Jihadicus

Image
    Can't find the appropriate forum for your topic? Post it here!

Moderators: ᴶᵛᵀᴬ, Omphalos, Freakzilla

Streaksy
Posts: 87
Joined: 13 Sep 2011 23:13

Jihadicus

Postby Streaksy » 28 Oct 2012 18:26

Hi. Haven't posted for a few months. Even though I'm reading all the original Dune books again and keep thinking of stuff I want to say but I hold back, else I would go on for days.

So, just food for thought, really, with a couple of questions. I get the impression that FH got hung up on the whole "but revolution will lead to just another corrupt government soon enough" thing after Muad'Dib dispensed with Corporal Shaddam VII in The Battle of Alkaline. Especially since Dune Messiah brought all that in to focus.

And... he needed a reason for the path of the Attreides to remain worth-it, else the awesome ending of Dune would be a sad ending, ultimately.

So... a good way to take it is that the chaos was the only path that didn't end in extinction.

First question.... am I right about that?

Second question... if it wasn't for Dune Messiah, which he maybe wrote while occupied with thoughts of naive corruptabilty of romantic revolutions that never actually expected to win, would the jihad and human extinction stuff not be needed? I mean, it's really good. I love how the scope just keeps on increasing. It continues the amazing tension and sense of struggle and justice from the very first Dune - probably via the behaviour of strong well-meaning characters. It's just that the ending of Dune used to be SO satisfying, and only still is if you don't think ahead to what soon follows. The bleak "Irulan's life is gonna suck" ending sort of sets the tone for grim nessecity and intrigue and stuff, and gives you the sense that this is just the beginning. I suppose what I'm asking is do you think FH took it down the "the nasty Golden Path is nessecary" road because he felt he had to, because he felt revolutions becoming romanticised was something people should be aware of - or rather it was a truth he felt was nessecary (he seemed to love finding truth)? I dunno. I just think theres some interesting stuff to think about here.

Chhheeeeers, like.
Last edited by Streaksy on 28 Oct 2012 18:50, edited 3 times in total.

Streaksy
Posts: 87
Joined: 13 Sep 2011 23:13

Re: Jihadicus

Postby Streaksy » 28 Oct 2012 18:30

And I AM right that The Golden Path is a mixture of chaos and enforced stagnation that leads to more chaos..?

User avatar
Freakzilla
Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
Posts: 18133
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Re: Jihadicus

Postby Freakzilla » 29 Oct 2012 06:27

Streaksy wrote:Hi. Haven't posted for a few months. Even though I'm reading all the original Dune books again and keep thinking of stuff I want to say but I hold back, else I would go on for days.

So, just food for thought, really, with a couple of questions. I get the impression that FH got hung up on the whole "but revolution will lead to just another corrupt government soon enough" thing after Muad'Dib dispensed with Corporal


You saying he dispensed with his body or that he was a non-commissioned officer?

Shaddam VII


IV?

in The Battle of Alkaline.


Battle of what?

Especially since Dune Messiah brought all that in to focus.


If you say so...

And... he needed a reason for the path of the Attreides to remain worth-it, else the awesome ending of Dune would be a sad ending, ultimately.

So... a good way to take it is that the chaos was the only path that didn't end in extinction.

First question.... am I right about that?


Paul never saw extinction as a possibility.

Second question... if it wasn't for Dune Messiah, which he maybe wrote while occupied with thoughts of naive corruptabilty of romantic revolutions that never actually expected to win, would the jihad and human extinction stuff not be needed? I mean, it's really good. I love how the scope just keeps on increasing. It continues the amazing tension and sense of struggle and justice from the very first Dune - probably via the behaviour of strong well-meaning characters. It's just that the ending of Dune used to be SO satisfying, and only still is if you don't think ahead to what soon follows. The bleak "Irulan's life is gonna suck" ending sort of sets the tone for grim nessecity and intrigue and stuff, and gives you the sense that this is just the beginning. I suppose what I'm asking is do you think FH took it down the "the nasty Golden Path is nessecary" road because he felt he had to, because he felt revolutions becoming romanticised was something people should be aware of - or rather it was a truth he felt was nessecary (he seemed to love finding truth)? I dunno. I just think theres some interesting stuff to think about here.

Chhheeeeers, like.



I'm pretty sure I don't understand your question, but the point of Dune Messiah was to destroy Paul.
Image
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman

Streaksy
Posts: 87
Joined: 13 Sep 2011 23:13

Re: Jihadicus

Postby Streaksy » 29 Oct 2012 06:39

You really didn't understand my question. :P Infact the quote replies were like you misunderstood every sentence I typed.

Battle of Arrakeen. I know it's not VII. I'm being light-hearted and fun.

I'll rephrase it all in summary.

I think FRANK HERBERT took the series down the route of the Fremen's Jihad maybe because FRANK HERBERT felt that the chaos that follows idealistic and unprepared revolution was a truth he had he couldn't deny. So then FRANK HERBERT had to come up with some greater-good for the post-Dune chaos and Fremen lunacy, so the ending of Dune wouldn't become just a pointless and unjust tragedy for the universe. There had to be good reason for it else the Attreides would be a force of badness (and the Attreides' ultimate progress is the spice of the whole series - at least the first 4 books), and he had to step back and increase the scope to find this reason for the broken dreams of the Fremen turning out to be a good thing for the universe. That's what I'm saying. Nessecity is the center of the Dune series. (It's so great)

And when I asked if I was right about what I said, I attempted to verify my understanding that LETO II's Golden Path was chaos and enforced stagnation that will lead to more chaos with the intent to cosmically sidestep human extinction. Once in a while in God Emperor (which I'm in the middle of) there's some comment from FRANK HERBERT that makes me wonder if I've misunderstood the whole thing.

And when FRANK HERBERT "destroyed PAUL" in Messiah, I think FRANK HERBERT subconciously linked martyrdom and sacrifice with a kind of glory, like self-sacrifice is the ultimate act of heroism, if you know what I mean. But that's another topic.
Last edited by Streaksy on 29 Oct 2012 06:53, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Freakzilla
Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
Posts: 18133
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Re: Jihadicus

Postby Freakzilla » 29 Oct 2012 06:52

Streaksy wrote:You really didn't understand my question. :P Infact the quote replies were like you misunderstood every sentence I typed.

Battle of Arrakeen. I know it's not VII. I'm being light-hearted and fun.


Sorry, you caught me before I finished my first cup of coffee...

I'll rephrase it all in summary.

I think when FRANK HERBERT took the series down the route of the Fremen's Jihad, it was because he felt it was a revelation about idealistic and unprepared revolution that he couldn't deny, so had to come up with some greater-good for it, so the ending of Dune wouldn't become just a pointless and unjust tragedy for the universe.


How was the ending of Dune unjust and tragic? Evil was punished and Paul became emperor, I thought it was a happy ending. "High camp" as FH put it.

There had to be good reason for it else the Attreides would be a force of badness (and the Attreides' ultimate progress is the spice of the whole series - at least the first 4 books), and he had to step back and increase the scope to find one. That's what I'm saying.


Muad'dib's Jihad was a result of the stagnation of the Empire, a desire of the human race consciousness for a wild, intermingling of genes. There was nothing Paul could have done to stop it once he joined the Fremen.

And I also attempted to verify my understanding that LETO II's Golden Path was chaos and enforced stagnation that will lead to more chaos with the intent to cosmically sidestep human extinction....?


The Golden Path was survival of the human race, allthough not chaos. It was enforced tranquility.

And when FRANK HERBERT "destroyed PAUL" in Messiah, I think FRANK HERBERT subconciously linked martyrdom and sacrifice with a kind of glory, if you know what I mean. But that's another topic.


I don't think it was subconscioius at all.
Image
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman

Streaksy
Posts: 87
Joined: 13 Sep 2011 23:13

Re: Jihadicus

Postby Streaksy » 29 Oct 2012 06:59

Happy ending? It led to the Fremen going on a rampage accross the known universe, a plot that would kill Chani, the reign of Leto II and therefore the scattering and the Honoured Matres (I read the series once like a decade ago and remember them).

My point is, before Dune Messiah happened, the ending of Dune WAS happy. But Dune Messiah was incredibly bleak and shows that the idealistic victory in Dune immediately led to a lot of ruin and set events that would lead to even more in ruin in motion.

SO, Frank Herbert had to make all that bad stuff lead to something better than how it all started - the survival of humanity. If Paul hadn't Kwizatz Hadarach'd the Emperor's crown off and then humanity would have never been put on the path to surviving the next 10,000 years.

its like, the Jihad stuff after Dune was horrible, but only set the scene for an even more glorious victory-through-epic-sacrifice. See what I'm getting at?

Half trying to get people thinking, and half trying to confirm that I understood what the Golden Path was. :P
Last edited by Streaksy on 29 Oct 2012 07:10, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Freakzilla
Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
Posts: 18133
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Re: Jihadicus

Postby Freakzilla » 29 Oct 2012 07:10

Streaksy wrote:Happy ending? It led to the Fremen going on a rampage accross the known universe, a plot that would kill Chani, the reign of Leto II and therefore the scattering and the Honoured Matres (I read the series once like a decade ago and remember them).


None of that happened at the end of Dune. Those events happened in the following books.

My point is, before Dune Messiah happened, the ending of Dune WAS happy. But Dune Messiah was incredibly bleak and shows that the idealistic victory in Dune immediately led to a lot of ruin and set even more in ruin.

SO, Frank Herbert had to make all that bad stuff lead to something better than how it all started - the survival of humanity. If Paul hadn't Kwizatz Hadarach'd the Emperor's crown off and then humanity would have never been put on the path to surviving the next 10,000 years.

its like, the Jihad stuff after Dune was horrible, but only set the scene for an even more glorious victory-through-epic-sacrifice. See what I'm getting at?

Half trying to get people thinking, and half trying to confirm that I understood what the Golden Path was. :P


At the end of Dune we all knew there would be a jihad but didn't know how bad it would be and that Paul would do everything he could to stop it or alieviate it's effects. DM showed how powerless Paul was to do anything about it and destroyed the hero mystique build up around Paul. Children of Dune was the tale of Paul unwillingly turning over his vision-trapped future to his son's greater plan.

And I think the answer to your question is, yes. FH had portions of the first three books planned before writing them.
Image
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman

Streaksy
Posts: 87
Joined: 13 Sep 2011 23:13

Re: Jihadicus

Postby Streaksy » 29 Oct 2012 07:21

"None of that happened at the end of Dune. Those events happened in the following books."

WTF?????? Obviously. I didn't say it did. I'm getting confused as to what you think is going on. Just because it didn't happen at the end of Dune doesn't mean the end of Dune would be anticlimatic when you learn what happens next. Without then finding out it all leads to somethign good, I mean. Seen Hostel? Very satisfying ending. A dude gets some revenge. Then in Hostel 2 (a horrible cheap sequel) he gets killed at the start just to set the pathetic scene. It RETROACTIVELY ruined the ending of the first one. It's like that. If there wasn't a good reason for the horrible stuff that happened after Dune, the ending of Dune would be ruined.

And sometimes it seems like he didn't plan so much bleakness when he was completing Dune. I think the idea for the slaughter and chaos came BEFORE the idea for the survival of humanity. I even think early mentions of "the golden path" might just be vague references to "something that will make it all work out somehow".


At the end of Dune, I got the impression that, yes, the Jihad was on the cards, and his next struggle was going to be to pick among futures to try and avoid it. Which is what Messiah was about, essentially.

I often get distracted while I'm reading, wondering how much of it WAS planned ahead. Like, while writing the end of Dune was he already looking ahead to the disillusioned Fremen and the universe blaming him for the Fremen rampage? I suppose I try to figure it out because I like to have the best idea as possible as to what Frank was trying to communicate, because it would be interesting if it's not what I'm getting out of it. Dune is like the only series I've read that I can even ask that about because it doesn't spoon-feed you and cue all your reactions.

And the problem for me is I read them quite young. I understood it but wasn't 100% that I GOT it. I'm reading it all again (I'm 32) and it's how I remember so far, but, like, it's difficult to put all the pieces together in to one whole picture sometimes, because a lot of the facts are still ingrained from a time I wasn't so trusting of my judgement.

So, yeah, that's basically the motivation for this thread. If you say he planned ahead, that sort of ends the discussion if you're right. How sure are you? ;/
Last edited by Streaksy on 29 Oct 2012 07:27, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
lotek
Posts: 5735
Joined: 28 Jul 2009 08:33

Re: Jihadicus

Postby lotek » 29 Oct 2012 07:24

Streaksy wrote:Happy ending? It led to the Fremen going on a rampage accross the known universe, a plot that would kill Chani, the reign of Leto II and therefore the scattering and the Honoured Matres (I read the series once like a decade ago and remember them).
Yeah, so the ending was the one you'd expect from adventure space operas, the good guy triumphs, avenges his father and gets the throne. Whatever happended afterwards is for later, as in it hasn't happened yet.
My point is, before Dune Messiah happened, the ending of Dune WAS happy. But Dune Messiah was incredibly bleak and shows that the idealistic victory in Dune immediately led to a lot of ruin and set even more in ruin.
The ending is still happy even after Dune Messiah happened, it doesn't change anything now does it? The whole point of DM is to deconstuct the hero myth, to make you feel like Paul is not so much in control as he looked like at the end of Dune. Which explains why you feel so shocked by his downfall. I believe it's the point.
SO, Frank Herbert had to make all that bad stuff lead to something better than how it all started - the survival of humanity. If Paul hadn't Kwizatz Hadarach'd the Emperor's crown off and then humanity would have never been put on the path to surviving the next 10,000 years.
I think the way you look at the 4th wall is at best confused. What happens in a story can't be blamed on who writes it to explain events that happen inside that story. What you say here could be applied to anything, if [x] hadn't to [y] yo [z] there would be no Dune. Hell if Frank hadn't been interested in receding sand dunes there would be no Paul.
If Paul hadn't done what he did, someone else would have, until humanity survived, and if not then well...

its like, the Jihad stuff after Dune was horrible, but only set the scene for an even more glorious victory-through-epic-sacrifice. See what I'm getting at?
No. What victory?
"'...What little information we have about the old times, the pittance of data which the Butlerians left us, Korba has brought it for you. Start with the Genghis Khan.' 'Ghenghis . . . Khan? Was he of the Sardaukar, m'Lord?' 'Oh, long before that. He killed . . . perhaps four million.' 'He must've had formidable weaponry to kill that many, Sire. Lasbeams, perhaps, or . . .' 'He didn't kill them himself, Stil. He killed the way I kill, by sending out his legions. There's another emperor I want you to note in passing--a Hitler. He killed more than six million. Pretty good for those days.' 'Killed . . . by his legions?' Stilgar asked. 'Yes.' 'Not very impressive statistics, m'Lord.'

There is always worse than what you can imagine.

Half trying to get people thinking, and half trying to confirm that I understood what the Golden Path was. :P
I don't know, maybe I'm not fully awake yet but you got me thinking to actually understand what you're trying to say. If you fight with the GP concept that's quite natural, people have been debating that for a while now haven't they?


EDIT TO ADD
what Freak said too.
Oh, and I've seen hostel but I thought it was boring.
Spice is the worm's gonads.

User avatar
Freakzilla
Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
Posts: 18133
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Re: Jihadicus

Postby Freakzilla » 29 Oct 2012 07:39

Streaksy wrote:If you say he planned ahead, that sort of ends the discussion if you're right. How sure are you? ;/



I've read as much in interviews with FH. I'd have to search for it if you want proof... but so could you. :D
Image
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman

Streaksy
Posts: 87
Joined: 13 Sep 2011 23:13

Re: Jihadicus

Postby Streaksy » 29 Oct 2012 07:48

No kidding. :D That wraps this up then. Cheers. Haha.

User avatar
lotek
Posts: 5735
Joined: 28 Jul 2009 08:33

Re: Jihadicus

Postby lotek » 29 Oct 2012 07:51

If you consider Frank Herbert's philosophy I think it's pretty obvious that he wanted to show the downfall of blindly following a charismatic leader.
Also, you seem to forget that right from the start the Jihad is "on the cards".


end of Dune book one wrote:"I can't go that way," he muttered. "That's what the old witches of your
schools really want."
"I don't understand you, Paul," his mother said.
He remained silent, thinking like the seed he was, thinking with the race
consciousness he had first experienced as terrible purpose. He found that he no
longer could hate the Bene Gesserit or the Emperor or even the Harkonnens. They
were all caught up in the need of their race to renew its scattered inheritance,
to cross and mingle and infuse their bloodlines in a great new pooling of genes.
And the race knew only one sure way for this--the ancient way, the tried and
certain way that rolled over everything in its path: jihad.
Surely, I cannot choose that way, he thought.


So there you go ^^

Try a search on "jihad" here http://johnnyturbo.org/dosh/02%20-%20He ... 20Dune.pdf
EDIT TO ADD
Too many edits on your posts I'm not sure what we're talking about here.
Last edited by lotek on 29 Oct 2012 07:56, edited 1 time in total.
Spice is the worm's gonads.

User avatar
SandRider
Watermaster
Posts: 6163
Joined: 05 Oct 2008 16:14
Location: In the back of your mind. Always.
Contact:

Re: Jihadicus

Postby SandRider » 29 Oct 2012 07:55

................ I exist only to amuse myself ................
ImageImage

I personally feel that this message board, Jacurutu, is full of hateful folks who don't know
how to fully interact with people.
~ "Spice Grandson" (Bryon Merrit) 08 June 2008

User avatar
Cpt. Aramsham
Posts: 100
Joined: 06 Oct 2012 11:11

Re: Jihadicus

Postby Cpt. Aramsham » 29 Oct 2012 11:11

I wouldn't really agree that Dune has a happy ending. Superficially it fits the space opera pattern with the hero triumphant, but really it represents Paul's failure and personal tragedy.

"My son is dead," Paul said, and knew as he spoke that it was true. "My son is dead . . . and Alia is a captive . . . hostage." He felt emptied, a shell without emotions. Everything he touched brought death and grief. And it was like a disease that could spread across the universe.
He could feel the old-man wisdom, the accumulation out of the experiences from countless possible lives. Something seemed to chuckle and rub its hands within him.
And Paul thought: How little the universe knows about the nature of real cruelty!

In revenge for his son's death, he declines to even try to stop the jihad. And the jihad is presented from the first as a terrible thing. Maybe a necessary or unavoidable thing (I don't trust those claims out of hand), but terrible nevertheless.

User avatar
Freakzilla
Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
Posts: 18133
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Re: Jihadicus

Postby Freakzilla » 29 Oct 2012 11:28

Cpt. Aramsham wrote:I wouldn't really agree that Dune has a happy ending. Superficially it fits the space opera pattern with the hero triumphant, but really it represents Paul's failure and personal tragedy.

"My son is dead," Paul said, and knew as he spoke that it was true. "My son is dead . . . and Alia is a captive . . . hostage." He felt emptied, a shell without emotions. Everything he touched brought death and grief. And it was like a disease that could spread across the universe.
He could feel the old-man wisdom, the accumulation out of the experiences from countless possible lives. Something seemed to chuckle and rub its hands within him.
And Paul thought: How little the universe knows about the nature of real cruelty!

In revenge for his son's death, he declines to even try to stop the jihad. And the jihad is presented from the first as a terrible thing. Maybe a necessary or unavoidable thing (I don't trust those claims out of hand), but terrible nevertheless.


Yeah, but we don't see any of that in Dune.

The Baron is killed, the Sardaukar smashed, Paul wins his duel, Shaddam gets exiled, Paul gets his CHOAM stock, the princess, revenge for House Atreides and the clouds part and he can see into the future again.

They all live happily ever after... until Dune Messiah.
Image
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman

User avatar
lotek
Posts: 5735
Joined: 28 Jul 2009 08:33

Re: Jihadicus

Postby lotek » 29 Oct 2012 12:51

Considering the scope of the victory and what's already been lost, losing a son is not a unreasonable price to pay.
I mean it's war isn't it?
Not that it's not important to Paul, but as the reader I didn't feel much for a kid that I didn't know.
I feel sadness for the Duke's death, even Yueh's, but whether it's on purpose or not, FH didn't flesh out much Paul's firstborn. (yes it was a baby, but the Atreides have a way with that genepool haven't they so it could have been done, after all what good are preborn if you can't have a staring baby?)
I think that kid was doomed from the start, because as you said there is a need to hint that things aren't as great as you'd expect after toppling the Empire, giving the finger to the Bene Gesserit AND the Guild, etc etc.

Also, Paul declines to stop the Jihad because he knows he can't face the alternative, like his future son will do later, not as revenge. Not saying that it didn't matter, but when Paul considers doing something to stop the Fremen hordes, he always faces the impossibility of the task.
Things were set in motion and the legend is not ready to back down that easily/
Spice is the worm's gonads.

Streaksy
Posts: 87
Joined: 13 Sep 2011 23:13

Re: Jihadicus

Postby Streaksy » 29 Oct 2012 19:05

People see different things in stuff, have different FEELINGS about how two stories in a canon connect. Chill out lotek. You barge around telling people that their perspective is wrong. To be honest it seems like your opinion about stuff is the less universal one here. Not that that should matter. Its up to you how you enjoy what amounts to entertainment. The only solid facts being discussed are what plot elements were intended by the author. When I said that endings can be retroactively become anticlimatic by sequels that say "actually they didnt' live happily ever after", that's totally up to the person, and it's wonderful that you can seperate yourself from that and take each book for what it is, but that's not everyone's feeling. And feeling is the part of it that's up to each person. It's not about right and wrong.

User avatar
Cpt. Aramsham
Posts: 100
Joined: 06 Oct 2012 11:11

Re: Jihadicus

Postby Cpt. Aramsham » 30 Oct 2012 11:14

Freakzilla wrote:
Cpt. Aramsham wrote:I wouldn't really agree that Dune has a happy ending. Superficially it fits the space opera pattern with the hero triumphant, but really it represents Paul's failure and personal tragedy.

"My son is dead," Paul said, and knew as he spoke that it was true. "My son is dead . . . and Alia is a captive . . . hostage." He felt emptied, a shell without emotions. Everything he touched brought death and grief. And it was like a disease that could spread across the universe.
He could feel the old-man wisdom, the accumulation out of the experiences from countless possible lives. Something seemed to chuckle and rub its hands within him.
And Paul thought: How little the universe knows about the nature of real cruelty!

In revenge for his son's death, he declines to even try to stop the jihad. And the jihad is presented from the first as a terrible thing. Maybe a necessary or unavoidable thing (I don't trust those claims out of hand), but terrible nevertheless.


Yeah, but we don't see any of that in Dune.

The Baron is killed, the Sardaukar smashed, Paul wins his duel, Shaddam gets exiled, Paul gets his CHOAM stock, the princess, revenge for House Atreides and the clouds part and he can see into the future again.

They all live happily ever after... until Dune Messiah.

Everything in my post was from Dune. The ending is only superficially happy (and not even all that happy); you don't have to look very closely to find the cracks in the facade. Paul finds his victory turned to ashes, and acts out of bitterness and hopelessness. He lets both Chani and Gurney down in the process. Jessica is clearly sick and tired of the whole thing. Stilgar is reduced from a proud naib, Paul's friend and equal, to a mere worshiper, a "creature of the Lisan al-Gaib." Even Thufir implicitly rebukes him, saying he's more like his grandfather (who the book heavily hints was a harsh and unlikeable man) than his father. The Fremen are about to go berserk across the universe and kill a bunch of innocent people. No one is happy.

User avatar
lotek
Posts: 5735
Joined: 28 Jul 2009 08:33

Re: Jihadicus

Postby lotek » 30 Oct 2012 11:20

Streaksy wrote:People see different things in stuff, have different FEELINGS about how two stories in a canon connect. Chill out lotek. You barge around telling people that their perspective is wrong. To be honest it seems like your opinion about stuff is the less universal one here. Not that that should matter. Its up to you how you enjoy what amounts to entertainment. The only solid facts being discussed are what plot elements were intended by the author. When I said that endings can be retroactively become anticlimatic by sequels that say "actually they didnt' live happily ever after", that's totally up to the person, and it's wonderful that you can seperate yourself from that and take each book for what it is, but that's not everyone's feeling. And feeling is the part of it that's up to each person. It's not about right and wrong.



yeah it's about quotes.
That's solid fact for you.

EDIT TO ADD
When I said that endings can be retroactively become anticlimatic by sequels that say "actually they didnt' live happily ever after",

What a strange idea.
Spice is the worm's gonads.

User avatar
Freakzilla
Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
Posts: 18133
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Re: Jihadicus

Postby Freakzilla » 30 Oct 2012 11:46

Cpt. Aramsham wrote:
Freakzilla wrote:
Cpt. Aramsham wrote:I wouldn't really agree that Dune has a happy ending. Superficially it fits the space opera pattern with the hero triumphant, but really it represents Paul's failure and personal tragedy.

"My son is dead," Paul said, and knew as he spoke that it was true. "My son is dead . . . and Alia is a captive . . . hostage." He felt emptied, a shell without emotions. Everything he touched brought death and grief. And it was like a disease that could spread across the universe.
He could feel the old-man wisdom, the accumulation out of the experiences from countless possible lives. Something seemed to chuckle and rub its hands within him.
And Paul thought: How little the universe knows about the nature of real cruelty!

In revenge for his son's death, he declines to even try to stop the jihad. And the jihad is presented from the first as a terrible thing. Maybe a necessary or unavoidable thing (I don't trust those claims out of hand), but terrible nevertheless.


Yeah, but we don't see any of that in Dune.

The Baron is killed, the Sardaukar smashed, Paul wins his duel, Shaddam gets exiled, Paul gets his CHOAM stock, the princess, revenge for House Atreides and the clouds part and he can see into the future again.

They all live happily ever after... until Dune Messiah.

Everything in my post was from Dune. The ending is only superficially happy (and not even all that happy); you don't have to look very closely to find the cracks in the facade. Paul finds his victory turned to ashes, and acts out of bitterness and hopelessness. He lets both Chani and Gurney down in the process. Jessica is clearly sick and tired of the whole thing. Stilgar is reduced from a proud naib, Paul's friend and equal, to a mere worshiper, a "creature of the Lisan al-Gaib." Even Thufir implicitly rebukes him, saying he's more like his grandfather (who the book heavily hints was a harsh and unlikeable man) than his father. The Fremen are about to go berserk across the universe and kill a bunch of innocent people. No one is happy.


Yes, it was a bittersweet victory, but a victory none-the-less. It was the Jihad we didn't see in Dune, we only got a sample from Paul's past visions. We don't even get to see it later, only it's effects. Sure, things aren't easy, but he's not living in a smelly cave anymore, he's emperor of the known universe with his love by his side. It's not really a fairy tale ending but like I said, he was victorious.
Image
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman

User avatar
Cpt. Aramsham
Posts: 100
Joined: 06 Oct 2012 11:11

Re: Jihadicus

Postby Cpt. Aramsham » 30 Oct 2012 12:19

So was Michael Corleone. :violin:

I know what you're saying, though. I think FH (deliberately) achieved a pretty neat effect, where the ending feels satisfying to the readers because it's what we wanted, and that makes it easy to overlook or ignore all the times when the book makes it fairly explicit that it's not a "happily ever after" conclusion.

As for "living in a smelly cave," all in all this was probably the happiest time in his life:

Paul felt himself at the center, at the pivot where the whole structure turned, walking a thin wire of peace with a measure of happiness, Chani at his side. He could see it stretching ahead of him, a time of relative quiet in a hidden sietch, a moment of peace between periods of violence.
"There's no other place for peace," he said.


Incidentally, I think that's why he chooses this path, why he decides to lead the Fremen instead of trying to stop the jihad right away. It's so he can be with Chani.

User avatar
Freakzilla
Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
Posts: 18133
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Re: Jihadicus

Postby Freakzilla » 30 Oct 2012 12:58

Cpt. Aramsham wrote:Incidentally, I think that's why he chooses this path, why he decides to lead the Fremen instead of trying to stop the jihad right away. It's so he can be with Chani.


After a long silence, Paul said: "The end adjusts the path behind it. Just
once I failed to fight for my principles. Just once. I accepted the Mahdinate. I
did it for Chani, but it made me a bad leader."

~Children of Dune

:wink:
Image
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman

Streaksy
Posts: 87
Joined: 13 Sep 2011 23:13

Re: Jihadicus

Postby Streaksy » 30 Oct 2012 20:11

Lotec.

If a sequel carries on the same characters' fates, then not only can it make a previous ending anticlimatic, but it actually stops it being an ending. It's becomes just an ending to a book, not the story in the book.

Stop acting like you can't see the distinction. If you really can't grasp that a sequel can ruin the ending of something for some people, then either you've cared about very little entertainment, or are untouchably simple. Personally I think you're just playing dumb to be argumentative and correctist. Too much time spent in forums around people who quote every little passing thing so they can be pedantic.

User avatar
lotek
Posts: 5735
Joined: 28 Jul 2009 08:33

Re: Jihadicus

Postby lotek » 31 Oct 2012 07:05

Streaksy wrote:Lotec.

If a sequel carries on the same characters' fates, then not only can it make a previous ending anticlimatic, but it actually stops it being an ending. It's becomes just an ending to a book, not the story in the book.


Wow...
So when there is a sequel to a story, that story is not over. No freaking shit.
But how can you be disappointed at the end of something that didn't end, that's beyond me.

Streaksy wrote:Stop acting like you can't see the distinction. If you really can't grasp that a sequel can ruin the ending of something for some people, then either you've cared about very little entertainment, or are untouchably simple. Personally I think you're just playing dumb to be argumentative and correctist. Too much time spent in forums around people who quote every little passing thing so they can be pedantic.


I'm acting like I think you use too many words without knowing what they mean.
If you can't realize how silly coming here and lecture me about sequels ruining endings you've gone way beyond simple.
I'd love to think you too are playing dumb but I'm afraid you're not an act.
Spice is the worm's gonads.

User avatar
Cpt. Aramsham
Posts: 100
Joined: 06 Oct 2012 11:11

Re: Jihadicus

Postby Cpt. Aramsham » 31 Oct 2012 12:25

The example I've usually heard to illustrate Streaksy's point is Alien3 ruining the ending of Aliens by killing off Newt and Hicks.

I don't particularly agree with that example, but the principle holds. So why couldn't some of the stuff in Dune Messiah and Children ruin the ending of Dune?


Return to “˱”