about PKD and art

[rhet...@gmail.com]

Do any of you folks listen to "This American Life" on National Public
Radio?

A couple of weeks ago they had a show on art. Towards the end of the
show they discussed Philip Dick and how he always wanted to write a
great novel in the tradition of Dostoevsky, but how critics never took
his work seriously. He wrote much of the sci-fi simply to pay the
bills and towards the end of his life he was disappointed that he
didn't do something more worthwhile artistically.

At this point, many of his books have been turned into films (blade
runner, minority report, total recall, a scanner darkly), and many
writers directors cite him as a major influence on their own work.

So what do you think? Was PKD a successful artist?

[10lees]

I hate the fact that it depends on what an author writes that
determines their 'artistic' worth. I would argue that some of the
best authors are science fiction ones, they have more liberty to
explore the world as it may be, to show us the error of our ways.
Ursula LeGuin, Ray Bradbury, Jaspar Fforde, and Philip Dick are some
great writers who leap to mind.

The mix of great writing and great storytelling is what makes great
artists - I almost completely hate new fiction. I know this is wrong
of me, but I think that it is so depressing. I would rather read
something uplifting, or at least interestingly depressing - instead of
just 'real world' depressing. (This is all my own opinion of course)

I think he was a successful artist, but I think this discussion will
have more merit as the book unfolds.

[rhet...@gmail.com]

I mean, it really comes down to what the point of art is. ne guy
featured on the program was the foremost authority on making balloon
animals. I mean, he's a master at it. Is that *real* art? I think
so. I think, for whatever reason, if your art touches people enough
that they are willing to pay money for it (which, if you think about
it, we exchange our lives to make money), then it's successful. I
think PKD was an exceptional artist, even if I don't understand it,
always ;)

[rhet...@gmail.com]

oh, I'd also add Kurt Vonnegut to the list of awesome sci-fi authors.

[richt...@gmail.com]

This kind of ties into the conversation that Betsy and I were getting
into in regards to canon literature. Art is an intense experience
that, really is only capable of being experienced and appreciated by
one's self. You can share the love of a piece of art with other
individuals and, through discussion, perhaps the person spoken to will
appreciate it, but then enter psycology major from stage left who will
ask you is it the art that the person likes now or the person that
explained to them why they should like the art.

Going back to Dick and his aspirations of writing a "serious" novel.
I have a genuine issue with this because to do that he would have to
force art, not create it. This isn't to say that we're all born into
a caste system where we're all only capable of performing one thing or
limited by our abilities. Perhaps he could've written a Dostoevsky-
esque novel, but when you set off to write the greatest novel you get
something like Finnegans Wake. Joyce is a genius (Dubliners and
Ulysses are some of my favorite works) however when you set off to
write the greatest novel in literature you're left with something that
is so Yoko Ono or Patty Smith that nobody will be able to read it but
will say that it is great because they can't. My point is we need
people like Dick who saw empathy in situations and exposed lunacy both
thinking of the present and future moronity of humanity.

I think both of you guys are right though, Science Fiction, Fantasy,
Mystery, they all get bum raps and probably for the most part because
they're fun to read.