with a good deal of luck (and of course some aptitude) can make it in writing and/or Hollywood -- it's a bit inspirational in some ways :)

>13 Shadekeep: I'm really glad you and others can appreciate him. As I said, I'd give one of his novels a chance if it gets the fine press treatment, but I just could never recommend his short stories. But I also had a roommate once that loved his short stories, so certainly to each their own.

>14 astropi: Harlan, angry? Say it isn't so!

https://youtu.be/XtdEIG5OTjY?si=KnoOjCURNuZ9HGc1

"Call me a science fiction writer, I’ll come to your house and I’ll nail your pet’s head to a coffee table. I’ll hit you so hard your ancestors will die. I'll punch you so hard your grandmother will bleed. I'm a writer. There's no adjective in front of it. I'm just a writer.”

>14 astropi: From what you've written above, I think you might have approached him the wrong way. If I understand correctly (and correct me if I'm wrong), what you've attempted to do is plough through his complete short stories from the beginning and found it disappointing. Well, probably it would be if that's what you've done. Maybe you're not taking into account that he got better with time and that these guys used to churn out short stories on a weekly or monthly basis, just to earn a basic income. They weren't spending years obsessing over their prose, trying to create 'great' stories or novels. Probably what you should have done is researched the consensus on his, say, top ten or twenty short stories and started with those. Probably it's not a good idea to approach any author by attempting a 'complete short story collection, in chronological order'; I wonder if you've done that with any of the other authors you mention? And if you've not experienced his novels then I'm not sure you're really in a position to judge whether he's overrated or not: try Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheet, Ubik and A Scanner Darkly for starters.

Is PKD a great prose stylist? No, and I doubt he'd have claimed he was either. But in terms of his ideas and influence in the science fiction genre, and beyond, there are very few who can match him. Also, he's quite unique; I can't really think of any other quite writer like him.

'As I said, I'd give one of his novels a chance if it gets the fine press treatment'. Well, I think Folio have released the three novels I listed above (so similar production values to the short story collection you have) and Suntup have released A Scanner Darkly.

>15 SDB2012: haha, yeah, he certainly seemed to have a chip the size of a mountain on his shoulder all his life!

>16 Levin40: I think I've read just about everything by Lovecraft, Hodgson, and a number of other Weird Tale authors. Also numerous (most likely not all) sci-fi stories by Asimov, Bradbury, Le Guin, and Haldeman. Perhaps others that don't come to mind right now as well. I will say there are definitely short stories I personally do not really care for from great writers like Bradbury and Asimov. But those tend to be few, and even so, I can't argue about their prose and general writing ability. PKD -- just not good. Again, my opinion. And I would certainly not argue that he is incredibly influential.

And if I'm being pedantic, I think A Scanner Darkly was not truly fine press (not letterpress) and I'm scared right now to spend money on a PKD work, but maybe I'll give it a go at some point :)

>14 astropi: Aye, there not a lot of his short stories that stick with me like his novels do. I can only name a few that I think would make a good fine press edition aside from We Can Remember It... - Second Variety, Adjustment Team, The Father-Thing, The Days of Perky Pat, and I Hope I Shall Arrive Soon. Probably missing a few others, been a while since I read through the whole lot, but those stand out.

>17 astropi: With all due respect, do you really need a book to be a fine letterpress printed edition before you’ll give it a chance? There are lots of very affordable options for sampling PKD’s novels ranging from used paperbacks under $5 to the Folio editions that Levin40 mentioned (which I would say are still a bit on the pricey side for something you’re not sure you’ll even enjoy, but a fraction of the potential price of a letterpress printed version of the same.) I have the 3 volume Library of America collection of his novels, and would highly recommend. I would also agree with Levin40 that until you’ve read at least a few of his novels, you aren’t really in a position to judge him as overrated.

We all love fine press - that’s why we’re here. But to dismiss even the idea of reading something unless it’s presented in a format costing hundreds or even thousands seems counter-intuitive (unless you don’t also value the reading aspects of this hobby in addition to the collecting, which I should hope is not the case with any of us.) It’s kind of like saying “I hate McDonald’s Big Macs but I’d be willing to change my opinion if it’s served to me at a 5-star restaurant in a solid gold box.” Especially if you have a strong suspicion you will not enjoy something, I’m not sure why you would want to shell out excessive amounts of money for it when far more affordable options exists.

I’ll end by echoing what many others have expressed. While not the greatest prose stylist, PKD was full of inventive, even groundbreaking, ideas. If you love weird fiction, I found Ubik more psychologically disturbing than almost anything I’ve read in any genre. The effectiveness of his writing is evident in the atmosphere and ideas presented in that work. It’s not something every competent writer can do. His achievements were most definitely not just a result of dumb luck.

>19 Nightcrawl: Well again, I did read volumes of his short stories, so I feel I certainly gave PKD more than a chance. When you're reading a fine press book, even if the work isn't to your taste, at least you can enjoy the craftsmanship and illustrations. So for me to read any more PKD I would need it to be a fine press. And again, I'm not here to argue that his ideas were not exciting, inventive, imaginative, but his prose is poor. I'm honestly also not a huge fan of Heinlein, although I can not deny that Heinlein know how to string sentences together. PKD did not. And just to reiterate, that's just my personal opinion of course.

>20 astropi: You do realise that the Folio edition you read also wasn't letterpress, right? Perhaps that's why you didn't like it. ;-)

I think saying that PKD 'didn't know how to string a sentence together' is way too harsh. I've read plenty of him, and while I would never say his prose was outstanding I don't remember ever thinking that it got in the way of the story. And, as I said, I think your approach was wrong: it's a bit like reading a bunch of short stories Dickens wrote in his early twenties, then claiming he was overrated, without ever having read David Copperfield, Great Expectations or Bleak House (not that I'm comparing Dick with Dickens, before anyone says that ;-)). As many others have suggested, I highly recommend you read his best known novels. They also have the advantage that they're quite different to the films that were later made of them in many cases.

>21 Levin40: I think the approach to reading Dickens (in a personal or academic context) should these days almost be turned on its head. Sketches by Boz and the broader journalistic output of Dickens in his twenties would often be tackled by the modern reader after they were already familiar with the full-length novels, almost as part of a "deep-dive" as it were.

However, as the ability to focus and maintaining extended concentration levels seem steadily to be on the decline (at least so we're constantly being told and it does seem to be borne out) the shorter works of Dickens are now perhaps the perfect place to begin.

They are like microcosms of the longer works, the campaigning zeal just as evident; the characterization just as strong (though necessarily with less scope for development within a work); and the quality of the writing generally, whether expressing humour, compassion or outrage, the match of most that would follow.

Once someone has a grounding in (say) Sketches by Boz they will be all the better equipped to read the mature masterpieces, and shun the doom-scroll.

I have just finished Flow My Tears by PKD. I did not find the prose particularly engaging, but neither was it all that awful. Fairly standard SF, from what I've read. Some quite nice incidental world building; some clunky passages where the story isn't progressing and he tries to dive a bit deeper into things. The primacy is obviously on the concepts and ideas. Certainly no F Scott Fitzgerald, but I cannot judge whether he is any worse than other SF writers of the period. Seemed quite close to Asimov to me.

>21 Levin40: True, but the FS LE had beautiful covers and excellent artwork, so I did give it a pass :)
Again, at some point, given the right publication, I would give his better known novels a chance. Right now, I have plenty to read as is.