Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?
by Philip K. Dick (1968)
2024 reads, 16/22:
It’s hard not to picture Harrison Ford as Rick Deckard, the main character of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? by PDK, and the inspiration for Ridley Scott’s 1982 movie Blade Runner. But this isn’t a bad thing, especially since Blade Runner is my favorite movie. It’s also surprising I’ve only now gotten around to reading the source material.
“Future and past blurred; what he had already experienced and what he would eventually experience blended so that nothing remained but the moment.”
Lots of differences between the movie and the book, and the biggest of which that stood out to me was the large focus on religion in the book. The core religion in DADOES, Mercerism, ultimately aims to increase human empathy; this sounds great, but it has its flaws. For example, its followers must use a device called an “empathy box,” which connects multiple people simultaneously into a virtual collective suffering. I loved this double-edged sword take on religion – by basing it on human empathy, we are led to believe in its inherent “good.”
Animal imagery is also much more prevalent in the book. This futuristic society seems to not just categorize, but rank, different beings: replicants, animals (both real and ‘electric’), specials (or chickenheads), and humans. It’s not as simple as humans vs. replicants; there are layers, or tiers, to this society. Maybe it’s because of the background reading I did on religion before reading Pynchon's Mason & Dixon, but this societal structure reminded me of the great chain of being, a hierarchical structure of all life decreed by God (the perfect scapegoat). This all circles back to the dark underside of religion, adding another dimension to Mercerism.
“Empathy, evidently, existed only within the human community, whereas intelligence to some degree could be found throughout every phylum and order including the arachnida.”
Based on how much I’ve mentioned the movie left out, you might think that this is a case of “the book is better than the movie” – and maybe, for most people, it is. But I just think they are two different pieces of art, trying to resonate with us in different ways. Reading this book got me thinking about adaptations in general, and what causes them to fail or succeed.
While they both accurately portray this concept of humanity and empathy, PKD does so by allowing us insight into the characters’ thoughts and feelings. The inner monologues of Deckard and John Isidore are all laid out. On the other hand, Ridley Scott chooses to use atmosphere and soundtrack. We read the characters’ faces, we feel Vangelis’ score pulsing throughout, pulling us in and widening our view on dystopia. We get a general sense of the time and mood, which is, in my opinion, also extremely effective.
After finally reading this book, I fully believe that Blade Runner and DADOES both get five stars, in their own way. If you like the book, give the movie a chance. If you like the movie, give the book a chance. I’m sure you’ll enjoy at least one of them.
“You will be required to do wrong no matter where you go. It is the basic condition of life, to be required to violate your own identity. At some time, every creature which lives must do so. It is the ultimate shadow, the defeat of creation; this is the curse at work, the curse that feeds on all life. Everywhere in the universe.”
PS: The unnamed owl in the movie, is officially named “Scrappy” in the book…
#readingyear2024 #scifi #dystopia #book2screen #pkd #book2screen
