(Original Review, 1981-04-15)

"One" by David Karp, 1953.

It is like a nightmarish but plausible convergence of an über HR Services Dept. and the State, attempting to flush out and supplant individual heresy with conformity, even when dealing with the life of a most innocuous individual. A bit like some of the places we now have to work in really. Sh*t, I've really dropped myself in it now. I’m so skeptical and paranoid of any workplace that attempts to implement cultural change ever since. (I automatically switch in to heresy mode, can't help it.) They won’t come for me yet but it'd be only a matter of time, why are they waiting? Posting this now before it's too late because I don’t even what I’m going to major in, maybe Theoretical Physics or Computer Science, let alone what work I’ll do in the future [2018 EDIT: It’s so funny reading this in 2018…ROTFL!]

I just finished re-reading this magnificent novel that I first discovered in the early '80s. I had come across this title on James Martin's "Beginner's Manual for Apprentice Book Burners", a satirical list of "burnable" books. I then fortuitously found a copy in the used book sale at my local library for 50 cents and read it right away. The book blew me away. It is easily one of the best dystopian novels ever written. The obliteration of the main character's identity because of his inability to conform is one of the most hair raising episodes I've ever come across. I read that Karp wrote the screenplay for two TV productions of "One" in the Fifties. I would love to find those. This book is definitely comparable to "1984". I would recommend to anyone who likes "One" another neglected classic of this genre.

It is truly the psychological thriller of the genre. There are but three main characters: the protagonist, a Professor Burden, who is oblivious of any threat he may represent to The State until, by chance, he is called into The Department of Internal Examination (The Department) for a review of a report he has made. Professor Burden has a minor but interesting connection to the state. His interview is revealing and he is subsequently brought to the attention of Assistant Commissioner Lark, who must verify if indeed the professor is a threat, and what must be done. From here I found myself unable to put the book down. Mr. Karp has written such a compelling story of the all-powerful state against the individual; we are to find out what the state might, or must, do in order to maintain control of its citizenry. Lastly the reader is introduced to a Mr. Hughes. There are, of course, secondary characters.

All of whom contribute to a riveting story.

[2018 EDIT: Thank you SO much for mentioning this brilliant book Robert. I read it over many eons ago, and thought it as good as or maybe better than in 1981. But I lost my copy, and all I could remember was the title. It’s been driving me mad for years because I would love to re-read it, but searching for “One” on the Net never produced a result. Turns out Amazon listed six copies. Now only four because I’ve just bought two of them - one for me and one as backup. An absolute ‘must read’. Incredibly powerful. Once again, many thanks. This is such an extraordinary - but almost completely forgotten - dystopian novel that I can’t help but add another comment. But first, there are not four but about twenty copies available via Amazon, in the UK and the US. Buy one! You won’t regret it. It’s so long since I read it that I couldn’t write a decent review right now, but here is one from Amazon which sums it up nicely.] ( )

This was from my father’s collection of Penguin paperbacks and, despite being a literary dystopia, it wasn’t a novel I’d heard of until I came across his copy. I mean, I’ve read Nineteen Eighty-four and Brave New World and I’m aware of We and ‘When the Machine Stops’… but I don’t recall ever seeing mention of One in discussions of dystopian fiction. Has it dropped out of favour? Is it considered not sfnal enough to mention in discussions of dystopias? Because it’s a damn sight more science-fictional than Nineteen Eighty-four. (And is no longer in print, I see.) A couple of centuries from now, the “benevolent State” rules the entire planet. A college professor is a secret informer for the State and writes regular reports on his colleagues and students. But then he is called in for a random check, mistakes his interview with the Department of Internal Examination as an indication the department is about to reward him for his diligence, and so reveals himself to be a “heretic”. But a senior member of the department believes heretics such as the professor are curable, and tries to do so. (Normally, they’re simply executed.) The professor is brainwashed and rejoins society under a different name and with an entirely different personality. But his subsequent behaviour, although he appears to be a model citizen, reveals that his heresy has not been completely eradicated… Clearly, the 1950s US fear of communism is the driving force behind the world and plot of One, but such novels reveal more about the flaws of the writer’s society than they do those of their invented dystopia (hello there, Fahrenheit 451). The benevolent State is crime-free and the vast majority of its citizens are happy. Why is this a bad thing? A handful of malcontents who believe their dissatisfaction is a result of their “individualism” being curtailed is no reason to write off the entire society. But, of course, that’s how dystopian fiction works. It reinforces present-day values by valourising one single aspect of the writer’s society that a “dystopia” might diminish, while ignoring all the social problems said dystopia might actually fix. Obviously, the USSR was far from a utopia, but at least it tried to become one – which is more than can be said for the US (or indeed most nations). One has its flaws – it’s simplistic, it’s all a bit men-in-hats sf, and its prose is functional rather than evocative (although better than most sf novels of the time). It also makes a meal of the whole “individualism” thing, when it actually does a better job of disproving the need for it. It’s still worth reading. ( )