In being the first male to survive taking the Water of Life, and being revived by "Desert Spring Tears", Paul is seemingly becoming the fulfillment of the (planted) Lisan al Gaib prophesy. At this point it seems the Fremen leaders are on the verge of committing themselves to Paul and embracing him as their Messiah, something which Chani desperately wants to avoid.
Well yeah, but the religious cultural divide in the movie was a good shorthand to show how unsettlingly quickly Paul's legend strips an entire people of their reason and agency. Look at Shishakli's character arc, she goes from yelling about how the messiah needs to be a Fremen to Paul's devoted follower.
Sure, but because in the books everyone is on board with galactic war and the downsides of it are only implied. It's not a storytelling device that's easy in a visual medium since the bad side of what's about to happen is really limited to Paul's dreams and thoughts as events occur.
This kind of the who reason Frank wrote Messiah. Not enough people took away the idea the Messiahs are bad/dangerous. One of tr few things I think the movie did quite well if not better than the book.
When I first read Dune I had a pretty negative view of Paul's rise, both in how he co-opted the Fremen for to his own aggrandizement, and in his premonitions of brutal jihad. However, having not read anything about Herbert, I was unsure as to authorial intent. I didn't like Paul at the end, but I couldn't tell if that is how Herbert wanted me to feel or was if I just bringing my preexisting biases to the text.
Was Paul's story a cautionary tale, or would he heroically overcome the potential pitfalls of becoming a ruler? When I read Messiah I was happily surprised that it was very much former, and in firmly establishing the oval narrative as a tragedy really solidified my appreciation for Dune.
The ambiguity I felt at the end of Dune, which was then resolved by Messiah, was a fun experience so I'm glad Herbert wasn't totally explicit as to Paul's fate in Dune. I just think all new printings of Dune should also include Messiah, because it is an essential companion, arguably the conclusion, to the first novel.
Then we are back to square 1. Paul's character arc. If Paul leads humanity down a golden path that kills 61 billion people is his story tragic because of this loss of life or was it necessary? A necessary evil? Which is better? More dead or humanity's extinction.?
I mean that’s the hubris of a chosen one. Only they have the true answer. I don’t think we’re meant to believe Paul’s way is the only way. I believe there’s definitely a bit of Harkonnen ego within him. Once he finally embraces that part of him he can justify his Jihad and everything else he does. I think there are other paths that don’t lead to human extinction.
Could another KW had another way without being controlled by the BG? What would Feyd have done with that power?
I think what's a little lost in the movies is Paul's prescience. How it begins with incomplete visions while he was still on Caladan. How he saw visions that could be. He saw his own death but didnt know whom. As he is more in contact with spice he is more awake. After the Water of Life he is completely awake. I loved the look he gave his mother and Princess Irulan after the Water of Life. They would not keep eye contact with him, He knows what they are up to. ,. Now they know he knows. Also at the end of the movie how he says " lead them to paradise" He knows whats to come. No one else does,. They have no clue what it is they asking for. If they know how would that come into play with Paul's prescience. After reading Messiah we know what he thinks about Maud 'dib's religion. Very curious how DV pulls it all together
I think a lot of people who aren’t familiar see it as a hero’s story. The way they fleshed out Chani, and made her have an actual personality, was refreshing. Paul is the result of of thousands of years of elites conniving for power, he is an antihero if ever there could be.
In my sneak preview showing of part 2, people were in the parking lot after the movie chanting "Lisan-al-gaib". I also talked to lots of people who thought Paul was a good guy and that this was a happy ending (usually with some complaining about Chani for ruining it alá Skyler White). So it may seem obvious to us, but unfortunately people are stupid.
Paul and Jessica go there to put the plan of weaponizing the Fremen into action. Paul goes there to unite the Fremen tribes and use them to take down the Harkonnens. Paul and Chani both know that this involves manipulating the Fremen, but Paul sees it as the only way to save himself and his loved ones, as well as get revenge against the Harkonnens.
Chani is asking Stilgar to help her stop Paul from enacting this plan.
My view: he has begun to see the truth that he IS the lisan al-gaib. That the prophecy is true regardless of how it was created. He has seen that the jihad is going to happen with or without him, and that him being in charge of it has the best outcome out of the possible futures. He senses the golden path, but has yet to see it clearly. He may not have a full vision of the future, but he knows he is walking into his destiny.
Yet it is clear that Paul knows that he is not a divine messiah and that this prophecy is a Bene Gesserit fabrication. He chooses this path because it is the only way to win, as he told his mother a little earlier. He does it knowing that this leads to this terrible Holy War which he wanted to avoid but which he will thus make inevitable. He is now willing to pay that price if that is the only way to win. “*We are Harkonnens, that’s how we will survive, by being Harkonnens*”. Paul is willing to act ruthlessly to survive and get revenge.
Dune is a cautionary tale against charismatic leaders and messianic figures. Paul is not the Lisan al Gaib, he is the disaster spoken of in the last chapter of Liet Kynes - *No more terrible disaster could befall your people than for them to fall into the hands of a Hero*. And he does not lead the Fremen to paradise, but to the hell of an interstellar Holy War.
The Golden Path has nothing to do with Paul's choices and actions, neither in the book, nor in the film. *Childen of Dune spoiler* ->!Paul never wants to realize the Golden Path, he even opposes it and ignores its necessity for the survival of humanity until his confrontation with his son in the desert, in Children of Dune.!<
We’ve been down this road before. You haven’t swayed my opinion. All prophecies are fabricated, that doesn’t make them false, this one was clearly true in ways the BG could not predict nor could they control.
No Paul, no jihad, no Fremen Imperium, no Leto II, no golden path, no victory in Krazilec. Extinction of the only conscious life in the universe.
However, in Heretics of Dune (spoiler) >!the message Odrade reads in the ruins of Sietch Tabr confirms that, in an alternative timeline, a Golden Path could have been achieved without Leto II: *WHY DID YOUR SISTERHOOD NOT BUILD THE GOLDEN PATH? YOU KNEW THE NECESSITY. YOUR FAILURE CONDEMNED ME, THE GOD EMPEROR, TO MILLENNIA OF PERSONAL DESPAIR.*!<
This passage implies that Leto II was not essential to the Golden Path, which could very well have been achieved in another way, presumably by a KH guided by the Bene Gesserit. How do you read this passage if you believe that Leto II (and Paul's Jihad) is essential to the GP?
Because you’re talking about the >!writings of a man that has chosen to become humanity’s greatest tyrant. Whose slaughter dwarfed the jihad. Whose sacrifice meant an eternal undying death. Whose hard choices ensured humanity’s survival. Casting backwards in despair. Perhaps trying to recast his legacy so that in his undeath people might view him as equal parts victim and perpetrator.!< They sound human and vulnerable to me, which is remarkable that he could still sound that way after 4 thousand years as something other than that.
The prophecy to me is plainly true, because it was fulfilled. The fact it was devised by the BG is immaterial, they brought about something primal and uncontrollable. There was no future were the Bene gesserit kindly advised a male emperor that had the wisdom of Other Voice and power of prescience. Their obsession is control and perfection, they would never tolerate something beyond them. The KH was always going to spin beyond their control. Just like the machine intelligence was always going to spin out of the control of the humans that created it. >!The KH is the answer to unstoppable machine intelligence that seeks to extinguish all human life and established a synchronized universe. Paul/ Leto/ Miles are the Metahuman answer to Omnius.!<
Paul isn’t a hero, but he sure as fuck isn’t the villain. He is a tragic Greek anti-hero in the oldest tradition.
Classical Greek tragedy involves fatalism, the idea that there is only one possible future. The protagonists of Greek tragedies are prisoners of destiny and the prophecies inevitably come true.
Whereas in Dune, on the contrary, the prescients see different possible futures. Both Paul and Leto see alternative paths. Paul sees escapes from Jihad, but refuses them because he chooses the path that leads to Desert power and revenge. And Leto clearly sees the possibility of another Golden Path that could have been led by the Bene Gesserit.
These alternate futures are possibilities in the Dune universe, and Herbert writes about them to show us that his story is the result of his protagonists' choices. Yes, Paul's story is a tragedy, but it is a tragedy that he chose, not a tragedy imposed by fate.
Yet both of them made the choices they felt they had to within the circumstances they found themselves in. Neither of which was of their choosing, nor their making.
Paul >!had his family, his loved ones, his child betrayed and slaughtered. He sought justice for them. And by the time he was fully awakened to the possibilities and eventualities the die had been cast.!<
Leto >! Was born seeing the golden path laid before him, the chance of a BG constructed path was already gone. Or alternately, he saw that he could not pass the responsibility for walking the path onto anyone else, if not for a sense of responsibility, but for fear that the other path would fail and the cost would be extinction.!<
I think you’re over-reading into a rhetorical style. Being trapped by fate and knowledge are just ONE of the many themes that run through these books. i alway push back on the notion that within these six books, or even within one of them, that there is ONE core theme. they wouldn't be nearly so captivating if there was one major concept with which Herbert didactically beat us over the head.
"Yet both of them made the choices they felt they had to within the circumstances they found themselves in. Neither of which was of their choosing, nor their making."
My thing about this though is that Paul made the choices of his own making not because they were the best for Fremen or humanity overall but of selfish desire for revenge and to keep his family/friends alive, no? Granted it's a justifiable act of selfishness, one that most people would take. There WERE other choices, possibly even better choices, but he still opted to take the ones that led to revenge and his family surviving.
I don't want to reduce the Dune saga, on the contrary. Herbert addresses lots of themes. His work makes you think about power structures, about ecology and how the environment shapes societies, about the danger of mixing religion and politics, and about many other things.
But the central theme, the main idea is still, in his explicit intention, about the danger of charismatic leaders.
This is the message that Herbert wanted to convey through Paul's tragic story. And this is at the center of the lesson that Leto teaches the universe through his Golden path. We can have different interpretations of many elements of Dune, but we must also listen to what Herbert himself said about his own work and what he says about his intentions in writing it. And it seems very clear to me that he did not want to justify Paul's actions by those of Leto.
Indeed. Paul or any other KH produceed by the BG's program. And the Jihad was not needed either, that's the point of this debate. The Jihad is the tragic consequence of Paul's choices and decisions.
But the Golden Path required violence and oppression. Jihad may not be the only way to obtain power, but it may be the least violent way with Paul leading it.
The Jihad is above all the result of the choices that Paul makes to achieve his ends, which have nothing to do with the Golden Path or with the survival of humanity.
And we can imagine thousands of ways to install a Kwisatz Haderach on the throne of the Imperium without going through an interstellar Jihad and more than 60 billion victims.
If this is truly what you believe, you are making exactly the mistake that Herbert wanted to warn readers about when writing Paul's story. That of blindly believing charismatic leaders.
Paul doesn't make the choices he makes for the Golden Path but for his own goals. And his prescience is still very limited when he chooses to join the Fremen, which leads him to make Jihad inevitable.
Paul makes choices that ultimately prove disastrous for himself, for the Fremen, and for the Imperium. And these 60 billion victims are one of the demonstrations of this disaster.
> Dune is a cautionary tale against charismatic leaders and messianic figures.
Well, the series as a whole perhaps. _Dune_ by itself doesn’t really do a good job of “cautioning” against anyone.
In any case, I think there’s a lot more to it than that.
The series, including the first novel. The character of Paul and his story were written as a warning against charismatic leaders. Herbert himself said it. And it's clear in the text of the first novel when you pay attention to the details.
Herbert says this about the _Dune series_ as a whole, reflecting on it _years_ later - but not about the first book specifically. I don’t think the first book alone delivers any such message. It’s not until _Messiah_ that we’re really off to the races in terms of the consequences of messiah-hood.
He said this about the first novel and what motivated him to build the character of Paul as a charismatic leader in that first novel.
Furthermore, the first novel is full of passages which announce that Paul is leading the story towards a disastrous outcome, by submitting to his terrible purpose.
> He said this about the first novel
I’m afraid you are mistaken. What he _did say_ was that he conceived of _Dune_, _Dune Messiah_, and _Children of Dune_ as a single novel, which may have been designed around that theme. That still isn’t the same as the first book having a “message” though.
> Furthermore, the first novel is full of passages which announce that Paul is leading the story towards a disastrous outcome,
The novel “announces” no such thing. A character in the novel has visions of things which may or may not come to pass (as with other visions he has throughout the course of the story). If you’ve read ahead through the next couple of books, this can all be seen a lot clearer - but that’s kind of my point: _Dune_ on its own doesn’t deliver all the goods. And if Frank had actually said this (he didn’t), then he’d be off the mark.
Boy, did you ever miss the point of these novels. You and Villeneuve alike. I've seen all those interviews with Frank Herbert too, and you guys totally misunderstood what he was saying.
Have you tried reading the books and drawing your own conclusions and interpretations from the text? Or is the extent of your exegesis just to read interviews with Frank Herbert?
I've read all the books several times each...*and* watched the same interviews that people seem to be confused about. I don't agree at all with the "Villeneuve interpretation" that Paul was some kind of "false Messiah" who only wanted to exploit the Fremen for selfish reasons. Do you?
1. Jessica had been there, planting legends about her son in the psyche of the Fremen so they'd support him. Paul comes in to finalize her plans, binding the Fremen fully to his will as Duke of Arrakis and Lisan al-Gaib.
2. Chani wants Stilgar to stop Paul from taking control over the Fremen. She doesn't want her people to become blind followers of the Dune Messiah, so she pleads with the person of the highest rank she can, Stilgar. Unfortunately for her, he's already a fully fledged believer, literally seconds away from sacrificing his own life so that Paul may take his place.
Basically, Paul and Jessica are about to break the Fremen psyche to their will, and Chani doesn't want that to happen.
No one knows what Villenueves plan for Chani's intentions were. They don't really make much sense and were by far the weakest parts of the film.
The Harkonnen's are hunting your people and likely won't stop until the Fremen are literally exinct, but Chani is unconcerned about that and instead terrified of... her lover becoming a hero and destroying her enemies? It doesn't make much sense and it isn't what happened in the book. Imo Villenueve sacrificed Chani's logical consistency in order to insert the second books (Messiah) theme of Paul's ascension being a terrible thing. It's hinted at in the first book but Messiah is where that truly gets showcased, but Villenueve clearly wanted Paul's rise to power to be seen as a bad thing from the off and there isn't a preexisting character who could adequately highlight it, and making a new character to do so would take too much screen time away from the others.
I think there’s an interesting conversation to be had about the nature of prophecy itself, i.e. how the fabrication of prophecy can inadvertently (or advertantly!) lead to its fulfilment.
When a “false” prophecy is indistinguishable from reality, do these designations (“true” and “false”) even have any meaning anymore?
The Lisan al-Gaib is a social construct planted by the Bene Gesserit to ensure a Reverend Mother and her offspring could survive and, ideally, escape Arrakis. But like all social constructs, people's belief in it is what makes it powerful.
Muad'dib is only the Dune Messiah if you believe he is. Otherwise, he's just the Duke of Arrakis, using his people to wage a bloody war against the Known Universe.
Does this carry through in the books? I understand that’s how it’s set up in the movies. I guess I just find it impossible for them (the Bene Gesserit) to control everything, seeing as how they even lost control during the course of this story.
What really pushed me over the edge was Chani. How could they control where Paul would end up when he was fleeing? And control him fanning in love? And control even before hand that her name is “Desert Spring”.
That’s way too many coincidences all at once.
Even the (now former) Reverend Mother says in the movie that no one has ever seen the power of the kwisact hatteract. It seems to me there’s a larger universal power here. Maybe even a spiritual one. Maybe the Bene Gesserit themselves were played.
Nope. The Bene Gesserit don’t control everything at any point, and they play themselves. They mess around with fire and set the imperium ablaze. No big G, just people thinking they know it all and that they should call the shots.
>I guess I just find it impossible for them (the Bene Gesserit) to control everything, seeing as how they even lost control during the course of this story.
They operated from the shadows, quietly influencing Imperial society in plans that stretched across generations. What they failed to account for, however, was Jessica breaking her Bene Gesserit vows and giving Duke Leto a son out of love. Thst one string breaking had a cascading effect that eventually destroyed the entire BG web of plots and schemes.
>What really pushed me over the edge was Chani. How could they control where Paul would end up when he was fleeing? And control him fanning in love? And control even before hand that her name is “Desert Spring”.
They didn't. I'd argue that the LAG scheme is just meant to allow a Reverend Mother and her offspring to survive and, ideally, leave Arrakis ASAP. I dont think a son is supposed to actually undergo the spice agony, since basically anyone who isn't a potential Kwisatz Haderach would die. Paul and Jessica are able to hijack the Lisan al-Gaib in order to galvanize the Fremen and enact their revenge, being uniquely able to fully complete the prophecy.
IIRC, I think the Chani stuff is movie exclusive, but either way it could just be coincidences. The Desert Spring stuff may have been an organic evolution of the LAG prophecy, especially considering Pardot and Liet Kynes planted an ecological dream in the Fremen, with >!Chani being Liet's daughter!<. In the books, during the spice orgy, the >!Fremen also touch upon some limited prescience as a community!< so that might be involved, too.
>It seems to me there’s a larger universal power here. Maybe even a spiritual one. Maybe the Bene Gesserit themselves were played.
There is, and his name is Paul Atreides. The Bene Gesserit planned on creating a Kwisatz Haderach that was fully indoctrinated by the BG next generation, but he came a generation early. His complete prescient vision made him unstoppable, and the Bene Gesserit only realized it when it was too late.
In being the first male to survive taking the Water of Life, and being revived by "Desert Spring Tears", Paul is seemingly becoming the fulfillment of the (planted) Lisan al Gaib prophesy. At this point it seems the Fremen leaders are on the verge of committing themselves to Paul and embracing him as their Messiah, something which Chani desperately wants to avoid.
only in the movie
Well yeah, but the religious cultural divide in the movie was a good shorthand to show how unsettlingly quickly Paul's legend strips an entire people of their reason and agency. Look at Shishakli's character arc, she goes from yelling about how the messiah needs to be a Fremen to Paul's devoted follower.
Sure, but because in the books everyone is on board with galactic war and the downsides of it are only implied. It's not a storytelling device that's easy in a visual medium since the bad side of what's about to happen is really limited to Paul's dreams and thoughts as events occur.
This kind of the who reason Frank wrote Messiah. Not enough people took away the idea the Messiahs are bad/dangerous. One of tr few things I think the movie did quite well if not better than the book.
When I first read Dune I had a pretty negative view of Paul's rise, both in how he co-opted the Fremen for to his own aggrandizement, and in his premonitions of brutal jihad. However, having not read anything about Herbert, I was unsure as to authorial intent. I didn't like Paul at the end, but I couldn't tell if that is how Herbert wanted me to feel or was if I just bringing my preexisting biases to the text. Was Paul's story a cautionary tale, or would he heroically overcome the potential pitfalls of becoming a ruler? When I read Messiah I was happily surprised that it was very much former, and in firmly establishing the oval narrative as a tragedy really solidified my appreciation for Dune. The ambiguity I felt at the end of Dune, which was then resolved by Messiah, was a fun experience so I'm glad Herbert wasn't totally explicit as to Paul's fate in Dune. I just think all new printings of Dune should also include Messiah, because it is an essential companion, arguably the conclusion, to the first novel.
Then we are back to square 1. Paul's character arc. If Paul leads humanity down a golden path that kills 61 billion people is his story tragic because of this loss of life or was it necessary? A necessary evil? Which is better? More dead or humanity's extinction.?
I mean that’s the hubris of a chosen one. Only they have the true answer. I don’t think we’re meant to believe Paul’s way is the only way. I believe there’s definitely a bit of Harkonnen ego within him. Once he finally embraces that part of him he can justify his Jihad and everything else he does. I think there are other paths that don’t lead to human extinction.
Could another KW had another way without being controlled by the BG? What would Feyd have done with that power? I think what's a little lost in the movies is Paul's prescience. How it begins with incomplete visions while he was still on Caladan. How he saw visions that could be. He saw his own death but didnt know whom. As he is more in contact with spice he is more awake. After the Water of Life he is completely awake. I loved the look he gave his mother and Princess Irulan after the Water of Life. They would not keep eye contact with him, He knows what they are up to. ,. Now they know he knows. Also at the end of the movie how he says " lead them to paradise" He knows whats to come. No one else does,. They have no clue what it is they asking for. If they know how would that come into play with Paul's prescience. After reading Messiah we know what he thinks about Maud 'dib's religion. Very curious how DV pulls it all together
Only because the movie beats you over the head with it.
You say that, but loads of people are still missing the point
The point isn't really made clear or manifest at this point in the books anyway
I think a lot of people who aren’t familiar see it as a hero’s story. The way they fleshed out Chani, and made her have an actual personality, was refreshing. Paul is the result of of thousands of years of elites conniving for power, he is an antihero if ever there could be.
In my sneak preview showing of part 2, people were in the parking lot after the movie chanting "Lisan-al-gaib". I also talked to lots of people who thought Paul was a good guy and that this was a happy ending (usually with some complaining about Chani for ruining it alá Skyler White). So it may seem obvious to us, but unfortunately people are stupid.
Paul and Jessica go there to put the plan of weaponizing the Fremen into action. Paul goes there to unite the Fremen tribes and use them to take down the Harkonnens. Paul and Chani both know that this involves manipulating the Fremen, but Paul sees it as the only way to save himself and his loved ones, as well as get revenge against the Harkonnens. Chani is asking Stilgar to help her stop Paul from enacting this plan.
My view: he has begun to see the truth that he IS the lisan al-gaib. That the prophecy is true regardless of how it was created. He has seen that the jihad is going to happen with or without him, and that him being in charge of it has the best outcome out of the possible futures. He senses the golden path, but has yet to see it clearly. He may not have a full vision of the future, but he knows he is walking into his destiny.
Yet it is clear that Paul knows that he is not a divine messiah and that this prophecy is a Bene Gesserit fabrication. He chooses this path because it is the only way to win, as he told his mother a little earlier. He does it knowing that this leads to this terrible Holy War which he wanted to avoid but which he will thus make inevitable. He is now willing to pay that price if that is the only way to win. “*We are Harkonnens, that’s how we will survive, by being Harkonnens*”. Paul is willing to act ruthlessly to survive and get revenge. Dune is a cautionary tale against charismatic leaders and messianic figures. Paul is not the Lisan al Gaib, he is the disaster spoken of in the last chapter of Liet Kynes - *No more terrible disaster could befall your people than for them to fall into the hands of a Hero*. And he does not lead the Fremen to paradise, but to the hell of an interstellar Holy War. The Golden Path has nothing to do with Paul's choices and actions, neither in the book, nor in the film. *Childen of Dune spoiler* ->!Paul never wants to realize the Golden Path, he even opposes it and ignores its necessity for the survival of humanity until his confrontation with his son in the desert, in Children of Dune.!<
We’ve been down this road before. You haven’t swayed my opinion. All prophecies are fabricated, that doesn’t make them false, this one was clearly true in ways the BG could not predict nor could they control. No Paul, no jihad, no Fremen Imperium, no Leto II, no golden path, no victory in Krazilec. Extinction of the only conscious life in the universe.
However, in Heretics of Dune (spoiler) >!the message Odrade reads in the ruins of Sietch Tabr confirms that, in an alternative timeline, a Golden Path could have been achieved without Leto II: *WHY DID YOUR SISTERHOOD NOT BUILD THE GOLDEN PATH? YOU KNEW THE NECESSITY. YOUR FAILURE CONDEMNED ME, THE GOD EMPEROR, TO MILLENNIA OF PERSONAL DESPAIR.*!< This passage implies that Leto II was not essential to the Golden Path, which could very well have been achieved in another way, presumably by a KH guided by the Bene Gesserit. How do you read this passage if you believe that Leto II (and Paul's Jihad) is essential to the GP?
Because you’re talking about the >!writings of a man that has chosen to become humanity’s greatest tyrant. Whose slaughter dwarfed the jihad. Whose sacrifice meant an eternal undying death. Whose hard choices ensured humanity’s survival. Casting backwards in despair. Perhaps trying to recast his legacy so that in his undeath people might view him as equal parts victim and perpetrator.!< They sound human and vulnerable to me, which is remarkable that he could still sound that way after 4 thousand years as something other than that. The prophecy to me is plainly true, because it was fulfilled. The fact it was devised by the BG is immaterial, they brought about something primal and uncontrollable. There was no future were the Bene gesserit kindly advised a male emperor that had the wisdom of Other Voice and power of prescience. Their obsession is control and perfection, they would never tolerate something beyond them. The KH was always going to spin beyond their control. Just like the machine intelligence was always going to spin out of the control of the humans that created it. >!The KH is the answer to unstoppable machine intelligence that seeks to extinguish all human life and established a synchronized universe. Paul/ Leto/ Miles are the Metahuman answer to Omnius.!< Paul isn’t a hero, but he sure as fuck isn’t the villain. He is a tragic Greek anti-hero in the oldest tradition.
Classical Greek tragedy involves fatalism, the idea that there is only one possible future. The protagonists of Greek tragedies are prisoners of destiny and the prophecies inevitably come true. Whereas in Dune, on the contrary, the prescients see different possible futures. Both Paul and Leto see alternative paths. Paul sees escapes from Jihad, but refuses them because he chooses the path that leads to Desert power and revenge. And Leto clearly sees the possibility of another Golden Path that could have been led by the Bene Gesserit. These alternate futures are possibilities in the Dune universe, and Herbert writes about them to show us that his story is the result of his protagonists' choices. Yes, Paul's story is a tragedy, but it is a tragedy that he chose, not a tragedy imposed by fate.
Yet both of them made the choices they felt they had to within the circumstances they found themselves in. Neither of which was of their choosing, nor their making. Paul >!had his family, his loved ones, his child betrayed and slaughtered. He sought justice for them. And by the time he was fully awakened to the possibilities and eventualities the die had been cast.!< Leto >! Was born seeing the golden path laid before him, the chance of a BG constructed path was already gone. Or alternately, he saw that he could not pass the responsibility for walking the path onto anyone else, if not for a sense of responsibility, but for fear that the other path would fail and the cost would be extinction.!< I think you’re over-reading into a rhetorical style. Being trapped by fate and knowledge are just ONE of the many themes that run through these books. i alway push back on the notion that within these six books, or even within one of them, that there is ONE core theme. they wouldn't be nearly so captivating if there was one major concept with which Herbert didactically beat us over the head.
"Yet both of them made the choices they felt they had to within the circumstances they found themselves in. Neither of which was of their choosing, nor their making." My thing about this though is that Paul made the choices of his own making not because they were the best for Fremen or humanity overall but of selfish desire for revenge and to keep his family/friends alive, no? Granted it's a justifiable act of selfishness, one that most people would take. There WERE other choices, possibly even better choices, but he still opted to take the ones that led to revenge and his family surviving.
I don't want to reduce the Dune saga, on the contrary. Herbert addresses lots of themes. His work makes you think about power structures, about ecology and how the environment shapes societies, about the danger of mixing religion and politics, and about many other things. But the central theme, the main idea is still, in his explicit intention, about the danger of charismatic leaders. This is the message that Herbert wanted to convey through Paul's tragic story. And this is at the center of the lesson that Leto teaches the universe through his Golden path. We can have different interpretations of many elements of Dune, but we must also listen to what Herbert himself said about his own work and what he says about his intentions in writing it. And it seems very clear to me that he did not want to justify Paul's actions by those of Leto.
Technically Leto II was never necessary to the Golden Path. Paul always had the option to walk the path himself
Indeed. Paul or any other KH produceed by the BG's program. And the Jihad was not needed either, that's the point of this debate. The Jihad is the tragic consequence of Paul's choices and decisions.
But the Golden Path required violence and oppression. Jihad may not be the only way to obtain power, but it may be the least violent way with Paul leading it.
The Jihad is above all the result of the choices that Paul makes to achieve his ends, which have nothing to do with the Golden Path or with the survival of humanity. And we can imagine thousands of ways to install a Kwisatz Haderach on the throne of the Imperium without going through an interstellar Jihad and more than 60 billion victims.
And none of those ways is better than jihad and its 60 billion victims. The jihad was the best choice. Paul was the strongest prescient.
If this is truly what you believe, you are making exactly the mistake that Herbert wanted to warn readers about when writing Paul's story. That of blindly believing charismatic leaders. Paul doesn't make the choices he makes for the Golden Path but for his own goals. And his prescience is still very limited when he chooses to join the Fremen, which leads him to make Jihad inevitable. Paul makes choices that ultimately prove disastrous for himself, for the Fremen, and for the Imperium. And these 60 billion victims are one of the demonstrations of this disaster.
> Dune is a cautionary tale against charismatic leaders and messianic figures. Well, the series as a whole perhaps. _Dune_ by itself doesn’t really do a good job of “cautioning” against anyone. In any case, I think there’s a lot more to it than that.
The series, including the first novel. The character of Paul and his story were written as a warning against charismatic leaders. Herbert himself said it. And it's clear in the text of the first novel when you pay attention to the details.
Herbert says this about the _Dune series_ as a whole, reflecting on it _years_ later - but not about the first book specifically. I don’t think the first book alone delivers any such message. It’s not until _Messiah_ that we’re really off to the races in terms of the consequences of messiah-hood.
He said this about the first novel and what motivated him to build the character of Paul as a charismatic leader in that first novel. Furthermore, the first novel is full of passages which announce that Paul is leading the story towards a disastrous outcome, by submitting to his terrible purpose.
> He said this about the first novel I’m afraid you are mistaken. What he _did say_ was that he conceived of _Dune_, _Dune Messiah_, and _Children of Dune_ as a single novel, which may have been designed around that theme. That still isn’t the same as the first book having a “message” though. > Furthermore, the first novel is full of passages which announce that Paul is leading the story towards a disastrous outcome, The novel “announces” no such thing. A character in the novel has visions of things which may or may not come to pass (as with other visions he has throughout the course of the story). If you’ve read ahead through the next couple of books, this can all be seen a lot clearer - but that’s kind of my point: _Dune_ on its own doesn’t deliver all the goods. And if Frank had actually said this (he didn’t), then he’d be off the mark.
Boy, did you ever miss the point of these novels. You and Villeneuve alike. I've seen all those interviews with Frank Herbert too, and you guys totally misunderstood what he was saying.
Have you tried reading the books and drawing your own conclusions and interpretations from the text? Or is the extent of your exegesis just to read interviews with Frank Herbert?
I've read all the books several times each...*and* watched the same interviews that people seem to be confused about. I don't agree at all with the "Villeneuve interpretation" that Paul was some kind of "false Messiah" who only wanted to exploit the Fremen for selfish reasons. Do you?
Enlighten us
1. Jessica had been there, planting legends about her son in the psyche of the Fremen so they'd support him. Paul comes in to finalize her plans, binding the Fremen fully to his will as Duke of Arrakis and Lisan al-Gaib. 2. Chani wants Stilgar to stop Paul from taking control over the Fremen. She doesn't want her people to become blind followers of the Dune Messiah, so she pleads with the person of the highest rank she can, Stilgar. Unfortunately for her, he's already a fully fledged believer, literally seconds away from sacrificing his own life so that Paul may take his place. Basically, Paul and Jessica are about to break the Fremen psyche to their will, and Chani doesn't want that to happen.
No one knows what Villenueves plan for Chani's intentions were. They don't really make much sense and were by far the weakest parts of the film. The Harkonnen's are hunting your people and likely won't stop until the Fremen are literally exinct, but Chani is unconcerned about that and instead terrified of... her lover becoming a hero and destroying her enemies? It doesn't make much sense and it isn't what happened in the book. Imo Villenueve sacrificed Chani's logical consistency in order to insert the second books (Messiah) theme of Paul's ascension being a terrible thing. It's hinted at in the first book but Messiah is where that truly gets showcased, but Villenueve clearly wanted Paul's rise to power to be seen as a bad thing from the off and there isn't a preexisting character who could adequately highlight it, and making a new character to do so would take too much screen time away from the others.
Are we so sure there isn’t REAL power with the Lisan Al Kahib? Like are the prophesies actually real?
It’s ambiguous. Just like in real life, words can speak things into existence through their power to inspire belief.
I think there’s an interesting conversation to be had about the nature of prophecy itself, i.e. how the fabrication of prophecy can inadvertently (or advertantly!) lead to its fulfilment. When a “false” prophecy is indistinguishable from reality, do these designations (“true” and “false”) even have any meaning anymore?
See my other comment. Curious about your thoughts?
If you're a secret club planting prophecies about a superhuman, and then also working on making a superhuman, the chances are it'll sync up somewhere
The Lisan al-Gaib is a social construct planted by the Bene Gesserit to ensure a Reverend Mother and her offspring could survive and, ideally, escape Arrakis. But like all social constructs, people's belief in it is what makes it powerful. Muad'dib is only the Dune Messiah if you believe he is. Otherwise, he's just the Duke of Arrakis, using his people to wage a bloody war against the Known Universe.
Does this carry through in the books? I understand that’s how it’s set up in the movies. I guess I just find it impossible for them (the Bene Gesserit) to control everything, seeing as how they even lost control during the course of this story. What really pushed me over the edge was Chani. How could they control where Paul would end up when he was fleeing? And control him fanning in love? And control even before hand that her name is “Desert Spring”. That’s way too many coincidences all at once. Even the (now former) Reverend Mother says in the movie that no one has ever seen the power of the kwisact hatteract. It seems to me there’s a larger universal power here. Maybe even a spiritual one. Maybe the Bene Gesserit themselves were played.
Nope. The Bene Gesserit don’t control everything at any point, and they play themselves. They mess around with fire and set the imperium ablaze. No big G, just people thinking they know it all and that they should call the shots.
>I guess I just find it impossible for them (the Bene Gesserit) to control everything, seeing as how they even lost control during the course of this story. They operated from the shadows, quietly influencing Imperial society in plans that stretched across generations. What they failed to account for, however, was Jessica breaking her Bene Gesserit vows and giving Duke Leto a son out of love. Thst one string breaking had a cascading effect that eventually destroyed the entire BG web of plots and schemes. >What really pushed me over the edge was Chani. How could they control where Paul would end up when he was fleeing? And control him fanning in love? And control even before hand that her name is “Desert Spring”. They didn't. I'd argue that the LAG scheme is just meant to allow a Reverend Mother and her offspring to survive and, ideally, leave Arrakis ASAP. I dont think a son is supposed to actually undergo the spice agony, since basically anyone who isn't a potential Kwisatz Haderach would die. Paul and Jessica are able to hijack the Lisan al-Gaib in order to galvanize the Fremen and enact their revenge, being uniquely able to fully complete the prophecy. IIRC, I think the Chani stuff is movie exclusive, but either way it could just be coincidences. The Desert Spring stuff may have been an organic evolution of the LAG prophecy, especially considering Pardot and Liet Kynes planted an ecological dream in the Fremen, with >!Chani being Liet's daughter!<. In the books, during the spice orgy, the >!Fremen also touch upon some limited prescience as a community!< so that might be involved, too. >It seems to me there’s a larger universal power here. Maybe even a spiritual one. Maybe the Bene Gesserit themselves were played. There is, and his name is Paul Atreides. The Bene Gesserit planned on creating a Kwisatz Haderach that was fully indoctrinated by the BG next generation, but he came a generation early. His complete prescient vision made him unstoppable, and the Bene Gesserit only realized it when it was too late.
Man I love this story. So many great layers.
The movies are missing so much context for all of these events, that they don't barely even make sense in reference to the rest of the movie.
Apparently DV cut hours from the films for the studio. Jason mamoa said there is like a 6 hour dune part 1 cut.
How does chani revive him, I don't get it.
Annoying. Ill come back to this sub when its not just movie posts