Talk:The Man in the High Castle/Archive 1

Doubts about the map
I am not sure that the map of the alternate world in this article is reliable. Dick (unlike Orwell) doesn't bother to say exactly what are the borderlines dividing the super-states in the novel. Moreover, while the novel says that the Mediterranean is reclaimed by Nazi Germany thanks to its superior technology, it doesn't say that the reclaimed lands are given to Mussolini's Italian Empire. All in all I find the map rather arbitrary and possibly misleading.--93.40.141.143 (talk) 15:25, 13 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Agreed. There are all kinds of assumptions which I feel rise to the level of original research. We don't know if the TMitHC Nazis actually occupied Newfoundland and Labrador, for example, or British Honduras, as they could have easily decided that they were unworthy of the attention and are in no way mentioned in the novel. We also have no knowledge of whether the Territory of Alaska was attached to the PSA or adminstered separately as this is not directly addressed in the novel, which states the PSA consisted of Washington, Oregon, California, and part of Nevada (logically, the western part). We also do not know if the "Rocky Mountain States" actually consisted of everything east of the above and west of the Mississippi River, or if any prewar states were divided in creating the region (as was Nevada above).  As far as any of us know, the name could be literal and the boundry could be at the foot of the Front Range.  In short, I question the utility of this map, or any map of the world of TMitHC, as there is too much speculation/OR involved.  166.152.219.142 (talk) 20:57, 28 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Thirding this. If one colors only the areas about which things are known, there will be large whites on that map and no straight lines anywhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:7E8:C0BC:1A01:223:54FF:FE15:1831 (talk) 14:27, 17 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Additionally, the Mediterranean seems to have been transformed either wholly or partially into arable land (as Robert Childan reflects on the history of the Reich on page 17 or thereabouts) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:7E8:C0BC:1A01:223:54FF:FE15:1831 (talk) 15:19, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

please stop mimicking the language in the book
i have noticed the article and even this discussion page sometimes mimics the speech patterns attributed to the japanese characters in the book and this seems grossly inappropriate especially since this is an encyclopedia article and since that language is part of a stereotype. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.247.76.23 (talk) 14:16, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Haha you're having a laugh right??!! ROF --  maxrspct  ping me  20:21, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * While I don't agree with "maxrspct's" response ;) I do agree with his statement. However if you'd like to give a couple of examples Anon I'm sure we could look in to them. Peace and Love--Vortic (talk) 16:49, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

ROR Why so mad? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.163.179.89 (talk) 20:45, 24 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Something unsaid is that all of the major characters in the book, at least the non-Europeans that is, of them all whom we get to know well enough to know of their internal monlogues have this stereotypically Japanese pattern to their thoughts as well as spoken words. To me, this is done to suggest the throughness of the Japanese victory, but that doesn't actually belong in the article unless it has been stated in a published review somewhere; otherwise it's original research.  166.152.219.142 (talk) 10:52, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Rexford Tugwell
there is an error in the following paragraph in the article "The next president, Rexford Tugwell (who is completely fictional)..."

rexford tugwell is mentioned in wikipedias's article on fdr, as follows "After the 1934 Congressional elections, which gave the Democrats large majorities in both houses, there was a fresh surge of New Deal legislation, driven by the "brains trust" of young economists and social planners gathered in the White House, including Raymond Moley, Rexford Tugwell and Adolf Berle of Columbia University, attorney Basil O'Connor, economist Bernard Baruch and Felix Frankfurter of Harvard Law School. Eleanor Roosevelt, Labor Secretary Frances Perkins (the first female Cabinet Secretary) and Agriculture Secretary Henry A. Wallace were also important influences."

so, it does not seem that he was fictional (at least, not completely :)

I've changed it. There is a Rexford Guy Tugwell page (although it consists of nothing but a copiright violation warning currently) so I've linked to it. --Shimbo 16:55, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I've also amended the recently added paragraph about The Grasshopper Lies Heavy being the fictional world counterpart of "The Man in the High Castle". Although this was a valuable addition I don't think it was entirely correct, in that The Grasshopper Lies Heavy does not describe our reality. The plot of The Grasshopper Lies Heavy as described in the article certainly does not coincide with real world history. Hence I don't think the assertation that "our" real world is fiction to the inhabitants of the world of "The Man in the High Castle" is questionable and also the suggestion that Abendson is the fictional counterpart of the real Philip K Dick. I've also moved the paragrah to the themes section where I think it fits better and added my take of the relationship between the books and what this implies about the real and fictional worlds. Please let me know if you don't agree. --Shimbo 17:33, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

British war crime trials
Without US support against Germany, surely Britain would have collapsed before it was able to undertake carpet bombing? The large scale destruction of German cities (eg Dresden) led by Bomber Harris did not occur until much later in the (real) war. --212.113.23.124 14:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * And what exactly was the "(real) war"? Terrasidius (talk) 21:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * The book also mentions desperate British commandos launching unorthodox and cruel raids behind Axis lines. D Boland (talk) 01:42, 14 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Can we all just admit that there are inconsistencies and forget it? It's an alternative reality science fiction novel, some things are just going to be different. It's a good bit of literature.

In the Grasshopper Lies Heavily in the book it also states that Hitler survived, want to pick at that next? Not a forum, Peace and Love --Vortic (talk) 16:51, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Map?
A map for this article would be great, see this example --Astrokey 44 13:51, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Done.--SyL64 04:39, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

It does refer to the area of the Rocky Mountain States as the USA though.194.46.232.49 20:32, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree there should be a map on the page, would be cool. Terrasidius (talk) 21:33, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Mr. Baynes
"Mr. Baynes" in the story actually seems to be a tribute to Cary F. Baynes, the translator of the "I Ching" into English in collaboration with Hellmut Wilhelm, Bollingen Series, Princeton University Press.--zumanon 14:40, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Nuclear weapons
"Nazi Germany and the Japanese Empire both possess nuclear weapons and are mired in their own Cold War."

I'm pretty sure this is incorrect. The Germans have nuclear weapons, but the Japanese do not; hence their impotence in the face of Operation Dandelion. Certainly the Japanese had no nuclear weapons program in our world prior to and during World War II. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BukkWylde (talk • contribs) 08:28, 16 January 2007 (UTC).


 * Japanese atomic program -- 209.195.72.181 (talk) 18:04, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

According to the book, Operation Dandelion was intended as a 'surprise' nuclear attack on Japan's "Home Islands." For the surprise to be signficant in that context, one can infer that both sides have nuclear weapons and are constrained from using them due to the existence of something analogous to the doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction during our own Cold War. For that not to be the case would imply that Nazi Germany had a strategic advantage in these matters, which it probably would have been unable to resist exploiting.

User Calibanu 10 February 2006 11.57


 * "Operation Dandedlion" seems to be all about exploiting that advantage from the way that it was described. Obviously the Nazis of this timeline were divided into camps that felt the use of the H-bomb against an estwhile ally were acceptable and those who were not, not "MAD".

166.152.219.142 (talk) 21:01, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Colt .44
...not Colt 45. In chapter 4, Mr. Childan calls it an "exceptional Colt .44 of 1860." The gun Mr. Tagami uses in chapter 12, is also described as a "U.S. 1860 Civil War Colt .44." He laboriously loads the weapon because it is a black powder gun.

The Colt 45 wasn't manufactured until 1873 and did not use black powder and ball ammunition.

The "Colt revolver of the Frontier period" that Frank was making in chapter 4 may have been a Colt 45. However, Frank's unfinished gun was not mentioned again in the book.

--TheLimbicOne (talk) 09:48, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

GA Fail
I have to fail this GA nomination, for several major reasons:


 * The article is completely unreferenced.
 * Large portions of the article are written from an "in-universe" perspective (please see Manual of Style (writing about fiction)).
 * Way too little mention of the book's real-world impact - critical reception, sales figures, cultural influence, etc.
 * Article has a "Trivia" section, which is discouraged.

Essentially the article needs a complete rewrite with the Manual of Style (writing about fiction) used as a guide. Sorry. - Merzbow 06:13, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * If I may, I would like to add my own two cents here as it were:


 * Your references point is valid - the article needs referencing quite a lot as soon as possible to improve its odds as a good article.


 * The "real-world" perspective; what of it? We live in the real world; with The Man In The High Castle/The Grasshopper Lies Heavy alternate realities being merely periphery. Our perceptions dictate that a plot summary must begin at the point of divergence and go on to from there; the plot summary is sound; though the map needs to be less imposing upon it.


 * Your third point - some critics consider this book PKD's finest; and certainly his best prior to his starting use of Amphetamines and LSD which turned him a nad nutty hence a slew of later, more disturbing books. We need a reception page; one thing we do know is that it won the Hugo Award in 1962 and likely influenced Robert Harris's book Fatherland. We could incorporate some of PKD's "Influence" section from his article. Sales figures wise...these will be hard to garner, a compilation inclusive of this work is relatively high on Amazon.com's list at 743. Individually the book is at 8,800 or so. As for sales figures from 1962 to now...we will have trouble finding them. Are they really all that relevant? The book remains in print and is a cult classic that is accessible to any. I know for a fact it has been translated into Russian Cyrillic (with an Axis soldier on the cover, and PKD's French and German translations are renowned hence a heavy following here in Europe.)


 * Indeed some of the trivia entries are superfluous - PKD's references can be read prior to the novel's start. As for the poem...again a bit of a superfluous chatter here; could be removed. The other points such as the name dedication to Cary F. Baynes (the very literate translator of the I Ching), are good ones. So shortened yes, removed entirely, no! The fact weed is legal in the PSA of the book is significant as a trivia piece. -- D-Katana 09:27, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Present map, Good article possibility
Hello all!

I have read this book a few times and must praise it as an alternate history piece of fiction together with its featuring the I-Ching which I consult and read on occasion. Now, about this new map - if I may quote the book herein... A map was uploaded to the Man In The High Castle article very recently; and an accurate one too... though I think Japan had more of a presence in South America myself "wooden houses on stilts" in the Amazon etc.) construction and all that - it is implied Germany/Japan were competing down there for control of it's peoples, that the Nazis want to drive back the Japanese a little.

Another point is that the Mediterranean Sea is not portrayed as drained for farmland quite yet. Lastly I'd say the area East of the Caspian Sea past/around a probably ruined Omsk is less Nazi "controlled/Greater German Reich" and more the Slavic peoples fleeing grounds; again to quote PKD's work "(The Axis powers...)drove them back two thousand year's worth; back to hunting with bow and arrow...". With present Eastern Europe firmly Lebenstraum (living space) in the book, and the Med not shaded a light/translucant green to indicate farmland the map is flawed; but very good for a first draft nevertheless. Advise the text in the corner be made somewhat larger too. If anyone has anymore criticisms then do reply to this topic.

But other than this the map is some fine work - Perhaps Japan did gain some of Eastern Russia such as Vladivostok but this we cannot know of. With the map perfected and meeting my above critique we should have this article at Good status in no time when somebody references it extensively, together with a few descriptive edits - I may be able to do the latter when time permits after a lengthy hiatus from Wikipedia. Perhaps the original pixel size of this map should be lowered so the map dominates the page less too? -- D-Katana 08:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I see. I forgot to mention that I haven't read the book myself. I just took my knowledge from this article to make a map (not to mention some skill in geopolitics and a bit of logic) so I was not aware of those details you just mentioned. If anyone knows how to make, or at least edit maps, you are more than welcome to fix mine. --SyL64 20:42, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * There is a free program for Windows which you may find useful for this purpose - including the renaming of the "United States of America" to the actual name of "Rocky Mountain States.". It is called paint.net - if you wish I could do the business of perfecting this already finely done map as per the facts in this alternate reality. Paint.net will easily enlarge your small text; thus viewers of this article will doubtless be able to work out what is what regards. -- D-Katana 14:44, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, a second note - the article describes it as a bitmap editor; however a revised map could easily be uploaded - as Paint.net can save files in the JPEG and PNG formats which are more space efficient. For a diagram such as yours, editing it (ie lining or shading the former Med. sea in a light green denoting farmland; without betraying the maps political nature would prove a good plan. Also, the remaining Slavic peoples do likely hunt in a primitive manner at Omsk and beyond; though Dick is uncertain as to how far they were "drove back" - certainly past the Black Sea, to be sure.

Also I highly recommend you read this book Syl (it is Sylvia, correct?) as it is one amazing read. Glad to be of assistance. - D-Katana 14:48, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

...

I'm a male. And map updated, according to your information... for the most part, that is. --SyL64 00:19, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah. Forgive assertion. The map, save the text size which is tad small, is brilliant (now the introduction of more areas will likely encourage persons browsing this article to look at it full size. Now all that remains is for you to read this remarkable book! :) -- D-Katana 11:58, 22 May 2007 (UTC)


 * The map still seems to need updating. The novel revolves around Hawthorne Abendsen's book .. and he is holed up in the Rocky Mountain States buffer zone which is not indicated on the map. Also, the New York area is drawn as separate from the rest of the nazi USA zone. I don't remember this being indicated as such in the book.. only a reference to Rommel's governership etc. Select Carribean states are also assigned to the Third Reich. This wasn't in the book either. Was Australia not part of the Japanese Empire proper? Scary map. --  maxrspct  ping me  22:43, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

OK. I took out the map as it is basically inaccurate and embellished. - assigns lands not mentioned in the book and does not show the 'Rocky Mountain States' (which are undetailed in the book.. i'e which individual states). If anyone wants to redraw the map with the RMS and without making anything up or OTT embellishments, please link it here on the talkpage first. Thanks. --  maxrspct  ping me  13:03, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Tagomi
Tagomi doesn't find solace in the killing of the SD agents. It disturbs him greatly and eventually leads him back to Childan to try and trade back the gun. The whole episode around that involves him in the possbile break with his current reality. Again, interleaving with the themes of what is real/genuine/authentic. Is his gun authentic? It fires like a real gun. He tries to take it back but the seller won't take it because unbeknown to Tagomi, Childan suspects it is a replica. Paradoxically, Childan tries, successfully, to sell genuine jewellery made by (unbeknowns to both of them) the maker of the possibly fake gun. Paradoxically, again, Tagomi initially eschews the jewellery because of a lack of "historicity" even though it is actually more "real" than all of the other artifacts in the shop may be being an honest product of the forger. Although, of course, while yet initally failing to fulfil its purpose i.e inherent wu. That is, the non-functioning real counterposed to the functioning fake.

194.46.232.49 20:48, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Woah!

Division of North America
The southern states were split off by the Nazis? Nevada as U.S capitol? I don't remember these being in the book. Can someone clarify? --  maxrspct  ping me  10:38, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

This paragraph section: "The Southern United States was revived as a quasi-independent state (as a Nazi puppet state like Vichy France). The Rocky Mountain States and much of the Midwest remained autonomous with Nevada becoming the US capital, being considered unimportant by either of the victors, as well as a useful buffer. At the end of the war, the Allied leaders and generals were tried for war crimes (e.g. the carpet bombing of German cities) in a parallel of the Nuremberg Trials." I don't see any of this in the book. Care to remind me? I will delete the sentences within a week if noone replies. --  maxrspct  ping me  07:46, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

No, there are no Southern United States in the novel, thwy would be part of the Nazi-controlled Eastern United States. --93.40.141.143 (talk) 17:55, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, in the first chapter Frank contemplates moving to the Rocky Mountain States and to "the South", with the implication that "the South" is a separate puppet state from the rest of the German-controlled USA. 124.190.153.10 (talk) 03:48, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe "the South" of The Man in the High Castle's timeline is merely a somewhat culturally distinct region of the rump USA, just as it was and has remained in our own reality. At any rate, not "implied" firmly enough to be stated as fact.  166.152.219.142 (talk) 20:38, 28 February 2013 (UTC)


 * "the South" is described in "What about the South? His body recoiled. Ugh. Not that. As a white man he would have plenty of place, in fact more than he had here in the PSA. But ... he did not want that kind of place. And, worse, the South had a cat's cradle of ties, economic, ideological, and god knew what, with the Reich.", "it'd be death for me if I left Japanese-controlled land and showed up in the South or in Europe - anywhere in the Reich." one further hint for "the South" could be in the second chapter "German or South ships docked at the port of San Francisco all the time, and blacks occasionally were allowed off for short intervals.". In the first chapter he mentioned "slip across" the border. First alternative "into the Rocky Mountain States" through eastern Nevada or perhaps Arizona, and the second "the South" which could be beyond the Mexican border? To get to the southern states of the U.S. he would have to cross states of both the PSA and RMS. The northern alternative Canada is not taken into consideration, probably because he had to cross Oregon and Washington of PSA. Canada is later described allowing political comedy "... he has to broadcast from Canada. And it's a little freer up there." 80.187.101.148 (talk) 05:58, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Too Much Emphasis on the Plot
I read this recently and was struck by how accurately it depicts California today. I wonder if it was ever intended to be an "alternate" version of reality or actually a comment on America hidden behind the sci-fi premise. This would explain the end which is intentionally left unclear as to which reality is correct. Of course, today there are more foreign people in California and the Governor is not only foreign but the son of Nazis. Yet, there were signs things were headed in that direction at the time Dick wrote. He was interested in science like the space program, which was dominated by foreign people (even ex-Nazis). He had psychological problems and many doctors in this area were foreign. Mental institutions at the time tended to cause more mental strain then help and he likely knew about that. His books eventually became successful films but until late in his career he was shut out of Hollywood. Most Hollywood sci-fi was badly written, mostly cribbed, and the industry was controlled by foreigners. The businessman depicted in the book is easily recognizible as a Hollywood type mogul. The parts about Americans being shut out and not even being able to go to nicer sections of the city isn't far from reality today, and probably wasn't back then either. So Dick is really one of the American artists in the book, whose work is having an impact but is not repected, nor were probably his friends. He could see that things could go either way and maybe he would be successful or maybe not. All of these issues are more important than various plot points. It seems to me the obsession with the plot misses the point. Frankpalardy (talk) 23:26, 6 May 2008 (UTC)


 * It is a comment on America hidden behind a sci-fi premise, as most of Dick's work was. He did not want to write so much SF, but publishers rejected his realistic works and he had to write SF to make ends meet. So he used SF devices to explore his main interest, "What is real?" (as opposed to fake masquerading as real). Dick saw the cookie-cutter California suburbs as artificial and menacing, covered by a whitewash of freshness and cleanness. This attitude is commonplace today, but Dick wrote about it during the 50s, years before others did. (The fact that Abendsen lives in a tract house in the suburbs is thus irony.) All this falls under Dick's general themes and motivations, rather than specifically about The Man in the High Castle. In several books like Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, people with various mental illnesses (often caused by nuclear radiation) belong to social groups named after each illness or mutation. Dick speculated that some mental illnesses (and psychedelic drugs) were doors to superior understanding or precognition, viz. the autistic in Martian Time-Slip.


 * The Nazi/Japanese takeover is probably a plot device rather than a statement about foreign domination. It occurs in only one of his books, which was written within 20 years of WWII. There was a general interest in stories about "What if the Nazis had won?" Dick's family was German American, and a large number of people in his books have German names, though without negative connotations. Dick's villains are usually good ol' Americans or space aliens. You could draw a parallel between space aliens and foreigners, but I'm not sure how accurate it would be. There is no evidence I know of that Dick considered the publishing industry or California to be foreign dominated, or that he was rejected for being American. That's more of a 1990s attitude than a 1960s. Note that Dick was especially negative about the suburbs and the military-industrial complex, which are both oh-so American. The suburbs Dick railed against were white; Asians and blacks did not start moving to them until the 1970s (after redlining and white-only covenants were outlawed). There's also Dick's favorable treatment of Eastern religion. It's hard to see how he'd have ill will against the people who brought a religion he learned from. Sluggoster (talk) 15:18, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

The I Ching's Novel
Should it not be explained, perhaps with warnings for spoilers, that The Grasshopper Lies Heavy was written almost entirely by the I Ching and the only thing the author did was put it into prose? From here then, the final question they ask the I Ching is "Why did you write this book?" and the answer of course is essentially "Because it's true."

This is sort of the pinnacle of the TMITHC's discussions of reality, historicity and objective values. The novel in the novel is supposed to be the true history of the world, despite the fact that it differs from the world the characters live in, which shocks them, and is also different from the world we live in, which is supposed to shock us. Real Phillip K. Dick material here.

This might be giving the whole novel away, but it's also the summation of everything the book tries to say and I think it should be represented in this Wikipedia article. D Boland (talk) 21:13, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

i'm not sure if this is important or relevant, but i thought it was just referred to as "i ching" not "the i ching."

just a suggestion.

anyway, i have no idea what the correct way to bring this up is, i'm very new here.


 * Juliana thinks the novel is written by the I Ching, but the author doesn't agree. He sees it more as a collaboration. All of Juliana's perceptions and experiences are open to wide interpretation it seems to me, whether because she is the "chthonic being" Hawthorne judges her to be, or because she too, like Tagomi, seems to have her fugue-like breaks with daily perception.Erikacornia (talk) 04:56, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

The Grasshopper Lies Heavy
I deleted the unverified and controversial statement that the title, The Grasshopper Lies Heavy is taken from Ecclesiastes 12:5.

Neither the novel nor the author states this. In Chapter 5 a minor character, Rita, states, "The Grasshopper Lies Heavy. That's a quote from the Bible." but there is no more specific attribution. Fans have long sought to locate the verse and speculated about the most likely Biblical verse quoted. There is no concensus on what verse this is, whether it is a quotation from a version of the Bible that exists in the The Man In The High Castle's world but not our world or even if Rita is correct in calling it a quotation rather than an allusion.

Ecclesiastes 12:5 ("Also from the high places they will fear, and terrors on the road, and the almond tree will blossom, and the grasshopper will drag itself along, and sexual desire will fail, for man goes to his everlasting home, and the mourners go about in the street") and Exodus 10:14-15 may be the most frequently suggested sources of a quote or allusion but no one seems able to find a verse in any book of any English language Bible that contains the exact phrase "the grasshopper lies heavy" or even "the locust lies heavy". Moss&amp;Fern (talk) 08:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

It´s a watermark used to differentiate parallel realities. Gr Li He indicates the events that spliced this reality. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.78.240.169 (talk) 11:51, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Gestapo, or Sicherheitsdienst (SD)?
I read this book, but did not "The Shifting of Philip K. Dick". In the book is stated that Gestapo was superseded by SD right after the war. Well, then they can't get into the parallel reality as is stated in the "Sequel" paragraph. Does anyone read the "Shifting", so we can be reasonably sure that Dick stated Gestapo was there (although is might be mistake)? --Newman.x (talk) 18:39, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Strange list of languages and titles
What is up with that list of languages into which the book has been translated along with titles? This isn't terribly useful to anyone, and is quite trivial. Moreover, I don't think I've seen anything like it for other books. It should be dumped.Ekwos (talk) 01:33, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and removed this list. It isn't terrible useful and creates a lot of clutter.Ekwos (talk) 17:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Ekwos, I restored the list giving the reason, "Translations indicate cross-cultural appeal, international popularity and influence". Less than 5 hours later you removed them again stating, "In that case write a blurb discussing its cross cultural appeal". I believe your action was hasty and your stated reason was weak though I recognize the Edit Summary has limited room to comment. I agree there should be more discussion of the novel's cross-cultural appeal. Also its international popularity and influence, perhaps some mention of the importance of the foreign royalties in supporting the author's carreer and other subjects. The GA Fail noted a major defect was, "Way too little mention of the book's real-world impact - critical reception, sales figures, cultural influence, etc." It seems to me the translations information was a start in addressing that defect and removing the translation information was a step backwards from encouraging such discussion.
 * You've stated the list of languages into which the novel has been translated along with the translation titles "isn't terribly useful to anyone, and is quite trivial." This may be trivial and unuseful to you yet important and useful to others. For example, I know El hombre en el castillo was first published in Argentina and think the time of publication may have been significantly related to the "dirty war". Someone else may be able to write something important about that. I'm not going to get into an editing war but ask you to reconsider your deletion of the translation material and restore it or ask for other opinions if you decide it may be worthwhile keeping in the article. -- Moss&amp;Fern (talk) 14:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)


 * No, it is useless. Something about the Argentinian "dirty war" like you indicated might actually be interesting.  A discussion of the translation history might be interesting.  A list of the name in foreign languages (and recall that often works get different titles each time they are translated) is useless.Ekwos (talk) 23:19, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I want to second Ekwos' warning that a mere list of translations and titles is not considered encyclopedic content, and is not a feature of our better articles on books. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  14:40, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

editing suggestions
a few things here seem to be poorly edited in words or formatting. it's not clear why the phrase "how they cope with living under totalitarianism" is all italicized under "characters", and it looks like vital words are missing from this sentence:

Despite He is arrested after his attempted sabotage of Wyndham-Matson — by telling Childan that the Americana he sells are fake.

"retaining" seems to be incorrect here: Robert Childan desperately attempts retaining his honour despite the forced obsequiousness towards the Japanese overlords. Rmd1023 (talk) 00:10, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I have fixed all three errors. In the future, please don't hesitate to correct things like this yourself - one of our main precepts is that if you see something broken, fix it! keɪɑtɪk flʌfi (talk) 00:15, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Non linear?
The first sentence under "Characters" begins, "The story of The Man in the High Castle is non-linear..." Is this correct? It seems to me that the story is linear (it doesn't jump around in time), even though it jumps between characters Dcwaterboy (talk) 20:22, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

That bothered me too, so I reworded the paragraph. The issue is not linearity but narrative mode. Dick's mode is an omniscient third-person point of view: he sees into everybody's minds, but focuses on one character at a time. I changed it to, "The Man in the High Castle contains a loose collection of characters. Some of them know each other, while others are connected in more indirect ways as they all cope with living under totalitarianism. Three characters guide their lives based on the I Ching: ...". Sluggoster (talk) 19:25, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Africa
The introduction ends with, "The victorious Axis Powers — Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany — are conducting intrigues against each other in North America, specifically in the former U.S., which surrendered to them once they had conquered Eurasia and destroyed the populaces of Africa." But didn't the destruction of the populace of Africa happen after the end of the war in the novel? Could someone with a copy of the book double check? Dcwaterboy (talk) 20:22, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

True: first they win the war and invade the USA, then the Nazi endeavour to "cleanse" Africa, but from what the book lets readers surmise, it's a disaster.--93.40.141.143 (talk) 15:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Typo
Sorry, I'm just a reader who doesn't know how to edit Wikipedia pages, or I'd fix this myself: "national Socialism" at the end of the "Background" section should be "National Socialism," I think. --Done —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.26.96.62 (talk) 06:01, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Deleted "Theatrical or Live Action Adaptation" section
Only thing listed was "An Englishman's Castle" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0077007/) which wasn't an adaptation of the novel. -- Moss&amp;Fern (talk) 02:57, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

The Grasshopper lies heavy fake article
There had been an extremely funny fake wikipedia article linked to this about a year or two ago, "The Grasshopper lies Heavy". Does anyone have or know how to get the source for this page? it was great, and can easily be transplanted onto uncyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.25.81.163 (talk) 01:48, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Map geological incorrect
There is at least one error from a geological POV (and a glaring one at that): The Mediterranean is gone. This is likely a side-effect of someone (potentially correctly) considering it a part of the Italian empire; however, even if so, the map should clearly show the water surrounded by Italy. Anything else is misleading (not to mention highly non-standard). 188.100.206.102 (talk) 09:55, 8 February 2010 (UTC)


 * The map is correct (by what is in the book anyway)! What may be worthwhile adding is some explanatory text to the article though, as the idea is that in the book the Med. was drained by Nazi's after the war (along with a whole load of other activities such as sending men to the Moon, Mars) for land reclamation.  The book is good, but this was one of the few bits that did jar with me a little, PKD was just going down a bit of a pulp sci-fi road there with random unfeasible ideas like draining the Med. SFC9394 (talk) 13:34, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

unbelievably awful language
despite the handy map, this article is a shambles. everything from 'characters' through 'themes' reads as if written for a high school book report: alternately pretentious and incompetent. someone, please, please, rewrite this ground-up according to some minimal literary standard.

--thanks, a guest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.239.63.41 (talk) 02:37, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Will be working on it to streamline and clean up grammar as soon as I am able. Djathink  imacowboy  07:33, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

If It Had Happened Otherwise
If It Had Happened Otherwise includes a story in a world where the South won the Civil War hypothesizing how they might not have won. This seems analogous to the double-alternate-history aspect of The Grasshopper Lies Heavy. Maybe should be mentioned as related even if it didn't directly influence PKD. KingAlanI (talk) 10:16, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * No, that's original research unless you can find a reference directly stating that it influenced Dick in some way. The guy was an SF reader as well as writer: he was familiar with a lot of less obscure SF stories than just the one you mention. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  00:05, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

New map query
Perhaps this was "TV laziness" on the part of the producers, but I watched "Prophets of Science Fiction: Philip K. Dick", and it showed the United States divided in half: the east belonged to the Nazis, the West to the Japanese Empire. Is the map presented here actually correct? It looks wrong compared to the map I saw. Djathink imacowboy  07:36, 17 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Definitely TV laziness. The buffer zone is clearly demarcated in the book. eldamorie (talk) 14:30, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Another Source of Inspiration for TMITHC
In The Selected Letters of Phillip K Dick 1980-1982 (Underwood Books), PKD wrote a letter on 30 January 1980 in which he mentions that "The structure of [The Man in the High Castle] is based on the novels written by Japanese students in the French Department at Tokyo University just after World War Two; they had been reading nineteenth Century French realistic novels, took the structure thereof and modified it to fit certain traditions of their own. It seemed to me appropriate to then adopt this interesting fusion of west and east in my novel." Once I finish digging through the other 300+ pages I'll see what else I can contribute to the discussion.Boy mechanic (talk) 04:14, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Possible additions to the article
I just finished reading this book for the first time and I would like to suggest several things which might be added to the article:
 * 1) The Japanese characters were in general appealing people and were presented sympathetically.  I was surprised because it was certainly unlike their behavior during WWII in our timeline.  The Nazis, on the other hand, were just as bad as in our timeline.  This contrast in treatment should be mentioned somewhere.
 * 2) For some characters Philip K. Dick tells us what they are thinking, but for other characters he only describes them, as if he is not an omniscient narrator but only knows the inner thoughts of some of the characters.  I think this is a narrative device which makes the reader wonder what those characters are actually thinking.  It might be interesting to catalogue which characters are transparent and which are opaque.
 * 3) I found no mention of the husband and wife Paul and Betty Kasoura, who I found to be among the most interesting characters in the book.  They are also perhaps the most mysterious among the recurring characters, since they are always opaque and it is never explained why they have American rather than Japanese first names.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.212.78.220 (talk) 00:34, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Do we have any citations to reliable sources discussing any of these elements? -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  19:14, 21 August 2012 (UTC) Polemon (talk) 09:02, 23 October 2012 (UTC) [corrected numbering]

Section about book editions
I believe it would make sense to add a section about the various book editions. I'm reading a 2009 printed hardcover version by Gollancz. Now, the teaser text at the back has got quite an embarrassing error, it says: "[...] a work of fiction that explores an alternate world history in which the Axis powers (sic) lost the war." [...]. Since there have been so many different editions in the last decades, maybe a section highlighting errors and such, would make sense? Polemon (talk) 09:20, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
 * No. It would be particularly blatant undue emphasis on an extremely trivial matter. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  00:32, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Assumptions about divergence point
Several editors seem to assume that the point of divergence between the events of the novel and our current reality start when the assassination attempt on FDR in Miami which took the life of Mayor of Chicago Anton Cermak happened, and it was successful in the novel's timeline. However, this is incorrect as that real-world event occured while FDR was still President-elect; FDR's assassination in the novel occurred after he had actually been POTUS for about a year. It's a novel, for crying out loud, it's not literal reality, even in the divergence event. I think that we should assume from the context that the novel's FDR assassination was wholly separate from the real-world attempt, or is a fictionalized version of the actual even which occurred about one year later in the novel than it did in reality. In either case, an actual assassin shouldn't be named as the novel does not do so. 166.152.219.142 (talk) 21:14, 28 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I think one should ask the I Ching what reality is truer to true reality ;-) though I cannot fathom what the question would actually *be like* ... 2001:7E8:C0BC:1A01:223:54FF:FE15:1831 (talk) 14:39, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

First alternate history novel about an alternate history novel?
Has anyone ever seen a published, reliable source stating that TMitHC is the first alternate history novel about an alternate history novel? This would be a neat addition to the article if it could be show to be actually true, since the existence and popularity of The Grasshopper Lies Heavy within the timeline described is the central plot feature of this work. 166.152.219.142 (talk) 21:21, 28 February 2013 (UTC)