Blog Feed

On what grounds does Mountfort (2018) dispute Williams’ (1990) view that the I Ching does not figure in the novel aside from a few oracle consultations? 

The Man in the High Castle by Philip K. Dick is an alternate history novel presenting a world where Germany and Japan have won World War Two. Featuring throughout the novel is the I Ching or Book of Changes – a Chinese oracle or divination text that help the characters determine their next course of action. Mountfort (2016) disputes the view of Williams (1990) that the I Ching does not figure in the novel aside from a few oracle consultations, arguing that the I Ching is a central plot device that underlies the novel’s construction and philosophy. 

Philip K. Dick consulted the I Ching to help him write and develop The Man in the High Castle (MHC) (Mountfort, 2016). He posed questions to the oracle during crucial junctures of his writing, such as what would happen to his characters, how they should behave, and how the plot should move forward. Mountfort (2016) describes this as a metafictional discussion between the author and the protagonists and therefore the reader and the text. This is because Dick’s use of the oracle as a deciding factor for his next move as a writer mirrors his characters’ use of the oracle to decide how they will proceed in their lives. 

Williams’ view of the I Ching in relation to MHC is that the novel’s plot does not come from I Ching readings directly, and that it only participates in the novel when the characters are consulting it (Williams, 1990). In other words, Williams’ view is that the I Ching is a feature of the plot rather than a driving force of the philosophy behind it. Mountfort (2016) disputes this view and argues that the I Ching underpins the entire fabric of the novel. 

For example, the I Ching provides the philosophical foundation of the novel, particularly the concept of synchronicity (Mountfort, 2016). This is described as events being meaningful coincidences where they have no causal relationship but are still purposefully related (Tarnas, 2006). Synchronic philosophy is evident in each major character using the I Ching to guide their next course of action. Mountfort (2016) argues that there are twelve instances of oracular consultations that take place in the novel, each revealing patterns that mirror each other. For example, four of the twelve consultations involve characters Frank Frink and Mr. Tagomi consulting the oracle twice and in a similar pattern (Mountfort, 2016). Their first question (respectively) is about meeting someone and how to go about a delicate interpersonal situation, in Frink’s case with his boss Wyndham Matson, and in Tagomi’s case with obtaining a gift for an important visitor from Robert Childan (Mountfort, 2016). The answers to their second questions are both concerned with the inner nature of a person rather than what they outwardly appear to be, in Frink’s case his ex-wife and in Tagomi’s case his business contact (Mountfort, 2016). What’s significant about this is that Frink and Tagomi’s paths intersect towards the end of the novel, without either character having met each other (Mountfort, 2016). Tagomi ultimately saves Frink from being surrendered to the Nazis, thereby intimately connecting the two characters while they each have no idea of the impact they’ve had on each other’s lives (Lison, 2014). This is integral to the philosophy of the I Ching as the two characters are meaningfully connected as their fates interlock together (Mountfort, 2016).  

Lison (2014) argues that Frink and Tagomi’s storyline is predicted by the I Ching. This is because when Frink consults the oracle as to whether or not his jewelry business will succeed, he receives a mixed reply where it says the business will bring good fortune, but also warns of a future catastrophe unconnected to the jewelry business (Lison, 2014). This refers to the destruction of Japan due to Operation Dandelion, which Frink is unaware of. Lison (2014) argues that the oracle passes favorable judgement on Frink’s business while simultaneously indicating that it is dwarfed by a larger concern. They argue that this mirrors the narrative structure of the novel, in which small moments of favor, such as Mr. Tagomi’s act of kindness to Frink, are dwarfed by the larger concern of the characters’ reality not being real, as revealed at the end of the book (Lison, 2014). 

Another way that the I Ching is central to the construction of the novel is how it presents alternate worlds. MHC presents us with three alternate worlds – the world the novel is set in, the world presented in the novel within the novel (The Grasshopper Lies Heavy), and the world of the reader (Mountfort, 2016). This many-worlds interpretation ties in with the I Ching as they are both based on the element of chance, suggesting that alternative possibilities in different realities always exist (Mountfort, 2016). The fate of each character is decided by a text in which multiple scenarios are possible. Again, this is mirrored by the multiple universes within the novel. Even the ambiguous ending of the novel emphasizes how there is not one reality in which the novel should end, but rather multiple possibilities as determined by the aleatory nature of the I Ching (Mountfort, 2016). 

References 

Lison, A. (2014). “The very idea of place”: Form, contingency, and Adornian volition in The Man in the High Castle. Science Fiction Studies, 41(1), 45-68. 

Mountfort, P. (2016). The I Ching and Philip K. Dick’s The Man in the High Castle. Science Fiction Studies, 43(2), 287-309. https://doi:10.5621/sciefictstud.43.2.0287 

Tarnas, R. (2006). Cosmos and psyche. Plume. 

Williams, P. (1990, December). The author and the oracle. PKDS Newsletter, (25), 1-10. 

2.What distinctions are there between alternate history, postmodern alternate history, and uchronie genres?

Alternative history has been regarded as a subgenre of literary fiction, science fiction, or historical fiction, with a series of fiction genres starting from the assumption”What if humanity’s history had evolved differently from previous facts?” Alternative history is mainly intertwined so closely that it cannot be discussed apart from intersecting time, time splitting that it is distinguished in many ways: alternative history, postmodern alternative history and uchronie genres.

Mountfort (2016) distinguishes the three genres with Philip K dick’s The Man in the High Castle, published in 1962 in research. High Castle is one of the most well-known of all alternative histories and is one of the most popular themes in the whole field of history. Also, The Man in the High Castle was inspired by I Ching, an ancient Chinese literary device also known primarily as the text of divination, or the Book of Changes. In the novel, it transcends the philosophical complexities of the story, given that the Nazi win World War II. However, many opinions are divided depending on whether they are viewed from a diachronic or synchronic perspective. 

“Amy Ransom argues that critics discussing alternate history (AH) have often neglected to distinguish among the more conventional forms, which are underpinned by a linear, causal, or diachronic view of time, and the more synchronic view implicit in the French term for the genre, uchronie”(Mountfort,2016).

First of all, alternative history usually has the straightest and diachronic view of time. A diachronic perspective can be understood as the concept of time from one point to another, which varies with the changes of the times. Also, unchronie has a synchronic view of time, which can be understood by the concept of a single point in time associated with the same era. In fact, many academic sources study High Castle as a formative example of alternative history, but mostly as a novel of a diachronic genre. However, “Dick’s notion of history is certainly synchronic rather than diachronic, in the terms of Jameson’s analysis, both in his evocation of a web of interrelationships and in his sense that the profusion of possible realities could radically undermine our sense of the real”(Mountfort,2016). 

This is linked to the concept of “synchronicity” that Carl Jung and other scholars have tried to explain. “Ransom describes Jung’s synchronicity concept as “related to that associated by Jameson and Alkon with the postmodern”. he defined synchronicity both as an “acausal connecting principle” and as “meaningful coincidence” or “cross-connection”.”(Mountfort,2016). It shows that the work is linked to the Postmodern Alternate History time view. From this, we can see that the three genres of alternative history are distinguished by whether we have a diachronic or a synchronic view, and these are dependent on how we accept stories.

References

Mountfort , P. (2016) The I Ching and Philip K Dick’s The Man in the High Castle SF-TH Inc

What distinctions are there between alternate history, postmodern alternate history, and uchronie genres?

Alternate history, postmodern alternate history, and uchronie genres all fall under the specific literary, fictional genre, that involves the concepts of parallel worlds and timelines. The alternate history genre can be seen as an overarching genre which involves narratives where one or multiple historical events may occur differently. The uchronie genres, derived from a French term, includes an ‘alternative history,’ where a story occurs in a similar world to ours until a specific event is altered to what we believe is true. In Mountfort’s (2016) research, subgenres of the uchronie genres are identified, and there appears to be three different variations such as ‘pure uchronie,’ involving a singular alternative world, ‘plural uchronia,’ consisting the existence of an alternative world in parallel, and ‘infinite uchronia,’ where there is the possibility of many or infinite parallel worlds.

In addition, the term uchronie mostly emphasizes a less causal or ‘diachronic’ form of history, but rather a ‘synchronic’ one. Mountfort (2016) explains the relevance of Philip K. Dick’s The Man in the High Castle (TMITHC), as one of the most critically acclaimed, and a prime expample of the uchronie or alternative history genre. TMITHC was primarily inspired by the I Ching, which is an ancient, Chinese literary device also known as a text of divination, or the ‘Book of Changes.’ Dick’s novel inspires the use of this in it’s main plot, and figuratively uses it and gives the reader a sophisticated postmodern fiction that examines the extremities of the text and the world in which it occurs. In fact, many academic sources have studies TMINHC as a formative example of alternate history, but specifically as a novel of the uchronie genre. However, Dick uses a more synchronic view of history than diachronic in TMINHC.

Moreover, other scholars such as Carl Jung have also tried to explain theories behind the concept of ‘synchronicity,’ which is a major element in the alternative history genre, as it involves the altering of certain events in history. Jung describes synchronicity as something related with the ‘postmodern,’ which was objectively true, but a distinct factor of Jung’s understandings were that he was concerned with the simultaneities between the objective events of the genre and the related subjective states (which often had a psychological or spiritual quality to them). Jung addressed synchronicity as an ‘acausal connecting principle,’ and as a ‘meaningful coincidence.’ Where, the critical disjunctions found in the linear timeline is a factor of the uchronie genre.

Overall, alternate history, postmodern alternate history, and uchronie genres all involve the existence of an alternate world, where although it is similar to our world, events may occur differently to what we believe. The major distinguishing features between these three concepts is whether they involve a more synchronic or diachronic narrative to them.

4. How does Dick use the I Ching and how did his views on the oracle and its role in the novel shift over time?

According to Mountfort (2020) Dick used the I Ching as an oracle to help him write his novel, the answers he got was a key element when he wrote the story. The main characters use of the I Ching acts as the novels central plot element and Dick used the I Ching obsessively when he wrote the book (Mountfort, 2016). Dick (n.d.) said himself that he used the I Ching because several of his characters used it. When one of the characters asked a question, he’d throw the coinsand and write the hexagram lines they got. This resulted in twelve I Ching results that highlights the central concerns of the novels main characters. It connects characters who never meet, but their actions still affect each other in specific ways (Mountfort, 2016).
Mountfort (2016) writes that Dick’s obsession with using the I Ching helped setting up a “powerful metafictional dynamic” between Dick and his protagonists. Although Dick uses the oracle to help him in his writing, Mountfort (2016) mentions that Paul Williams wrote an useful analysis of the most important points where the I Ching is used in the text, Williams doesn’t believe that the plot were gained mainly through I Ching reading, but that it were used only when the characters used it in the story.
Mountfort (2016) writes on that the I Ching added a philosophical base for the story in the “synchronistic notion of simultaneity or “meaningful coincidence” that is contrary to classical western views of causality” and he argues that the I Ching is a device that unifies stylistic and philosophical levels of the book.
As for Dick’s relationship with the I Ching it seems to have had its ups and downs. Dick was never satisfied with the ending of his novel ad he blamed the I Ching for not providing him with a satisfying ending, he wrote that he would have liked it to have a “stronger, better ending”. Dick actually came to a point where he believed that the oracle had misled and betrayed him on purpose, although this conflict with the I Ching didn’t last very long (Mountfort, 2016).
The oracle shifted from being a key element to his writing to becoming the villain in a way, considering how Dick thought the I Ching had given him an unsatisfying ending in purpose.  

Sources:

Mountfort, P. (2016). The I Ching and Philip K. Dick’s The Man in the High Castle. SF-TH Inc.

Mountfort, P. (2020). Week 10: The Man in the High Castle, uchronie and the I Ching. PowerPoint.