Talkfest: PKD/LoA

The forthcoming publication of a Library of America edition of four Philip K. Dick novels of the 1960s ("The Man in the High Castle," "The Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch," "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" and "Ubik"), introduced by Jonathan Lethem (who in 1984 dropped out of college in order to become the Philip K. Dick Society's first recruit), will undoubtedly, hopefully, raise a few hackles.

I mean: Henry Adams, Louisa May Alcott, Theodore Dreiser, Henry James, Edith Wharton... and the author of "The Zap Gun"? I say "hopefully" just because I hope there are people out there who still take literary standards seriously. But, of course, as Ideas and Brainiac readers may already know, I think Dick is one of the greatest novelists of the 2d half of the 20th century.

Anyway, the folks at the Valve are arguing about the Library of America/Philip K. Dick question this week. Scott Eric Kaufman doesn't touch the question of whether Dick is a talented writer or not, but wonders whether the 2d half of the 20th century was really a time of creeping paranoia, or if it was just Dick's paranoia that will make it seem so to future readers of the Library of America volume. If a novelist is like a seismograph (and that's a big if), is Dick a trustworthy instrument? David Moles says yes: "You don't have to argue for the literal truth of Dick's work to call it a potent metaphor for its time, whether it really is or not." Others disagree. What do you think, readers?

I nominate this discussion for talkfest of the week.

PS: My obsession can't compare to Lethem's, but here are a few things I've written about PKD: "Hermenaut of the Month: Philip K. Dick," for Hermenaut | "The slacktivism of Richard Linklater," for Slate | "The Black Iron Prison," for n+1 | "Back to utopia," for Ideas | "Radio Free Boston," for Ideas

PPS: Here's James Parker writing about Dick, for Ideas: "Substance."

UPDATE: Thanks, RealFake blog, for the following comment on this post:

I think that's a compliment...