Dune Series

[Michael]

I mentioned a few times how much I liked the Dune series of books by Frank Herbert, particularly and most specifically the fourth book in the series, God Emperor of Dune. It is of course the political philosophy of it that most intrigues me. In an effort to stir up some discussion, I'll list here some of the key ideas introduced in the book that I find most interesting. The plot/story of the book is beside the point.

The Fish Speakers - this is the name of the Emperor's all-female army. Herbert makes the argument here that male armies are always dangerous because they will always turn on their own society if/when an external enemy is not available. Herbert suggests that an all-female army would be immune to this danger to the state. I think Herbert's idea has some merit.

Management recruitment - Leto the God-Emperor of the Galaxy has a curious way of choosing his most senior staff - he recruits them only from rebel-leaders. The argument here is that they make the best administrators because they demonstrate a passion and dedication for doing right (and fighting against tyranny). Traditional forms of executive recruitment tend only to reward sycophants who always seek to maintain the status quo - and line their own pockets in the process. Again, I think Herbert's idea has some merit.

Leto's Golden Path - the Emperor is ultimately engaged in a game of self-sacrifice here. As he rules the galaxy with an iron fist, it is hoped this historical fact may ultimately cure humans of their obsessive and collective need for rulership with iron fists. Again, I think Herbert is onto something here - pointing at how humans do demonstrate an obsessive need for iron rulership even when this is antithetical to human existence, human character and human spirit.

Leto's Golden Path (part II) - the Emperor's rise to power had everything to do with 'predictability' and 'prescience' (caused by spice addiction). It is thus the Emperor's goal to re-establish 'unpredictability' to the human universe - asserting that this is the ultimate human characteristic that is necessary for human survival. This is interesting because it is counter-intuitive to the human desire for imposing order. Herbert asserts that it is our obsession with order that will be our downfall.

These are just four of the most salient points of political philosophy that I find lurking in the novel. I find each of these ideas to be very interesting and comparatively radical.

[Zarquon]

I have seen the David Lynch movie and played the late 90's videogame, but not read any of the novels.
Interesting stuff, but I'm not taken with science-fiction novels nowadays.

[Non Sequitur]

I love the Dune series, although the last two are a little bit too weird for me. Personally, I always thought the first one was the best.

What I have always found interesting is the differences between Paul and Leto. Leto goes down a path that Paul was not willing to.

[Donkey]

*sigh*

I guess I'd better read beyond the first one, eh? I do like the first one a whole lot.

[Michael]

I'll certianly agree that the first book is by far the best book of the series, according to conventional considerations of plot and character development. It is as they say, 'a page-turner'. Very easy and quick to read because it is fun.

The second and third book are kind of like a big epilogue to the first book. It is the fourth book that is very different (jumps a 1000 years into the future), but puts the first three books into perspective and explains what is really going on.

In other words, from the point of view of 'literature', the first book is the best. But from a political or philosophic perspective, it is the fourth book that is the most simple and most complex (and thus the most interesting to me!).

[Margot]

I've tried to read Dune about six times, but never got passed page 23. It's so poorly written! I mean, I'm sure it's a great story, but I just can't hack the dialogue (and I'm a science fiction nut, so I'm pretty used to heinous dialogue).

I feel like all of the topics listed in the OP are pretty flat. They all seem to make sense, but they all exist in a vacuum.

[Michael]

I've tried to read Dune about six times, but never got passed page 23. It's so poorly written! I mean, I'm sure it's a great story, but I just can't hack the dialogue (and I'm a science fiction nut, so I'm pretty used to heinous dialogue).

I feel like all of the topics listed in the OP are pretty flat. They all seem to make sense, but they all exist in a vacuum.

Trolling for battle with the God Emperor? :yoda:

[Donkey]

Trolling for battle with the God Emperor? :yoda:
:cavalry:She's intractable on this one. :shrug:

[Michael]

I feel like all of the topics listed in the OP are pretty flat. They all seem to make sense, but they all exist in a vacuum.
Perhaps the topics appear to be in a vacuum since since you haven't read the books?

[Michael]

Seems like some blog had a contest to see who could write the best review of Dune. :D

DUNE CONTEST: WE HAVE A WINNER!!!

CONGRATULATIONS TO THE LAURASAURUS MACHINE!

From the moment you open the book to the instant you reluctantly put it down after melding to a chair for two days, Frank Herbert mercilessly immerses you in a world that more polite folk would call “richly textured” but that I will instead call ridiculously fucking immense. Dune is motherfucking awesome because Dune is an adventure story set in an utterly realistic sci-fi world filled with political backstabbing worthy of the Plantagenets, laced with religious themes (but not of the proselytizing variety), and with just the lightest dash of romance mixed in. By my extremely scientific calculations, there are three main reasons why Dune is motherfucking awesome. Firstly, the universe Herbert created is fascinating, diverse, and terrifying. Secondly, his characters and peoples are not just tropes or simple good guys/bad guys, and the women are capable of great acts of badassery. Thirdly, and most ingeniously of all, it is absolutely a political book with relevance to our politics. There’s intergalactic feudal shenaniganry in the old style (Who’s in with the Emperor? Whose house do you swear allegiance to?), and then there’s economic shadiness and capitalistic corruption underpinning the entire system. Frank Herbert didn’t just write a sci-fi novel – he wrote a political masterpiece through a captivating fictional lens.

Source (http://lazybookreviews.tumblr.com/post/3813642913/dune-contest-we-have-a-winner)

I do find it interesting that there are small pockets on the net of people who think as highly of this series as I do. LOTR is the only thing that I could compare with it, and yet LOTR pales in comparison if one is interested in politics and philosophy.

[dilettante]

I've only finished the first one as well. I started the second but it was...odd. Anyway, it didn't hold my interest strongly enough for me to persist with it.

So I don't really have context for the points mentioned in the OP. However, just based on the brief descriptions, isn't the "Management recruitment" one problematic? If the rebel leaders really cared about fighting tyranny, they'd refuse to be part of a tyrannical system and/or use their status to undermine the leader; if they can be persuaded to uphold the tyranny of the leader by working for him, then they've sacrificed their rebellious virtues. Maybe it makes more sense in the context of the book?

[Michael]

I've only finished the first one as well. I started the second but it was...odd. Anyway, it didn't hold my interest strongly enough for me to persist with it.

So I don't really have context for the points mentioned in the OP. However, just based on the brief descriptions, isn't the "Management recruitment" one problematic? If the rebel leaders really cared about fighting tyranny, they'd refuse to be part of a tyrannical system and/or use their status to undermine the leader; if they can be persuaded to uphold the tyranny of the leader by working for him, then they've sacrificed their rebellious virtues. Maybe it makes more sense in the context of the book?

Rebels make the best rulers. The God Emperor explains the reasoning. I'm inclined to agree with him.

As I've always said, all the good stuff is the 4th book. The first three books set the stage for that one.

[Donkey]

Seems like some blog had a contest to see who could write the best review of Dune. :D



Source (http://lazybookreviews.tumblr.com/post/3813642913/dune-contest-we-have-a-winner)

I do find it interesting that there are small pockets on the net of people who think as highly of this series as I do. LOTR is the only thing that I could compare with it, and yet LOTR pales in comparison if one is interested in politics and philosophy.
Hrm. My only quibble with this review is that I don't think that Dune is immediately gripping. You have to get a little way into it before the OH HOLY SHIT THIS IS OSSUM moment.

[Margot]

Hrm. My only quibble with this review is that I don't think that Dune is immediately gripping. You have to get a little way into it before the OH HOLY SHIT THIS IS OSSUM moment.

Yeah. Because it's horribly written.

[Donkey]

Yeah. Because it's horribly written.
:sneaky: You're horribly written.

[Michael]

Hrm. My only quibble with this review is that I don't think that Dune is immediately gripping. You have to get a little way into it before the OH HOLY SHIT THIS IS OSSUM moment.

Agreed. I really didn't think too highly of the books after I read the first trilogy. It was just 'ok'. Then when the 4th book came out, everything made sense with the 'meta-story' - and I got into re-reading the first three books again and came to appreciate the brilliance of some of the ideas in the books.

I'll agree with Margot that there is nothing special about the writing style. It is as pedestrian as any popular best selling fiction. That's not a knock in my book. For me, the ideas expressed are far more important and interesting than any style of authorship - often as not, I'd consider stylistic authorship to detract from this, though that's probably my bias towards non-fiction reading.

[The Drunk Girl]

http://www.avclub.com/articles/paramount-gives-up-on-making-new-dune-film,53514/

[Michael]

http://www.avclub.com/articles/paramount-gives-up-on-making-new-dune-film,53514/

That doesn't surprise me at all. The first book can be made into a movie as it has a traditional plot and some big action scenes (including a big battle). The other books don't have much by way of plots and often switch back and forth in time and changing perspectives. That's not good movie material.

Btw, speaking of Dune, I do find it quite amusing that many of my most favorite bloggers are secret Dune-philes. :D

This is evidenced by the number of obscure Dune comments that pop up in otherwise cerebral discussions of other topics. :lol:

For example, MYglesias recently suggested the Japanese Government ought to start publishing the "litany against fear".