The Man in the High Castle Hardcover Book by Easton Press - Collector's Edition for Sci-Fi Fans & Book Lovers - Perfect for Reading, Display & Gifting

An adage from screenplay writing: Every specific detail you introduce should contribute to the rest of the plot in some meaningful way.With this in mind, a reasonable complaint to begin with is: Why was Juliana Frink introduced as the ex-wife of Frank Frink? Both of the characters’ having had a recent divorce contributed to the plot: Franks’ as motivation for taking on some higher calling, and Julianas’ for going all mid-life crisis with some strange trucker. And their being single was an important element contributing to their motions towards agency and changing the world. But it was completely unmeaningful that they had been married to each other and this actually undermines PKD’s thesis.(**SPOILER ALERT**)For an example of a relevant, seemingly trivial detail, consider the serendipity that took place during Frank’s arrest: Frank is picked up off the street for having been recognize from earlier involvement in minor conspiracy, is recognized as a Jew, but the papers for his deportation to Reich-controlled land reach Tagomi in the wake of the Germans’ attempt to assassinate an Abwehr agent. Tagomi refuses to sign it, with some stirring feeling of detraction from diplomacy. But Tagomi mightn’t have even come in that day feeling confrontational, if he hadn’t angrily broken away from the meditative stupor induced by contemplating a small piece of original American jewelry he’d purchased from Childan on a whim. Jewelry that Childan had purchased from Frink’s co-conspirator as a direct consequence of Frank’s original “crime”.This minor detail of Frank’s deportation being narrowly avoided is wrapped up in two major forces that dictate the world arc: Chance and interconnectivity. In PKD’s world, these forces underlie everything that happens (either ironically from the reader’s perspective, or objectively through the I Ching) , and even everything that didn’t happen: The Grasshopper written by the eponymous Abendsen is revealed to have been completely composed via chance consultations with the I Ching. The interconnectivity is otherwise underlined in highly enjoyable, Murakami-like narratives about Tao, Yin-Yang, and Wu, and the interleaved arcs of every single main character except for Juliana and Frank. So frustrating! Just introduce Juliana with a different name, and the story would have been equally powerful with one less meaningless detail.In the larger scope, the Axis victory came about by chance military victories or political outcomes (Pearl Harbor and the African Front and Roosevelt’s assassination), and those events’ interconnectivity with the rest of WWII military history understandably lead to a reversal of outcomes. Of course, this is cursorily disputable by a quick glance of military trends on Germany’s Eastern front post-1942. But PKD’s presentation is so powerful, with the thesis woven into almost every aspect of the narrative (except for the Frinks’ divorce! Argh!) that arguing the historical details just feels base. Besides, the thesis is about serendipity and misfortune, not predictable evolution of events from initial conditions. Parts of the book actually fall neatly into absurdist literature, especially in the last two chapters. I think these parts could have been a lot more moving had they been related to the war in some way (e.g. Slaughterhouse 5 style delusional coping) instead of minor violent episodes.Finally, I thought the narrative dealt with ethical relativism and injustice very tactfully. Yes, allied forces did start committing war crimes in desperation as their defeat became inevitable (spoiler: The criminal fire bombings of German civilians by allied bombings isn’t just fiction). Yes, the British were put on show trial for these war crimes. And no, the world isn’t equally terrible as if the allies had won; It’s far, far worse. There are basically no Jews, Slavs, or Africans left alive on the planet, and even Axis powers like Italians and Japanese are unhappy with the state of the world because Nazi ideology isn’t actually compatible with diplomacy with anyone but Aryans. There’s no attempt to equivocate the morality of the postwar world between the versions of reality. That’s how it should be: Even if interconnected, chance events dictate the history of the world, that doesn’t make outcomes equivalent. Even if victory is awarded by chance, compassion certainly isn’t. Even if you argue that I Ching, coin flips, astral signs, or Gods’ whims are responsible for the course of history, these things will never justify the way we choose to condemn fellow humans to tyranny and violent deaths.