Meh. Their time and money to waste on spinning that drivel.
,
The part in Paul of Dune in which it was flat-out stated that the novel Dune was no more than a propaganda piece written by Princess Irulan at Paul's orders to manipulate certain biographical facts and cement Paul's role as a messiah, and that therefore everything in Dune was wrong
You don't see a problem giving a big "fuck you" to the author who created the universe you're currently writing in, gleefully undoing the canon events and characters that had been established, telling the readers that the original author's work is wrong and that only the new books should be taken as canon?I don't see a problem with this.
You don't see a problem giving a big "fuck you" to the author who created the universe you're currently writing in, gleefully undoing the canon events and characters that had been established, telling the readers that the original author's work is wrong and that only the new books should be taken as canon?
They may have the legal right, but their ethics are at the bottom of a very deep dumpster.No.
I don't believe that the intent on the part of BH and KJA was actually what you're claiming, but even if it were, it's their prerogative to do so as those responsible for the Dune property.
You forgot about the scene where Irulan's biography of Muad'Dib was given to the Fremen to read and they kept wondering why she got it so wrong? Why, everyone knew that the Messiah was born on Kaitain, and not Caladan, and of course he had been off-world several times before coming to Dune, and blah-blah-blah... And it's later stated very explicitly that the entire contents of Frank Herbert's novel Dune is nothing more than made-up propaganda that Paul ordered Irulan to write. That was the point where I threw the book across the room in disgust.Ha, I was so distracted by Paul running away to join the space circus I had totally forgotten about the whole "Dune is in universe propoganda" junk.
Of course you don't. Neither do many others I've explained this to over the years.At the risk of sounding insensitive Dune will always exist and no future work will ruin it. So I don't get the disrespect argument.
I've talked to people who thought Tolkien ripped off J.K. Rowling. It's not worth trying to explain it because people can't sort out a publishing history but take things out face value. Sorry, I don't feel it needs to be an argument. And I certainly don't see the disrespect of a work that continues to exist.and they think Frank got everything wrong, how dare he!
And I, having only read the original, would have gotten that wrong. I thought Earth was destroyed.Okay, pop quiz here: Where did the creators of the Orange Catholic Bible gather after the conclusion of the Butlerian Jihad to hammer out the details of what to include and leave out or change, in order to create a holy book for the masses that would spread the word that anything even hinting of machine intelligence would be taboo, anathema, forbidden, etc.? The objective was to ingrain this into every citizen's head so thoroughly, that in their gut-level reaction they would believe "thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man's mind" to be a holy truth.
Cool.So this is just one of the ways in which the original six books and the HLP-published stuff is a blatant contradiction that can't be reconciled.
No, I wouldn't. Respect is not something that comes automatically, at least in my experience.Sure, but it just seems wrong to me for the people who have been handed to reins of a franchise to take a giant metaphorical shit all over the original source material. And it's even worse when one of the people doing it is the son of the original creator, since you'd expect a son to show his father a bit more respect.
Funny you should mention somebody ripping off J.K. Rowling, since Ursula K. LeGuin was rather pissed off that Rowling never acknowledged getting some of her inspiration for Hogwarts and other aspects of Harry Potter from LeGuin's work.I've talked to people who thought Tolkien ripped off J.K. Rowling. It's not worth trying to explain it because people can't sort out a publishing history but take things out face value. Sorry, I don't feel it needs to be an argument. And I certainly don't see the disrespect of a work that continues to exist.
What led you to believe that? Nothing in Dune ever said Earth was destroyed. Or did you not bother to read the Appendices? If that's the case, you missed a lot of interesting material that helps explain the history, technology, and society of the Imperium as it was at the time of the novel's opening. Not everything can be simply inserted into a story with an "as you know...." information dump between characters talking to each other (this is something that is frowned upon in writing).And I, having only read the original, would have gotten that wrong. I thought Earth was destroyed.
So you're okay with Brian taking out whatever personal issues he had with his father in the books.No, I wouldn't. Respect is not something that comes automatically, at least in my experience.
That's a fascinating topic in of itself.I could go into the ways in which Star Wars ripped off Dune
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)What led you to believe that? Nothing in Dune ever said Earth was destroyed. Or did you not bother to read the Appendices? If that's the case, you missed a lot of interesting material that helps explain the history, technology, and society of the Imperium as it was at the time of the novel's opening. Not everything can be simply inserted into a story with an "as you know...." information dump between characters talking to each other (this is something that is frowned upon in writing).
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.So you're okay with Brian taking out whatever personal issues he had with his father in the books.
Cool.![]()
It's not that hard to just "hey, Dune was published first". But I'm the kind of person who likes to help make people understand when they made mistake.I've talked to people who thought Tolkien ripped off J.K. Rowling. It's not worth trying to explain it because people can't sort out a publishing history but take things out face value.
There are plenty of ways to disrespect a work without destroying. Insulting it, or coming in as a new author chosen to continue a beloved franchise and dismissing the original source material as bullshit are good ways to do that. Notice how the creators of the post-Rodenberry Star Trek show's stayed as consistent as possible with TNG and TOS, and how the Disney Star Wars creators worked around the original and prequel trilogy and didn't just dismiss them as bullshit and do their own thing.Sorry, I don't feel it needs to be an argument. And I certainly don't see the disrespect of a work that continues to exist.
What gave you that impression? I read the book a while back, and I remember wondering about Earth since it was never mentioned in the body of the book, but I don't remember ever getting the impression it was destroyed. I honestly can't remember if I read the appendices.And I, having only read the original, would have gotten that wrong. I thought Earth was destroyed.
I would think the fact that the original is a beloved classic, that it was written by Brian Herbert's father, and that out of all of the writers out there, they were chosen to continue the franchise would earn it a lot of respect.No, I wouldn't. Respect is not something that comes automatically, at least in my experience.
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.There are plenty of ways to disrespect a work without destroying. Insulting it, or coming in as a new author chosen to continue a beloved franchise and dismissing the original source material as bullshit are good ways to do that. Notice how the creators of the post-Rodenberry Star Trek show's stayed as consistent as possible with TNG and TOS, and how the Disney Star Wars creators worked around the original and prequel trilogy and didn't just dismiss them as bullshit and do their own thing.
Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe he felt that he could actually go in and adjust things without it because of his closeness to the work. I don't know the man.I would think the fact that the original is a beloved classic, that it was written by Brian Herbert's father, and that out of all of the writers out there, they were chosen to continue the franchise would earn it a lot of respect.
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)
Hmm...whelp, my memory is flawed.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).
Also I think Dune was the only one to have an appendice but don't recall anything about Earth.
Even in the book in the section on how the Fremen first arrived on Arrakis, they talk of another planet (Bela Teluse? - I find the section of the book boring and tend to skip though it shows Alia's abilities).
The Dune wiki says that Earth was mentioned in the journals of Leto II and mention by the Reverend Mother Darwi Odrade so look like it doesn't come up until Herectics of Dune (which I might have tried to read 30+ years ago).
So no mention direct referece in Dune it's self or the appendix.
Earth, or more specifically Hitler gets mentioned in Dune Messiah.The Dune wiki says that Earth was mentioned in the journals of Leto II and mention by the Reverend Mother Darwi Odrade so look like it doesn't come up until Herectics of Dune (which I might have tried to read 30+ years ago).
Genghis Khan too. Indeed that whole scene with Stilgar & Korba probably gives us the clearest picture of where Earth (or rather the concept of Earth) sits in the Dune Universe; said historical period being referred to as "The Golden Age of Earth" indicates in rather less than golden by 10,209AG, and at least in Stilgar's mind (who says he can name every planet his people set foot on in the wandering) these are "myths from the dawn of time". For context Paul mentions that those mere handful of shigawire reels are all that the Butlarian Jihad left them with in terms of Earth history. Presumably most of it was destroyed along with the machines and computer systems that held them, with only a fraction of a sliver being preserved and transcribed to something analogue.Earth, or more specifically Hitler gets mentioned in Dune Messiah.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.