Thoughts?
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /lit/ - Literature
You are currently reading a thread in /lit/ - Literature
Thoughts?
My stomach is a bit sore and I wish I'd done more of what I was meaning to do today.
I turned the dial to 29 and felt like this book was worth reading tonight.
I think they might, but I'm no android so I can't say for sure
>>7439423
>Thoughts?
Go back to reddit.
Regarding the book:
It's good, the movie's good too and y'all should read meditations by the D.
>>7439423
Good book. Haven't read it in a while but I remember it being hilarious to me
Interesting philosophy, but characters, prose and the dialogues were shit. The movie is better, overall.
>>7439594
How Can Electric Sheep Be Real If Our Cyborg Eyes Aren't Real
>>7439618
Awful taste senpai
>>7439667
>implying those aren't legit criticisms of the book
I swear, I wasn't sure if the characters in the book were supposed to be humans or androids, their dialogues were that sterile, official and characterless. The movie, on the other hand, has great charismatic actors, effects and atmosphere.
>>7439756
>I swear, I wasn't sure if the characters in the book were supposed to be humans or androids
not him, but I think a certain degree of ambiguity was intentional, no?
>>7439423
I love Dick's crazy outlook and I love the use of Jungian theory in the book. I didn't even expect it to be there, was expecting "Blade Runner," so I was super excited to keep reading.
>>7439763
Yep, definitely intentional.
>>7439423
Do /lit/izens Think of 'Electric Sheep'?Or are theydancer?
>>7439756
I like the robotic dialogue though. It makes it funnier.
The movie is a lot more serious yet it doesn't really go deep into the themes of "what makes us le human" and religion like the book does.
The book is waaay better imo.
They don't even mention mercerism in the movie so I would hardly consider it an adaptation. It's a seperate thing altogether. Let's just stop comparing the two pls.
>>7439793
Are you asking if friends are electric?
>>7439774
>jungian theory
I'm a huge sucker for jung, care to xplain?
Dick writes the most forgettable books ever. Like I can sort of tell you what most of his books are about and what are the themes, but I always have a hard time remembering the characters or going more in depth.
It was neat, worth a read.
>>7439763
>it's meant to be bad!
No. If those androids were actually supposed to be indistinguishable from humans, they'd have more personality.
>>7439794
>I like the robotic dialogue though. It makes it funnier.
It was frustrating and annoying for me.
>The movie is a lot more serious yet it doesn't really go deep into the themes of "what makes us le human" and religion like the book does.
Well, I kind of agree with this, the book indeed has a more developed philosophy.
>>7439849
Was this the first Dick book you've read?
If you don't like the robotic dialogue but want to give him another shot, check out A Scanner Darkly.
I think it has the best dialogue out of all of his books (that I've read anyways).
>>7439864
Yeah, it was the first. I'll give him an another chance, his books aren't very long, it seems, so I won't lose much if I don't like them.
>>7439839
Well if you do return... The collective unconscious is definitely the spiritual center of the book. It's not the main focus of the book, but the very end is poignant and connected to that concept. Dick was really well read, especially in esoteric texts, so it takes on a certain spirituality that I think makes the book stand out from most other sci-fi.
>>7439794
The first thing that Ridley Scott said to Philip K dick about Blade Runner was that he was not making an esoteric film.
>>7440281
so it was just a visual film then?
because he barely used any of the sci-fi elements from the bookanimals were talked about for like a second when that owl flew down
I really digged on his writing for a while about five years ago. Ubik, Scanner Darkly, Androids, some of his shorts; never made it through Valis. I often have trouble visualizing worlds in science fiction and fantasy. I never had that problem with his books.
>>7439423
Any more like this one? I loved it.
>>7439618
Most accurate post on this thread.
>>7440806
You're an idiot
>>7440264
>Dick was really well read, especially in esoteric texts
It's a shame he doesn't apply that to stellar prose. Robert Anton Wilson ate esoteric texts for breakfast, and/but his novels were better written than Dick's (imo) because they have a lot of Pynchon-dickriding. Dick goes full pulp, which I sometimes can't stand
The title always had me annoyed, I mean, the sheeps in our dreams are just as electric ):
>tfw androids are called "Synths" now
>>7441571
That's also what Skrillex's music sounds like now.
>>7440806
movie and book arent even close to the same thing
>>7439801
yes.
>>7439423
Film is definitely better. Roy baty is barely a distinguishable character in the novel but the theme of religion and what it means to be human is definitely more fleshed out here.
>>7442085
Stop comparing it to the movie
John Isodore doesn't even have the same job as he does in the book and is barely talked about in the movie. Rick's wife isn't even in the movie. Buster Friendly isn't in the movie. Mercerism isn't in the movie.
Seriously, fuck off.
>>7439423
I had no idea this book had three sequels.
http://www.goodreads.com/series/53723-blade-runner
Blade Runner is literally just "hurr let's strip everything in the book that made it good and just make it look cool"
Fuck people who think the movie is better.
just finished this five minutes ago
thoughts?
>>7443042
h-hey anon, since when do you have an artificial arm?
>>7443042
One of my favorites by him
we should all just love eachother
Blade Runner is great, but has almost nothing to do with the book. There is no humour and all the mystic/religious themes peculiar to PKD were excluded.
Three Stigmata is amazing - one of the most trippy and hasstrong in it the recurring themes that permeates all PKD works: religious experience and fabricated realities.
>>7439423
I liked it. Read it, then watch Blade Runner
