Name: Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?
Rating: 3.905850091407678 (547 reviews)
ISBN: 9780345404473

Philip K. Dick

Captures the strange world of twenty-first-century Earth, a devastated planet in which sophisticated androids, banned from the planet, fight back against their potential destroyers

Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?

Sven Schmidt

里森

This book is slow to read but contains beautiful expressions like this.

Robin

It had not merely become silent; it had stopped existing, scared into its grave by his knock.

A merry little surge of electricity piped by automatic alarm from the mood organ beside his bed awakened Rick Deckard.

“My schedule for today lists a six-hour self-accusatory depression,” Iran said.

Silence. It flashed from the woodwork and the walls; it smote him with an awful, total power, as if generated by a vast mill.

Tosin oyebade

By 2021, companies have built incredibly realistic androids. Fearful of the havoc these artificial humans could wreak, the government bans them from Earth, but when androids don't want to be identified, they just blend in. Rick Deckard is an officially sanctioned bounty hunter whose job is to find rogue androids and "retire" them. But cornered, they tend to fight back, with deadly results.

Do androids dream of electric sheep?

Christian

The author's ideas are interesting, particularly the social pressures around owning and caring for living animals. The prose is clunky, and although I realize the author is not known for particularly beautiful writing, at times it was unclear or distracting, as in "The conductor then departed; the musicians left their instruments and also left." The parts written from J.R. Isidore's viewpoint really brought me down; he is aware of how the poisoned environment is affecting him, to the point where he is genetically unsuitable for reproducing, and has become too dim-witted to be allowed to emigrate to Mars. His intellect degrades further over the course of the story; by the end he is dismayed to find that he can't recall the name of his employer. One aspect of the story-world that I couldn't come to grips with was the idea that the best and brightest had mostly moved to Mars, and yet the remaining population still managed to keep at least two continental economies going, supporting opera troupes, flying cars, fresh fruit, and most incredibly, realistic flying and crawling electric insects intended to fed to electric toads, and sophisticated androids indistinguishable from humans (at times even by the androids themselves). The emotional journey of the main character (Rick Deckard) seemed muddled and aimless - he clearly goes through some changes and introspection, though these don't seem to lead anywhere relevant to the plot. Deckard's interactions and relationships are similarly aimless. This aspect of the story added to the sense of dystopian malaise that was my main take-away from this book. I'll be interested to watch Blade Runner and see how familiarity with the original story affects my understanding of the film.

San Francisco lies under a cloud of radioactive dust. The World War has killed millions, driving entire species to extinction and sending mankind off-planet. Those who remain covet any living creature, and for people who can't afford one, companies build incredibly realistic fakes: horses, birds, cats, sheep...even humans. Rick Deckard is an officially sanctioned bounty hunter tasked to find six rogue androids. They're machines, but look, sound, and think like humans

Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep

Captures the strange world of twenty-first-century Earth, a devastated planet in which sophisticated androids, banned from the planet, fight back against their potential destroyers, while bounty hunter Rick Deckard sets out to track down the replicants. Reissue. (Tie-in to the Fall 2007 release of the deluxe twenty-fifth anniversary DVD of the Warner Bros. film, directed by Ridley Scott, starring Harrison Ford, Rutger Hauer, Sean Young, and others) (Science Fiction)

Blade Runner

ラップの神 del ray🗡🐸

January 2021: World War Terminus has killed millions, driving entire species into extinction. Living creatures are prized and coveted possessions; for people who can't afford one, companies construct incredible mechanical animals, to be passed off as natural by their new owners. They've even built humanoids who are just as convincing... When bounty hunter Rick Deckard, owner of an electric sheep, is instructed to track down and 'retire' six human-style androids that went rogue, he's glad of the job - he'd love to be able to afford a real animal again. But then he himself is accused of being an 'andy'...

Filmden kat kat daha iyi ve daha cok düşünmeye itiyor. Başlangıç ve sonucu zayıf olmasına rağmen ozellikle opera sanatçısı kısımlarında ana karakterin insanlığını sorgulayis kisimlari guzel

Ada guruney

Great food for thought at points but very much lacking in terms of plot and entertainment.

Maya

I don't know why I hated this so much. I just felt like it was so damn confusing all the time and the characters and plot were not very well written. The idea of them was good but not the way it was delivered. Very disappointed in this.

As the eagerly-anticipated new film Blade Runner 2049 finally comes to the screen, rediscover the world of Blade Runner . . . World War Terminus had left the Earth devastated. Through its ruins, bounty hunter Rick Deckard stalked, in search of the renegade replicants who were his prey. When he wasn't 'retiring' them with his laser weapon, he dreamed of owning a live animal - the ultimate status symbol in a world all but bereft of animal life. Then Rick got his chance: the assignment to kill six Nexus-6 targets, for a huge reward. But in Deckard's world things were never that simple, and his assignment quickly turned into a nightmare kaleidoscope of subterfuge and deceit - and the threat of death for the hunter, rather than the hunted . . .

Anna 

** spoiler alert **
           3,5*
.
if it's so hard to kill the nexus 6 types why did he manage to kill them all within seconds? most of them didn't even try to protect themselves??
also what's up with that whole mercerism thing? 😭
it was fine, the movie was better, more action packed and with better storyline. but i'm glad I read it, it wasn't boring.

Luke

Sarah Sammis

My taste for Philip K. Dick's style of writing has changed since I made that first journal entry. I thoroughly enjoyed this book and felt that it helped fill in a lot of the holes of the film even though there are so many changes between novel and film. Interestingly, the androids (not called replicants), though more talented than they are in the film, are more obviously different than the humans. They lack empathy and faith (though faith is shown to be a human weakness throughout). Decker is not the ambiguous lone wolf that he is in the film; he is married, albeit not necessarily happily but somewhat comfortably. Rachel is not the completely naive child in a woman's body that she is in the film; she is a full-fledged femme fatale! Many of the other names are changed and the setting changed (from San Francisco to Los Angeles) but one can see how the book inspired the film.

Regarding San Francisco, I enjoyed seeing Dick's vision of the city post nuclear war. Especially chilling was ghost town peninsula. Realistically, San Francisco would not be a good choice for survivors to congregate given the weather patterns (replace 10 months of daily fog with 10 months of daily fallout). A better choice would be Dublin/Pleasanton as they are in the rain shadow of the Hayward Hills but at the time Dick wrote this novel, these cities wouldn't have been more than just farming communities.

Finally the inclusion of animals (whether fake or real) in the film take on new meaning after reading the book. The word "dream" in the title refers more to the aspiration to own an animal than for the thinking of an animal when asleep. So the question posed by the title isn't so much: "Do androids count sheep when they're asleep?" to "Can androids love life enough to aspire to own a pet?" It goes back to the central theme of empathy. What will happen to society when androids are built well enough to empathize with living things? Or, if androids keep android pets, is that an equivalent empathy to a human keeping a completely biological pet?

World War Terminus had left the Earth devastated. Through its ruins, bounty hunter Rick Deckard stalked, in search of the renegade replicants who were his prey. When he wasn't 'retiring' them with his laser weapon, he dreamed of owning a live animal -- the ultimate status symbol in a world all but bereft of animal life. Then Rick got his chance: the assignment to kill six Nexus-6 targets, for a huge reward. But in Deckard's world things were never that simple, and his assignment quickly turned into a nightmare kaleidoscope of subterfuge and deceit -- and the threat of death for the hunter rather than the hunted . . .

Luis Ponce

Había huido de la novela durante dos años. Tengo un recuerdo, demasiado vago tal vez, en el que me encontraba en una cafetería acompañado de alguien que leía a Philip K. Dick por primera vez. Le pregunté "¿Cómo así?" y me respondió algo sobre Blade Runner, la de 2017 con Ryan Gosling en su ciudadela de neón y los posteriores edits demasiado patéticos como para ser tristes a secas. 
En la primera lectura llegué hasta la escena en la que Rick trata de comprar el animal de su vecino sin éxito y, pese a que me reí un poco, confieso que me dejé desorientar por unas cuantas lecturas pendientes. Luego llegó el anime de Pluto, basado en el manga homónimo de Naoki Urasawa. Una de las reseñas que leí, apena salió su primer capítulo, fue "No vean esta basura. No pierdan horas de su vida para, al final, ver que los robots también tienen sentimientos". Conciso, supongo, pero no es el caso a final de cuentas. Podría creer, a riesgo de quemarme las manos, que Pluto es la aceptación posterior de lo que en su momento planteaba Do Androids..., en una situación en la que las apariencias legitiman la esclavitud. Si Philip K. Dick pensó en los andies como subalternos, máquinas renegadas a la obedicencia y la actitud dócil, Urasawa pensó que su aceptación, sobre todo mediática, radicaría en su uso como marionetas-o-fuerzas del órden. En otras palabras: si le das un arma a un androide humillado, no huirá de las colonias marcianas; si le das un arma, le enseñas a dispararla y lo crías como a un humano, podría ser una excusa pequeña para iniciar una guerra. 

Quisiera ver la primera película y sentir la desolación de los últimos capítulos: la benevolencia de la ironía transformada en sapo, un redimirse nulo en forma de moscas básicas. Por desgracia, sí me vi 2049.

Chaitanya Baranwal

This book lacks an engaging plot or a strong jittering climax. I'd even go ahead and say that plot-wise, the ending pages might have been the most boring. What's special with the book is how it permeates with thoughtful questions about human existence, and how it is riddled with ironies from start to end. It's way different from the movie, and it's based on an Earth destroyed by nuclear radiation, with almost all of the human population having emigrated to Mars.

What makes us human? The book considers empathy the litmus test for humanity, something which "androids" don't show. While humans continue to show empathy for the upper echelons of the society through connecting with them from the "empathy box", they never show that empathy for people with disabilities both mental and physical, the so-called "specials" (who show as much empathy as any normal human). Moreover, if humans have real emotions, why do they need empathy boxes (which were later proved to be fake), to connect to others? If they have real emotions, why do they need a Penfield mood organ to simulate those? Throughout the book, the line between androids and humans keeps getting blurrier and blurrier.

Deckard's life takes a 180 when he interacts with Luba Luft and Phil Resch. A bounty hunter who's ready to kill androids without a thought, he feels that a talented singer like Luba deserves to live. He mistakes Phil Resch for an android who deserves to die, only because he loves killing androids. This complete reversal of emotions evokes newfound feelings in Rick, and he goes on to make love with the android Rachael. From a merciless android-killer, he turns to having feelings for androids. Is it wrong to have feelings for someone who does not have emotions? 

While the book considers androids to not have empathy, all I can think about is one question: if frames of metal and circuits do end up having empathy along with every other emotion, what is it that would truly make us "human"?

A masterpiece ahead of its time, a prescient rendering of a dark future, and the inspiration for the blockbuster film Blade Runner By 2021, the World War has killed millions, driving entire species into extinction and sending mankind off-planet. Those who remain covet any living creature, and for people who can’t afford one, companies built incredibly realistic simulacra: horses, birds, cats, sheep. They’ve even built humans. Immigrants to Mars receive androids so sophisticated they are indistinguishable from true men or women. Fearful of the havoc these artificial humans can wreak, the government bans them from Earth. Driven into hiding, unauthorized androids live among human beings, undetected. Rick Deckard, an officially sanctioned bounty hunter, is commissioned to find rogue androids and “retire” them. But when cornered, androids fight back—with lethal force. Praise for Philip K. Dick “The most consistently brilliant science fiction writer in the world.”—John Brunner “A kind of pulp-fiction Kafka, a prophet.”—The New York Times “[Philip K. Dick] sees all the sparkling—and terrifying—possibilities . . . that other authors shy away from.”—Rolling Stone

The inspiration for the films Blade Runner and Blade Runner 2049

An interesting blend of thoughtful sci-fi and unexpected, fantastical near-surrealism. Not all of it has aged gracefully, and it can be a bit clunky. But reads quickly, and it’s undoubtedly a hugely influential and compelling pondering of humanity. 

Michael Klepacki

Good but I had a hard time understanding anything

Gwenifer

Laura Mauler

The author could imagine a future where people fuse their minds with each other, but not a future where women are anything but receptionists, secretaries, or housewives. Also, he felt the need to describe the tits of every female character, sometimes more than once.

Putting aside from the author's gross sexism, the book was pretty weak. Rick felt he couldn't do some things; then in the next paragraph he felt he could; then in the next paragraph he felt he couldn't - and on and on for the entire book. And all that Mercer stuff! It was so poorly written I still don't understand what he was going for. Hard pass on this book, not a good read.

Joshua Line

I would have rated it 5 stars if it did not have such a weak ending.

karol tang

Winona 

The mystery is interesting, but the prose is flat and boring so I didn't really care when anyone died.

Dimitris Papastergiou

I liked it. Once again and this time's a final. 

Great story with an intriguing premise and a somewhat sad character that's just rolling with the punches most of the time.

You like your sci-fi? You'll like this one.

I don't know if it would be better if I was to go into this one without having seen the movie first but I did. And for that reason I'd always read about Deckard and picture Harrison Ford. Always. Not that I didn't like the movie or anything, but that still remained.

And of course the book is better than the movie here too, except for that it ends rather quickly like Philip K. Dick wanted to wrap things up? Don't know why or what happened but it feels that way and leaves you wanting more. 

He built a great world that makes you wanna read more, which is why I'm reading the comics too and going to see what's up with the next Blade Runner book the Edge of Human by K.W. Jeter.

Anyway, should you read it? Sure. Before watching the movie? Yeah if you haven't watched it yet, read this one first.

Do androids dream of electric sheep?.

Audrey Lord

an amazing science fiction book. so great.

Prashanth Srivatsa

Makes you more inquisitive than Blade Runner did, but falls a tad short of the movie's engagement. The story follows Rick Deckard, a bounty hunter, out to kill rogue androids who resemble humans, and in the process, identifies and questions his own morals and existence. Dick's portrayal of everyday, domestic animals as a status symbol is especially fascinating. But it's his ability to create a pseudo-alive, polluted environment on Earth and struggle to feed it with empathy that makes this book a winner.

A book about empathy and what it means. Towards what can you and should you be empathic?  A bounty Hunter who only wants a sheep, a real sheep, in a world of eletric animals and who is willing to sacrifice  everything for it, but when you sacrifice everything what will you and up with?

Patrícia 

Dave | Storyphoria

If you love classic sci-fi stories with that dystopian, cyberpunk aesthetic, you’ll find a lot to love about this story. While a lot of science fiction takes a stab at posing bigger questions or tackling societal issues, Dick delivers on asking the simplest, yet toughest, questions while never beating us over the head trying to force HIS answers on us as readers. We are left with a lot to consider within ourselves and while that makes this book sound dry or academic, it’s still an incredibly fun adventure that will satisfy anyone looking for a great sci-fi cyberpunk style romp.

Ryan LaFerney

A seminal work of sci-fi that deals with the nature of what it means to be human. It's ultimately about the nature of empathy. Dick describes empathy as the defining trait of humanity; it’s what makes us different from every other creature, including the androids. So what happens when we aren't emphatic? What happens when we kill creatures that can feel and think? Does that make us inhuman?

The answer just might be yes.

Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?

Reviews

Highlights