The Man in the High Castle by Philip K. Dick REVIEW

The Man in the High Castle by Philip K. Dick
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

This book is incredibly clever, but that didn’t translate directly to enjoyment for me. I was always initially interested, but I quickly fell asleep when I picked up the book in the evening. The biggest problem for me was that I didn’t care about any of the characters. None of the POVs had any moral fortitude, nor were they enjoyable antagonists.

I had other problems as well. Dick tackled big themes, but I’m not sure I always knew what his point was. Was he trying to say that we, as individuals, control our destinies, or we should just throw in the towel and let I Ching direct us on a need to know basis? I have no idea where Dick was going in Chapter 14 with Tagomi’s exploration of the pin. I had the feeling that was mumbo jumbo ramblings disguised to seem like something deep and intellectual. Also, the ending was lackluster. I didn’t mind ambiguity in the wrap-ups of each of the POV storylines, but I greatly disliked the ending as related to The Grasshopper Lies Heavy. That needed explanation. I’m not impressed when authors just throw out weird stuff, leave it to you to figure out and walk away.

On the whole, even though I didn’t love it, I would recommend this book. The themes were very relevant in the context of the 1960’s political and social environment. I appreciate sci-fi used as social commentary. Alternate realities aren’t particularly unique, but for some reason, when they are done well, they seem fresh. The Man in the High Castle isn’t ordinary. I can understand the wide appeal of this book.


View all my reviews

The Metamorphosis by Franz Kafka, Stanley Corngold (Translator) REVIEW

The Metamorphosis by Franz Kafka
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

This is a difficult book for me to rate. On one hand, there is no denying that it is brilliant. Kafka has a strong point of view. He wants to talk about alienation and loneliness among other things. His themes are universal and have been worked by many other competent writers, but Kafka gives the reader something unique and unexpected. An English teacher could spend a semester of delight helping students understand all of the nuances of this book.

But…For me, personally, reading it was a chore. I didn’t look forward to it. Metamorphosis did not speak to my soul. It was annoying that it was so weird. Taking into account my level of enjoyment, I can only give this book three stars, but I would never want to discourage anyone from reading it. It is a classic for a reason, and I think that it could be enjoyed today as easily as the day it was written.

View all my reviews

Black No More by George Schuyler REVIEW

Black No More by George S. Schuyler
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

In this Harlem renaissance classic, Schuler mixes satire and science fiction for a unique blend of social commentary. Black No More is not often referred to as science fiction, but it is the first science-fiction work by an African-American writer.

By definition, a satire is supposed to be “over the top” funny. Here, Schuler’s jokes are mostly “in your face”, but just when you, as a reader, are feeling saturated by the humor, he switches it up and gives you something a little more subtle. For myself, I didn’t think that it was laugh out loud funny, but I found it extremely interesting. The irreverence he showed for the icons of his time, like DuBois was shocking, but I felt he made a good cases to justify his criticism.

Schulyer’s overarching themes are: (1) Racism is absurd; (2) Racism is used by capitalist elites to control the population. After reading this book, I did a little research on Schyuler, and I was shocked that shortly after writing this book, his political leanings took a 180 degree turn. Clearly, part of the agenda in writing Black No More was to garner support for, what was considered at the time, socialist ideas. Also, Schuler was very critical of the NAACP. Maybe his satire spoke more truth about who he was than anyone could have guessed. In Black No More he accused everyone of using racism to make money, but Schulyer seems to have done exactly that. He aligned himself with agendas that most would consider hostile to civil rights. For example, in 1968, in a radio broadcast Schuyler said, "In South Africa you have a system of apartheid. That's their business. I don’t think it’s the business of other people to change their society." He opposed Martin Luther King’s award of the Nobel Peace prize. Although, in Black No More, he was very critical of the NAACP, Schulyer worked for the NAACP from 1937-1944 as business manager.

Was any of the satire based on genuine conviction? He criticizes black men for their apparent rejection of black women, but at the time he wrote the book, he was married to the rich, white heiress, Josephine Lewis Cogdell. Schuyler became a staunch conservative, leaning extremely right, and he made a good living expounding his point of view. He may have switch sides in real life as easily as Max Disher turned into Matthew Fisher. It might be interesting to read one of his later books like Black and Conservative: the Autobiography of George Schuyler or Rac(e)Ing to the Right. I assume either would offer some explanation for his transformation.

Questioning Schuyler’s real opinions when he wrote this book is interesting, on an academic level to me, but does not change my perception of the book itself. It is well done. The book lacks depth, but that can be forgiven with a satire. I didn’t like the part of the ending involving the botched getaway. I thought it was little long and gory. When I read Black No More, it reminded me of Mat Johnson’s Pym. In a way, even the endings were similar. Johnson lost control of Pym in the same way I think Black got away from Schulyer. Both books offer irreverent, entertaining social commentary.


View all my reviews

Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury REVIEW

Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

Without a doubt, Bradbury had an incredible imagination. He gave his 1950s audience flat panel TVs, IPODs and ATM machines. He also turned the traditional role of the fireman upside down and used the symbolism of fire to both bring forth life and destroy it. It is one thing to be a good storyteller or a talented writer, which certainly, Bradbury is, but in my opinion, it elevates the craft to do that while making relevant social commentary. Bradbury had a lot to say, and he did it in the context of a compelling and entertaining story.

Bradbury wrote Fahrenheit 451 during the McCarthy error; so government censorship was a serious and real concern. What is interesting to me is that Bradbury makes the point that the people and the state share the blame for censorship, with the people bearing most of the culpability. Every group that has a viewpoint wants the counter-viewpoint censored. Bradbury warns us of the perils of political correctness before political correctness even had a name.

Bradbury also warns that as society intoxicates itself with pleasures and titillation of mass media people will increasingly move away from, not only intellectual pursuits, but they will lose their ability to bond with one another. Bradbury didn’t even own a TV until the 1950s, but he had the foresight to understand the (now well documented) mental health issues that can come from heavy ICT use.

I was, generally, pleased with the storytelling. Bradbury was, at times, a little long winded but he painted vivid pictures. The foreshadowing was nicely done, and even though I knew the plot, I was surprised a few times. Really, you can’t ask for much more out of a book. It is a cool coincidence that I just happened to read this classic during banned book week.


View all my reviews