The Man in the High Castle
When we were discussing the difference between history & fiction and what a postmodernist history might look like, one of the things that came to mind was a book I had read, The Man in the High Castle by Philip K. Dick (it’s also a TV show now). It’s basically an alternative history. It follows different people living in a reality where Germany and Japan won World War II. That’s already an interesting idea but to make it even wackier, there is a book in the novel that different characters come across, The Grasshopper Lies Heavy. That book is about an alternate reality where Germany and Japan lost the war. So, I’m reading a book set in an alternate reality in which people are reading a book set in an alternate reality which is my reality? Can it get any weirder? Spoiler alert – yes. Apparently, the author of The Grasshopper Lies Heavy consulted the I Ching to write his book. The I Ching is a source of divine fate and inner truth, so its predictions always come true. At the end of the novel, they ask the I Ching why it wanted to write The Grasshopper Lies Heavy, and the answer is “inner truth”. Not gonna lie, this ending really confused me, because now the truth is that Germany and Japan did lose the war, but they’re living in a reality where they won??
Something about the novel this felt very postmodern. The idea of alternate realities where one reality is apparently the “truth” just sounds like something a postmodernist would love. Also, if there aren't many differences between history and fiction – they’re both just narratives – who’s to say that The Man in the High Castle isn’t just as true as our history? Aren’t the authors of The Man in the High Castle and The Grasshopper Lies Heavy basically the same? This novel questions what reality is and poses the idea of multiple realities. Earlier, we talked about how postmodernism is more ontological dominant – more like “what is reality?”. In that case, The Man in the High Castle is postmodern because it thinks about an alternate reality where people are also thinking about an alternative reality – so it’s answer to what is reality is something like there are multiple realities and who knows which one is the truth. That’s the other thing I find postmodern about this novel, the whole idea of what’s the truth? I think postmodernism argues that we don’t really know what the truth about anything is, and in the novel, the characters don’t know either – they live in a reality but something that's always right says no this other reality is the “inner truth”.
All this thinking about the truth and what is reality kinda makes my brain hurt, but The Man in the High Castle was a pretty good book (idk about the show tho, I’ve never watched it).
Anyway, what do you guys think? Is The Man in the High Castle postmodern?
HOLY SHIT I also am currently consuming The Man in the High Castle and thought the exact same thing. I even asked Mr. Mitchell if he had read or watched it, and he said no, so that's sad.
ReplyDeleteI watched about the first season of the show and then it kinda started to suck so I started the book. I'm only a few chapters in but the pacing is... way better. Amazon took this SHORT novel -- amazing, but short -- and tried to stretch it out into like five seasons of one-hour episodes. The first season is cool because you're kinda learning about the world, etc. etc., but by the second season it's really clear it's gonna be some Lost shit where they just never tell you what the hell is going on and string you along with moderate doses of sex and violence. Like, The Grasshopper Lies Heavy isn't a book, it's some mysterious tapes, and we don't get the exposition about what they are, we just get isolated scenes so it stays ~confusing~... they're just not interested in the postmodern aspects at all, it seems. Also there are a ridiculous number of characters and plot arcs.
Also also also, they did my boi Frank a really bad character development. I don't know if it happens in the book, but in the show, he starts out as this pretty flawed character who is maybe a bit unsure of himself, doesn't want to join the rebellion group, not predisposed to violence except in really drastic situations, ends up not shooting the crown prince, etc. And then in roughly the first five minutes of Season 2, he just suddenly and awkwardly shifts and becomes Mr. Violence Resistance Man, which makes absolutely no sense. He'd just settled down to do some... honest??... work with the Yakuza, got reunited with Ed and everything, and then he's like "Now I all of a sudden want to fight and kill all the bad guys" which, like, fair, but it contradicts his entire character development thus far and it feels kinda inorganic? I miss the old Frank. And then there's this whole OTHER scene where he's guarding some explosives or shit with this Japanese-American woman and she's like, "yeah, the Americans put me into this detainment camp and I saw some fucked up shit like one time some people went on a hunger strike when I was eight, and then the guards beat them up and then the guards beat them up again and that's when I first felt righteous anger" and apparently, Frank's inner monologue is like "wow, childhood you having a scarring, experience is real fuckin... hot" (??????????) and they proceed to make out. Do I just not understand people? Is this a normal human thing to do? It isn't right? They're the strange ones.
Anyway, this comment isn't directly related to postmodernism, but it still counts, right, Mr. Mitchell?
It's really long. Can it count for two?
Wow that book sounds like a mind fuck. It does sound postmodern, and it reminds me of Ragtime in that the author seems to be reminding us he's in control; he is flaunting his power to create anything he wants to, similar to how doctorow reminds us he's in control by randomly crashing houdini into a pole. Dick is reminding us that we're in his world and we're reading a novel. From what you've said, I think you're right about the book being postmodern.
ReplyDeleteI do think the novel is postmodern because reality and the "truth" seems subjective. I don't know why I thought about this but there are pockets of different realities in the world. In North Korea there is a museum dedicated towards their victories against America. There probably are people in North Korea who grow up and die never really knowing about what the rest of the world is like because their only knowledge comes from the state narrative. Everyone to some degree views world events differently based on which country they live in, however, it's incredible that sometimes these views are 180 degrees away from the "truth."
ReplyDeleteI've watched a couple episodes of The Man in the High Castle, but I'm not good at watching TV shows so I've not gotten very far into it. Mostly because the episodes are 45 minutes to an hour long and I don't have the time to sit through that. However, based on my limited knowledge of it, I think you're totally right. The Man in the High Castle messes around with the idea of what reality is, though it sounds like they do that more in the novel than in the TV show. Like Pomona said, the TV show turns The Grasshopper Lies Heavy into mysterious tapes, which doesn't dive into the idea of multiple realities nearly as much as the book did. In general, the entire concept of the show and book are hard to wrap your head around, which is really interesting considering we're dealing with a massive historical event. We all know about WWII and its outcome, but The Man in the High Castle makes you think much harder about it and the implications of alternate realities where the ending of the war was different. Very postmodern of it --- I'm finding postmodernist works make my brain hurt, and The Man in the High Castle (the book) certainly sounds like it would hurt my head.
ReplyDeleteI binge watched The Man In the High Castle when I came upon it last summer and it certainly was one of my favorite shows I have ever watched. I too have found that it is a very Postmodern show, given its basis in a particularly sensitive area of history. I find it particularly interesting how in the show, almost everyone has grown to love the Nazi's which is very difficult to believe given the way they are portrayed in modern history classes. What Sarah said was especially true. The young people in "The Man In the High Castle" (Hitler Youth) have only ever seen the Nazi society, kind of like North Korean children, leading them to believe that they are indeed living a good life, when there is a better reality out there.
ReplyDeletePhillip K. Dick, who wrote the original novel that the TV show was based off of, covered a variety of postmodern topics throughout all of his literature, which has been adapted to various other forms of media. Blade Runner is one of my favorite films, and although the plot and setting are vastly different, it still covers some very existential topics that could be considered postmodern, especially around the question of artificial or created intelligence.
ReplyDelete_The Man in the High Castle_ (series and book) is now on my list. Y'all do a great job talking about why it's interesting and relevant to our concerns in this course, and I've been meaning to check it out for a while now. I'm on it!
ReplyDelete