Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

Justin's Reviews > Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?

Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? by Philip K. Dick
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
433808
's review

liked it
bookshelves: taught

I've been saying for years that this book is boring. But it's more than that, it's not excusable in the way that a purely boring book can be. Instead, it's a tremendous idea told badly.

It seems that when Dick wrote this he didn't have a good grasp on translating his big ideas into an engrossing--or even active story. It's not that there's no movement in the story. Things happen, but even when they do, even in the throes of the final confrontation, when Deckard is retiring three andys in one abandoned apartment, nothing ever SEEMS to happen.

Making the mundane exciting is one of those rare skills that good writers--if they're going to make it anywhere--must have full command over. Making the exciting mundane is a failing that returns in cause to Truman Capote's characteristically droll critique of On the Road:

"That's not writing, that's typing."

The amazing thing about Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep and Philip K. Dick in general is how easily we can excuse his incessant typing for those moments when--as if by chance--writing catches up with him. There aren't many of those in this book, but occasionally, when the skin of the words breaks and some real pathos shows through, the hundred pages we've slogged through to get to this point don't matter.

That's the glory of PKD's ideas, and why his work has become a well of cinematic creation, that when they work as they should they're masterful stories that explore much of the human condition. The drawback--and in some ways the tax we as readers must pay--is that when they don't work, it's like dragging through a swamp: resistant to forward progress, and distasteful in our mouths.
121 likes ·  âˆ� flag

Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

Finished Reading
December 5, 2007 – Shelved
June 24, 2010 – Shelved as: taught

Comments Showing 1-9 of 9 (9 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Dana (last edited Aug 25, 2016 02:10PM) (new) - rated it 3 stars

Dana I think you're right to say that it's bad despite it's ideas. The post-apocalyptic setting and the concepts of electric animals and mood machines are intriguing, are something that I remember years after reading this book, but they're not enough to make me want to read it again.


message 2: by [deleted user] (new)

A tremendous idea told badly. You summarized the book perfectly.


Crystal this is perfect! going through the reviews i thought i was the only one who felt this way, thanks for posting.


message 4: by Art (new) - rated it 3 stars

Art Hill My sentiments, exactly


Mamg Fully agree. The author gave a bad drawing while there were so many opportunities throughout the book to color his unique idea.


Scott Buddy I don't agree in the slightest with you. The book is exploring how we humans perceive empathy. we are meant to feel sorry for Deckard throughout the book. His desire for a real animal, his extremely dangerous job and low wage bracket. I think the book was written in a very mundane way to push the concept of a mundane and dreary world where showing an empathetic outlook in life is what defines us as human.


message 7: by Jan (new) - rated it 3 stars

Jan Priddy Spot on review. (And I laughed out loud about On the Road.)


message 8: by Sebastian (new)

Sebastian Sotto Couldn't have said it better


message 9: by Kar (new) - rated it 3 stars

Kar Castilla Agree


back to top