PKD and the I Ching
In his 2006 conference speech Dr Mountfort (2006) identified the I Ching as an organisational and character
illumination device in The Man in the High
Castle of Philip K. Dick (2001; 1962). He enlists all of the ten “readings” (i.e. consultations of the
oracle) as being instrumental in the development of the narrative and thus in
the portrayal of the main protagonists.
According to PKD’s 1965 essay where he
rambles on about concepts such as the koinos kosmos and the idios kosmos, synchronicity
and acausality, mostly redigesting Jung’s (and Pauli’s) constructs without
explicitly mentioning or let alone referencing them, he asserts the I Ching
being “a device by which synchronicity
can be handled.” (p.176). Jung’s influence is clear, since “Traces of the I Ching can be found in Jung’s
own work with archetypes, the universally understood symbols that illuminate
the collective unconscious.” (Jahan, 2012,
p. 9)
Dick’s affection for Eastern schools of
thought- strongly influenced by studying Carl Jung,- could be interpreted as an
expression of Orientalism, however the exploration of this notion is beyond the
limitations of this post.
On the other hand, a cynical critic could
state that the readings conveniently support PKD’s premeditated storyline,
character development and ultimate message about totalitarianism in general,
and Naziism [PKD spelling] in
particular.(P. K. Dick,
1995) One
could argue, that the cybertextual creation of the novel –“The Oracle […] told me to write this piece” (p.181) – interpreted by
Dr Mountfort as “HOW to write this piece”, as in PKD taking
the ten mentioned readings himself to decide on how to proceed – could be PKD’s
trick only on the audience to gain absolution of any repercussions he was sure
to expect. We may take his statements of “morbid
dependence on the book”( p.182) at face value, but the only person who
could prove their absolute verity is the –alas - late PKD.
References
Excellent post Balazs! Comments as discussed in tutorial.
ReplyDelete