Dune 2018 (19,20,21...)

[Timewalker]

They actually had a line in the books saying the original was all lies and only their stuff is the truth?
It's one thing if the original author decides to retcon things, but for someone else who came in after the author died to do that is pretty disrespect.

Yep. It's why the "but... but... but... George Lucas/Gene Roddenberry" excuse doesn't work when applied to Dune.

George Lucas had full control over Star Wars at the time that he altered the original trilogy, and while there were a lot more people involved in taking Star Trek from TOS to the movies and TNG, Roddenberry still had reasonable grounds to say that while TOS was what he and the production team, et. al had done in the '60s, he had a different vision for the '70s and '80s. After all, it was still his own creation he was altering.

It's not the same with Dune. The original six novels were Frank Herbert's creation. Brian had nothing to do with it.

That's a fascinating topic in of itself.

Just the way they talked about Earth in the book. I did read parts of the appendices but strangely they did not stick as well as other SF works would do (i.e. Heinlein)

Which Heinlein works are you thinking of? There are a lot of them that are hopelessly outdated now, given what we've learned about the solar system and astrophysics in general. It's a shame, but some of my favorite Heinlein juveniles haven't aged well at all. Even The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress seems dated since the breakup of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War.

Sure. Why not? Let him process through it. It doesn't impact me, as flippant as that sounds as I'm writing it. Largely because as much as I love Dune, well, other than the original, I don't have the same connection with it as others do. So, while I get that Brian's take is controversial I'm not going to sit there and demand he pay respect to the original. Sorry, that's not something I feel is necessary. Dune will stand as a great work, no matter what. It doesn't need paltry respect from me, or any other human to ensure that.

You realize that "great works" are considered great works because they've earned some measure of respect from the public, right?

It doesn't help when a great work's legacy is actively undermined because of the inability of the legacy creator's son and his writing partner to understand what the work actually means and what's more, they don't care.

But, the work still stands. My attitude towards it will not change it as a classic. I mean, Gene was famously dismissive of TOS from time to time, with TMP being his "true vision" (or whatever). I understanding wanting to regard the past but there is line to me where respect turns in to ridged ideology. I don't agree with Brian Herbert but good grief do I struggle with the disrespect argument.

Again, there's a difference between Gene Roddenberry deciding which version of Trek is his "true vision" on every second Tuesday and Brian Herbert retconning the basic foundation of his father's creation into something that doesn't make a lick of sense.

But, to be perfectly honest, to you and @Timewalker, I don't believe a work that has stood the test of time can be disrespected in any meaningful way. I truly believe that people basically are being offended for the sake of the original author. And, that's not a burden I am willing to bear.

So don't bear it. You have the right not to care about it. But how about not dismissing those of us who do care?

ETA: I should add that I admire the passionate defense that has been offered for Frank Herbert's work. I think his work, and his legacy, can stand on its own. If someone is willing to engage his work and not be argued in to liking Dune.

If every cultural artifact was expected to stand on its own, the advertising industry would collapse thisfast and nobody would ever discuss the merits or failings of anything. None of us would be here and this forum would not exist because Star Trek and everything else we discuss here would "stand on its own."

8000 years in to the future, mankind scattered across the universe and you have the sort of situation where Earth is just a vague memory/legend (same as in Asimov's Foundation series).

The events of Dune take place considerably more than 8000 years in the future. The year 10,191 A.G. means 10,191 years after the establishment of the Spacing Guild (A.G. = "After Guild"), which happened somewhere in the neighborhood of 10-11,000 years after our present (I could look this up more precisely if my books weren't still packed away after my move last fall).

 

[wayoung]

Edit: Yup, it's the DE that had 25,000 years.

The "Golden age of invention" (20th century) was 14,500 BG


Edit again:. Keep in mind the DE is intentionally wrong in its timeline, in order to show the distortion of history across time. As an example, the DE timeline has Rome conquering the entire world (with China being the last hold out, but eventually falling to Rome).


OP
I believe it's about 20,000 - 25,000 years in our future. The exact difference is tricky because a standard year in Dune is less than a solar year on Earth. When I was younger 25,000 was the accepted difference, although that number seems to be growing less popular and people tend to say 20,000 - 23,000 more often now. I'd have to look it up but I suspect the difference is the DE vs the new books again.

I remember Jeopardy had that as a question and used the wrong answer not too many years ago (they also confused AG with AD).

 

[Timewalker]

the DE timeline has Rome conquering the entire world (with China being the last hold out, but eventually falling to Rome).

Which article is this in? I've read most of the Encyclopedia, and don't remember anything like this.

The only Rome-conquers-the-world stuff I remember reading is a Robert Silverberg book called Roma Eterna, which was published decades after the Dune Encyclopedia.

 

[wayoung]

Which article is this in? I've read most of the Encyclopedia, and don't remember anything like this.

The only Rome-conquers-the-world stuff I remember reading is a Robert Silverberg book called Roma Eterna, which was published decades after the Dune Encyclopedia.

The timeline. At the very beginning of the DE.

 

[wayoung]

Which article is this in? I've read most of the Encyclopedia, and don't remember anything like this.

The only Rome-conquers-the-world stuff I remember reading is a Robert Silverberg book called Roma Eterna, which was published decades after the Dune Encyclopedia.

"Aleksandr creates FIRST
EMPIRE.
ROMAN EMPIRE arises and
16400- conquers the known world,
16000 except for China, which
resists until 14400. "

Edit: And yes, by the dates here, Rome ruled the world well beyond present day. Basically, the DE timeline treats all of Earth history as being under the rule of the Roman Empire, with subsequent empires merely moving the capitol, and stuff like the cold war are merely inter provincial disputes. As I said, it's intentionally wrong.

 

[Timewalker]

"Aleksandr creates FIRST
EMPIRE.
ROMAN EMPIRE arises and
16400- conquers the known world,
16000 except for China, which
resists until 14400. "

"Aleksandr" = Alexander the Great?

Not that I have my copy of the Encyclopedia handy, but generally speaking "the known world" doesn't necessarily mean "the entire world."

However, I will read the article when I find my Dune books (there's a downside to having several dozen boxes of books to unpack).

 

[wayoung]

"Aleksandr" = Alexander the Great?

Not that I have my copy of the Encyclopedia handy, but generally speaking "the known world" doesn't necessarily mean "the entire world."

However, I will read the article when I find my Dune books (there's a downside to having several dozen boxes of books to unpack).

It literally says they conquered China and the USA. Human history from the formation of the Roman Empire to our settling of the solar system is one big long Roman Empire. Only with the destruction of Ceres, the capital of the empire after we colonize the solar system, does the Roman Empire fall.

 

[fireproof78]

So don't bear it. You have the right not to care about it. But how about not dismissing those of us who do care?

It's not meant as dismissal. I'm trying to understand how others define respect around an inanimate piece of work. Respect for people is something I grasp quite well. Respect for art is a whole other matter. I get admiration, awe, or acknowledgement of accomplishment. Perhaps I define respect too narrowly in this context.

If every cultural artifact was expected to stand on its own, the advertising industry would collapse thisfast and nobody would ever discuss the merits or failings of anything. None of us would be here and this forum would not exist because Star Trek and everything else we discuss here would "stand on its own."

Ok...I think this misses my point but I will take this and simply take it as a point of learning.

You realize that "great works" are considered great works because they've earned some measure of respect from the public, right?

It doesn't help when a great work's legacy is actively undermined because of the inability of the legacy creator's son and his writing partner to understand what the work actually means and what's more, they don't care.

I guess I don't see it as being undermined.

I'll leave this topic be. I clearly don't have the sense to see what is happening as you. .

 

[Reverend]

It literally says they conquered China and the USA. Human history from the formation of the Roman Empire to our settling of the solar system is one big long Roman Empire. Only with the destruction of Ceres, the capital of the empire after we colonize the solar system, does the Roman Empire fall.

I guess one can take this one of two ways: either as you say, it's a distorted, inaccurate accounting of ancient history (about as accurate and complete as our knowledge of the pre-classical era), or there was some Neo Roman Empire founded by some guy called Aleksandr in the 21st/22nd/23rd-ish century (give or take) that really did conquer the globe (the first "true" Empire as the people of the Corrino Empire would rate it) and China really did hold out for a good 1600 years.

Either works, and TBH I can't decide which explanation I like more. The former seems more in the spirit of the thing, but the latter has a certain ring of credibility to it too. Honestly I rather like the ambiguity, and it's not like it matters what's "true" or not. History has always been a semi-fictional version of events that people have agreed to go along with, and the "true history" is always changing from one century to the next.

 

[wayoung]

I guess one can take this one of two ways: either as you say, it's a distorted, inaccurate accounting of ancient history (about as accurate and complete as our knowledge of the pre-classical era), or there was some Neo Roman Empire founded by some guy called Aleksandr in the 21st/22nd/23rd-ish century (give or take) that really did conquer the globe (the first "true" Empire as the people of the Corrino Empire would rate it) and China really did hold out for a good 1600 years.

Either works, and TBH I can't decide which explanation I like more. The former seems more in the spirit of the thing, but the latter has a certain ring of credibility to it too. Honestly I rather like the ambiguity, and it's not like it matters what's "true" or not. History has always been a semi-fictional version of events that people have agreed to go along with, and the "true history" is always changing from one century to the next.

Option 2 doesn't work.

14,500 corresponds to the 20th century. The Roman Empire is founded 2,500 years earlier, and China is conquered 100 years prior to the 20th Century. They also have the seat of imperial control moving to Madrid due to the discovery of the Americas (corresponding to Spain's Empire gaining power with the discovery of the Americas, this is explicitly written) and then to London with the rise of the British Empire, and then Washington with the rise of the American Empire. It's clearly distorted history.

Edit:. If you don't have your own copy of the DE, googling DE Chronographs or timeline will pull it up, it's been posted online a lot. It's really clear it's distorted history.

 

[JD]

I couldn't find any images of the timeline itself, but I did skim through the Encyclopedia timeline on the Dune Wiki, and yeah it's definitely distorted history.

OP
I believe it's about 20,000 - 25,000 years in our future. The exact difference is tricky because a standard year in Dune is less than a solar year on Earth. When I was younger 25,000 was the accepted difference, although that number seems to be growing less popular and people tend to say 20,000 - 23,000 more often now. I'd have to look it up but I suspect the difference is the DE vs the new books again.

Wow, I didn't realize it was that far in the future. It was clearly a lot farther out that things like Star Trek, or The Expanse, but I thought it was maybe 1K or 2K years from now.

 

[Reverend]

Option 2 doesn't work.

14,500 corresponds to the 20th century. The Roman Empire is founded 2,500 years earlier, and China is conquered 100 years prior to the 20th Century. They also have the seat of imperial control moving to Madrid due to the discovery of the Americas (corresponding to Spain's Empire gaining power with the discovery of the Americas, this is explicitly written) and then to London with the rise of the British Empire, and then Washington with the rise of the American Empire. It's clearly distorted history.

Edit:. If you don't have your own copy of the DE, googling DE Chronographs or timeline will pull it up, it's been posted online a lot. It's really clear it's distorted history.

Or the dates are wrong/thrown off/confused by the non-terracentric year length re-calculation. Or the reckoning on when "Space Travel!" became a thing is off. Or is only counted from when Mars was actually settled, or the first manned ship left the system. Or perhaps the 22nd Century Neo Roman Empire gets confused with the Classical one because: the Butlarian Jihad burned down all the space libraries...etc.
Like I said, it's ambiguous enough you can interpret it any way you like, and the fact that whichever version you pick may not have actually *happened* is kinda the point if you're going with a "history is an unreliable narrator" mindset.

As a bit of a sidenote, I seem to vaguely recall Scytale having some insights into Old Terra. While it wouldn't be surprising that the Tleilaxu may have horded lost knowledge, it actually seemed like a first had recollection. Maybe the face dancers unlocked genetic memory and got away from their masters' control WAY earlier than they let on? Or just an artefact of Frank changing course from book to book?

 

[wayoung]

Or the dates are wrong/thrown off/confused by the non-terracentric year length re-calculation. Or the reckoning on when "Space Travel!" is off. Or is only counted from when Mars was actually settled, or the first manned ship left the system. Or perhaps the 22nd Century Neo Roman Empire gets confused with the Classical one because: the Butlarian Jihad burned down all the space libraries...etc.
Like I said, it's ambiguous enough you can interpret it any way you like, and the fact that whichever version you pick may not have actually *happened* is kinda the point if you're going with a "history is an unreliable narrator" mindset.

As a bit of a sidenote, I seem to vaguely recall Scytale having some insights into Old Terra. While it wouldn't be surprising that the Tleilaxu may have horded lost knowledge, it actually seemed like a first had recollection. Maybe the face dancers unlocked genetic memory and got away from their masters' control WAY earlier than they let on? Or just an artefact of Frank changing course from book to book?

You realize your theory would require Spain discovering America after the Roman Empire settled Mars, and then 500 years later inventing TV, Atomic energy, and rocketry, right? Did you look up the timeline? It's not ambiguous like you are theorizing. It starts with the founding of the first human settlements. It's just wrong, aka distorted. I am not going from memory, I have it open beside me.

 

[JD]

Here's the DE timeline on the Dune wiki.

 

[Reverend]

You realize your theory would require Spain discovering America after the Roman Empire settled Mars, and then 500 years later inventing TV, Atomic energy, and rocketry, right? Did you look up the timeline? It's not ambiguous like you are theorizing. It starts with the founding of the first human settlements. It's just wrong, aka distorted. I am not going from memory, I have it open beside me.

Me too. Again, if we're going with "it's meant to be inaccurate" then it can be inaccurate in any number of ways. Some Imperial scholars may have abundant sources that say the atom was first split in the deserts of Mars by the Great Man Hatten, in the 9th century BC. Others may hotly contend that the claims the Old Terra is the birthplace of humanity is a sham concocted to fleece gullible pilgrims, and that multiple pre-Butlarian historical sources and religious texts both name the planet Eden, lost when Betelgeuse (eponym of Bela Tegeuse) went supernova in the third millennium BG, as the true cradle of humanity.

If all the Dune Encyclopedia's timeline is supposed to be is "A" version of events, then if follows that (by design) it's not the definitive one, for such does not exist. I mean it's all fiction anyway, may as well have fun with it!

And just to be clear; I'm not claiming that any of this is "right", just illustrating the possibilities. I mean for all we know, they could have a poorly translated fragment of a transcript of a Flash Gordon serial episode and have taken it as a primary historical source. Emperor Ming of the Mongo Dynasty could have been a tiny footnote in Imperial textbooks for over 10,000 years and nobody was the wiser until Leto II came across it and laughed his tail off for two decades straight.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

Mangling the ancient history of our time was probably a deliberate joke on Frank Herbert's part. In his books, other memory revealed the truth to those with that ability but they probably saw no value in trying to set matters straight as such memories were more useful kept concealed. On the other hand, mangling Frank Herbert's work to make money is no joke.

 

[Timewalker]

Frank Herbert didn't write the Encyclopedia. There's some odd stuff in it, though. I have to admit that I didn't read this stuff about the Romans, but there are other weird things, like the two Bene Gesserit sisters who win a trip for two to Gamont. And there's sheet music for a couple of Gurney Halleck's songs (I transcribed them for the organ and tried playing them).

 

[wayoung]

Frank Herbert didn't write the Encyclopedia. There's some odd stuff in it, though. I have to admit that I didn't read this stuff about the Romans, but there are other weird things, like the two Bene Gesserit sisters who win a trip for two to Gamont. And there's sheet music for a couple of Gurney Halleck's songs (I transcribed them for the organ and tried playing them).

My recollection is that it the writers were grad students of McNelly's, He then edited and compiled into one book. Irulans character assassination in it was the weirdest bit to me. Whomever wrote the Ghanima article did not like Irulan.

And, as discussed earlier, then McNelly and Herbert were going to write a single novel based on the DE's Butlerian Jihad, the first two chapters of which are available on Reddit (McNelly left them to a school, they are publicly viewable to anyone who goes there, and professor who was friends with McNelly went to see them, and transcribed them online).

Note: FH did not actually write any of those chapters, McNelly wrote the first draft and FH was to re-write, but at that point he was too sick, which is why the project died.

 

[Timewalker]

My recollection is that it the writers were grad students of McNelly's, He then edited and compiled into one book. Irulans character assassination in it was the weirdest bit to me. Whomever wrote the Ghanima article did not like Irulan.

Actually, Irulan never got a decent break until the TV miniseries (It's my understanding that FH originally intended to kill her off at the end of Dune Messiah, but changed his mind). When you consider that she was basically an Imperial puppet used by both Shaddam IV and the Bene Gesserit, she didn't get to say much for herself except in the little bits at the start of each chapter.

It took the miniseries and Julie Cox's interpretation to make me like this character and feel some empathy for her.

And, as discussed earlier, then McNelly and Herbert were going to write a single novel based on the DE's Butlerian Jihad, the first two chapters of which are available on Reddit (McNelly left them to a school, they are publicly viewable to anyone who goes there, and professor who was friends with McNelly went to see them, and transcribed them online).

Note: FH did not actually write any of those chapters, McNelly wrote the first draft and FH was to re-write, but at that point he was too sick, which is why the project died.

Link, please? I'd love to read that, and have no familiarity with Reddit.

 

[fireproof78]

It's interesting to watch Irulan's growth and change in different adaptations. I recall doing a book report and study in high school on Dune, and looking at the miniseries vs. novel in terms of characters and growth. It was interesting to see just how much the miniseries brought to that character.