Talk:Dune (novel)/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

This archive covers discussion from 2003 - 2005. Discussion was placed in this archive as it appeared in the main talk page and thus may not be in chronological order.

Talk archives for Dune (novel) (current talk page)
<< 1          Archive 1 Archive 2 > 3 >>

Contents

POV bias

Some wise guy has been trying to invoke the hate of the innumerable legions of Dune fans. He has decided it funny to write this: ...nce fiction, Dune is popularly considered one of the most boring science fiction novels of all time, and is frequently cited as the worse-selling science fiction novel in history[1]. Dune spawned five hundred sequels written by Herbert, and inspired a film adaptation by Dav....

Some wise guy has been trying to invoke the hate of the innumerable legions of Dune fans. He has decided it funny to write this:

"Dune was a SF landmarks for a number of reasons:" all of which are entirely the POV of the author. --orthogonal 22:49, 18 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hm! I wrote the section you are refering to, and I agree I have a POV in favour of Frank Herbert and Dune. My points however are not entirely my POV as you suggest. I'm sure the reasons are overly positive and need to be be toned down, but the reasons in a toned down version are the reasons are0 that Dune is considered a landmark novel. And Dune is quite obviously a landmark Science Fiction novel from any perspective you would like to take. --ChrisG 23:02, 18 Nov 2003 (UTC)
We don't actually want to see your POV in Wikipedia; if yours can get in, then so can that of every Dune-hater, and I'm sure you wouldn't like that! Dune is indeed a landmark, and there are plenty of SF histories and critics who will be happy to make the authoritative claim for you; for instance Trillion Year Spree has a couple pages on it, and includes the observation that Dune is notable more for the interweaving of ideas, since all the specific ideas had appeared already somewhere. --Stan 03:24, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Rubbish. Everybody writes from a point of view, one just does their best to be as NPOV as possible. It is from the interaction of POV's from different people that you get some form of NPOV. Nobody can write about something they are enthusiastic about without some form of POV. I acknowledge that and I would be more than happy if someone more critical edited the article. : ChrisG 11:11, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)
I think maybe you don't understand NPOV yet. There's nothing wrong with enthusiasm, and most people choose to work on things that interest them, but the readers (who are ultimately the reason for doing all this) are not really interested in your personal opinions on a topic, and really don't want to be misled into thinking that your opinion is somehow universal. It's also not a good idea to add in lots of POV, and expect other people to clean it up; if that never happens, the readers are being misled again. If you can't think of how to express something neutrally, better just to leave it out, or ask for advice on the talk page. There's always time to expand an article, while it's almost impossible to track down all the readers and let them know that a mistaken article has been fixed. --Stan 17:03, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)
I disagree with you quite profoundly. I believe that no-one is capable of true NPOV without the interaction of other people. You believe that you (and presumably others) are capable of NPOV from the start. I think you are far too optimistic about your lack of bias. Everyone is biased, the issue is whether you can rise above your lack of bias when it is pointed out to you. Obviously perceiving reality truly is ideal, but from a philosophical point of view to believe that you have or will ever have that epistemological foundation is rather naive. It is an ideal to aspire to, not a goal you will ever achieve.
As a final point I don't think the article is particularly far off NPOV as it presently stands, certainly there are many more articles far further away. I've now quoted Clarke, Heinlein, the Library Journal, the New York Times Book review and Spark Notes. The views presented in the article are hardly in the minority. Nor were the views I initially stated, before I bothered to find the quotes to back them up, rather than write from memory. --ChrisG 10:45, 20 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Don't read in more than what I said; I agree that NPOV is a goal, not something that springs fully formed from one's forehead. But it's a bad approach to say that because everybody inherently has a POV, there's no point in trying to write neutrally to begin with. Since you've filled in this article to a much greater depth than any other WP editor, it is to some extent "yours" now; other Wikipedians will tend to defer to your judgment, and this very discussion may be all the interaction that the article ever gets. For instance, the quotes and attributions are pretty good now, but I think the net effect is still to overstate the significance of Dune. Even so, I don't have the time or resources to dig up the Dune-hating critics' comments I remember reading, so the slant will remain until you or somebody else fixes it. --Stan 14:29, 20 Nov 2003 (UTC)
I don't see that it will be a long term problem. As Wikipedia grows more popular, the number of contributors will vastly increase. At the moment people are spread thin throughout the encyclopedia but that will not be the case in a few years. And so any significant article will have multiple interested contributors and NPOV will be achieved. As to this article, I'm sure there are many Dune haters out there, but how many of those hate Science Fiction on principle? Incidentally I never asserted that one shouldn't attempt to write from NPOV, I just said that it is innately impossible, especially when you are writing about something you are enthusiastic about. It's better to accept that, than delude ourselves that we have it. --ChrisG 14:45, 20 Nov 2003 (UTC)

POV in Dune?

Dune (novel), revision of 14:52, 27 Oct 2003, seems to have added quite a bit of POV. Or is it just me? --orthogonal 22:52, 18 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Orthogonal is referring to this diff in the Dune (novel) article. IMO bold assertions like those made in that addition need some external authoritative sources. What was the thinking behind bringing this to the Village Pump? --Pete 00:13, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)
I figured it would be noticed in pump. (It was, the OP of that revision toned it down some (but not, I think, enough).) Where should I have posted this? --orthogonal 02:49, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Best place is to put it on the Discussion page for the article. Wikipedians listing Dune for "monitoring" will pick up that uyou added something there. Include a pertinent statement in the "Summary" Editing stuff like this should just be discussed among those working on the specific page, and the Discussion page keeps a record of questions, disputes, resolutions where it is most pertinent. --Marshman 03:19, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)

After a little research, it seems clear to me that Dune is very widely considered to be a "landmark novel". Therefore by saying this, surely the editor is stating a fact? --Anjouli 06:42, 24 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Indeed he is; Dune has not only sold remarkably well for a sci-fi novel, it has received serious critical attention, and is usually included in courses on Sci-Fi literature. The problem lies more in how he says, and lack of any specifics. -- Maru Dubshinki 07:37 PM Saturday, 12 March 2005

Dune Timeline

Some years ago I made a more correct timeline for dune because the one made by the author of Dune Encyclopedia did a pretty bad job (and the Encyclopedia is NOT canon!) ;)


1. 201 - 108 BG Butlerian Jihad "two cruel generations" Appendix II / V

2. ~11 200 The 20th century "Mankind's movement through deep space placed a unique stamp on religion during the one hundred and ten centuries that preceded the Butlerian Jihad. " Appendix II


3. 10 191 House Atreides moved to Arrakis (Dune)


~11200 -2000 + 10 191 = ~19391 AD --MilesTeg

I agree this should be changed in the article. At the very least, the Dune Encyclopedia isn't canonical, so figuring the Dune timeline from it shouldn't be presented as such. The Encyclopedia appears to be a few thousand years off.
(But: shouldn't you add 2000, not subtract it? ~2000 years from 1 BC/AD to space travel, 11000 years from space travel to the Butlerian Jihad, 200 years from the Butlerian Jihad to the Guild, 10191 years from the Guild to Dune; when you add them all, it's about 23391 years from 1 BC/AD to Dune, or 23391 AD.) --Anonymous
You are right.
10191 AG = 23391 AD
The timeline that proves it can be found here: http://home.t-online.de/home/duneweb/welt/zeittafel.html
I'm inclined to trust these numbers a lot more than something coming from the Dune Encyclopedia, because (a) it comes from Frank Herbert's writing, (b) it comes from the original Dune novel, and (c) it includes references (which I verified -- good work!).
--MilesTeg
I just changed the Dating System in the article. I´m 100% sure about the data but I´m not so sure about my english ;)

Dune universe

I've created a Dune universe article and have therefore removed that type of material from this article; which was serving as both a article on the novel and the universe. --ChrisG 22:20, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Synopsis

Duplicated material from teaser synopsis for possible later merging:

Dune is the tale of a political conflict among three noble houses: House Atreides, House Harkonnen and House Corrino, in the galactic Empire ruled by Shaddam IV of House Corrino, "Padishah Emperor of the Known Universe," at a time of great political instability.

House Corrino's power is supported by military might (their legions of 'Sardaukar' warrior-fanatics are a legendary force popularly considered unbeatable), economic power (they own a controlling stake in the CHOAM corporation, which oversees all interstellar commerce), and political influence, (support from the Spacing Guild, and the Bene Gesserit). Shaddam IV, however, succeeded his father due to the influence and assistance of the Bene Gesserit and the tacit approval of the Guild, who now enjoy considerable influence over the throne.

The political instability of the Emperor is exacerbated by the Bene Gesserit, who have prevented Shaddam IV from producing a male heir and ignited competition among the Great Houses while undermining the power of House Corrino. Concurrently, their centuries-old breeding program to produce the Kwisatz Haderach is nearing fruition.

Shaddam IV sees House Atreides as a threat to his throne. Duke Leto Atreides has become very popular — and powerful — among the noble houses of the Imperium in the Landsraad. In addition, The Duke has created a military force similar to the Sardaukar in combat prowess and dedication, but on a smaller scale. The Emperor fears that it would be a matter of time before the Atreides forces could equal or surpasses his dreaded Sardaukar.

The Emperor decides that House Atreides must be destroyed, but realizes that an open attack on the popular Duke Atreides and his House could unite the individual Houses of the Landsraad against House Corrino (each nobleman would fear being the next House to be isolated and destroyed, and all might unite against the Emperor to prevent this). For this reason, the Emperor conceives of a devious conspiracy using the Atreides's ancient enemies, House Harkonnen, as a weapon against the Duke. Baron Vladimir Harkonnen willingly participates in the plot because of his personal hatred toward the Duke and his House and because he believes he will reap substantial gains in personal and familial power by serving the Emperor, potentially marrying his heir Feyd-Rautha Harkonnen to a Corrino daughter and placing him on the Imperial Throne.

The Emperor awards the Duke a fiefdom, previously held by the Harkonnens, on Arrakis, a desert planet which is the only source of the 'Spice.' Indeed the Spacing Guild and the Bene Gesserit cannot function and exert power without spice — the Guild could not 'fold space' to navigate across immense distances in space, and the Bene Gesserit's powers of memory recall would be stunted. Civilization depends on the Spice, making it the most valuable commodity in the universe.

Despite their misgivings, the Atreides have no choice but to accept the honor and status accorded by this fiefdom, and must relocate to Arrakis. Unbeknownst to the Duke, the Emperor has enlisted the Harkonnens to attack the Atreides shortly after they are installed on Arrakis, under the pretext of their inter-House feud and the Harkonnen loss of Arrakis. They will be covertly aided in this attack by legions of Sardaukar dressed in the livery of House Harkonnen, so as to conceal the Emperor's hand in the destruction of Duke Atreides.

In addition to covert military assistance, the Harkonnen are aided by a traitor they have recruited in House Atreides. The Duke's only son, Paul Atreides, and Paul's mother, the Bene Gesserit Jessica, manage to flee into the desert to seek refuge among Arrakis's indigenous Fremen. Paul Atreides is able to harness the power of the Fremen by appearing to fulfill their religious prophecies while at the same time developing into the Kwisatz Haderach. With help of the Fremen, Paul launches a war to restore Atreides control over Arrakis, avenge the death of his father, assume the Imperial Throne, and become the most powerful man the universe has ever seen.


Restored the more extensive synopsis from history. From what I can see this original synopsis was replaced by a teaser because editor thought it wasn't appropriate to have an extensive synopsis of book. However, Wikipedia is not paper and so there is no reason not to have a detailed synopsis. All the other articles have detailed synopsis as well, as do other articles on various novels. Obviously the synopsis is a spoiler if you haven't read the book; but this is an encyclopedia not a magazine review.
I should, however, note that I originally added all the synopis' for the original series and thus have a personal interest in not having wasted that time writing it in the first place for Wikipedia. --ChrisG 22:17, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

To NPOV or not to NPOV....

ChrisG, Stan: I think the discussion about NPOV above is pointless! You just agree on:

  • Absolute NPOV from a single editor is not possible
  • Editors make an effort to be as NPOV as they can; so if still POV, another editor's POV is needed.

But the point here is how to NPOV this article, and that someone'd better do it. I'm near totally ignorant about Dune, so i cannot help. But you both, ChrisG & Stan, agree on which points are POV!... So you surely know how to fix them!

If I were to write an article on Zelda, it surely would talk of all its goodness. But that doesn't mean I cannot read/research what the critics on it are about! It's not that difficult to write "some people think A because of bla bla bla. Another people think B, considering that blu blu blu"

In conclusion: when we appreciate some piece of text is POVed, we are all capable of [or asking someone to] fix it, so it approaches a little more to NPOV. (And that remains true when the piece of text I consider POVed was written by me!) --euyyn 22:25, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

In actual fact the parts of the article which there were disagreements about NPOV were removed at some point over the months I was away from actively editing Wikipedia. Thanks for the reminder, because I certainly believe there needs to be a section on the critical status of Dune in Science Fiction and so I will have to look again at the deleted history --ChrisG 23:20, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Bene Gesserit and Reverend Mothers =

When a Bene Gesserit goes through the initiation to become a reverend mother she does not recieved all of her ancestral memories, she only receives the memories of all the preceding Reverend Mothers in her line, and it is not the "male ancestral memories" that she can not access, just a certain "black" area that terrifies. This may be the male part of the psyche, but I think even that is speculation. I am going to make these changes if no one objects. --ZaQ 12:54, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)


The memories are limited to all blood lines up the point of conception. The "Black" Area they can not go is ability to see the future. Paul's sister talks to the Baron, and is taken over by him in book III. The space guild navigators are the opposite of the reverend mothers. Where the reverend mothers can look into there past the Navigators and peers into the future to plot a path for the ship so he can navigate through fold space. Yes this needs to be edited!

Introduction

This article is badly in need of a brief overview of the novel in the Introduction section -- 10 lines long max. Anyone coming to the article with no Dune knowledge gets nothing before being dumped into a discussion of Themes and then a long detailed setting and synopsis. --Motor 15:00, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)


Stop writing articles for experts to read!!! I rely on Wikipedia for one good reason, and this is what it should be all about: to learn about a whole world of knowledge on a topic I haven't the slightest inkling of. Dune..what's Dune? It was a novel from the 60's. Oh, okay, so I'll read about the novel. This page therefore should introduce the ideas of the Dune canon to a reader as if they've never heard of Dune. The problem is, the article mentions Paul and story elements before the reader even knows who Paul is or what the story is about. --Anonymous

The article as it stands is a mess, IMO. It serves no-one well. Newbie or expert. I made a few changes recently (a better first paragraph) and a minor cleanup but it's not anywhere near enough. -Motor 10:25, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)
I would scrap the lot and start again more like this: Dune: novel written by Frank Herbert...how important was it for the world/for sci-fi genres etc..now what was it about (briefly)..the premise: what was this universe based around, what are the technologies (nothing to do with Paul yet), and then what happened that led to the events of his book...then at the end mention how and why this book began the whole canon of stuff. --Anonymous
I don't think starting again is needed (or a good idea). We could start by deleting the entire Synopsis section -- it's garbled and long-winded and too fannish. It needs someone to take resposibility for redoing the synopsis and reorder the article. I'll do it, but only as a last resort since I'm not that knowledgble about Dune -- just someone who's read the novel and atttempted a minor clean up about a month ago. Does anyone want to step up? I'm going to make a start by removing the synopsis and and see what it provokes. --Motor 10:25, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Get the idea? Make it without cross references. That's what sets apart professional encyclopedia authors and amateurs like us. Don't make the Britannica people laugh at us! --Anonymous

While I agree with a lot of what you said, this is just trollish and unnecessary. --Motor 10:25, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Deleting/rewriting synopsis

Motor, working on the article is not deleting the whole synopsis. Wikipedia is not paper and space restrictions are not an issue. If you want to work on the article/synopsis then fine; but outright deleting the section is inappropriate behaviour. --ChrisG 13:46, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I have to wonder whether you bothered to read the talk page before reverting and writing this. This isn't a space issue. It's a quality one. I made it quite clear that I'm willing to work on this page unless someone else with more Dune experience comes along. The Synopsis as it stands is unencyclopedic... with it in, no-one seems to want to tackle a large block of fannish writing... without it perhaps the article has a chance of improving. I'd hoped that removing the offending block of text would actually provoke someone into improving it rather than a knee-jerk response about space restrictions (BTW, wikipedia articles have a recommeded size limit, not for space, but for readability and to prevent them just getting longer and long rather than better -- which is exactly the problem with the synposis). --Motor 15:08, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)
I'll volunteer: whoever wrote these synopses (they seem to comprise the entirety of some of the less-well known Dune novel articles) didn't do a very good job. Too much detail, and is too confusing. I expect I'll focus on how the plot is multiply stranded: have any suggestions, post'em below. -- Maru Dubshinki 07:35 PM Saturday, 12 March 2005
Check the edit history before you insult someone's work; and while your at it you might also want to delete the synopsis' to all the other five original dune novels. Cheers. :ChrisG 20:27, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Har har Chris- I am foolhardy and arrogant; not insane. -- Maru Dubshinki 05:44 PM Sunday, 13 March 2005
I agree that the "synopsis" as written is not encyclopedic style and is also longer than necessary. I would like to take a crack at the synopsis as well, let's see how it goes. Kaisershatner 15:47, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Congatulations, I think you've done a pretty good job. I think maybe "Introduction" would be better heading than "Description without spoilers", and perhaps themes should come after the new/smaller synopsis -- but apart from that, well done. Motor 16:54, 2005 Mar 31 (UTC)

Synopsis Pt.2

As I mentioned above feel free to rewrite/improve the synopsis for this or the other original Dune novels , I don't own them; and I would be ecstatic if someone would seriously improve them. Its just Motor and yourself majorly underestimates how difficult it is to write a synopsis for a novel as complex as Dune starting from a blank screen. Criticising an article is easy and copyediting fairly easy compared to writing a long original article. Apologies for my curtness. :ChrisG 20:50, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

On the contrary, I think you are over-estimating what is required for a synopsis. It doesn't need a detailed description of the plot points. It just a short one-page plot summary. Look at the current state of the article from the point of view of someone looking up Dune because they've heard about it on the TV/Radio/Web. The introduction section tells you nothing other than the fact that Dune was originally two shorter works, and that Herbert dedicated it to some ecologists. Then the reader is dumped into a discussion about "Themes"? Eh? For what? We haven't even told people what Dune is about. We then follow it up with a blizzard of jargon and strange names: Butlerian Jihad, Mentats and Bene Gesserits. And finally a Synopsis that is far too long and detailed to provide any information to newbies, and which adds little for those familiar with Dune already. As I said way, way back before this current fuss -- this article needs a 10-15 line intro to what Dune is about. Plus, a synopsis should be no longer than a page. IMO, the basic structure of the article should be:
  • Introductory pagagraph - Dune is a Sci-book, date of publication, mention of other media.
  • Introduction - What is Dune? What is the basic story? No mention of Butlerian Jihad (leave that for the Dune universe article). Just keep it simple and as jargon free as possible. Introduce Paul.
  • Synopsis - Introduce the major characters and organisations (Leto, Jessica, Imperial house, Atreides, Harkonnen, Fremen) and the planet itself. Spice (and its effects). Worms. Paul ends up in the desert and builds a power base to take over Arrakis/Dune, and because of the Spice... the empire too. Sure it's short and skips detail... but that's what a synopsis is.
  • Themes - economics, religious, political, ecological. Here's where you can go to town with more detail and discussion.
  • Fuller list of characters and organisations: The major ones and smaller ones such a Mentats, Bene Gesserit, Halleck, Idaho, Alia, Yueh etc etc.
  • Awards
  • See also
  • Ext links
BTW: I do realise that you put a lot of work into the synopsis. It's not my aim to insult you over it and if it comes across that way I apologise. --Motor 12:30, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC)
That's a pretty good basis, but I had been thinking more of:
  • Introduction: a really abbreivated summary of Dune Universe, and a capsule summary of why the Atreides are going to Arrakis. Backstory and context in other words.
  • Events: the actual stuf that y'know, happens in the book, finishing with Paul as Emperor and a wikilink to the next book.
  • Critical look: themes, textual features, maybe history of book if not already covered in the w/u. I'm trying to find a book that made a big thing of the threaded-ness, the 'polyphonic' quality of the books, so it might be a while before I can produce a critical summary.
-- Maru Dubshinki
Sounds fine. I'm glad you said "abbreviated summary" of Dune universe. If you treat it as an article about Dune the standalone novel rather than Dune the saga, it will make writing it more manageable, and make it a lot easier to read. Though obviously there will be parts later in the article about its place in the larger saga. I look forward to seeing the result. Motor 15:47, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC)

Media Mention

The 'Dune' article got mentioned in Slate today- [1];

Wikipedia is a colossal improvement—it's just like the fictional Hitchhiker's Guide, only nerdier. Wikipedia is the Web fetishist's ideal data structure: It's free, it's open-source, and it features a 4,000-word exegesis of Dune.

I'm not sure if that is a compliment or insult, but I'm posting it anyways. --maru 11:37, 4 May 2005 (UTC)


Geographic extent

Just reverted an anon's edit; do we actually know whether the empire embraces multiple empires? The descriptions of the Guild implies that it can travel essentially anywhere it knows of, but the empire was formed of pre-guild colonized planets, so athe geographic extent seems to me uncertain, and thusly unwarranted to put in such a claim. Appreciate any feedback. --maru 13:35, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Detailed Synopsis?

Have just read through the article and overall it's pretty good but i think in order to be considered as a more encyclopaedic entry it should lose the detailed synopsis. The reasons being is that for those that have read the book and want to look up dune, i'm imagining they would like to know about things such as: its critical reception, the ideas and themes that Herbert explores within the book and it's influence on the literary world. For those who have never read the book the detailed synopsis really goes into too much depth about a great book which they should seek out and explore themselves. A brief synopsis will entice new readers where as a long one detailing plot strands and character events pre-empties the enjoyment of reading the book.

I think if you erased the detailed synopsis and instead expanded on the theme section with more detailed and thorough research with opinions from academia, how the book was received in critical circles both positive and negative and also the impact the book has had on the genre of science fiction that would make for a great article about a fantastic book (in my opinion possibly the best book iv'e read to this date).

To those who have written and edited the detailed synopsis i can see that you have put a huge amount of time and effort in to it but i think that it would be better to sacrifice this section for the betterment of the article. What do people think? --Yakuzai 21:30, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

If you look higher up, you'll see that I did indeed intend to do just that (well, minus the scholarly apparatus part). How's it going and when will I post it? Err.... Soon! --maru 22:36, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Copyedits Dec 2005, and Long Synopsis

I made some structural changes. As much as I love "themes" and "allegory" they really have to go under the synopsis. No sense discussing the implications of the story w/o mentioning...the actual story. In addition, I really think the long synopsis is un-necessary and we ought to consider removing it. I hate to trash so much work, but I'm not sure it adds to the article. There's a similar problem at Les Miserables. It's also a long book. Kaisershatner 17:15, 9 December 2005 (UTC)