Critical Analysis of 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?'

Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? was written in 1968 by Philip. K. Dick. The novel is set in a future world where earth has almost been destroyed by World War Terminus and many people have emigrated to one of the colony planets. The threat of radioactive waste and its effects are constantly being told to those living on earth, with slogans such as ‘Emigrate or degenerate! The choice is yours!’ (p.6) being commonplace. As an incentive to emigrate to one of the colonies, each emigrant is given an ‘android subtype of his choice’ (p.13). Occasionally, these androids escape and since they resemble humans so much, they return to earth to attempt to live unnoticed. This essay will critically analyse Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? paying particular attention to the theme of reality in the text; what is real and what is not. Alongside this, this essay will also explore the influence that the culture industry has on creating, concealing and revealing reality in the text. Key postmodern theories this essay will apply are Adorno’s, The Culture Industry (1944) and Baudrillard’s, Simulacra and Simulations (1981).

Baudrillard (1981) believes that we are living in a world that is ‘sheltered from reality […so much that] never again will the real have the chance to produce itself’ (p.2). In other words, the reality that we live in has been constructed by media images and messages so that it is impossible to locate a ‘real’ reality. Therefore, our reality is simulated from media reproductions of what the culture industry have decided our society should be like. Baudrillard (In Woods 1999), famously argued that the Gulf War did not take place because the media constructed a reality of it which was not true. Adorno (1944 in Rivkin & Ryan 1998), believes that the culture industry, and in particular, television are ‘stunting […] consumers powers of imagination’ (p.1039) resulting in what he calls (1944 in Bernstein 1991) a ‘false-realism’ (p.158). This means that as a result of being exposed constantly to social ideals on television, people are losing their ability to think creatively, and have become to think that life in reality should be as it is on television. The ideas of Baudrillard and Adorno can be clearly identified in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? Simulation is a key theme in the novel, with the lines often being blurred between what is in fact real and what is not; there are simulated humans, animals and police stations. The moods of characters in the text are simulated by using the Penfield mood organ, where you dial a number for whatever mood you wish to be in; there is even a number for a mood evoking ‘ecstatic sexual bliss’ (p.5). The vidphone in the text, essentially a telephone where you can see each other, shows how deeply embedded into the text the theme of simulation is. The characters, using the vidphone, are simulating face to face conversations. Similarly, the influence of the culture industry, and in particular, the television can be seen in the text through the emphasis on the Buster Friendly television show and the effects of this on the characters.

The concept of reality and the characters abilities to distinguish between what is real and what is not is a recurring theme in the text. This can be seen when we are introduced to Isidore, who works for a company that repairs false animals. After picking an animal up for repair, which turns out to be real, his boss angrily asks him ‘couldn’t you tell, Isidore? Didn’t you notice the difference?’ (p.67). Milt, a co-worker, rises to Isidore’s defence saying ‘the fakes are beginning to be darn near real’ (p.67). This is what Kincaid (2010), describes as the ‘disturbing likeness between nature and artifact’ (p.1). The simulation of the real is becoming so real that it is becoming impossible to tell the difference. Isidore did not know that the cat was a simulation, just as Baudrillard (1981) suggests that society does not know that its reality is a simulation.

An extended example of this can be seen in the androids which Rick Deckard is employed to retire in the text. Pagetti (1975), says that the text is furnished with ‘mechanical devices that […] are so perfect as to be confused with men and take their place’ (p6). A perfect example of this in the text is Garland who is an android posing as a police officer. The only way Rick can tell if a person is human or an android is by administering the voigt-kampff test which analyses ‘empathic response’ (p.103). Although, as Wheale (1995) points out, this is becoming increasingly difficult since ‘the latest generation of Nexus-6 andys approach nearer and nearer to human empathic ability’ (p.105). Baudrillard (1981) says ‘to simulate is to feign what one doesn’t have’ (p.2). This is exactly what the new Nexus-6 androids are doing, they are simulating human empathy, but their responses on the voigt-kampff test betray them. This blurs the line between what Rick knows as reality and what he knows as an android replication, or simulacrum. Rachel, an android that Rick forges a relationship with in the text, shows some human emotion. When she realises that Rick has to retire an android of her subtype she feels an ‘identification’ (p164) with the android. It transpires that Rachel knows the androids that Rick has been commissioned to retire and had been ‘close friends’ (p.172) with Luba Luft, an android Rick retired earlier in the day. Although these feelings do not equate to empathy, Rick is astonished at the amount of human feeling Rachel appears to have when another bounty hunter who he met earlier in the day, Resch, seemed to have so little. Resch expressed such a lack of empathy that Rick said to him: ‘I hope to god you do test out as an android’ (p.119). Resch, is not an android but he suffers from what Hayles (1999) describes as one of the characteristics of an android, a ‘flattening of affect’ (p.161). That is, a reduced amount of empathy compared to what a human usually feels. Resch’s android like behaviour, and Rachel’s apparent moments of human feeling, cause Rick to question the difference between androids and humans, hence reality and its simulation.

The influence of the culture industry can be seen in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? and further blurs the line between reality and the simulation of it. Kincaid (2010), says that the characters in the text are addicted to the television; but, it can be seen in the text that the presence of the television in the character’s lives is also influenced by the mood organ. By dialling an ‘888, [characters have] the desire to watch TV, no matter what’s on it’ (p.4). The simulation of this mood exposes the characters to what Grace (2006), describes as a ‘powerful propaganda tool’ (p.6). Adverts promising the characters a better life on the colonies are doing in the text what Adorno (1944 in Rivkin & Ryan 1998) says happens in reality; they are ‘working with larger institutions […] to influence what and how consumers think’ (p.1038). Through promoting emigration, the television company is promoting the large corporations producing androids; similarly, in real life, television programmes promote products.

The Buster Friendly show is the best example in the text of how the culture industry influences its audience. Buster has a television and radio show which both run for ‘twenty-three unbroken warm hours a day’ (p.63). During this time its audience are subjected to propaganda adverts and ‘knee-slapping’ (p.55) comedy. This is a perfect example of what Adorno calls ‘stunting [of the ..] imagination’ (p.1039). Being able to watch knee-slapping comedy almost every hour of the day prevents the audiences from thinking about the messages the show is giving out. Buster himself blurs the boundaries of reality as it would be impossible for a human to produce two live shows, twenty-three hours a day. The television show further blurs the line between reality and its illusion when Buster apparently reveals reality by exposing Mercer as a fake. Mercer is the figurehead of Mercerism, the religion practised by humans in the text. Buster exposes Mercer as a fake but he still conceals reality as he does not admit to being an android, instead, this is told to Isidore by Pris, an android, when she says ‘Buster is one of us’ (p.184). Buster reveals the truth about Mercerism but it is in his interests not to reveal the reality about himself, therefore he still prevents the characters in the text from knowing the ‘true’ reality.


The emphasis placed on reality in the novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? and the critical discourse surrounding reality in the postmodern era suggests that it is a key concern for postmodernists. This essay has explored the theme of reality in the text; particularly the ways in which reality is constructed, the ways in which the line between what is real and what is not is blurred and finally, how reality is (apparently) revealed to be false. This essay has also shown how Baudrillard’s theory of Simulacrum and Simulation and Adorno’s theory of The Culture Industry can be applied to the theme of reality in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? The emphasis placed on the television in the text shows how deeply connected the television and culture industry is with the construction and simulation of reality; the two are so entangled that it seems one could not exist without the other. Ultimately, upon finishing the text, the reader is left to question their own reality and how much of it is influenced by the culture industry.

Word Count: 1615

Reference List

Adorno, T. (1944), The Culture Industry. In Rivkin, J & Ryan, J (eds) (1998). Literary Theory: An Anthology. Blackwell: Oxford.

Adorno, T. (1944). How to Look at Television. In Bernstein, J. M. (eds) (1991) The Culture Industry. Routledge: New York.

Baudrillard, J. (1981) Simulacrum and Simulation. In Poster, M. (eds.) (1988) Jean Baudrillard: Selected Writings. Stanford University Press: Stanford.

Dick, P. K. (1968) Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? Orion: London.

Grace, D. (2006) Literary Contexts in Novels: Philip K. Dick's 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?' Great Neck Publishing: [s.l]. [Online] Available from: http://web.ebscohost.com.ezp.don.ac.uk:8081/lrc/detail?sid=63206629-f753-4b1e-998a-4259b5177c3b%40sessionmgr11&vid=8&hid=9&bdata=JnNpdGU9bHJjLWxpdmU%3d#db=lfh&AN=23184823 [Accessed 10 Jan 2012].

Hayles, K. (1999) How we Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature and Informatics. University of Chicago: Chicago.

Kincaid, P. (2010) Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? Masterplots. Nov 2010 (4), pp. 1-3. [Online] Available from: http://web.ebscohost.com.ezp.don.ac.uk:8081/lrc/detail?vid=3&hid=9&sid=63206629-f753-4b1e-998a-4259b5177c3b%40sessionmgr11&bdata=JnNpdGU9bHJjLWxpdmU%3d#db=lfh&AN=103331MP415319820000535 [Accessed 10 Jan 2012].

Pagetti, C. (1975) Dick and Meta-SF (Trans Minchella, A. and Suvin, D.) Science Fiction Studies. 5 (2) pp 1- 10.

Wheale, N. (1995) Recognising a ‘Human Thing’: Cyborgs, Robots and Replicants in Philip K. Dick’s Do Androids and Ridley Scott’s Bladerunner. In Wheale, N (eds) (1995) Postmodern Arts: An Introductory Reader. Routledge: London.

Woods, T. (1999) Beginning Postmodernism. Manchester University Press: Manchester.

Inception Ending Scene - Dream or reality ?

Dick's 'The Shock of Dysrecognition'

Philip K. Dick’s 1981 essay, My Definition of Science Fiction, sets out what he, as a science fiction writer, believes constitutes a work of science fiction and how this is different from other literary genres. Dick’s (1981) main theory of science fiction in this essay is that science fiction should produce in the reader, the ‘shock of dysrecognition’ (p.77). This effect, according to Dick (1981), can be achieved by making the world of the novel recognisable to the reader, but with one major difference that the reader could not comprehend as being a reality in their world. Dick (1981), says that ‘our society acts as a jumping off point […and is] transformed into that which it is not or not yet’ (p.76). The difference between the world that the reader is familiar with and the world in the text produces the shock of dysrecognition in the reader. That is, they recognise certain aspects of society in the text, but not others. Dick’s theory of the shock of dysrecognition, bears resemblance to Darko Suvin’s theory in his 1972 essay, On the Poetics of the Science Fiction Genre, in which he says the principle factor in science fiction is that of ‘cognitive estrangement’ (p.372). Suvin (1972), defines estrangement as ‘a representation […] which allows us to recognise its subject, but at the same time makes it seem unfamiliar’ (p.374). In other words, it makes sense to the reader, but, at the same time it is not the representation which they are used to. Both Dick and Suvin’s theory of science fiction say that the world in the text should resemble, but it some way differ, from the reader’s reality.

In order for Dick’s (1981) ‘shock of dysrecognition’ (p.77) to work the reader must believe in an alternate reality, albeit a constructed one. Links can be seen between this idea of a constructed reality and Baudrillard’s (1981), argument that our reality is in fact constructed. The reader of a science fiction text knows this; whereas, Baudrillard (1981), suggests that society is oblivious to the idea that their reality is constructed. This shows that one of the main postmodern preoccupations is that of reality; what is real and what is not. This question repeatedly occurs in Dick’s, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (1968) and is one which I shall discuss in the critical essay part of this blog.

References
Baudrillard, J. (1981) Simulacrum and Simulation. In Poster, M. (eds.) (1988) Jean Baudrillard: Selected Writings. Stanford University Press: Stanford.

Dick, P. K. (1968) Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? Orion: London.

Dick, P. K. (1981) My Definition of Science Fiction. In Sutin, L. (ed.) (1995) The Shifting Realities of P. K. Dick. Vintage Books: New York.

Suvin, D. (1972) On the Poetics of the Science Fiction Genre. College English. 34 (3), pp. 372 – 382 [Online]. Available from:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/54567147/Poetics-of-Sci-Fi-Suvin. [Accessed 10 January 2012].

Baudrillard's 'Simulacrum and Simulation'

Jean Baudrillard, a French philosopher, argues in Simulacra and Simulation (1981) that we are living in an era of hyper-reality. This is where the representation, or the signifier of an image has become simulated so that we are, according to Baudrillard (1981 in Poster 1988), ‘sheltered from the imaginary, and from any distinction between the real and the imaginary’ (p.167). In layman’s terms, this simply means that media images and political messages make us believe we are living a reality, when in fact, the reality we are living never really existed; instead, it was constructed by the messages given to us. Therefore, according to Baudrillard (1981), our reality is a simulacrum; which the Oxford Dictionary (2012) defines as ‘a representation of […] something’ (p.1). If something is a representation, which a simulacrum is, it cannot be original and therefore cannot be real. Baudrillard believes that the signifiers of language are being used to prevent a ‘real’ reality occurring. However, Douglas Kellner, in Media Studies (1995), believes that the media are using language signifiers to produce images ‘with which its audiences can identify and emulate, [therefore the signifier], possesses important socialising and enculturating effects’ (p.238). In other words, Kellner (1995), believes that the images which the media reproduce, promote culturally acceptable ideals, thus allowing those receiving the images to strive to fit into society.

Whilst Baudrillard’s theory is convincing, it does have its limitations. To say that our reality is totally constructed out of media messages to the extent that it is no longer real does not take into account the fact that the media must have gotten its initial ideas from somewhere. This would have to be a reality of some kind, therefore our reality cannot be completely constructed. Kellner’s theory suggests that the media are merely promoting what is culturally acceptable, but, he fails to take into account that more than one culture can, and very often does, live in a single area. Similarities between Baudrillard’s argument and Adorno’s argument in The Culture Industry can be identified. They both agree that the media is having a detrimental effect on society, in particular, with reference to the ability of society to use their imagination, and to distinguish between what is real and what is not. Likewise, similarities can also be seen between Kellner’s ideas and those of Fiske in Television Culture, where they both agree that media messages give individuals the chance to fit in society.

References
Adorno, T. (1944), The Culture Industry. In Rivkin, J & Ryan, J (eds) (1998). Literary Theory: An Anthology. Blackwell: Oxford.

Adorno, T. (1944). How to Look at Television. In Bernstein, J. M. (eds) (1991) The Culture Industry. Routledge: New York.

Baudrillard, J. (1981) Simulacrum and Simulation. In Poster, M. (eds.) (1988) Jean Baudrillard: Selected Writings. Stanford University Press: Stanford.

Fiske, J. (1990) Television Culture. In Rivkin, J & Ryan, J (eds) (1998). Literary Theory: An Anthology. Blackwell: Oxford.

Kellner, D. (1995) Media Culture: Cultural Studies, Identity and Politics Between the Modern and the Postmodern. Routledge: London.

Oxford Dictionary (2012) Simulacrum. Oxford University Press: Oxford. [Online]. Available from: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/simulcrum. [Accessed 10th January 2012].

The IT Crowd - Series 3 - Episode 5: Friendface #1

Adorno's 'The Culture Industry'.

Theodore Adorno’s 1944 book, The Culture Industry looks at the effect the culture industry, and in particular, the effect that films and television are having on society. One of Adorno’s (1944 in Rivkin & Ryan 1998) main arguments is that television is ‘stunting [..] consumers powers of imagination and spontaneity’ (p.1039). This is, that television, is preventing the audience from thinking. In the chapter How to Look at Television, Adorno (1944 in Bernstein 1991) argues that the different genres available to the consumer are predictable, therefore promoting a ‘false-realism’ (p.158). Adorno (1944 in Bernstein 1991) says that the false-realism produced, upholds dominant social ideology as the unsuspecting public are being given hidden meanings which are ‘likely to sink into the spectator’s mind’ (p.165). In other words, Adorno argues that the television and film industry are manipulating the audience into believing the social ideology of a particular state when they think are simply watching a programme on television.

However, Fiske, in his book, Television Culture (1987), disagrees that television serves to promote the dominant social ideology, although, he does agree that the dominant social ideology can be found in television programmes. Fiske (1990 in Rivkin and Ryan 1998), believes that reality is encoded according to the social ideology of a culture and so when any culture produces a television programme, the codes of that culture will be reproduced in the programme. Instead of believing that this in fact promotes those ideals, Fiske (1990 in Rivkin and Ryan 1998), believes that by showing the dominant social ideology on television, people can ‘resist the dominant ideology [..] and make sense of their existence’ (p.1097). In other words, by being shown the social ideals of their culture, people can explain the world around them and make a choice of whether or not to accept, and go along with the dominant ideology.

Whilst Adorno and Fiske both agree that television presents ideological views, their evaluations of why this is the case are at opposite ends of the scale. I personally feel that Fiske credits the public with too much intelligence and Adorno not enough. I agree that some people would use popular television programmes to question the ideology that is being presented but there are also many people, who immersed in television programmes for a large amount of their spare time, would, as Adorno suggests, become to expect life in reality to be as it is in television programmes.


References
Adorno, T (1944), The Culture Industry. In Rivkin, J & Ryan, J (eds) (1998). Literary Theory: An Anthology. Blackwell: Oxford.

Adorno, T (1944). How to Look at Television. In Bernstein, J. M. (eds) (1991) The Culture Industry. Routledge: New York.

Fiske, J (1990) Television Culture. In Rivkin, J & Ryan, J (eds) (1998). Literary Theory: An Anthology. Blackwell: Oxford.