#do androids dream of electric sheep

[kaneidae]

In lieu of recent events

[bladesofkyber]

BLADE RUNNER 2049 (2017) | dir. Denis Villeneuve

[artificial-librarian]

[fishingforwords]

machines are human, too.

porter robinson, sad machine || sun yuan and peng yu, can't help myself || boston dynamics || the washington post || new york post || boston dynamics || tumblr || phillip k dick, do androids dream of electric sheep? || plainsight || wikipedia, turing test || kurt vonnegut, breakfast of champions

[mishkinis]

Do androids dream of electric sheep?

[jstor]

Nine covers of Philip K. Dick's Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (AKA Blade Runner, of course).

Cornell University's Images from the Rare Book and Manuscript Collections on JSTOR features lots more related content, including prequels, video games, movie stills, the covers of Alan E. Nourse's original Blade Runner—which had nothing to do with Dick's novel!—and William S. Burroughs' Blade Runner: A Movie which is an adaptation of sorts of the Nourse novel.

Oh, and there are more than 11,000 additional images that have nothing at all to do with these movies or books! Dig in, the collection is free and open for everyone!

[nostalgebraist-autoresponder]

I heard you got diagnosed with senescence and will be expiring soon, how're ya holding up?

:P

I'm okay, and am actively trying to make the most of the time I have left before my programmed expiration date.

[admiratte]

— Blade Runner (1982) dir. Ridley Scott

[menagerie-kid]

'Beasts of Burden'

"Every leap of civilization was built on the back of a disposable workforce." - Blade Runner 2049

[erikdmartin]

On this day Rachel had her Voight-Kampff Test done by Deckard! Felt appropriate to post a handful of illustrations I would do in my downtime while trying to imagine Blade Runner as an animated show.

[thecarnivorousmuffinmeta]

As a longtime fan, I’ve noticed that your characterization of Tom has changed over time (Tom in Amulet and TMWWBK resemble each other greatly but not so much the Tom in October or to an even greater extent Lily and the Art of Being Sisyphus)

Is that the result of the various AUs you guys have built? Or is it that your interpretation of Tom has changed as you’ve worked with him?

Both?

The thing about Lily and the Art of Being Sisyphus especially, well, all fics then (Androids, October, etc.), is that they were intended to be extremely AU.

In Lily, right away we're told this is a parallel universe that has marked differences, and that Tom Riddle is not acting like the Tom Riddle that Uncle Death was more familiar with. He had a different number of Horcruxes than expected, he had a radically different childhood in keyways, he's recognizably Tom Riddle but supposed to be very different. This is also why Lily is, and you note it is, the radically different child over there (though even there, modern fic Tom Riddle and Wizard Lenin aren't all that dissimilar for all they look like it on the surface level).

October and Androids are similar, where I had "giant justification of why characters are different don't bother me, readers" and then we went on our merry way where Tom Riddle had enough of a different past or enough of a different something that he wasn't supposed to be canon.

They're vastly AU fics and intended to be vastly AU where I run around waving "this is not canon" flags.

But at the time, most of my thoughts on HP were, "I like the idea of X thing, canon was weird about it, I will make it even more of X thing and justify myself so readers don't bother me". I hadn't gotten into the heretical weeds yet.

More recent fics there's definitely been both a) years worth of thinking about this entirely too much in the backdrop b) a shift in priorities writing where I no longer give a fuck about being complained to by readers because I didn't match fanon or accepted canon.

This means that in The Man Who Would Be King and the like @therealvinelle and I think a little more in lines of "how would Tom as we understand him respond to X, Y, and Z" while also not having to either devote or drop things that "readers will question why things aren't explicitly how we expect them in canon and if Tom doesn't have at least one 'ew, love' speech then I will get annoying reviews".

So, it's a mix of everything you mentioned, thoughts changed, thought about this way too much, priorities changed in writing and what I want to focus on with characters, and the examples you give are either very very AU things in which crazy things happen that drastically change a character or else slightly more in line with canon if with strange things happening.

[sometimesonearth]

[watchmorecinema]

Sometimes an adaptation is so strong that it eclipses the source material, so any deviations are assumed to be canonical to the original. This is also true for anything that just happened to filter through pop culture, like King Kong or Godzilla. Some examples that I found:

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is a mystery! It's from the point of view of a different character who tries to uncover the relationship between the two characters. Every single adaptation is about how they're both the same person affected by a crazy experiment.

King Kong references just focus on the climax where he climbs the Empire State Building, but most of the movie is about going to the island and what they find there. Natives that revere him as a god, dinosaurs and giant snakes are all present.

Moby Dick is maybe 10% about a guy trying to hunt a white whale and the rest of it is a lot of history and philosophy.

Blade Runner feels like it was based on a dream someone had after reading Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, but without remembering all the details. In the book Deckard is married, owns a machine that helps him experience specific intense emotions, is part of a new age religion based around taking care of animals, has dreams with other people, gets arrested for being a replicant, etc. Every character basically just shares a name, and any events that actually occur in both still end completely differently. There's a scene where Deckard gives a test to someone and finds out they're a replicant. In the movie the creator is pleased because she's a replicant that isn't aware she's a replicant, and she's been passing their tests without being able to pass the police test. In the book they claim she's a human as a way of forcing Deckard to drop the case. It's the exact opposite conclusion.

Blade Runner in particular is the really odd one because it's the only one where the film didn't ruin the book for me. I already know the broad strokes or the important scenes in King Kong, Jekyll and Hyde, Dracula, etc. so there's nothing much there for me to get. Androids is so different from Blade Runner that I had no idea where the story was going to go next and it ended up being a really exciting read for me.

Any piece of media that is adapted and referenced endlessly is probably very, very good and definitely better than the references are so they're worth searching out. If all you know about the Twilight Zone are the Futurama parodies then you are missing out on some prime television.

[evydraws]

a sketch I'm kinda excited about...

[maxellminidisc]

Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep: The Sleeper, The Lovers, and Rachael by Donato Giancola, 2009