The written works produced by Philip K. Dick are frequently multifaceted and deeply introspective allegories that peel away the world's social structures, both of a personal and political nature, in an attempt to tap into the raw underlying ideological sources that form them. He draws from a great number or various theological concepts, including those of Christian, Buddhist, Taoist, and Hindi origins in order to establish a familiar framework or foundation that the reader then uses as tools to pry beneath the surface plot, revealing the inner-workings of the ideology that underpins the story.
According to McKnee, these theological roots that formed the basis of some of Dick's greatest works were often disregarded by scholars in their own analyses, who instead emphasized Dick's efforts to deconstruct the political power structures within his writings, particularly those as envisioned in 'The Man in the High Castle', as opposed to the theological concepts deeply rooted within them (McKnee, 2004.). This, McKnee argues, causes scholarly analysis to formulate inadequate conclusions and summaries based on Dick's fiction, failing to take notice of the author's intended allegorical meanings, which hint at the internal struggles embroiling his characters and their settings(McKnee, 2004.).
Furthermore, Dick's non-fiction writings within the field of religious study were misinterpreted in a fashion similar to the critical misconceptions that had also dogged his fictional works, which were subsequently erroneously categorized as the works of a "gnostic", a general term that did a disservice to the deeper nature of the material (McKnee, 2004.). As noted by McKnee, this frustrated the author greatly, leading to his eventual condemnation of the opinions of these critics who had so grievously misinterpreted the intentions behind his numerous written works (McKnee, 2004.).
As McKnee clearly illustrates, the mislabelling of Dick's written works as "gnostic" meant that the generalities applied to that label failed to acknowledge the author's deliberate synthesis of various theological concepts, which were drawn not from a single source, but a diverse array of religious sources that coloured in the fulfilment of the meaning (McKnee, 2004.). The same could be said of the multifaceted nature of the author's literary works, layers upon layers of which operate on a multitude of levels, each requiring a careful analytical and observational sense in order to ascertain the subsurface meanings encoded deep within them.
It seems that Dick was quite adept at hybridizing various religious motifs and embedding them within the framework of his narratives, each adding poignant and symbolic layers of depth to often-times seemingly innocuous or ordinary scenes that subtly hint at the deeper subtext that brews below the surface of his literary figures and settings. The deliberate decision to mutate disparate religious concepts, incorporating their fundamental components in such a way as to formulate whole new concepts, allowed Dick to establish the meat of his narratives upon the skeleton of theological thought that lay beneath it.
I believe that Dick wanted nothing more than total emancipation from the rigid social structures that dominate the modern world, and that through the storytelling craft, he was effectively casting off the shackles imposed upon him and the wider society of humanity at large, in a bid to discover the unseen hinges that conjoin individual ideations that are proliferated throughout the social consciousness of mankind. As a storyteller, it is essential that one writes from a stance completely free of all restrictions, and this rule is extended to the social structures that may impose limitations on independent thought and inhibit one's expression of self-hood, thereby granting the storyteller the freedom necessary to analyse the world in greater detail.
A fallacy of thinking among those belonging to academic circles is their enduring need to categorize the thoughts and ideas that encompass all manner of literature, the need to impose structures upon them that are often an ill fit at best, as a means of making sense of the great works of art that are borne of the minds of men and women who typically do not fit into any designated category at all. I would argue that Philip K. Dick was actively rebelling against this notion of imposed structural categorization that was awkwardly forming around his literary works, challenging the beliefs of his critics regarding his writings and novels through his breadth of theological understanding, but that he was ultimately doomed to fail in the attempt.
It is interesting to note that the films of master Japanese animator, Hayao Miyazaki, were also once the subject of imposed categorization among the academic community, and like Dick, he was also quick to shoot down the theories of his critics regarding his works, just as Dick had done before him. Like Miyazaki, Dick was a storyteller eager to plumb the depths of the human psyche and dredge up what lay below the surface, and it was due in large part to the theological and philosophical concepts that he drew from that he was able to do so, enriching his stories with a keen social conscience that remains unique to Dick and his classics of literature even to this day.
No comments:
Post a Comment