I finished a little while back and felt that I only took the story at face value. Herbert says in his introduction in God Emperor of Dune that his books have layers that apply to lots of different areas (i.e. economics, religion, politics, psychology, and about 4 others). I went through the books and noticed right away that they had depth to them (for me anyway) but I can't shake the feeling I finished the books not understanding half of what he was trying to say .
If anyone else felt this way, why did you? Was it just the way Herbert writes or what?
sidenote: ...I wish I hadn't called myself Duncan .
posted
My husband read all the Dune and says that he didn't get everything because of two main reasons:
1. He doesn't speak Chakobsa
2. He has never read the orange Catholic Bible.
Actually, three, if you include the fact that without the social-heritage that is created in the story taking place in a mythical future and dealing with a mythical past, it is hard to truly capture everything.
I know that when I read the first book, I hadn't realized how much Herbert was fascinated with the Bedouin way of life. But then again, in High School, I really knew next to nothing about middle eastern culture of any depth, only that they had one - or so I believed.
This'll show a little bit of ignorance on my part but I thought the orange Catholic Bible was an idea that was made up by Herbert himself. And I didn't know Chokosba(sp?) was an actual language. And to powder the donut, I know zilch about Middle-Eastern culture.
Whew, I feel a bit more relieved.
And just a note for Christine: Herbert puts a qoute in italics before each chapter. I forgot to mention(in your thread) that I started skipping these because they had nothing to do with the current chapter, they simply spouted off some philosophy from some government factions in the book. The meaningless italics before each chapter really wore on me. The main reason was because I didn't understand what they talked about, and it was hard to read them at three in the morning anyway .
posted
The first book "Dune" is on my top few favorite list. The rest I felt the author was too deep into his own study of metaphysics; for me the rest were muddy. Fear not Duncan, you can always change your user name to "Duncan Donuts,"
I did see and enjoy Herbert's big ideas in the first book. In fact, in the economic area replace Dune desert planet with the deserts of the Middle East, replace water with oil or better yet, Spice. Replace the Fremen with the Fedayin, replace the Bene Geserit with the Cabals of the World Monatary fund and OPEC, see what I mean. Already you see a hierarchy.
In religion: replace the planet Dune with "the church" as a stand alone entity with it's own state, replace the desert planet with spiritual hunger, replace Spice with Holy Water, redemption etc. replace the Fremen with Saints, replace the Bene Geserit with nuns, replace Paul with the Pope, replace the Harkonens with religous secrecy, cover up, downside.
In politics: replace "the wasteland planet" with government, replace Spice with election, replace the Fremen with your prefered political party, the Harkonens with those others, see Paul as a fresh new, underdog candidate and the Harkonens as the encumbent who seeks to thwart him, replace the BeneGeserit, Mentat etc. with political advisors, spin meisters, replace the organization and dreams of the Fremin and planet Arakais with the underground (the French underground WWII, the environmental movement etc.)
In psychology: the desert is depression, the spice is Prozac, the BeneGeserit are writers of thought (Freud, Masters & Johnson etc.) Paul gets on the couch and is cured. The Harkonens continue to deceive themselves, have faulty process and go nuts.
I could go on and on.
[This message has been edited by Julianna (edited July 01, 2003).]
[This message has been edited by Julianna (edited July 02, 2003).]
Printer-friendly view of this topic
.
.
.
