Talk:Frank Herbert/Archive 2

Brian and Kevin claims - the new material
I think it should be decided once and for all how Wikipedia is going to handle the controversies over Brian and Kevin's additions to the Dune universe - how we are going to refer to the notes, and whether the new writing is cannon. My claims on the new material are:

Cannot be cannon as it disagrees with Frank's own writing in significant places (I am not saying the Dune Encyclopedia should be cannon, I do not believe it is). If we do not count to separate universes, then we have a universe in which the Butlerian Jihad is both a religious/philosophical jihad against the use of machines, waged by humans without machines against humans with them, and at the same time it is a war of annihilation between already-enslaved humans and machines (making the word enslaved have two different meaning in the books - one for degrading ones soul, becoming less human and dictated by rationality and ones tools and one in which it simply means captured in a slave pen. --Lundse 09:52, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree that we need a policy on how to handle deviations and additions. I don't think we can justifiably 'split' the universes: If nothing else, Brian's work counts as authorized follow-on literature.  How about this:


 * Everywhere there's a direct contradiction between Frank and Brian's work, note that Brian's material contradicts the original Dune series (this makes Frank the authority, and Brian the deviant).
 * Where Brian's material adds something not present at all in Frank's books, note that it is an addition unique to Brian's work, not found in the originals. :


 * Where Brian's material broadly misconstrues what the original work was analyzed as implying, note the thematic deviation from the original. For example, I once made an addition regarding the Butlerian Jihad that Frank's original intent seemed to be that the Jihad signified a Heideggarian rejection of a technological mindset, rather than a straightforward man vs. machine Terminator scenario (don't know if it's still there).


 * We have to be careful ourselves not to violate NPOV because we hate Brian's additions. If we're careful and consistent, though, we can characterize what Brian's done as post hoc additions to his father's universe that deviate significantly from Frank's original work, and stand apart.


 * Perhaps we could also create a page called "Controversy Over Later Additions To The Duniverse" or something, cataloging how Brian's material differs. A smart reader should be able to tell that Brian's books are little more than crass commercial exploitation of the originals.


 * One more thing: It's canon, not cannon.  The former is the representative works of a particular area, the latter a great big booms-tick.  I wouldn't make a point of correcting you here, but I've corrected the spelling in the articles themselves a couple times. --Justin Johnson 20:13, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * That's a pretty sensible policy, and it meshes well with Wikipedia's policy of copyright-holder-defines-canonicity. I like it, but I'm not sure we need a separate page on the controversy- that could probably go in the general Dune or Dune Universe page. --maru (talk)

contribs 03:15, 6 March 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, I can agree to this. My concern was that the header information and sometimes bigger sections on certain pages gave mixed information - I agree that we should not make two separate Butlerian Jihad pages but maybe a Brian & Kevin section would be appropriate? And I do know about canons, I am just a sloppy speller :-) --Lundse

08:16, 6 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm sure Frank intended it to be the machine war since he himself wrote "thou shall not make a machine in the likeness of a human". Now if it were just a man vs man war - that wouldn't be the law. --Zeus69962 01:24, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Frank never specified who started it. But both Paul, The Tyrant, and most of the characters in the last two books go on at length about how dependence on machines conditions people to think like machines, which is not survival behavior.  The Butlerian Jihad is presented as a rejection of advanced machines by humankind, not as an escape from

subservience. The proscription against making machines in the likeness of a human is a proscription on making machines that are too advanced. In other words, AI is to be avoided because it tempts humans to depend on the machines. In the original books, there's absolutely nothing implying that mankind had been enslaved by machines.


 * See, this is why I'm so disgusted with the prequels. They take a very advanced idea that was a huge part of 20th century philosophy, and turn it into a literary version of Terminator.


 * One of the grossest discrepancies is BH's and KJA's making mentats the creation of the machines themselves, rather than as humanity's response to their need for computer-like tools. A mental far exceeds a computer just because he doesn't limit himself to raw, deterministic number crunching.  Even then, all six original books continually warn about becoming dependent on mentats and how fallible they are. --Justin Johnson 03:07, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Agreed. See my quotes on the Butlerian Jihad talk page for arguments for why the Frank's jihad was a human conflict. The fact that the remaining ban is on machines is no argument that the war must have been between humans and machines - but that it was fought *over* the question of machines. --Lundse 08:44, 14 March 2006

(UTC)


 * The controversy section is untrue - refer to my answers. It is slander. it is a misrepresentation of the facts of someone's creative work in an encyclopedia with the purpose of hurting their image. Aside

from the legality, it conflicts with Wikipedia's policies for sure. --Zeus69962 04:50, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Not true... You are misinformed about the origins of the Mentat. Zeus is 100% correct on this. --Kwisatz Haderach 00100 22:41, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

"Controversies"
First, Zeus, when you add something here, please put four ~s after it so that your comment is signed. Now, we need to discuss the change that Zeus keeps putting in. I disagree with it as it stands:
 * "This is most likely untrue based on what common sense would dictate. Moreover, they neglect to point out these “discrepancies in the writing” and fail to show any proof of Brian making any of this up. In any regard, even if the issues are true, which most likely, they are not. There would still be minimal conflicting issues when compared to many other works of fiction - especially speculative fiction. The amount of readers who state these opinions are minute and most times without merit. Most respectable critics applaud Brian and Kevin’s additions to the Dune saga; the New York Times, The Los Angeles Times are just some examples. The major conflict in this is between the fans who state the Dune Encyclopedia as canon when Frank Herbert had no part in its attempt to fill in gaps with Dune. Whatever the case may be, Brian has the legal rights to continue the story since he is the heir to Mr. Herbert’s legacy. Many reviewers have concurred that he is doing fine with the assistance of Kevin at figuratively filling the immense shoes of Frank’s vision which he left behind."

I have the following problems with it:


 * Claims to 'common sense' are not a cite or an argument.
 * Pointing out the opposing views failure to list discrepancies is not a valid counter-argument. Demanding removal of references to discrepancies without providing examples is fair.
 * "even if the issues are true, which most likely, they are not" is a POV statement that adds nothing.
 * "Most respectable critics..." requires cites as evidence. Links to reviews by reputable publications like those listed would be sufficient, though without qualifying them as "most".
 * The dispute over the canonicity of the Dune Encyclopedia is not the major issue, it's one of the issues.
 * "Many reviewers have concurred..." also requires cites. Linking to a couple reputable reviewers who say this is sufficient.

If we can make these changes, we'll have a useful addition to the controversies section. Otherwise, not. Until we reach agreement on this addition, I will keep reverting it. --Justin Johnson 22:00, 13 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Claims to 'common sense' are a justifiable reasoning for an argument when it's based on hearsay/conjecture


 * ''If what you're responding to is hearsay/conjecture, then the answer

is to get it removed, not to answer it with "common sense".''


 * Pointing out failure to list discrepancies is 100% valid if it was claimed that there were... It's natural to say "why is that so?" claiming an unfounded opinion is alright as long as it's written that there is no proof to this. Although, I believe it has no place in an "encyclopedia"


 * If there's no supporting evidence of the discrepancies, then the answer is to remove the reference to discrepancies, not to counter-argue in the page. Remember, this is an encyclopedia entry, not an essay.


 * The "even if it was true" is only to appease the thought for a minute to keep in mind that even if it were true, the problems are still small compared to Star Wars and other Sci-fi/fantasy/speculative fiction... It's playing the devil's advocate on the POV that was in there originally.


 * References to problems with canonicity in other works are irrelevant. Again, don't play devil's advocate on the page--if something is wrong, get it fixed or removed.
 * The New York Times is a somewhat respectable paper and seeing as you didn't write the "critics" that say negative things about KJA and BN, I think that this is more than a fair argument. If not then here are some critics that have positive things to say and you match it.
 * The New York TIMES book review of House Atreides: "[fans] rejoice in this chance to return to one of science fiction's most appealing futures."


 * PUBLISHERS WEEKLY on DUNE THE BUTLERIAN JIHAD: "The kind of intricate plotting and philosophical musings that would make the elder Herbert proud"


 * The Philadelphia Inquirer on DUNE HOUSE ATREIDES: "A spirited and entertaining adventure... The real pleasure here comes from watching the authors lay out the plot threads that will converge in Dune."


 * Need I go on?


 * These are the blurbs from the book's first pages. We need to reference the full review on those publication's websites.  When publishers get stuff like this, they cut and paste the best parts, to the point of misrepresenting the actual review.


 * Most meaning more say good things than bad... for every negative review you find I'm sure I'll find 2 more positive ones. You have yet to mention one negative one, though.


 * You can say this all you want, but without some quantitative reference (like Rotten Tomatoes does for movies), it's a meaningless assertion.

The dispute between The Dune Encyclopedia is the main issue when you're talking about inconsistencies because the only thing that the prequels contradict with is the aforementioned Dune Encyclopedia. --Zeus69962 00:00, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * You're just going to have to deal with the fact that there are many readers who see large discrepancies between the quality and details of the original books and the prequels, without reference to the Dune Encyclopedia. Mentioning the Dune Encyclopedia is a red herring anyway, because it's not canon itself - Frank sometimes contradicted it.


 * By the way, I do agree that, if there's to be a mention of the discrepancies, then examples need to be given. --Justin Johnson 03:24, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * You are just arguing for the sake of argument and basically it's either you warn people that this is an opinion of yours or you take the entire thing out. It has no place in an encyclopedia. You are not someone who can judge a work like that nor does it fit in this context. None of the claims you made have any support - support your claims IN FULL, leave my addition to your description or delete it all. Don't just delete the fact that I'm pointing out that it's just an opinion of yours and at least play devils advocate which is the next best thing to being unbiased - which you most definitely aren't. In addition, I've read every single book in the Dune series... Can you say the same? I think you are missing the point in the story. --65.49.222.35 07:07, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Who wrote this comment? Zeus69962?
 * Anyway, here are my thoughts on this matter, outlaid clearly and with a few arguments, even...
 * The new prequels are not canon. They cannot be canon because they contradict Frank Herbert's thoughts, ideas, plots, characters and most anything else you can think of. I have discussed with others here (Hello Justin) how we are to react to this and we have agreed that articles should be centered around Frank Herbert sources, with added sections or paragraphs detailing B&K additions (possibly with comments on when they stray from Frank H. canon). The Dune encyclopedia has nothing to do with this - I do not count it canon and the canon segment on its own page here at Wikipedia. reflect my views (since I have added to it).
 * Yes, let's write (with cited refs.) that some reviewers liked the new books and some don't. But do not make it out to be only a handful of fans who dislike them. Look over at alt.fan.dune newsgroup - most everyone who has read Frank Herbert seriously loathes what is being done in the new books (me included, I admit). So yes, I am biased, but

I do not want Wikipedia to reflect that bias - but I want it to reflect that Frank Herbert fans dislike the new books and that the books contradict FH's universe, theme and message. :Here are a few discrepancies between Frank Herbert's and B&K's universes (with thanks to alt.fan.dune and "Freakzilla":


 * The construction of the Harkonnen no-room we see in Heretics of Dune happens [in House Atreides]. However, Heretics of Dune firmly establishes that "the whole no-globe complex, some two hundred meters in diameter, was a fossil preserved intact from the time of the Tyrant."
 * Just a glaring mistake which would not have been made if they really had spent as much time as they claim on make the "Dune Accord" factbook.


 * Piter de Vries is addicted to Sappho juice. This is not mentioned at all in Dune, but much is, on the other hand, made of his addiction to spice (which House Atreides doesn't mention).
 * Rather important, spice addiction was an intricate part of Piter's personality and his relationship with the baron.


 * It appears to be general knowledge that the Bene Tleilaxu are religious fanatics. So how come it is such a major revelation for the Bene Gesserit in Heretics of Dune and is not known to any character in the Chronicles before that?


 * Misrepresentation and belittling of the BG's abilities of analysis and knowledge of religion is going directly against what they are and what FH uses them for thematically.


 * Crown Prince Shaddam and Count Fenring take great care to make sure no one discovers that Emperor Elrood has been poisoned. The Almanak en-Ashraf in Dune makes it clear that it was generally known that Elrood "succumbed to chaumurky".
 * Another rather obvious one.


 * House Vernius of Ix is a major player in all the prequels. However, Dune Messiah refers to the Ixian Confederacy, indicating no noble House ruled the planet.


 * "Fixing" a crysknife is explained as "keyed to the body of the owner so it would dissolve upon his death". In Dune it's the other way around: "Fixed knives are treated for storage."
 * They get the krysknives wrong!


 * One of the central plot points is the death of Leto's father, Duke Paulus. This happens before Jessica is born. However, in Dune, Jessica displays what can only be first-hand experience of the Old Duke.


 * We are told in that the Baron Harkonnen is so fat because he was

infected with a disease. The Chronicles pretty much state that it was due to a hereditary disposition and overeating: GEoD [of the Baron]: "He was a fat, monstrous..." "He was a seeker after sensations," Moneo said. "The fat was a side-effect, then perhaps something to experience for itself because it offended people and he enjoyed offending."


 * Again, misrepresentation of characters. The fat was used for more than gross-out effect by FH, but it is belittled only to make room for a plot of some disease and to shock old readers.


 * According to God Emperor of Dune, Duncan had a sister who was killed by Harkonnens. She is nowhere to be seen in House Atreides.


 * God Emperor of Dune also states that the Atreides rescued Duncan from Harkonnen bondage. The events in the prequel don't seem to match this description


 * Gurney and Liet-Kynes meet and become good friends yet when they meet again in Dune they don't recognize each other at all.


 * In Dune, Gurney calls Duke Leto "the man who rescued me from a Harkonnen slave pit, gave me freedom, life, and honor". However, in House Harkonnen he escapes the Harkonnens on his own.


 * The first time Duncan kills someone is when he stabs Trin Kronos (a Moritani) in the back with his sword to save his friend Resser. This takes place on planet Ginaz. Dune [Duncan]: "My sword was firs' blooded on Grumman! Killed a Harkon. . . Harkon . . . killed 'im f'r th' Duke."


 * Paul is born on Kaitan. From the opening paragraph of Dune: "Do not be deceived by the fact that he was born on Caladan and lived his first fifteen years there."


 * The biggest discrepancy (if only because they wrote a whole book on it) is the Jihad, of course.


 * In HA, cyborgs do not violate the tenants of the Butlerian Jihad. According to Chapterhouse: Dune, they do: " "Cyborgs?" [...] Didn't Idaho know the residue of revulsion left by the Butlerian Jihad even among the Bene Gesserit? Cyborg was one of those potpourri words, too. Where did mechanical additions to human flesh become dominant? When was the Cyborg no longer human? [...] The Butlerian Jihad had left its indelible mark on humans. Fought and won . . . for then. And here was another battle in that long-ago conflict."


 * I found some quotes in FH's dune books:
 * "Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them."


 * One moment he felt himself setting forth on the Butlerian Jihad, eager to destroy any machine which simulated human awareness. That had to be the past -- over and done with. Yet his senses hurtled through the experience, absorbing the most minute details. He heard a minister-companion speaking from a pulpit: "We must negate the machines-that-think. Humans must set their own guidelines. This is not something machines can do. Reasoning depends upon programming, not on hardware, and we are the ultimate program!" He heard the voice clearly, knew his surroundings -- a vast wooden hall with dark windows. Light came from sputtering flames. And his minister-companion said: "Our Jihad is a 'dump program.' We dump the things which destroy us as humans!"


 * This is Leto II remembering, note what he is eager to destroy - not an enslaver, enemy or dangerous thing but "any machine which..." - if FH had thought of this is humans vs. robots, whoever Leto is remembering would want to kill the evil robots, his captors, those things who slay his aunt or something.


 * My point being - the discrepancies are not something fancied by a few rapid fans. They are real, glaring and important to note on in any encyclopedia which takes the subject serious. I do not doubt that there are fans and reviewers who liked the new books (and that should be noted), but they are not the same people who really enjoyed Dune. This is not the place to review things, but I believe we should note that the new books are "space adventure" and follow in the tracks of Flash Gordon, Star Trek and Terminator more than they do the serious SF of Frank Herbert. --Lundse 09:29, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * A few more discrepancies:


 * No-rooms were invented well into the time of The Tyrant--they were one of the advances against prescience he was hoping for -not during House Atreides.
 * The use of "mass voice" in House Harkonnen, where the Baron invades Chapterhouse with a no-ship. Besides the fact that no-ships and no-rooms weren't invented until near the end of The Tyrant's reign, voice has always been about the ability of a trained user to pitch their voice in a way that speaks to the listener's subconscious, requiring at least some personal knowledge of the listener.  The listener is fully aware of the Bene Gesserit using it.  Group use and invisibility are just...
 * Chapterhouse, the planet housing the BG's headquarters, is always kept secret as to its location. There's no way the Baron would know where to find it.


 * You know, Lundse, maybe we have enough here for a 'discrepancies' page! --Justin Johnson 15:49, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Yep, the section under discussion and other relevant articles (Jihad, Mentat) could link to it. That might also be a place to let everyones side be shown, and would make it clear to anyone bothering to check that there is a real case of these matters. For now, I assume we wait a bit and see if there are any response/counterarguments before inserting the new controversy segment below? --Lundse 18:29, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * The information about the No-globe could have changed over time as most information does.
 * Every Mentat is addicted to Sappho Juice - every noble/anyone worth anything is addicted to Spice or uses it for a geriatric purpose which by default makes the dependant on it to live thus a form of addiction


 * No one is belittling the BG. In fact, in the Legends series they are extremely powerful telepaths and telekenetic women. It is all explained there. Everyone knows that the Tleilaxu are religious fanatics; because it was a revelation to A BENE GESSERIT does not make it a revelation to them all.


 * In The House series there are people who know/assume that Shaddam had Elrood killed.
 * The story of House Vernius may not be over yet... Remember that there is another series coming out in between the original and the House series'.


 * Jessica does not meet Paulus. All she knows about him is hearsay. She came right before Kalia attempted an assassination of Leto I.


 * The Baron makes it clear in the House Series that he wants people to think that the fat is a result of over indulgence so he wouldn't be judged as weak - I thought that was very clever and in a Feudal system the strong are prided. Some people claim Caesar had an affliction that he hid. I find no problem in this.


 * The Atreides did rescue Duncan from Harkonnen bondage. Read the damn books - It doesn't say exactly how in the originals and KJA + Brian have done a respectable job of recreating this.


 * When Liet met Gurney he was like 10 years old, Gurney was like 20-30... They meet again like 15-20 years later when they are much older and have been through much in their respective lives. Moreover, who would remember some random Fremen kid that they met. Would you remember some little kid that you met for a small period of time... In addition, he was under a different name and identity. That's understandable... In fact, I met someone recently that i didn't recognize and i haven't seen them in under 5 years as opposed to the 15-20 years that they haven't seen each other so i have no qualms about this.  Leto gave Gurney a place to stay and an honorable job after he left the Harkonnens, thus he did rescue him in a way. He just meant that he owed him a debt.  Duncan's killed many people... I'm sure he would forget the first person who he killed.


 * The record states that but he was actually born on Kaitan. He was sent back to Caladan almost instantly that it doesn't matter and how is this prudent to the story at all. Forget Kaitan! One of my friends was born in another country but he came here before his first year and he claims to be born here.


 * In regards to the Butlerian Jihad - I'm sure Frank intended it to be the machine war since he himself wrote "thou shall not make a machine in the likeness of a human". Now if it were just a man vs man war - that wouldn't be the law... It had to be something tragic that was done by someone who made a machine in the likeness of a human - The Titans - They are the humans with technology against the humans without - the cymechs had embodied human brains as well. IN any regard, you can still use your philosophical statement with this machine crusade. It doesn't have to be separate from one another. Maybe the people didn't want to speak the name of the machine/human hybrids anymore... maybe they forgot - who knows - this is 10,000 years prior after all. --65.49.222.35 20:41, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * All of your speculations/justifications/interpretations are irrelevant to the topic at hand, namely the fact that a large number of Dune fans do care about the discrepancies and don't like the prequels just because of that. That's the issue here, and that's what's being reported on.  What we're trying to do here is come up with a balanced characterization of the dispute that neither endorses nor denies it.  So we say "some fans think this; other fans think that".  You can't deny that the controversy itself exists.


 * You said, in our messenger chat, that you didn't want people to be turned off the prequels by reading that there's controversy over them. Too bad.  There is controversy, and it needs to be described.  We're not here to improve sales for Brian Herbert and KJA.  We're here to neutrally describe the controversy.  The fact that you don't think those fans are justified is irrelevant; the fact that someone may not buy the prequels because of that is irrelevant.


 * If nothing else, your rationalizing of the discrepancies just makes me more disgusted with the prequels because of the back flips you do. Duncan wouldn't remember his first kill?  Who are you kidding?  The Bene Gesserit are telepaths and telekinetics in the prequels, but not in the original series?  It's absurd.  --Justin Johnson 21:08, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Again, I agree. Changing the Bene Gesserit to telepaths completely misses any point they help carry in the original chronicles, and I am sorry for saying this, but the fact that you, Zeus, believe that FH thought of the Jihad as a machine-war is exactly the reason why Wikipedia needs to spell out that these discrepancies are real, so that others who go to read the books do not do violence to the original work in order to try and fit the new work in.

Now, about those inconsistencies...


 * You write:
 * Every Mentat is addicted to Sappho Juice - every noble/anyone worth anything is addicted to Spice or uses it for a geriatric purpose which by default makes the dependant on it to live thus a form of addiction.
 * True about the spice, but if you read Dune, you will find Piter addiction mentioned many times, and FH was too good a writer to have done that without reason. I am not going to analyze the book for you here, but check out the conversations between Piter and the Baron and consider whether it should have been left out.


 * You write:
 * No one is belittling the BG. In fact, in the Legends series they are

extremely powerful telepaths and telekenetic women. It is all explained there. Everyone knows that the Tleilaxu are religious fanatics; because it was a revelation to A BENE GESSERIT does not make it a revelation to them all.
 * Yes, they are powerful telekinesist (is that a word?) and as such uber-awesome in the prequels. But in Dune, they are interesting, mainly because their powers seem realistic and tie in with their philosophy, purpose and theme. The Bene Gesserit of Dune are knowledgeable in politics, sociology and religion - why did they not know that the Tleilaxu were religious? Is your argument that it was just one BG who did not know? If so, that is absurd, the BG in question is far too high in the hierarchy not to know (as would most any BG of any rank, considering the importance in understanding the Tleilaxu). I am sorry, but this an inconsistency, both in what powers they have, and with regards to the Tleilaxu.


 * You write:
 * In regards to the Butlerian Jihad - I'm sure Frank intended it to be the machine war since he himself wrote "thou shall not make a machine in the likeness of a human". Now if it were just a man vs man war - that wouldn't be the law... It had to be something tragic that was done by someone who made a machine in the likeness of a human - The Titans - They are the humans with technology against the humans without - the cymechs had embodied human brains as well. IN any regard, you can still use your philosophical statement with this machine crusade. It doesn't have to be separate from one another. Maybe the people didn't want to speak the name of the machine/human hybrids anymore... maybe they forgot - who knows - this is 10,000 years prior after all.
 * They remember not to build machines, but not why? That is absurd. Please reread the quotes on this above. Please explain how these "Titans" are the "other men" in this quote: "Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them."
 * And someone talking about the reasons for the jihad (while it is going on): "We must negate the machines-that-think. Humans must set their own guidelines." This is not the rhetoric of someone who is being hunted down by terminators and was formerly a slave of them, please explain why FH would include such a quote if he believed the machines were enslaving humans as per the terminator movies?


 * Your sole argument is that the law against machines must mean that it was machines they fought against. By the same logic, the law against counterfeiting currency means that eg. the US must have fought a war against an army made of false pennies. The argument simple does not hold, sorry. The Butlerian "law" itself clearly points to a religious/philosophical reason. Aside all that, the Heidegger-inspired points of the jihad would be totally lost if it had been a war for survival. --Lundse 21:29, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I've created a Discrepancies (Dune) page where we can neutrally catalog these, along with possible explanations or rationalizations. This way we can simply link the discrepancies in text, rather than deal with them everywhere else.  Later on I'll move as much of what we've listed here to that page.  --Justin Johnson 21:33, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

>>Piter de Vries is addicted to Sappho juice. This is not mentioned at all in Dune, but much is, on the other hand, made of his addiction to spice (which House Atreides doesn't mention).<<

The Piter in the HOUSE books is killed at the end of HOUSE CORRINO, and the Baron requests a new ghola, which is the one who appears in DUNE. Obviously, you haven't even read KJA's & Brian Herbert's novels.


 * You're right, I have read only very little. I have learned a lot

about them, though, in other ways.

>>It appears to be general knowledge that the Tleilaxu are religious fanatics. So how come it is such a major revelation for the Bene Gesserit in Heretics of Dune and is not known to any character in the Chronicles before that?<<

Umm, FIVE THOUSAND YEARS have passed. You can't imagine that the Tleilaxu have managed to change outside perceptions of them in five millennia?


 * No. The BG has archives and are the one group in the dune universe who would never forget something like that. Nor would they fall for a deceptive secularization ploy. Someone trying to make this fit in is, again, exactly the reason why people have to know there are "canonization" issues - so they won't try.

>>Crown Prince Shaddam and Count Fenring take great care to make sure no one discovers that Emperor Elrood has been poisoned. The Almanak en-Ashraf in Dune makes it clear that it was generally known that Elrood "succumbed to chaumurky".

So, obviously, some time after Shaddam was overthrown the secret came out. Duh!!! This is a pointless Question!!!


 * Never mind...

>>House Vernius of Ix is a major player in all the prequels. However, Dune Messiah refers to the Ixian Confederacy, indicating no noble House ruled the planet.

So, there's a Confederacy by the time of Paul's empire and after his Jihad. That says nothing about the government in place at the time of Paul's birth. You are fabricating "inconsistencies" without thinking them through.


 * So the house just got disbanded out of a sudden. I am not saying that is impossible, but it does require yet another step to be made for the two universes to fit together.

>>One of the central plot points is the death of Leto's father, Duke Paulus. This happens before Jessica is born. However, in Dune, Jessica displays what can only be first-hand experience of the Old Duke.<<

This is explained thoroughly in HOUSE CORRINO. Obviously, you haven't read it!


 * Whatever. Does House Corrino state that she met the duke before she was born or that she did not? This is really very simple and does not require reading the books. Either she has met the old duke in HC or she has not. In Dune, she has. Very simple, actually.

>>According to God Emperor of Dune, Duncan had a sister who was killed by Harkonnens. She is nowhere to be seen in House Atreides.

The HOUSE books state that "Duncan's family" was killed by the Harkonnens. In what way does a "sister" not count as part of the "family"??


 * Sorry, I was misinformed.

>>Gurney and Liet-Kynes meet and become good friends yet when they meet again in Dune they don't recognize each other at all.

[You should know the answer to that one]

>> In Dune, Gurney calls Duke Leto "the man who rescued me from a Harkonnen slave pit, gave me freedom, life, and honor". However, in House Harkonnen he escapes the Harkonnens on his own.<<

Have you even read HOUSE HARKONNEN? Gurney couldn't have escaped without the Atreides, and he acknowledges this fully in the prequel novels...

>>the first time Duncan kills someone is when he stabs Trin Kronos (a Moritani) in the back with his sword to save his friend Resser. This takes place on planet Ginaz. Dune [Duncan]: "My sword was firs' blooded on Grumman! Killed a Harkon. . . Harkon . . . killed 'im f'r th' Duke."

Again, you're not reading closely (or at all). When Duncan stabs Kronos, he is not using his own sword.


 * This is nitpicking.


 * And silly. --maru (talk) contribs 19:34, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

>>Paul is born on Kaitan. From the opening paragraph of Dune: "Do not be deceived by the fact that he was born on Caladan and lived his first fifteen years there."

That's been explained numerous times, too. That's a quote from Irulan's propaganda as she is trying to build the myth of Muad'Dib at a time where Kaitain and Shaddam are completely discredited. (Details of those events are to be shown in the "Paul of Dune" trilogy.)

All of those quibbles have clear answers if you would only look for them. Unfortunately, it seems those who continue to propagate this are frantically looking for "errors" without looking for solutions at all.


 * I see you are avoiding the two main issues, The Jihad and the BG's psychic powers. Please respond to them and let's forget the small nitpicks.

and now the coup de grâce..

In the original DUNE MOVIE intro, there is a sequence in which it explains the Dune chronology and backstory. There is a mention of "thinking machines" in there with detailed pictures and the aforementioned war. Although, that movie is not the best thing to base canonicity on, it just serves to show that Frank did authorize, if not create, a "thinking machine war concept" while he was still alive; which by default negates the entire "controversy" section entirely... Thus, Brian could not have fabricated it and insinuating that he fabricated the documents thereof is just in spite of your feelings towards them.


 * I am sorry, I do not remember that scene. And the movie was completely of base in so many areas that it hardly matters what it says - but if it was Lynch or one of the people mucking up his work who invented the AI vs human angle, that is interesting.
 * It should be deleted... Once again, it has no purpose in an encyclopedia if anywhere at all.

--Zeus69962 06:51, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry if I was misinformed about the prequels, but there are still discrepancies which I believe to be far too glaring to say the books are part of the same universe. These are:

The Bene Gesserit "forgetting" that the Tleilaxu are religious fanatics. Even if they changed their opinion it is weird how in later books they do not realize "we were wrong" but that they think "we just discovered something entirely new and unthought-of".

Bene Gesserit wielding psychic powers. This is thematically catastrophic, but it also raises the question of why they never use those powers or even think of them (we have a *lot* of internal dialogue of BGs) in Dune and beyond.

The Butlerian Jihad. I will not restate my arguments that FH did not see it as an AI vs human conflict, I will only ask that you try responding to some of those arguments.

I am still hoping we can discuss this (and to others reading in, I am sorry if this seems fanboy nitpicking to you all - if so encouraged I will be willing to move this discussion to private talk pages). Lundse 12:28, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

>>The Bene Gesserit "forgetting" that the Tleilaxu are religious fanatics. Even if they changed their opinion it is weird how in later books they do not realize "we were wrong" but that they think "we just discovered something entirely new and unthought-of".

That is just pretentiousness on the part of the BG... which is very common amongst them. Plus, they probably don't want to admit it... But the main point is history is 1) written by the victors, 2) bits and pieces get lost and 3) things change - sometimes.


 * What is just pretentiousness? That they know something about history?

I am beginning to doubt that you have read the original novels, and you certainly do not sound like you have understood them. And how can they "not want to admit something" in an internal dialogue? And how exactly has history been rewritten by the victors in this case? And that things "change - sometimes" means what? That suddenly the Tleilaxu never were religious fanatics, that everyones memories of them change? If you are going to take that line, you might as well claim that Star Trek and Dune is the same universe, people just forgot, history was rewritten and things have changed...

>>Bene Gesserit wielding psychic powers. This is thematically catastrophic, but it also raises the question of why they never use those powers or even think of them (we have a *lot* of internal dialogue of BGs) in Dune and beyond.

I'm not going to say this again - EVOLUTION!! Things change over time... That is one of the main themes in the DUNE saga... Especially in Children of Dune onwards.


 * Evolution? How is evolution going to remove a useful trait like

psychic powers? I do not believe you fully understand what the word means... And are you claiming that one the main themes of the chronicles is that sometimes, things change for no apparent reason and without any explanation and therefore so should basic facts of the universe?

>>The Butlerian Jihad. I will not restate my arguments that FH did not see it as an AI vs human conflict, I will only ask that you try responding to some of those arguments.

I don't understand what you mean here?? but I already explained that Frank Herbert DID see it as an AI VS Human conflict - or at least authorized it while he was still alive... Watch the Dune movie Intro - They explain the Thinking Machines and their rule over humanity with pictures... clear as a sunny day in July with no pollution. Please stop persisting in this outlandish theory and please get your facts straight before posting in here.

here is the aforementioned picture directly from the Movie for your enjoyment:

http://duneinfo.com/giedi_prime/dvd/prologue/images/thinking.jpg

and also this...

http://duneinfo.com/giedi_prime/dvd/prologue/images/jihad.jpg

look at who the humans are attacking

as well as this...who is that who is enslaving the humans in this picture - could it be the thinking machines? :)

http://duneinfo.com/giedi_prime/dvd/prologue/images/slaves.jpg

and a next picture again - This one is from before the Butlerian Jihad about humans in a state of apathy leading to the BJ.

http://duneinfo.com/giedi_prime/dvd/prologue/images/happy.jpg

Is this proof enough for those of who you sprout these theories (if not of Frank creating it himself) then of him at least authorizing it. Ergo, Brian COULD NOT have falsified the documents and created this himself.

Point final et le cas a fermé... N'est pas? Let's shut down this controversy section! It has no place here and is filled with misconstrued statements stemming from your spite for KJA and Brian. This is POV to the extreme.


 * The movie is not canon, neither are the prologue made for the DVD,

nor the pictures you have shown - they are irrelevant and muddling the issue (though quite interesting). I have given you many Frank Herbert quotes that contradict what you are claiming. Please try responding to these.

>>I am still hoping we can discuss this (and to others reading in, I am sorry if this seems fanboy nitpicking to you all - if so encouraged I will be willing to move this discussion to private talk pages)

I am willing to discuss any matter you have pertaining to Dune as long as you are able to think of solutions to the problems instead of persisting that KJA and Brian are the devil. KJA and Brian have done a remarkable job at continuing the Dune story and this is an insult to their hard work. The most important thing is that it DOES NOT belong in an encyclopedia... I can't stress that enough... People will go on believing these ludicrous theories which have no back-up.


 * I am willing to discuss this, you do not seem to be so inclined. When

you are ready to have a serious discussion, I will still be waiting. Try replying to one of my arguments, otherwise do not bother. Until you begin discussing this seriously, I will revert your edits to the effect that there is no controversy and no discrepancies. And calling someone a terrorist because you do not agree with them is simply too low. --Lundse 21:42, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Zeus69962 21:28, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I removed that comment long ago... the only way you could have read it is looking through the history. I did not call you that directly, my point was that these things have no basis and you propagating it is just to hurt Brian and KJA for no reason.

Did you see the pictures about the thinking machines? What question did I not reply to? I hope that suffices to satiate your problems about inconsistencies.

Do you have any other questions about these issues? If not please delete the controversy section.

and what exactly does this mean? "Until you begin discussing this seriously, I will revert your edits to the effect that there is no controversy and no discrepancies." I hope it means that you will delete the controversy section and not delete my answers to your issues. Indeed there is no controversy except for those that people create without just cause.

Zeus69962 21:52, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

>>Evolution? How is evolution going to remove a useful trait like psychic powers? I do not believe you fully understand what the word means... And are you claiming that one the main themes of the chronicles is that sometimes, things change for no apparent reason and without any explanation and therefore so should basic facts of the universe?

The "psychic powers" of the sisters of Rossak, when used killed them. Thus, it would be detrimental to their current health to use it. Secondly, the only reason that they did use it was because circumstances were so dire. In most occasions, they chose not to use it unless they had to.

>>The movie is not canon, neither are the prologue made for the DVD, nor the pictures you have shown - they are irrelevant and muddling the issue (though quite interesting). I have given you many Frank Herbert quotes that contradict what you are claiming. Please try responding to these.

I concurred to the fact that the movie should not be the basis of canonicity but my point was that if anything IT SERVES TO SHOW THAT BRIAN DID NOT MAKE IT UP! Nor is there ANY reason to assume that he fabricated the notes thereof... That's all I was saying about that!

Any other questions?

Zeus69962 22:02, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Suggested Rewrite Of 'Controversies' Section
Below is the text of the controversies section. I've made some changes to it. Please make your changes to the same paragraph:


 * Since his death a controversy among a segment of his fans is whether the new Dune books by Brian Herbert and Kevin Anderson should be considered canonical (see --Dune Discrepancies for more detail). Some critics have argued that the prequel books do not have the quality of the original series and lack the articulation of complex ideas about human life that were such a concern of Frank Herbert. Brian Herbert has said that his father had asked him to write further Dune novels (particularly the story of the Butlerian Jihad). Further, Brian is the acknowledged estate of his father, and the two did collaborate on some earlier works; some interpret this to mean that the new books follow Frank's wishes and intent, while others disagree, citing apparent discrepancies in facts and themes betweenthe original books and the new ones.


 * Brian Herbert says that he has, in his possession, notes and outlines made by Frank Herbert for two more books (7 & 8) in the Dune universe, sequels to --Chapterhouse: Dune entitled --Hunters of Dune and Sandworms of Dune respectively. A few fans have expressed doubt that Brian Herbert has the notes and outlines, citing the aforementioned divergence from their interpretation of Frank Herbert's vision and alleging that the reappearance of the notes is conspicuously convenient.  Against that, it has been argued that Brian is Frank's legal heir, so all of Frank's notes would necessarily be in Brian's possession; likewise, it's widely known that Frank Herbert worked on multiple books simultaneously and kept copious notes.


 * Another minor controversy in this is between the fans who view the Dune Encyclopedia as mostly canonical (i.e., except where Frank Herbert himself contradicted it), and cite discrepancies between it and Brian Herbert's books. This is a minor point, since Frank Herbert did not regard it as canonical, and didn't hesitate to contradict it, though he did find it "interesting and entertaining". Regardless of opinion, Brian is the heir to Frank Herbert's estate and its creative properties, so his additions to the Dune universe are prima facie canon where the Dune Encyclopedia is concerned.

Zeus, you can't seriously be proposing that words like "faction", "haranguing", "tirade" are NPOV. Furthermore, putting the positions of critics inside scare-quotes serves to demean their position, and is also POV.

I'm beginning to doubt that you're acting in good faith here. If you don't start taking this more seriously, I'm going to give up trying to engage you here and simply patrol these pages, reverting the POV changes you make without comment.

This isn't a battle of right and wrong, it's about accurately reporting what's happening. --Justin Johnson 23:31, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * We need to find a new word for "claim" since that word is POV as well then... I just put those words in front of your statements since you put claims in front of the things that Brian has said that he has.That belittles him and insinuates that he is a mendacious person or clandestine in an attempt to cover something up.


 * The thing about this is that you do not answer my questions, you just stick with your beliefs without thinking about variables like time (the subsequent effects of which) and evolution of characters/civilizations/technology. Moreover, you reject ideas of characters forgetting things or loosing information when that was a main theme from GOD EMPEROR onwards - facts in history go through a 'broken telephone' type concept and stuff ends up getting distorted. In any regard the beliefs that you have regarding canonicity are up to interpretation; many people agree with Brian and KJA's interpretation

and they are in control. I just don't see a point in arguing these little problems when the larger battle is Star Wars and all that Lucas has stolen from Dune while reaping all the benefits. In addition, compared to the inaccuracies in Star Wars and other speculative fiction (even if these are correct - which i stand by the fact that it's an opinion based thing) there aren't many problems... but once again you are not thinking in the larger sense - the only constant thing is that things persistently change. --Zeus69962 00:42, 15 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm done with you. This is not about Star Wars, this is not about rationalizing the discrepancies, this is not about who is in control of the legacy.  This is about presenting a factual matter of the fan base that you refuse to acknowledge because you fear that acknowledging it somehow justifies it.  You don't understand the purpose of Wikipedia and you don't understand what we're doing here.


 * Until you acknowledge this, I'm going to patrol this page and continue to revert any of your changes that I feel are POV. You might note that I've not reverted several of your changes that I felt were appropriate.


 * Also, the next time you remove text on the talk page that I've put there, I'm going to report you to the administrators here for vandalism. --Justin Johnson 00:48, 15 March 2006 (UTC)


 * This is to let Zeus69962 know that I am done discussing with him on this page. If anyone else wishes to take up the torch and discuss the matter of inconsistencies and KJA & Brian's additions, I will happily do so - but until someone is willing to argue my points I will let them stand as they are. --Lundse 21:58, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Anything that I have said here is the truth unless proven otherwise. Which has yet to be done. Moreover, this section shouldn't be here. I have answered everything. I'm sure this conflicts with KJA and Brian's Legal rights. --Zeus69962


 * What on earth are you talking about? This article and all its contents have exactly nothing to do with the terrible duo's legal rights until it ventures into libel territory, which we are light years from. --maru

(talk) contribs 04:36, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * The controversy section is untrue - refer to my answers. It is slander. it is a misrepresentation of the facts of someone's creative work in an encyclopedia with the purpose of hurting their image. Aside from the legality, it conflicts with Wikipedia's policies for sure. --Zeus69962 04:52, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * refer here to read the truth
 * http://www.psychcentral.com/psypsych/Frank_Herbert#Controversies

--Zeus69962 05:32, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Bullshit. It is not untrue; it is a neutral summary of along-standing argument within the Dune fandom (which I feel a

little qualified to assess, being part of it). It misrepresents no facts. And you are wildly accusing the editors of seeking to hurt the terrible duo's reputation- which is a lot closer to slander than the section itself, let me tell you.
 * As for policies... I see no policies violated. Unless it is your verging-on-personal attacks here. --maru (talk) contribs 06:46, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Watch your language! and no it is not there are no "apparent discrepancies in facts and themes between the original books and the new ones" if there are, anyone has yet to prove it. Plus, claiming that Brian fabricated the notes is outlandish. In addition, my retaliatory attacks were provoked and have been dealt with long ago. --Zeus69962


 * As well, you referring to KJA and Brian as "The Terrible Duo" is extremely POV and should not be allowed here. This is not a forum and should not be used for unfounded information.


 * So now you want to censor my language on talk pages, as well?

There are indeed discrepancies; I refer you to the FAQ of the terrible duo's website: [http://www.dunenovels.com/FAQ.html http://www.dunenovels.com/FAQ.html]. --maru (talk) contribs 17:52, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Vulgarities and opinions do not belong in an encyclopedia - These questions all have answers and thus are not "discrepancies". If you want to write opinions, do so on a forum. --Zeus69962 18:21, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Note that this is not part of the article. This is a talk page. --maru (talk) contribs 20:32, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I fully agree with Zeus on this. All of these questions have answers and you are continuing the propagation of obviously uninformed opinions as he has said. You obviously have not read the books or you haven't read them well. If you had then you would see that you are wrong in this and that all of these questions have been addressed at some point in time. This is wrong! I am going to report you! --Kwisatz Haderach 00100 22:38, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Also, that article is a rip off of the article that Zeus showed here. As well as propagating uninformed opinions, you are entering plagiarized work in here that you altered to make slant negatively. That conflicts with Wikipedia's copyright policy in many ways! --Kwisatz Haderach 00100 22:44, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! It seems someone else ACTUALLY knows something here about the story. --Zeus69962 22:54, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * You dumb git. You think an obvious sock puppet will change anything? No doubt the facts do not matter to you, but you might find actually reading the whole of the article (and especially the bottom) enlightening. --maru

(talk) contribs 23:35, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Marudubshinki, you obviously do not know what you are talking about. Refer to the sandbox to make foolish claims, not here! --Zeus69962 23:40, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * This is a direct quote from Dune: The Battle of Corrino (2004) by Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson based on the notes of Frank Herbert.


 * "The gravest error a thinking person can make is to believe that one particular version of history is absolute fact. History is recorded by a series of observers, none of whom is impartial. The facts are distorted by sheer passage of time and - especially in the case of the Butlerian Jihad - thousands of years of humanity's dark ages, deliberate misrepresentations by religious sects, and the inevitable corruption that comes from an accumulation of careless mistakes. The wise person, then, views history as a set of lessons to be learned, choices and ramifications to be considered and discussed, and mistakes that should never again be made." -PRINCESS Irulan, preface to the History of the Butlerian Jihad
 * --Zeus69962 23:37, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Zeus is right. --Anon.


 * Am I the only one who's starting to believe that Zeus IS Brian Herbert himself or possibly his agent? -Robrecht 18:40, 19 March 2006 (UTC)


 * That's just silly- I doubt those two would have this much free time. They are obviously just misguided fanboys. Besides, I'd like to think that BH couldn't write as badly as Zeus and his sockpuppets if he tried. --maru (talk) contribs 18:49, 19 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Does it matter who I am; just know that the person to whom you are refering to knows what he is saying... Read the books and you'd know that. All of these questions have a subsequent answer. Most of which I have already answered myself.

--Zeus69962 20:24, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Refer here for most of the answers - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Lundse/Zeus69962_Dune_discrepancy_discussion

Zeus69962 23:12, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Zeus' reasoning seems very logical. I request that this be removed Leeshy 02:53, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I totally agree with zeus on this. These questions are without merit and all have rational answers. I think it should be taken out as well. It shouldn't be here. It is not a controversy.Nat18327 05:06, 20 March 2006 (UTC)