P. K. Dick's Eye in the Sky, rev. jimroberts

I wrote this review because I like the book, but I see it has several reviews already. I'll post it later today, unless you persuade me that it needs a lot of change. There seem to be a lot of spoilers, but the blurb on the back of the ACE 1957 edition is about as bad in that respect, and I don't think it hurts the story to know that the characters pass through several illusory worlds.

Eye in the Sky is one of Dick's earliest science fiction novels but remains one of my favourites. It illustrates already some of Dick's recurring themes, such as deep distrust of authority and the problem of distinguishing between illusion and reality. It was first published in 1957, so Dick wrote it during the McCarthy era of Cold War paranoia.

The book opens with a report of an accident at the Bevatron in 1959, which injured seven visitors and their guide, but Dick quickly gives a bit a back story for some introduction to the characters. Jack Hamilton is an electronics engineer who worked for a company which does missile research for the government. He has just been told that his wife, Marsha, is a security risk. According to her FBI file, based in part on information supplied by Hamilton's supposed friend McFeyffe, a security guard for the company, she has shown interest in organisations thought to be sympathetic to Communism and supported causes also supported by Communists. Among many other errors, she objected to Charlie Chaplin being barred, she contributed $48.55 to the Society for the Advancement of Colored People, she has claimed to be in favour of peace, "she still turns up when some Commie group organizes to protest a lynching in the South". (I find it surprising that apparently all that the FBI claims is true: is that realistic?) His choice was, get rid of his wife or lose his job.

Hamilton and Marsha had planned to visit the Bevatron that afternoon and they stick with that. McFeyffe decides to go too and gives them a lift. They join a group under the charge of a young negro guide: he has an advanced degree from MIT, but it's not easy for a negro to get a better position here than tourist guide. There's a bit of conversation among the group which gives some hints of the kind of people some of them are — this is relevant later. There's the elderly gentleman who is more impressed by God's hurricanes than scientific marvels, the vaguely well-meaning middle-aged woman, the precise, fussy young woman. Then the accident happens: a beam of highly energetic particles escapes from the Bevatron and slices through the supports of their observation platform and they fall through the radiation and equipment to the concrete floor below. "Conscious of the grotesque brokenness of his body, he lay in an inert heap, trying aimlessly, reflexively, to get up. And realizing at the same time, that there would be no getting up for any of them. Not for a while."

Nonetheless, Hamilton wakes up that same afternoon in a hospital bed and is not much hurt after all. His wife is even less hurt and is in the room waiting for him. They go home, but begin to suspect that something is seriously wrong, and his experiences the next day when he applies for a job with an electronics company run by a friend of his father's amply confirm his suspicions. In fact, the victims of the accident are trapped in the delusional world of the religious member of the group, the elderly gentleman Arthur Silvester, and the development of this world and their adventures in it take up more than half of the book. The people begin to take on the characteristics of stereotypical members of the groups Silvester sees them as belonging too. Their escape from this world comes when Silvester is knocked unconscious during a fight between the others and some vengeful angels.

Relief at escape from illusion is short lived: they are now subject to the beliefs of the prudish middle-aged woman. Luckily she will abolish from her world anything she finds distasteful when it is pointed out to her. Since the processes of life are rather messy, she can be manoeuvred into rendering life impossible, thus killing herself and everybody else, which gets them out of that world, but into a yet worse one of paranoid fantasy, which is however also self destructive. The next and final illusory world is someone's communist vision of capitalist America, complete with bloated plutocrats and heroic labour leaders. The pain and struggle of the dissolution of this final fantasy merge into the pain of real life and the efforts to rescue and treat the accident victims.

After their real recovery, most of the accident victims, wiser, we hope, for their experiences, pool their talents and resources to set up a factory to make high-end sound reproduction equipment: the final, hopeful words are, "What are we waiting for? Let's get to work!"

On one level, Dick is crudely warning us of the dangers posed by extreme irrational political or religious ideologies — warnings which are as relevant today as they were during the Cold War. That covers, however, just the framing story and two of the fantasy worlds. More generally, he is urging us to consider whether our beliefs and fears are well grounded, because they too may endanger our welfare and happiness even while external influences do not.

I like it, and I really need to sample some of P.K.'s work.

#2: readafew "I like it, and I really need to sample some of P.K.'s work."

Where to start? So many are good. Obviously I like Eye in the Sky. I like Ubik too, and I think it's generally highly regarded. I also really like Galactic Pot-Healer and Clans of the Alphane Moon, which are not so well thought of.

I also need to sample me some P.K. Dick.

As for the review, I think there is too much synopsis. I wouldn't describe each of the worlds and definitely not the plot points that happen in each world. Not because of spoilers (well, not just because of spoilers), but just because it is too much detail in a review.

For instance, in the sentence "According to her FBI file, based in part on information supplied by Hamilton's supposed friend McFeyffe, a security guard for the company, she has shown interest in organisations thought to be sympathetic to Communism and supported causes also supported by Communists." I'd delete the part in italics. It's interesting, but unnecessary.

'Supported' twice in a sentence is weird. What about "and supported causes championed by Communists."

I'd cut Their escape from this world comes when Silvester is knocked unconscious during a fight between the others and some vengeful angels. and then sum up that and the entire next two paragraphs by saying:

They escape that world, but then travel through several other worlds based on the various characters' personal or political viewpoints. In the end most of the accident victims are wiser, we hope, for their experiences.

The final, hopeful words are, "What are we waiting for? Let's get to work!"

I have more, but am worried this post is becoming too naggy sounding.

And here's another one who hasn't been exposed to this author. Because of that, I appreciated the synopsis part of your review. Although, jseger may have a point about being able to cut that back a bit.

For people who may be reading your review with an eye toward getting the book, I would suggest (as I've seen done elsewhere) inserting a label between the first and second paragraphs, "Synopsis. Caution! ***SPOILER ALERT***"

And, then either labeling the last paragraph something different, or moving it up to become the second paragraph, in order to separate it from the synopsis part.

Enjoyed the review!

jseger9000, countrylife, thanks for the comments, but I'm not yet convinced that much needs changing. We may just have to disagree about the right amount and type of spoiling. I've left out major spoilers anyway.

I'm not normally a fan of using the same word twice in quick succession, but here I prefer to stick with "supported" twice. We might well suspect the CP support for worthy causes was based only on tactical considerations, that it would thereby be more favourably regarded by many Americans, and part of the thrust of the arguments against Masha is to raise doubts in Hamilton's mind as to his wife's sincerity.

There are arguments, which have come up in other threads, in favour of ending a review on a more personal note. I thought I had a fairly good balance here. At the beginning, I say I like it. Then I go on at (too much?) length about what is in the book. Then I come back and say more about why I liked it, based on what I've told you about it.

Yes, I especially liked that last paragraph, and thought it was a great ending to the review. As this is not the type of book that I would probably pick up to read, I appreciated getting the gist of it through the synopsis part of your review. I was just afraid that some who may consider reading the book, may not want to have seen the whole synopsis beforehand. But for ME, it was a good review!

I just wonder, reading the review would I be inclined to pick up the book, or would I feel like I know too much about it already?

Shortening the synopsis isn't just about the spoiler-ish angle, but also about how much synopsis is needed for a review? In general, a review is intended to inform a person who hasn't read the book on whether the book is worth picking up. If a review is highlighting plot points that occur two-thirds of the way through the book, I just wonder how well that serves a person reading the review.

It's kind of like when you watch a movie and then think about reading the book it was based on. Inevitably, the movie will have left bits out, but often you feel like you know enough about it that reading the book will feel a bit like a retread.

I do like the last paragraph where it i though. Even if the synopsis is not shortened at all, I would keep that at the end.

I've posted it here with very little change. Thank you all for your comments.

I couldn't read this review because it has spoiler info.