Page 4 of 4

Posted: 06 Dec 2008 13:21
by dunaddict
a few questions:

- how many facts from the 'notes' are used in each book?
- how many books does it take before all the 'notes' are used up? 10, 100, a thousand?

for those of you that DID read the prequels:
- would you still read the prequels if there's proof the notes are fake or don't exist at all?

for those of you that did NOT read the prequels:
- would you consider reading the prequels if there's proof the notes are real and used in the preqs?

Posted: 06 Dec 2008 13:45
by Tleszer
dunaddict wrote:a few questions:
for those of you that DID read the prequels:
- would you still read the prequels if there's proof the notes are fake or don't exist at all?


I read them and found that they're only good if someone enjoys more pulp than substance. While on its own that may not be a bad thing, but it is when the books are labeled as being "Dune" as they are clearly not Dune and despite the similarity in character's names the characters that appear in both are not even shadows of what Frank Herbert created.

Posted: 06 Dec 2008 13:53
by dunaddict
Yes I agree completely Tleszer.

But my question was, did the mysterious 'notes' play any role in you reading them?

(btw, I recently watched 'Lost Highway'. NOW I now why that guy seemed so familar)

Posted: 06 Dec 2008 15:31
by Frybread
dunaddict wrote:Yes I agree completely Tleszer.

But my question was, did the mysterious 'notes' play any role in you reading them?

(btw, I recently watched 'Lost Highway'. NOW I now why that guy seemed so familar)


The notes played a role in my reading the Legends and House series because I wanted to see what Frank would have done if he had lived longer. It especially was the reason why I read HuoD and SoD.

With that said, I still might have read them if I had known the notes didn't exist, but I wouldn't have been as eager to read them as I initially was.

Edited to add that SoD and PoD are bad enough that I will not read another KJA/BH Dune book again, even if they promise that the new books will be based off FH's notes. Their writing just isn't up-to-par for the Dune universe.

Posted: 06 Dec 2008 15:35
by TheDukester
dunaddict wrote:for those of you that did NOT read the prequels:
- would you consider reading the prequels if there's proof the notes are real and used in the preqs?

Not a chance in hell.

The notes are trivial to me. I'd love to see a nice hardbacked volume of nothing but FH notes, deleted scenes, etc. (think Christopher Tolkien), but not if The Hack and the Useless Sidekick have anything to do with it.

But the notes themselves are meaningless to me in terms of reading any nuDune material. Those books are "written" by two completely talent-free hacks (well, one that we know of for sure); a bunch of notes doesn't suddenly give them the ability to write.

Posted: 06 Dec 2008 15:41
by Tleszer
The House books were the first Dune I read. They got me into Dune proper. I had read Legends, and eventually Hunters and Sandworms b/c of the so-called notes, but it became increasingly clear that even if some of the ideas did come from "The Notes" that didn't even matter b/c of the lack of understanding KJA & BH have of the Duniverse.

I admit that I was tempted to read Paul of Dune just so that I could justly attack it, but from what I've read of it and the chapters I've read at Borders I've come to the conclusion (one that should have been reached long ago) that none of their Dune books are worth reading. They don't add anything to the universe except to "attack" what fans think they know by turning FH's novels into in-universe documents.

Posted: 06 Dec 2008 15:59
by GamePlayer
dunaddict wrote:a few questions:

for those of you that did NOT read the prequels:
- would you consider reading the prequels if there's proof the notes are real and used in the preqs?


No. From the moment KJA typed the first random collection of words under the guise of Dune, the infamous "Herbert notes" became totally irrelevant. Even if the notes existed, the significance of the notes would have been drowned in a sea of trash novels. Now that a ridiculous number of books have been released, it's clear the notes played no part in their creation, since the concepts included in such notes could never have sustained this many books. Perhaps one or two books could have been formed from the notes, but not six and certainly not ten. How do we know? Because Frank spent his entire life writing six and whatever he had in mind for a seventh book could not go much farther beyond that. Frank would had to have lived another 50 years to create enough material for six more books, let alone 10 more.

But we don't need the notes nor are we required to confirm their existence to know the prequels contain no Frank Herbert; one look at the subject matter of the books instantly tells any learned adult that the ideas for the prequels did not come from Frank Herbert. They came from Terminator, Watchmen, or any of a thousand other plundered works.

If the Frank Herbert notes DON'T exist, that explains why the prequels are awful books.

If the Frank Herbert notes exist, then they've been misinterpreted by two people that don't understand the slightest thing about Dune. The notes have been disfigured in the same way Asimov's I, Robot was corrupted from a book about robots into a ridiculous action film that bore no resemblance to the source material, save the name.

Posted: 06 Dec 2008 16:57
by DuneFishUK
GamePlayer wrote:
dunaddict wrote:a few questions:

for those of you that did NOT read the prequels:
- would you consider reading the prequels if there's proof the notes are real and used in the preqs?


No. From the moment KJA typed the first random collection of words under the guise of Dune, the infamous "Herbert notes" became totally irrelevant. Even if the notes existed, the significance of the notes would have been drowned in a sea of trash novels. Now that a ridiculous number of books have been released, it's clear the notes played no part in their creation, since the concepts included in such notes could never have sustained this many books. Perhaps one or two books could have been formed from the notes, but not six and certainly not ten. How do we know? Because Frank spent his entire life writing six and whatever he had in mind for a seventh book could not go much farther beyond that. Frank would had to have lived another 50 years to create enough material for six more books, let alone 10 more.

But we don't need the notes nor are we required to confirm their existence to know the prequels contain no Frank Herbert; one look at the subject matter of the books instantly tells any learned adult that the ideas for the prequels did not come from Frank Herbert. They came from Terminator, Watchmen, or any of a thousand other plundered works.

If the Frank Herbert notes DON'T exist, that explains why the prequels are awful books.

If the Frank Herbert notes exist, then they've been misinterpreted by two people that don't understand the slightest thing about Dune.


QFT - My attempt wasn't as good as this, but said the same thing in the end :P

The notes have been disfigured in the same way Asimov's I, Robot was corrupted from a book about robots into a ridiculous action film that bore no resemblance to the source material, save the name.

IRC Robot was originally written as a completely 'original' film, but then adapted towards Asimov's stories (adding in the 3 laws et al). Come to think of it though... that might be what the hacks are doing. :?

Posted: 06 Dec 2008 18:08
by dunaddict
The credits say 'suggested by Isaac Asimov' instead of the usual 'based on a book by'. I thought it was an ok movie, but it has nothing to do with the original stories. A shame.

'Bicentennial Man' was a much better Asimov-adaptation. But they invented a very important part of the plot. I hate it when these screenwriters think they know better than the original author. In the DVD-audiocommentaries they always defend themselves saying 'the book wouldn't work on the screen' or another lame excuse. If you know better, come up with your own story then, and stop raping those books.... :roll:

Posted: 06 Dec 2008 18:30
by Mandy
dunaddict wrote:
for those of you that did NOT read the prequels:
- would you consider reading the prequels if there's proof the notes are real and used in the preqs?


The notes (or lack thereof) had nothing to do with my decision not to read the prequels or sequels. It didn't really even have anything to do with the authors, except for the fact that they were not Frank Herbert. About 6yrs ago I was in a B&N bookstore specifically to buy new copies of the Dune series and I noticed House Corrino (I think) on the shelf alongside Dune. I picked it up, read the back, set it back on the shelf, and forgot about it.. I didn't want to waste my time reading something written by someone else in my Dune universe.

Posted: 06 Dec 2008 20:28
by DuneFishUK
dunaddict wrote:The credits say 'suggested by Isaac Asimov' instead of the usual 'based on a book by'. I thought it was an ok movie, but it has nothing to do with the original stories. A shame.

'Bicentennial Man' was a much better Asimov-adaptation. But they invented a very important part of the plot. I hate it when these screenwriters think they know better than the original author. In the DVD-audiocommentaries they always defend themselves saying 'the book wouldn't work on the screen' or another lame excuse. If you know better, come up with your own story then, and stop raping those books.... :roll:


Adaptation is a necessary evil - film and book are completely different media which have entirely different strengths. Books can really get inside a character, where as film is dumb... but can convey complex visual elements far more impressively. I love wordy films... but IMHO it is perfectly correct that a good film uses the elements that makes film good to be a good film.

In relation to nu-Dune I don't think I'd have a problem with new authors creating an entirely new and individual take on the Duniverse. There's a lot of scope for them to take themes and motifs and create something brilliant and individual. Unfortunately this standpoint CANNOT be applied to the actual new books. At least I Robot was entertaining....

Posted: 06 Dec 2008 20:37
by SandChigger
Not much left to add. ;)

The forcible insertion of their own "ideas" and characters (like Omnius and Erasmus and the expanded Norma) with very little lubricant virtually proves that there wasn't enough in the FH Notes to complete even that one or two books that someone mentioned above.

They had the House books "brainstormed" and planned out before they supposedly received the news of the safety deposit boxes and "Dune 7" outline or found the boxes and boxes of materials in Brian's garage attic. I figure that they simply grafted some ideas from what they found onto what they had already decided to write.

If no notes exist, what they have written is seriously inferior fanfiction marketed using a lie.

Even if notes do exist and they referred to them, their "filling in" of "gaps" with their own fecal material means that the result is not what Frank Herbert planned or ever would have written. So again, it's inferior fanfic.

And even if they had followed FH's Notes exactly and had added nothing of their own, they are not and never will be the writer that Frank Herbert was, so their books are automatically inferior.

(Hmm...this was going to be brief. ;) )

Posted: 06 Dec 2008 21:40
by Seraphan
dunaddict wrote:for those of you that did NOT read the prequels:
- would you consider reading the prequels if there's proof the notes are real and used in the preqs?

Like it was previously said, even if such notes existed the authors still failed to interpret them, this certainty is given through the fact of how they ignored/reversed Frank Herbert's ideas i.e. the scattering (of mankind's problem of depending on a specific natural resourse, giving away their decision making to charismatic leaders, along with other ideas). It is this total incomprehension of everything that Frank wrote and said that sets these authors as nothing but a pair of liars set on making money from exploring the stupidity of gullible people.
It is, in my view, a crime against literacy and art commited by a hack writer that is incapable of even understanding, or recognizing, any thematical content in the Frankenstein novel by Mary Shelley.
And still he continues to say that what he "does" is Dune while accusing fans of Frank of not understanding his novels. His arrogance and blatant cynicism are the manifestation of his wounded ego that searches to be recognized as some sort of artist. Fat chance :twisted:

Posted: 07 Dec 2008 01:17
by SandChigger
(He might have a chance as a fat artist? All that hiking and still...???)

Posted: 07 Dec 2008 06:09
by Seraphan
SandChigger wrote:(He might have a chance as a fat artist? All that hiking and still...???)

Fat? Yes. Artist? Not in a million years. He may mould his shit into pretty shapes but it's still shit.

Posted: 07 Dec 2008 07:38
by dunaddict
Seraphan wrote:Fat? Yes. Artist? Not in a million years.


How can you say that? KJA is the greatest con artist who ever lived.

Posted: 07 Dec 2008 11:07
by Tleszer
dunaddict wrote:
Seraphan wrote:Fat? Yes. Artist? Not in a million years.


How can you say that? KJA is the greatest con artist who ever lived.


Again, con yes. Artist no.

Posted: 07 Dec 2008 11:28
by Seraphan
Tleszer wrote:
dunaddict wrote:
Seraphan wrote:Fat? Yes. Artist? Not in a million years.


How can you say that? KJA is the greatest con artist who ever lived.


Again, con yes. Artist no.

And he's a failed con at that 'cause he cant even maintain consistency in his own bullshit. He doesnt fool anyone 'cept for the zombies that dwell in that decadent wasteland called DN.

(Speaking of Wasteland. Any fans of Fallout? The PC games.)

Posted: 07 Dec 2008 12:00
by Nekhrun
I haven't read all of the posts in this latest round of discussion, but I will say that just because FH put something in his notes it doesn't mean that even he would've used it. The hacks are probably throwing in every single scrap of shit he wrote down even if it would've ended up in the shredder at some point. They're shitty writers and it doesn't matter what notes they use, they'll turn it to garbage anyway.

Posted: 07 Dec 2008 12:29
by dunaddict
Seraphan wrote:(Speaking of Wasteland. Any fans of Fallout? The PC games.)

War. war never changes...

I'm known in the wasteland as 'the last best hope of humanity'.
Still haven't finished Fallout 1 (and 2) though. Maybe after I destroyed megaton in an Evil campaign.

Posted: 07 Dec 2008 12:58
by TheDukester
Nekhrun wrote:I haven't read all of the posts in this latest round of discussion, but I will say that just because FH put something in his notes it doesn't mean that even he would've used it.

Great point.

Some details about these alleged "notes" would be interesting. Were they scribblings and doodlings, or were they more of an outline? Were they just about Dune, or were there other items included? Was FH known as a note-taker? Was he known to use every idea he ever wrote down? And was he a "saver": someone, who, out of habit, tended to save pretty much everything that came into his life?

So little is actually known about these so-called notes ... which is mighty convenient if you are a snake-oil salesman called Kevin J. Hackerson. For all anyone really knows, they were found in a file clearly labeled "discarded ideas."