You asked for it.
/Puts geek hat on
Tagaziel said:
I've finished Hunters of Dune and I've yet to see how horrible it is. I don't mind [spoiler:d78c4cf598]Omnius and Erasmus making a return, since it provides an interesting closure - the world was born from the Butlerian Jihad and it will end with one[/spoiler:d78c4cf598]
It provides interesting closure to those cheesy spin-offs. I'm afraid their credibility goes out the window when they introduce elements of their own prequels, in a really clumsy attempt to make them seem more canonical and legitimate. Unless you're saying one of them is a transvestite robot? For real?
There's nothing to suggest anything like them in the previous books, if anything there's
strong evidence in Chapterhouse for them being evolved, independent facedancers. There's really no evidence elsewhere.
Besides the fact that with all the prescience going on over tens of thousands of years, and two omniscient characters who's
raison d'etre was the Golden Path - that of preserving mankind, that nobody would notice such a grave threat?
I don't know why I'm explaining this - they just made it up.
Tagaziel said:
[spoiler:d78c4cf598]the world was born from the Butlerian Jihad and it will end with one[/spoiler:d78c4cf598]
Que? Which world? It was there all along, and there were jihads in between, no?
Besides, The Butlerian Jihad was not supposed to be a Terminator: Judgement Day/Star Wars clone of robot armies and transformers enslaving mankind. Give me a break. Dune's about examining issues like the ecology, power, religion, drugs, sex, eugenics, imperialism, prescience etc. etc. not cheesy go-bot battles.
I don't see how it is poorly written either. Yes, it is a different style, but it isn't automatically worse because of that.
How would you describe that style then? Maybe you're not as demanding, to me, it's b-movie sci-fi space opera for teens. It's Mystery Science 3000 fare.
But that's not the worst part. It's just shallow. The characters lack depth or complexity. The dialogue is laughable. Mawkish soap-opera cheesiness, even from the robots! They rely on a lot of base gore and violence and gimmicky tech. They don't touch on any themes or philosophy in the depth that the originals did. They lowered the bar in every possible criteria except for quantity.
Nobody’s going to confuse the post-Herbert Dune spin-offs with the originals.
"I hear" is not a valid argument. Either provide proof or don't make baseless claims.
No need for being pedantic. It's not baseless at all, it's lacking citation, temporarily (all you had to do was ask or do the homework yourself, not just assume I'm full of shit, thank you).
As I said, I will not read those books, but initially reading
the two highest ranked reviews on Amazon a while back I first learned of the retconning:
I will not give out any spoilers, but what these writers did to justify their various contradictions of Frank Herbert's original books is completely horrifying and outrageous. In the back of my mind as I read that final chapter I was no longer visualizing the Dune universe, I was visualizing the two writers congratulating themselves on their own cleverness at "solving" the neat problem on how to change whatever else they want to change about the universe Frank Herbert created. And to do so calling it the "real" story enabling them to write many more books along the way as well. In my minds eye I saw them slapping each other on the back and that is the vision I held of this book.
Near the end of this book, another disturbing "fact" is revealed to us - that Herbert Sr's works are no longer canon, and are rather an inaccurate history (because Irulan wrote so many books), which is Brian and Kevin's way of saying to us 'We'll retcon whatever we want out of Dune, and you will LIKE IT!'
A little searching reveals this to be the passage in question I believe, in which Irulan outright confronts Paul with the inconsistencies presented in that same book:
Paul of Dune Pgs. 102-103 said:
One morning she went to Paul’s Imperial office to talk with him, holding a first-edition of The Life of Muad’Dib. She dropped the deep blue volume on his desktop, a plane of polished Elaccan bloodwood. “Exactly how much is missing from this story? I’ve been talking with Bludd. In your accounts of your life, you left out vital details.”
He raised his eyebrows. “Your publication has defined my life’s story.”
“You told me you had never left Caladan before your House moved to Arrakis. Whole parts of your youth have been left out.”
“Painful parts.” He frowned at her. “But, more importantly, irrelevant parts. We’ve streamlined the story for mass consumption, just as when you wrote that I was born on Caladan and not Kaitain. It sounds better that way, doesn’t it? We eliminated unnecessary complications, cut off unnecessary questions and explanations.”
She could not hide her frustration. “Sometimes the truth is complicated.”
“Yes, it is.”
“But if I tell a part of the story that directly contradicts what has been published before –”
“If you write it, they will believe it. Trust me.”
And then to follow up,
some joker corresponded with Anderson on the same subject where he himself cites that passage as proof "about the inaccuracies and liberties taken in Irulan’s purported histories of Muad’Dib".
I don't feel that his is in any way cashing in. As Anderson and Herbert explained, if they wanted to cash in on Frank Herbert's legacy, then they wouldn't have waited over a decade to do so. As much as I love Frank Herbert's work, I am going to be the last person to suggest that he was infallible, free from retconning his own work or that his work should not be touched under any circumstances.
Not cashing in? They've written twice as many books, and all they really bring to the table is the name on the cover, and playing "connect the dots" with things already laid out for them. They can't even really do that with any integrity.
I don't understand how the 10 year period is germane (proof!?), they were not associated at all at that time.
Maybe that's the fact that I'm a late arrival to the franchise and don't carry emotional luggage with me.
I don't know that the preexisting fanbase was one based on emotion. I've never seen them do cosplay and fake swordfights and the like. I think the appeal lies somewhere less superficial.
Proof? I've skimmed the synopsis of the mid-quels and I don't see anything contradictive, just an expanded background.
Ironclad.
Mid-quels, heh, is that what they're called? Not inbetweenquels?
You couldn't pay me to read those, but type <book> and inconsistencies/discrepancies in google and see for yourself, if you need more than gamebreakers I already cited.
I'm not interested, there's more wrong with them than just that, knock yourself out.
Yes, this is the dorkiest post ever.
