Criticism > Contemporary Literary Criticism > Dick, Philip K(indred) (Vol. 30) - Bruce Gillespie

1. Printable Version
2. Download PDF
3. Cite this Page
4. Tweet This

BRUCE GILLESPIE

[The following essay was written in 1967 and first published in a shortened form in SF Commentary, January, 1969.]

Nobody has ever accused Dick of being stupid, unoriginal, or dull, but no reviewer I've ever seen has been able to put his finger on the ways in which Dick is intelligent, original, and fascinating. One can but try.

Part of the problem is that Philip Dick's novels have several characteristics which divide him from other sf writers, and tend to sever communication with the average sf reader. As one can point out so easily, long passages in his books, although seldom whole books, are badly written by any standards. (p. 10)

Dick also shows some of the sentimentality we generally associate with the other sf writers, but his direction usually heads away from this approach. When sentimentality does appear in full soporific splendour (Barney Mayerson and Emily Hnatt in The Three Stigmata of Palmer...

Join eNotes

The above is a free excerpt. Get total access to this content with the:

eNotes Pass

1. Introduction
2. George Turner
3. Brian W. Aldiss
4. Stanislaw Lem
5. Roger Zelazny
6. Bruce Gillespie
7. Angus Taylor
8. Ursula K. Leguin
9. Philip Strick
10. Patricia S. Warrick
11. Copyright

1. Philip K. Dick