Scan barcode
eclaris's review
challenging
funny
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
derhindemith's review against another edition
5.0
I'm just going to keep reading this book. I thought I understood it the first time, but like the movie in the book, there are a lot of details that completely go by you, or at least are only perceived sub-consciously.
As I remarked to the last person I recommended the book to, it certainly helps if you've read other novels by dick before, because this touches on so many themes that are so important to him as an author.
It's kind of like King Lear, you really need, as an author, to have a lifetime's experience to draw upon in order to write a book like this. It's not only mature, it's careful, and it fucks with your head—both as a reader and as an author. Writers writing themselves into their novels isn't a new thing (admittedly, Dick did a lot of things really well, far before they became mainstays of the genre), but what sets this book apart is that he tells you from the very beginning everything that he's doing, and then proceeds to ignore what he's told you and tells you a story.
If I had to summarize the story, it would be this:
The following sentence is true.
The previous sentence is a lie.
As I remarked to the last person I recommended the book to, it certainly helps if you've read other novels by dick before, because this touches on so many themes that are so important to him as an author.
It's kind of like King Lear, you really need, as an author, to have a lifetime's experience to draw upon in order to write a book like this. It's not only mature, it's careful, and it fucks with your head—both as a reader and as an author. Writers writing themselves into their novels isn't a new thing (admittedly, Dick did a lot of things really well, far before they became mainstays of the genre), but what sets this book apart is that he tells you from the very beginning everything that he's doing, and then proceeds to ignore what he's told you and tells you a story.
If I had to summarize the story, it would be this:
The following sentence is true.
The previous sentence is a lie.
kjnicholson16's review
5.0
How does one review VALIS? Honestly, how does one ever comprehend explaining the damn book? Having never read PKD, I was drawn to the fact that this book was said to be somewhat of an autobiography. I wanted to learn about the man behind the novels before I dove in and boy oh boy did I get more than I bargained for!
Call it a Schizophrenic recollection, call it religious sci-fi, call it whatever you want. What you cannot deny, is that it is a brilliant novel. (And the first of a trilogy for that matter!) It blends alleged (bizarre) life experiences, beautiful prose, and most intriguingly, a tight yet flowing plot.
I look forward to finishing the VALIS trilogy and then getting to some of the PKD classic sci-fi novels.
Call it a Schizophrenic recollection, call it religious sci-fi, call it whatever you want. What you cannot deny, is that it is a brilliant novel. (And the first of a trilogy for that matter!) It blends alleged (bizarre) life experiences, beautiful prose, and most intriguingly, a tight yet flowing plot.
I look forward to finishing the VALIS trilogy and then getting to some of the PKD classic sci-fi novels.
read_alert's review
3.0
I'm writing this review to remind myself not to read this book again. Don't do it Jord. Do you really want to sift through that exegesis again?
No you don't.
I did however enjoy large parts of this book, and in 30 years if I don't read this review I may in fact read it again.
Does it deserve 3 stars? I think so.
No you don't.
I did however enjoy large parts of this book, and in 30 years if I don't read this review I may in fact read it again.
Does it deserve 3 stars? I think so.
yates9's review
4.0
An amazing twist in writing built on a mythology that is convincing, dense of reinterpretation of Christian stories... Overly emphatic deliberations around the possibility of suicide but that become transformed.
I didn’t quite enjoy the book but I learned a lot about what is possible in writing.
I didn’t quite enjoy the book but I learned a lot about what is possible in writing.
wtfrjk's review
3.0
*Spoilers*
I think my favorite part of the book is when he gets called out on his shit.
"Horselover Fat did."
"But that's you. You just . . . you just translated your name. 'Philip' means 'lover of horses' and 'Dick' means 'fat'."
I think my favorite part of the book is when he gets called out on his shit.
"Horselover Fat did."
"But that's you. You just . . . you just translated your name. 'Philip' means 'lover of horses' and 'Dick' means 'fat'."
arf88's review against another edition
2.0
This is the first of Philip K. Dick's work that I really haven't enjoyed. It wasn't bad, and there was part's I enjoyed, and it was an interesting structure, but I also found it boring and a struggle to finish. The "exegesis" parts especially were a chore that I started skimming towards the end. I also found parts of it uncomfortable - it's semi-autobiographical and I didn't really enjoy reading PKD's real psychological breakdown.
mjdalton1717's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
emotional
informative
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
rpych2's review against another edition
3.0
For a while, I didn’t actually understand what the hell was going on in this book. It was a slow burn, but the commentary on mental health and the meta aspects of it made it pretty awesome in the end. Leave too soon, and you’ll wonder what all the fuss is about. But stick around, and it’ll leave you with the existential crisis you didn’t know you wanted.