Is it really better than the movie?

His writing isn't bad, it's bland. And that's all the better. If he would fire up some impenetrable prose, while his theories are as cryptic and heavy as they are, it would be unreadable

You probably just don't have a very active imagination. The worlds Dick creates are intentionally bizarre and detached from reality.

Bland writing is bad writing when it's the only kind an author is capable of.
The worlds aren't my issue with him. It's his lack of an ability to make me care about them.

Wouldn't say so. The philosophy is much better in the book, sure, but everything else is better in the movie.
Give it a shot anyway, if you can get it in a library.

Your apathy is internal, it isn't an issue of Dicks writing.

Not him, but you are dumb

Most people that make their sole complaint a matter of their lack of interest don't understand that you should only read something if you're already drawn to it from an already present internal interest. You shouldn't go into a book already in a state of apathy and expect the book to snap you out of it, then blame the book for not being able to deliver.

>it's the only kind an author is capable of
It's not though.

Not my favourite book by him, but it's an appropriate starting place. It's sure where I began. Read The Man In the High Castle next, to further get a sense of style, and then read UBIK (by far his best book. After that read his second best books, A Scanner Darkly and Flow My Tears, the Policeman Said. And read VALIS last.

>UBIK (by far his best book)
Really? I prefer Three Stigmata, VALIS and Androids. UBIK was sort of a letdown, despite the shitload of themes going on. The characters were far too exeggerated to me.

I think they're both good in their own ways. I wouldn't compare either, since they operate in different mediums. For cinema, Bladerunner is one of the best films ever made (imo). And, DADoES was an enjoyable read.

Both are great, although they have very little in common. It's a short read and a good entry point to PKD (not that you need an "entry point" for him, but it's one of his best books). I say read it.

>Is it really better than the movie?

Yes, yes and yes. The movie is vapid crap with only it's visuals/atmosphere going for it.

>Is it the best PKD novel?

No, not at all. The best three Phillip K. Dick novels are in my opinion Scanner Darkly, VALIS, and Martian Timeslip.

no
all of PKDs work is pulp tier dreck that he pumped out at a high volume without any time to consider the work or rewrite with the help of amphetamines to keep up the high rate of production because he always made low sales

What a dick.

I wouldn't be that harsh, the aren't especially well-written by any means, but I find his imagination fascinating engaging enough to read his work.

Not him, but I tried reading A Scanner Darkly and some other shit by him because the premise sounded interesting. They ended up not being interesting at all because of how he wrote about it.

So you're full of shit, t b h.

>Martian Timeslip

Curious what you like so much about this one. I've never seen someone mention it as a favorite.

My top three are probably VALIS, Tim Archer, and Crap Artist with honorable mentions to High Castle and Ubik

>he has never had a friend suffer from drug abuse and mental illness

you'll grow up some day user,

I have actually. It's not interesting.

its very different from the movie
i wouldnt say its better than the movie

Sorry, I didn't realize you lacked empathy and aren't capable of thinking about the human experience.. My bad.

Yeah man, I think that one doesn't get enough credit. I'd say it feels the most alien and haunting out of all PKD's books that I've read so far (even more than Three Stigmata, which are kinda meme here on Veeky Forums). It has this passage with "soft" rape in it (as in the woman clearly doesn't want it, but she doesn't resist) which left me emotionaly raw to the degree few books ever managed to do.

Isn't Confessions of a Crap Artist one of his "literary" books?

What does this even mean you psued shitter

Not at all. It's not even in the top five of PKD's books.

Very false, movie was ass....

UBIK, this book and The Man in the High Castle are his best works. He isn't by any means a great writer, and one could argue he isn't even a good one, just decent.

However, it's his sci-fi plots that are interesting and his character development isn't too shabby either. Those 3 books are a go, some of his others are atrociously bad though...

Ubik is complete trash.
Book is good. Movie is good. They are almost completely unrelated tho.

>Isn't Confessions of a Crap Artist one of his "literary" books?

Yeah, in that it's not science fiction. Just a regular old intensely bleak and nihilistic story about people in california.

DESU it's not that great until the ending, which redeems the entire work.

I don't rate Ubik as highly as most other people do, but I wouldn't say it's complete trash. Jory is still among the best villains in all of his stories, I'd say second to Palmer Eldritch

way better. the movie entirely cuts out that motif of mindless, droning and robotic materialism. i mean what really struck me about the novel wasnt the androids or decker's ethical metamorphosis regarding his killing androids but rather that sad, monotonous compulsion towards status symbols and what people will risk to fit in, i.e. buy electric sheep.

a great book and a quick read, well worth the kindle dl

1. A Maze of Death
2. Ubik
3. Three Stigmata

Removing Deckards wife and the effect her nihilistic despair towards life had on him removed so much of what made the story in the book meaningful. The meaning of his entire relationship with Rachael within the story hinges on his empty relationship with his wife.

Not even comparable. they are both really great on their own and aren't really that alike.

What do you know of his 1982 book?

The Transmigration of Timothy Archer or The Owl in Daylight?

The movie is fantastic in the visual aspect, but it lacks everything that made the book so good.

Second that.

>everything that made the book so good.

What do you think made the book good?

Not that guy but:

SPOILERS

- The existential nausea of Deckard's wife fucking around with the mood organ
- The themes of Mercerism/animals (it is kinda goofy, but at the same time very creative)
- The fake police station full of androids (that was a really good scene imho)
- Lead codpieces
- John R. Isidore is just a regular autistic bloke instead of a giant weirdo who fucks around with living marionettes
- The whole subplot of Buster Friendly and his friendly friends exposing Mercer as fake

That's just what I can remember of the top of my head. I don't think that Androids are that good, but it's still way more entertaining and complex story than Blade Runner (which looks nice, but really otherwise has nothing going for it, save for a few pretentious quotes).

>- The existential nausea of Deckard's wife fucking around with the mood organ

this was really my only takeaway from that book

So I've read
DADOES
Ubik
Man in the High Castle

What should I read next?

VALIS

eh, they're both good for different reasons. Kinda like comparing apples to oranges and all that.

This is the sad truth, but the beauty is that his ideas and worldview were so interesting that they are able to shine through the often turgid, deadline and rent induced prose. There are exceptions though, A Scanner Darkly in particular has some pretty good writing and is most emotionally affective work. Even that though, you should keep in mind that he really needed that paycheck and it, like all the rest, was rushed.
But it's because of all this that the more you read of Dick the more you like him. Most of his books, except for the stand outs like High Castle and Scanner Darkly, aren't too memorable on their own. But taken together they each become one piece of a much larger whole.

They're good for different reasons. Really enjoy both.