 |
|  |
 |
|
JohnT

|
 |
Capitalist
Mar 1999 time: 00:30
|
|
Because August was frenetically busy for me, I decided to take a month off from the discussion group and start it up again in September. Remember: next months book is The Dune Chronicles (the entire series, not just the first book).
Book: The Man in the High Castle
Author: Philip K. ****
Published: 1962
There are a few books that one reads that, even though you are quite capable of understanding the words, you can't make the sense of them, much less figure why this book is held in such high esteem by others. To me, the top book in this category is Ted Sturgeons More Than Human, which I thought was a complete waste - no ideas, all style, pretty full of boredom.
High Castle brought back a little of that feeling for me... though I've read the book twice since purchasing it, I'm still wondering: What's the point? Did anything actually happen in this book? Perhaps I'm too linear in my expectations, but still... just what was this book about? "Slice of life" stories are fine... as long as you can find an interesting slice of the life you're writing about. 
I found his portrayal of the Japanese as the most rational and least emotive (and least racist!) of peoples to be almost laughable - while the Japanese are fine people, how PKD could not have been aware of their ability to go from wild Xenophobics to cultural assimilators and back is amazing. Had he not heard of the Nanking Massacre? Did he never look up the definition of the traditional Japanese word for foreigners, gaijin, which translates into, iirc, "foreign devils", i.e., if you're not Japanese you are, by default, a devil and not to be trusted. This is one of those things which sticks out so badly that my enjoyment of the rest of the book suffers by comparison.
I sent a PM to Drake seeing if he could give some insight into the Japanese mindset - hopefully, he'll participate (I have no idea if he has read the book). 
Last edited by JohnT on 07-09-2003 at 21:37
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Eli
|
|
Israel
Jul 2000 time: 07:30
|
|
quote: There are a few books that one reads that, even though you are quite capable of reading the words, you can't make the sense of them, much less understand why this book is held in such high esteem by others. To me, the top book in this category is Ted Sturgeons More Than Human, which I thought was a complete waste - no ideas, all style, pretty full of boredom.
High Castle brought back a little of that feeling for me... though I've read the book twice since purchasing it, I'm still wondering: What's the point? Did anything actually happen in this book? Perhaps I'm too linear in my expectations, but still... just what was this book about? "Slice of life" stories are fine... as long as you can find an interesting slice of the life you're writing about. |
100% Agreed. I was reading the book and mainly looking for those rare lines of actual alternate history instead of the usual descriptions of people's lives.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
VetLegion
|
|
By the way, while we are in this genre; Turtledove's Ruled Britannia got some good critics. Supposedly his writing is much better than in his sequel ridden work.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
VetLegion
|
|
I Ching my thing at that. How convincing is it for Americans to eagerly accept something like that? Whatever.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
monolith94
|
 |
New England
Jan 1970 time: 00:30
|
|
"Hell, I was just looking for a plot."
There is a plot, and it is deeply rooted. I guess I'll have to be the books defender here. First, I think the writing style is much better than turtledove - I just kept turning the page for countless hours. Second, the book is about something - I think it's commentary on the very idea of alternate history itself. Is alternate history proper? Is it right? Are there really an infinite number of equally plausible universes, or is there really only one universe, where everything has happened as it has happened, and will happen as it will happen.
And if there is only one universe, what does this say about fate?
Also, I loved the characters. Oh well, whatever. Can't expect the swinish multitudes of apolyton to agree with everything I reccomend... 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Drake Tungsten
|
 |
Knee deep in alien womyn...
Oct 2001 time: 14:30
|
|
quote: I sent a PM to Drake seeing if he could give some insight into the Japanese mindset |
I don't really think I'm qualified to comment on "the Japanese mindset," but I'll give it a shot.
quote: I found his portrayal of the Japanese as the most rational and least emotive (and least racist!) of peoples to be almost laughable |
For the record, I haven't read the book, so I don't have a great idea of what Dick's view of the Japanese was like. That being said, I think he has a point if he describes the Japanese as rational and non-emotive. I wouldn't call them the most rational and non-emotive of peoples, but they're certainly high on the list.
The non-emotive aspect of Japanese culture is quite noticeable when you live here, especially if you are around adult men. In Japan, with its almost maniacal focus on group harmony, it is considered childish to lose one's temper or make any comparable show of emotion that could effect group relations. The male teachers I work with demonstrate this well. I've been working with them for over a month and have yet to see any demonstration of what I would call a "strong" emotional response. They all have this poker face on all the time that makes it extremely difficult to gauge what they're feelings are. The only time that they really drop their guard is when they are drinking, which is the one activity in which it is socially acceptable to speak one's mind.
For example, I thought that the baseball coach didn't like me, as he was always very distant around me, but we all went out drinking last night and he couldn't have been nicer to me, talking to me and teaching me "lessons" about going out in Japan. However, once we were back at work today, it was back to the same old standoff-ish attitude.
This non-emotive behavior is most noticeable in adult males, but the women exhibit it as well, particularly in regards to negative emotions. The only ones who show what I would consider "normal" levels of emotion are the young men.
As for the "rationality" of the Japanese, that's a hard quality to really observe. I can see how Dick might consider them rational, however, as the social structure here requires a great amount of thinking to navigate properly. You always have to consider the social hierarchy here and adjust your behavior according to who you are dealing with. You also have to think about the best ways to get what you want, but in an indirect manner, as direct means of communication are shunned here.
The best way I can think of to describe this combination of rationality and non-emotiveness in the Japanese psyche is through an adage I picked up somewhere (source forgotten at the moment). The adage states that Japanese society is like a duck swimming on a lake; calm on the surface, but paddling like hell underneath. The non-emotive aspect of Japanese behavior maintains the "calm surface", the veneer of harmony that is so vital to good group relations. Meanwhile, the rationality of the Japanese is honed in the hidden but very real struggle to improve one's lot in the society, the underwater "paddling."
Is that what you were looking for, John? I could write some more on the other topics you brought up, if you want.
edit: Be careful what you ask for, however. A discussion of Japanese "racism" and its Confucian roots could end up many times longer than this monster post. 
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30. Apolyton Time is 00:30. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|