Page 2 of 2

Re: "Paul is a weakling and a coward"

Posted: 12 Nov 2009 19:19
by Freakzilla
A Thing of Eternity wrote:Still should have been blocked by Paul's prescience, remember even Paul was blocked by a mere navagator.


I wouldn't say "blocked". "Mere" either. Prescients conceal those that share their goals. The don't totally block the other's prescience.

Re: "Paul is a weakling and a coward"

Posted: 13 Nov 2009 01:52
by A Thing of Eternity
Freakzilla wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:Still should have been blocked by Paul's prescience, remember even Paul was blocked by a mere navagator.


I wouldn't say "blocked". "Mere" either. Prescients conceal those that share their goals. The don't totally block the other's prescience.


In this conext I think "mere" is appropriate, I was contrasting a navigator's ability to conceal/block/insert semantics things from the KH to the BT KH being able to see Paul. If Paul couldn't see a navigator in his visions, then the BTKH certainly wouldn't be able to see Paul. I didn't mean that a nav's abilities were insignificant, but in comparison to Paul...

Re: "Paul is a weakling and a coward"

Posted: 13 Nov 2009 05:44
by Anathema
Idahopotato wrote:
Freakzilla wrote:My bad, it was Tandis who first told Paul he had twins and it was Harah who asked if he was truely blind.

When Hayt heard of Chani's death, that was the instant his programming to kill Paul kicked in and didn't say much after that until his memories were restored.


Along that topic, Hayt's programming was such that when Paul uttered the phrase "she's gone" it would kick in. How did the BT know that he would say that? It seems like a rather large gamble placing all your hopes on a phrase that may or may not come.


I forgot, did Bijaz condition Hayt to react at those exact words or just at the moment at wich Paul realizes Chani's dead?

I assume the former...
The simplest (and rather crappy) explanation was that it was a good bet that Paul would say those words at some point after Chani dying.
Another would be that the Tleilaxu assumed correctly that Paul's vision would reveal to him how to trigger Hayt's compulsion and what its effect would be.
And yet another one...nevermind, I'm out for the moment.

Re: "Paul is a weakling and a coward"

Posted: 13 Nov 2009 06:18
by Redstar
Maybe the words were written down in one of the various historical documents written on Paul, and the Bene Tleilax learned of it from prescient vision coming from Bijaz or Guild-connections. Since the events leading up to the event of him actually saying those words would have to be so specific, then it's likely there were different trigger words for different possible futures.

Re: "Paul is a weakling and a coward"

Posted: 13 Nov 2009 13:08
by Freakzilla
A Thing of Eternity wrote:
Freakzilla wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:Still should have been blocked by Paul's prescience, remember even Paul was blocked by a mere navagator.


I wouldn't say "blocked". "Mere" either. Prescients conceal those that share their goals. The don't totally block the other's prescience.


In this conext I think "mere" is appropriate, I was contrasting a navigator's ability to conceal/block/insert semantics things from the KH to the BT KH being able to see Paul. If Paul couldn't see a navigator in his visions, then the BTKH certainly wouldn't be able to see Paul. I didn't mean that a nav's abilities were insignificant, but in comparison to Paul...


You're assuming the BTKH was prescient. Nothing in the books even suggests that. The BTKH was an experiment in pure essences.

Re: "Paul is a weakling and a coward"

Posted: 13 Nov 2009 13:11
by Freakzilla
Anathema wrote:
Idahopotato wrote:
Freakzilla wrote:My bad, it was Tandis who first told Paul he had twins and it was Harah who asked if he was truely blind.

When Hayt heard of Chani's death, that was the instant his programming to kill Paul kicked in and didn't say much after that until his memories were restored.


Along that topic, Hayt's programming was such that when Paul uttered the phrase "she's gone" it would kick in. How did the BT know that he would say that? It seems like a rather large gamble placing all your hopes on a phrase that may or may not come.


I forgot, did Bijaz condition Hayt to react at those exact words or just at the moment at wich Paul realizes Chani's dead?

I assume the former...
The simplest (and rather crappy) explanation was that it was a good bet that Paul would say those words at some point after Chani dying.
Another would be that the Tleilaxu assumed correctly that Paul's vision would reveal to him how to trigger Hayt's compulsion and what its effect would be.
And yet another one...nevermind, I'm out for the moment.


"One day," Bijaz said, "the Emperor will come to you. He will say: 'She is
gone.' The grief mask will occupy his face. He will give water to the dead, as
they call their tears hereabouts. And you will say, using my voice: 'Master! Oh,
Master!' "

Re: "Paul is a weakling and a coward"

Posted: 13 Nov 2009 13:20
by A Thing of Eternity
Freakzilla wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:
Freakzilla wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:Still should have been blocked by Paul's prescience, remember even Paul was blocked by a mere navagator.


I wouldn't say "blocked". "Mere" either. Prescients conceal those that share their goals. The don't totally block the other's prescience.


In this conext I think "mere" is appropriate, I was contrasting a navigator's ability to conceal/block/insert semantics things from the KH to the BT KH being able to see Paul. If Paul couldn't see a navigator in his visions, then the BTKH certainly wouldn't be able to see Paul. I didn't mean that a nav's abilities were insignificant, but in comparison to Paul...


You're assuming the BTKH was prescient. Nothing in the books even suggests that. The BTKH was an experiment in pure essences.


Good point, but that actually just backs up my point that they couldn't have gotten the info from the BTKH, which is what I was responding to someone.

Re: "Paul is a weakling and a coward"

Posted: 22 Nov 2009 10:29
by The_Kat
Redstar wrote:
lexus wrote:I loved the first book. Because it had a clear end. It should have stopped there.




Got to admit, i came to dune through the film at the age of 12. I spent a few years thinking like this guy, appart from i did understanding most of the plot. I thought the sequels robbed the first book, unlike Frank Herbert i was all for the idea as paul as a superman, and the latter books introduce/show paul as flawed and working within the boundaries set for him by his vision.

Now however i totally agree with Frank the flawed(failed) superman and further the ultimate Despot (Leto II) revealed to be paying the ultimate price. Is much more interesting.

Re: "Paul is a weakling and a coward"

Posted: 26 Aug 2014 12:08
by georgiedenbro
Freakzilla wrote:
Serkanner wrote:
Freakzilla wrote:
inhuien wrote:
Freakzilla wrote:Paul saw the Golden Path but never saw the extinction of humanity.

"I cannot lie to you any more than I could lie to myself," Paul said. "I
know this. Every man should have such an auditor. I will only ask this one
thing: is the Typhoon Struggle necessary?"
"It's that or humans will be extinguished."
Paul heard the truth in Leto's words, spoke in a low voice which
acknowledged the greater breadth of his son's vision. "I did not see that among
the choices."

~CoD

So to him, the Golden Path was just an extremely cruel lesson.
So he only so the cause not the effect as it were, I wonderful if it took the preborn to perceive it's fullness. And re preventing the Second Jihad, IIRC the only possibility for that was when the Fremen troop were returning to Sietch Tabr, or was is it Cave of Birds, for the first time and it required the death of everyone whom was there.


I think you're right about it being Cave of Bird and yes, the whole troup would have had to die for word of the messiah not to get out.

Leto's prescience was orders of magnitude greater than Paul's it seems. Either Paul chose not to look or couldn't. However, the extinction would have occured before the time of Leto's death so your guess is as good as mine. Could Paul see 3,500 years into the future? There're no accounts of him looking even remotely that far into the future.


Wouldn't it be logical to assume Paul couldn't see any further then Leto's birth at all? Prescience clouded by an even greater oracle?


No, He just didn't see Leto. His Vision wasn't completely blinded until Leto was born and Duncan told him about it.


Isn't this the point? Leto II was invisible to Paul prior to his birth by the fact that Leto II would become an oracle. I'm becoming fairly certain that an oracle's presence is masked even before he's alive. Your argument that Leto II's power may have been orders of magnitudes greater than Paul's could be supported by the fact that the instant Leto II is born Paul becomes blind. Assuming their goals were similar, Leto II's vision would completely blanket out Paul's and the control would now be in Leto II's hands. I don't think Paul's blindness was caused by any choice of his...I think he realized when Leto II was born that his blindness was caused by Leto II taking control of the visions, and that he was finally relieved of it. Consider that a prescient can shield an area around him from being viewed. Now consider that Leto II's 'area' might have been the known universe, and that he could blanket everything from being seen if he so chose. Might this not be possible?

But once we assume that Leto II himself was the cause of Paul losing his prescience, we might realize why Paul didn't see the need for the Golden Path: maybe that course was hidden from him by Leto II himself. Maybe that path's existence was only created when Leto II was born in the first place. Prior to Leto II there might actually have been no need for the Golden Path as other than a cruel lesson, but since Leto II was willing to teach that lesson, it therefore would lead to the events that Leto II would need to prevent through that path. No Leto II might mean no need for the Golden Path as anything other than a cruel lesson.

Leto II does say the following to Paul:

Children of Dune wrote:"I spit on your lesson!" Paul said. "You think I've not seen a thing similar to what you choose?"
"You saw it," Leto agreed.
"Is your vision any better than mine?"
"Not one whit better. Worse, perhaps," Leto said.


I don't think Leto II is being falsely humble. I think this somewhat proves that the vision of the Golden Path as Leto II saw it could only exist when seen by Leto II, as a result of the things Leto II would choose to do. Leto II made both the Golden Path but also the need for it. Recall that the only proof we have that the extinction would have happened is by Leto II's word. We believe him, and yet we wonder whether he was responsible for it in the first place. Paul would never have done the Golden Path, and therefore that particular extinction might not have ever come to pass under his rule. On this ground I would say it's not at all fair to call Paul a coward. Being willing to walk away from one's empire, family, birthright, powers, and everything else just to try to make the best future for all - this is real heroism. Refusing to be a grand figure, that is real nobility. I think Paul is really the opposite of a coward, he's the most courageous personality in all the books. It takes courage to hate that which is terrible, to fear it. Lacking fear of terrible things - this isn't courage, it's sociopathy, a trait the Harkonnens had.

Re: "Paul is a weakling and a coward"

Posted: 26 Aug 2014 12:52
by MuaB'Beep
Resurrection of a necro topic :wink: .

Actually I believe that whole trilogy (D+DM+CoD) were created as a one continuous piece to single the Frank Herbert political view - the human folly of following a charismatic leader. I remember in one interview he mentioned how dangerous was Kennedy compared to Nixon. Kennedy was a charming, flawless leader whom rallied masses and Nixon was ugly, unsympathetic crook with everyone double checking him because of that.

In the first book Paul is leading a rebellion, which he thinks is justified and wins. In the second book he loses control of what he unleashed. In the third book he is broken and only a literally monster - his son can scramble the mess that the old empire become and ultimately leading the humanity to hunger and scattering after his death.

Did actually anyone in the old empire became better after Paul crusade? He destroyed millennium working political structures, initiated perpetual genocide that couldn't be stopped until last of his enemy would drop dead. If there is a strong leader there is a structure growing around him - much more potent than himself made from forces beyond his control. Without the leader the structure crumbles burying everyone close to him. The stronger Paul grew the more fragile his empire became - dependent on the will of one man. Corrino empire survived millenia because how self-balancing it was - without the golden path which was a necessity the Atreides Empire wouldn't survive Alia regency.

Re: "Paul is a weakling and a coward"

Posted: 26 Aug 2014 13:07
by D Pope
Corrino empire survived millenia because how self-balancing it was - without the golden path which was a necessity the Atreides Empire wouldn't survive Alia regency.

But for the Golden Path, how would the empire have ended?

Re: "Paul is a weakling and a coward"

Posted: 28 Aug 2014 10:02
by Freakzilla
The ecological transformation would have proceeded, the worms would die, the Guild would die and all the planets would become isolated islands.

Re: "Paul is a weakling and a coward"

Posted: 28 Aug 2014 10:08
by D Pope
Without the spice yeah...
I thought there was a more immediate threat. Leto II told Siona that without his
becoming the Emperor, humanity would already have been extinct. Wasn't there
a hint here at Jac about autonomous hunter seekers?
(maybe that was a hack thread.)

Re: "Paul is a weakling and a coward"

Posted: 28 Aug 2014 11:16
by Freakzilla
True, but if interstellar travel broke down before that how would they get from planet to planet?

Re: "Paul is a weakling and a coward"

Posted: 28 Aug 2014 11:28
by georgiedenbro
GEoD wrote:"The lxians contemplated making a weapon-a type of hunter-seeker, self-propelled
death with a machine mind. It was to be designed as a self improving thing which
would seek out life and reduce that life to its inorganic matter."
"I have not heard of this thing, Lord."
"I know that. The lxians do not recognize that machine makers always run the
risk of becoming totally machine. This is ultimate sterility. Machines always
fail . . . given time. And when these machines failed there would be nothing
left, no life at all."


I think Freak is saying that the hunter-seeker threat was sometime during Leto II's reign, and that the spice production would have stopped prior to that. We don't really know how many centuries of stockpiles the factions had, mind you.

The one thing I wonder about is whether the climate change on Arrakis was really irrevocable. Since Leto II mentions that the sandtrout were brought to Arrakis and turned it to desert, might we not assume that if climatological activities by humans were halted the sandtrout would eventually just reduce the place to a full desert again? Assuming no water had been imported from off-planet, the ecological balance pre-Pardot could presumably have been restored before the worms died out.

Re: "Paul is a weakling and a coward"

Posted: 28 Aug 2014 12:20
by MuaB'Beep
D Pope wrote:
Corrino empire survived millenia because how self-balancing it was - without the golden path which was a necessity the Atreides Empire wouldn't survive Alia regency.

But for the Golden Path, how would the empire have ended?


No empire would survive without creating synthetic spice and AI navigator.

I think that in original Frank Herbert just thought about certain fragility that the empire and all possible other transtellar state entities based on spice and navigators talent in order to expand. If something happened to Dune spice production or the guild then any posibility for humanity to expand was dead. I could only think about the time when he wrote original six about relation of the western world on OPEC oil. I think he even compared CHOAM to OPEC during one speech.

I haven't read the 8th and 9th books by KJA and Bobo yet (so I don't know about those hunter seekers) - but if Marty and Daniel are Omnious and Erasmus from Butlerian Jihad I would just throw up. I always thought those two were just Bev and Frank breaking the fourth wall!

Re: "Paul is a weakling and a coward"

Posted: 28 Aug 2014 13:13
by Freakzilla
georgiedenbro wrote:
GEoD wrote:"The lxians contemplated making a weapon-a type of hunter-seeker, self-propelled
death with a machine mind. It was to be designed as a self improving thing which
would seek out life and reduce that life to its inorganic matter."
"I have not heard of this thing, Lord."
"I know that. The lxians do not recognize that machine makers always run the
risk of becoming totally machine. This is ultimate sterility. Machines always
fail . . . given time. And when these machines failed there would be nothing
left, no life at all."


I think Freak is saying that the hunter-seeker threat was sometime during Leto II's reign, and that the spice production would have stopped prior to that. We don't really know how many centuries of stockpiles the factions had, mind you.


That's true, but unless they came up with another way to produce spice or a navigation machine, the clock would be ticking.

The one thing I wonder about is whether the climate change on Arrakis was really irrevocable. Since Leto II mentions that the sandtrout were brought to Arrakis and turned it to desert, might we not assume that if climatological activities by humans were halted the sandtrout would eventually just reduce the place to a full desert again? Assuming no water had been imported from off-planet, the ecological balance pre-Pardot could presumably have been restored before the worms died out.


Alia, possessed by the Baron, what hell bent on destroying the spice cycle by means of ecological transformation. If something stopped her I don't see why it couldn't go back to being desert as long as the cycle hadn't completely stopped yet.

Re: "Paul is a weakling and a coward"

Posted: 28 Aug 2014 13:14
by Freakzilla
MuaB'Beep wrote:I haven't read the 8th and 9th books by KJA and Bobo yet (so I don't know about those hunter seekers) - but if Marty and Daniel are Omnious and Erasmus from Butlerian Jihad I would just throw up. I always thought those two were just Bev and Frank breaking the fourth wall!


We don't discuss the prequels/sequels in Dune forums here. :naughty:

Re: "Paul is a weakling and a coward"

Posted: 28 Aug 2014 16:16
by Naib
Freakzilla wrote:
MuaB'Beep wrote:I haven't read the 8th and 9th books by KJA and Bobo yet (so I don't know about those hunter seekers) - but if Marty and Daniel are Omnious and Erasmus from Butlerian Jihad I would just throw up. I always thought those two were just Bev and Frank breaking the fourth wall!


We don't discuss the prequels/sequels in Dune forums here. :naughty:


Discuss? I prefer to disbelieve.

Re: "Paul is a weakling and a coward"

Posted: 29 Aug 2014 00:33
by SandRider
MuaB'Beep wrote:I haven't read the 8th and 9th books by KJA and Bobo yet (so I don't know about those hunter seekers) - but if Marty and Daniel are Omnious and Erasmus from Butlerian Jihad I would just throw up. I always thought those two were just Bev and Frank breaking the fourth wall!


:vomit:

Re: "Paul is a weakling and a coward"

Posted: 29 Aug 2014 04:26
by MuaB'Beep
SandRider wrote:
MuaB'Beep wrote:I haven't read the 8th and 9th books by KJA and Bobo yet (so I don't know about those hunter seekers) - but if Marty and Daniel are Omnious and Erasmus from Butlerian Jihad I would just throw up. I always thought those two were just Bev and Frank breaking the fourth wall!


:vomit:


oh no... :tissue2: