How do you react to a lie? Angered? Outraged? Do you seek out justice or the truth? Penultimate Truth by Philip K. Dick examines such a question, much like many of Dick’s other stories.

The basic premise of the story (no spoilers) is that the majority of the world’s population lives in underground bunkers after a nuclear war. The war is conducted on the surface by high level beaureacrats while the average Joe hunkers down in cramped quarters and lives a meek and meager lifestyle underground.

Except here comes the usual Dick twist; The war ended after two years, yet the population has been kept underground for fifteen years. This is of course, a carefully managed conspiracy by faking war-related broadcasts and news. But why would anyone want to pull such a conspiracy on the public living in bunkers? For power of course. To control the resources of land and manufacturing, while keeping the rest of the population in poverty below.

Most of the story revolves around two characters. One character lives below, and must travel to the surface to find a medical supply for his community. The other character lives above, and works in the agency responsible for creating false war news and propaganda.

I’ve told you virtually nothing about the story’s actual plot, in case you want to read it. The reason I bring all this up, is because I found it interesting how a convoluted conspiracy affects the characters–or more importantly, how it doesn’t.

My issue with the storytelling is purely a character problem. Several of the characters who exist on the surface and help to perpetuate the conspiracy do not actually believe in the motives or goals of the conspiracy itself. They have no ‘buy-in’ to the conspiracy. Yet, these very same characters act day-in, day-out, without giving their role in the conspiracy much thought. To me this doesn’t seem very realistic.

The question for me which shatters the illusion, or shatters my suspension of disbelief is this; “Why wouldn’t they just walk away? Or worse, work to undermine the conspiracy?”

Indeed, one of the central characters helps to do this, but he seems to do it in complete paranoia, and without much scruples as to why and how he should care to begin with. In other words, he defies the conspiracy in a less-than intentional way. This makes him less of a hero, and more of a bystander who simply tries not to hurt the tankers as much as his peers do.

The same is true for the character who must travel to the surface. Once he discovers that the war is over, and has been over for a while, he does not seem greatly distressed by this news. Dick’s explanation seems to be, this ‘tanker,’ as the bunker-dwellers are called, has become so accustomed to life in squalor underground, that he doesn’t know what to think when he finds out about the reality of life on the surface.

I don’t buy it. Because Dick later explains that the conspiracy could not be exposed to all the tankers at once, as it would ‘shock’ them and cause a revolution. Of course it would! And I believe it would with the main characters as well.

Keep in mind, the characters did not grow up from childhood in these surroundings. The entire framework of the premise takes place over 15 years. Unless the characters are all fifteen years old, there is no way they would go about their routine so mindlessly when it comes to something as important as freedom, and a conspiracy to infringe upon it.

None of the characters seem to take a hard emotional stand, or fight for anything they believe in. This not only makes the story less believable, it denies the reader an identification with a hero. It hurts both the logic of the conspiracy, and the characterizations.

It is an excellent example where the author could have asked himself, “What would I do in this situation?” Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem Dick asked such a question. If you read it, you might agree that a character affected by conspiracy is a penultimate truth.