Why did Tolkien dislike Dune?

[Idril Celebrindal]

Hmm. I do everything on my phone, so you may not see the dots, but you should see an "edit" at the bottom of your post -- it's next to the little square and "Report".

I have the "edit" option on my recent posts, but it's not there on the older ones.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

Oh, yes, now I recall Manwe put a time limit on editing posts. How about send me a PM of (brief! 😄) changes you'd like me to make?

 

[Eljorahir]

"on the one hand/on the other hand"

Tolkien on Dune:
“Thank you for sending me a copy of Dune. I received one last year from Lanier and so already know something about the book. It is impossible for an author still writing to be fair to another author working along the same lines. At least I find it so. In fact I dislike DUNE with some intensity, and in that unfortunate case it is much the best and fairest to another author to keep silent and refuse to comment …"

Paraphrasing Tolkien on Dune:
On the one hand...it would be unfair to give my thoughts regarding Dune so I will refuse to comment.
On the other hand...I disliked it with some intensity.
On the other other hand...I know something about Dune (but I'm not explicitly confirming that I've even read it)

Doesn't announcing that you dislike something with some intensity count as a comment? Is he trying to be ironic?

I find this hilarious. But, then again, I often see humor that maybe isn't really there.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

True, but I was thinking more of his appreciation of some aspects of Eddison's work: literary quality and world-building -- while simultaneously despising his "moral" attitude, to put it that way. A different sort of "one hand/other hand" I think.

 

[Deimos]

Thank you for pointing this out, I think another person mentioned it before as well. I would change the thread title and my post to disliked instead of hated, except that I have no idea how, or if that's even possible. Also, I was not saying that dislike = hate. I was simply abbreviating "dislike with some intensity" to "hate", albeit sloppily. I suppose that a small amount of miscommunication is present whenever the internet is used to communicate. I understand why the "hate" part in my post bothers some people, but I honestly have no idea how to edit it.

I use "hate" (and""love"), as do a lot of people, when talking informally about non serious preferences.
I hate liver and onions... (really, what's not to hate about that? 😣)
But when discussing topics of some importance, clarity is paramount, and requires more precision in one's choice of words .

 

[AaronSecret]

I think because "Dune" is vulgar in a way that it displays dystopia. The book did attempt to deconstruct monarchy, morality and offer cynicism in return. Tolkien liked to find a deeper meaning and had faith in beauty despite corruption, or how to say it - he is more complex than just the negation of good due to disbelief in the Source (Eru). I think the key is hidden in the quote:
And thou, Melkor, shalt see that no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite.

Which is a major display of faith in the coordinated, logical process of nature, surveilled by the Deities' forces, where the beauty and honour of the soul shape the meaning of the world, and even evil is beautiful beyond its distorted concepts, in the essence of the imperishable flame.
I think he preferred "the Queen" ideal to "Sid Vicious" modern deconstruction. I use these as metaphors.

Other than that, I am not sure about the literature stylistic disagreements and narrative preferences. I haven't acquainted myself with that; however, I feel he respected the freedom of speech - I think Tolkien understood that people sometimes prefer dystopia - maybe it just wasn't his cup of tea.

 

[Bomb_Tombadil]

There is such a wealth of literary knowledge in this thread - I have learned a great deal and, having given up on Dune after a few chapters, have nothing to add.

I would just like to ask whether there is a Watsonian explanation in Dune for the 'recycling' of cultural phenomena and indeed names? In my brief scan, I encountered the Bene Gesserit, whose name evidently came from the legal phrase of term-limitation "quamdiu se bene gesserit"; the Landsraad on loan from the Holy Roman Empire, the Atreides on loan from Homer and Aeschylus...within the story itself, are these far-future people echoing old Earth terms for some sensible reason? For example, through a conscious desire to recreate solid certainties of the past, when faced with a vast and appalling galaxy? Is there an intentional jumbling of the Greek and the German etc. to give the impression that old parochial Earth distinctions are as nothing, faced with the variety of the modern galaxy? Like the mix of Chinese and American culture in Firefly?

At first, I found it it irritating to see all these familiar words, rather than bold reimaginings. I longed for Gene Wolfe's clever 'defamiliarization' of a world where destriers mix with alzabos...Then it occurred to me that there is probably some clever and satisfying reason in Herbert's mind, which I was not patient and generous enough to wait for. But it made me wonder whether Tolkien, with his love of principled sub-creation and his intolerance of importations from the "primary" world (such as when C.S. Lewis imported Father Christmas to Narnia), might have faulted Herbert for not creating cultures from wholer cloth, for borrowing too much? Perhaps someone can enlighten me.

I saw the first film and saw its honour-and-vengeance morality as being stolidly and uprightly pagan, worthy of Homer. Deficient or incomplete, but not willfully twisted. I gather that the characters' motivations are revealed to be more and more cold and grandly inhuman as the narrative goes on.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

I longed for Gene Wolfe's clever 'defamiliarization' of a world where destriers mix with alzabos

I'm not sure I grasp your meaning -- Wolfe did use Greek words himself, like "peltast" -- though what he was describing was hardly that. I seem to remember his explaining the use of such terns, though I don't recall what he said about it.

In a way, it's a bit unfair to compare authors of different "generations"; Herbert was notable at the time for trying to think about a whole ecology, something mostly lacking in the SF of his day, though expected today -- at least in part due to his influence. Tolkien, of course, was well aware early on of the need for "plausibility", but dealing in fantasy, was ignored as irrelevant by most SF writers of the time.

You might enjoy Harry Harrison's Eden series for its attempt to seriously think through and work out the implications for a world developed differently from ours -- in this case, an earth where a major meteor strike didn't kill off the dinosaurs.

 

[Deimos]

...

You might enjoy Harry Harrison's Eden series for its attempt to seriously think through and work out the implications for a world developed differently from ours -- in this case, an earth where a major meteor strike didn't kill off the dinosaurs.

Ummm.... the meteors are over in the Trivia thread (just thought you might like to know that... 😇)

 

[Radaghast]

I've started on this book and, so far, I'm a bit put off by the idea of a planet that's entirely desert. But I'm gonna give the benefit of the doubt that there'll an explanation for this, as well as for how water is deadly to worms and machines that have wings like birds. I've not gone very far into the book, so, please, no spoilers.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

The planet in this novel has no land at all, being entirely covered with an ocean.

 

[Deimos]

I've started on this book and, so far, I'm a bit put off by the idea of a planet that's entirely desert. But I'm gonna give the benefit of the doubt that there'll an explanation for this, as well as for how water is deadly to worms and machines that have wings like birds. I've not gone very far into the book, so, please, no spoilers.

It's kind of like reading Tolkien; his stories are fantasy.
So with Dune...as long as you can accept his initial "premise" (his "sub-creation") it works.
At least, it did with me.

 

[Radaghast]

It's kind of like reading Tolkien; his stories are fantasy.
So with Dune...as long as you can accept his initial "premise" (his "sub-creation") it works.
At least, it did with me.

I mean, it's not a deal-breaker. After all, Star Wars has its ice, jungle, desert, etc. planets too (perhaps an idea Lucas cribbed from Dune?). But Star Wars is at least as much fantasy as it is science fiction so it seems a bit more viable (for lack of a better word) there. I expected Dune to be more science fiction. Ironically, Middle-earth is perhaps more believable from a geological standpoint.

 

[Radaghast]

The planet in this novel has no land at all, being entirely covered with an ocean.
View attachment 40038

Another author I want to read more of.

 

[Deimos]

I mean, it's not a deal-breaker. After all, Star Wars has its ice, jungle, desert, etc. planets too (perhaps an idea Lucas cribbed from Dune?). But Star Wars is at least as much fantasy as it is science fiction so it seems a bit more viable (for lack of a better word) there. I expected Dune to be more science fiction. Ironically, Middle-earth is perhaps more believable from a geological standpoint.

Yep, I get you.... Tolkien was pretty consistent with his sub-creation.
It's been so long since I read Dune that I can't recall if things are really explained in depth, or if they just "are".

 

[Radaghast]

Come to think of it, Midworld by Alan Dean Foster (believed to be one of the inspirations for James Cameron's Avatar) features a world that's entirely rainforest, so I guess the idea of a planet with only one environment might just be a common sci-fi trope. Oh well, just forget I said anything 😄

 

[Ugluk]

It might useful to compare Tolkien's comments on E.R.Eddison, about whose work he had conflicting, or we could say "nuanced" views, writing in a 1944 letter to Christopher of hearing Eddison read "a new chapter from an uncompleted romance -- of undiminished power and felicity of expression".

In Letter 199 (1957) he writes:

(My emphasis)

I'd call that as extreme an example of an "on the one hand/on the other hand" attitude about an author as you could find; we can only guess at whether he might have expressed something similar, had he written more about Herbert.

About the Alice stories, it should perhaps be kept in mind that they're filled with parody and satire, aimed at many targets, some, like Victorian politics and moral attitudes, losing their sharpness and relevance to the mere passage of time; some, like the White Knight's song as an elaborate parody of Wordsworth, due to lack of familiarity with their originals; or many which are more or less in-jokes, such as the Hatter's "Twinkle, twinkle, little bat", which, besides parodying the "Little Star" song, something that would have delighted the young Liddell sisters, referred to a mathematics professor at Oxford, who was known as "The Bat" because his lectures flew over the heads of his students.

One more little note:

In this, he reminds me of H.P.Lovecraft, that lover of everything 18th century, and hater of everything 19th, who, when finding himself at any event where "America" ('My Country, 'Tis of Thee') was being sung, would loudly sing the words to "God Save the King". 😄

No fan of Lovecraft but I find myself liking him for this!

 

[Idril Celebrindal]

There is such a wealth of literary knowledge in this thread - I have learned a great deal and, having given up on Dune after a few chapters, have nothing to add.

I would just like to ask whether there is a Watsonian explanation in Dune for the 'recycling' of cultural phenomena and indeed names? In my brief scan, I encountered the Bene Gesserit, whose name evidently came from the legal phrase of term-limitation "quamdiu se bene gesserit"; the Landsraad on loan from the Holy Roman Empire, the Atreides on loan from Homer and Aeschylus...within the story itself, are these far-future people echoing old Earth terms for some sensible reason? For example, through a conscious desire to recreate solid certainties of the past, when faced with a vast and appalling galaxy? Is there an intentional jumbling of the Greek and the German etc. to give the impression that old parochial Earth distinctions are as nothing, faced with the variety of the modern galaxy? Like the mix of Chinese and American culture in Firefly?

At first, I found it it irritating to see all these familiar words, rather than bold reimaginings. I longed for Gene Wolfe's clever 'defamiliarization' of a world where destriers mix with alzabos...Then it occurred to me that there is probably some clever and satisfying reason in Herbert's mind, which I was not patient and generous enough to wait for. But it made me wonder whether Tolkien, with his love of principled sub-creation and his intolerance of importations from the "primary" world (such as when C.S. Lewis imported Father Christmas to Narnia), might have faulted Herbert for not creating cultures from wholer cloth, for borrowing too much? Perhaps someone can enlighten me.

I saw the first film and saw its honour-and-vengeance morality as being stolidly and uprightly pagan, worthy of Homer. Deficient or incomplete, but not willfully twisted. I gather that the characters' motivations are revealed to be more and more cold and grandly inhuman as the narrative goes on.

I don't know about the origin of the Bene Gesserit name or the Atreides being connected to Homer (interesting observation, though), but I do know that Herbert used real languages in Dune. I gave Dune to one of my Arabic-speaking friends just so that she could look at the first few pages, and she said that Lisan-Al-Gaib actually means "he who is many places at once" and "voice from the outer world" in Arabic. I've noticed some familiar words in Chakobsa as well. I think Herbert intended the people in Dune to be our descendants, so it kind of makes sense if they have some similar languages, customs and names to ours.

 

[Radaghast]

A little help, please. At one point Gurney Haleck says, "The she-witch! Alive! The one I swore vengeance against!" Not sure if that is an exact quote but it's close enough. Anyway, first of all, I'm not sure how that makes a lot of sense, but more to the point, I thought it was Thulfir Hawat who suspected Jessica and swore to kill her? I can't even recall that much POV given to Haleck. Am I losing it here? 😕

No spoilers, please, if it can be avoided. I have about 130 pages to go.

 

[Idril Celebrindal]

A little help, please. At one point Gurney Haleck says, "The she-witch! Alive! The one I swore vengeance against!" Not sure if that is an exact quote but it's close enough. Anyway, first of all, I'm not sure how that makes a lot of sense, but more to the point, I thought it was Thulfir Hawat who suspected Jessica and swore to kill her? I can't even recall that much POV given to Haleck. Am I losing it here? 😕

No spoilers, please, if it can be avoided. I have about 130 pages to go.

All of the people who were close to Duke Leto, such as Thufir Hawat, Duncan Idaho and Gurney Halleck knew that Leto "suspected" the Lady Jessica of treatchury (of course, Leto didn't actually believe that she was a traitor, but the only person he told about that was Paul). If you recall, there's a scene after the big banquet that Leto hosts where Gurney Halleck comes back drunk and is making a disturbance. When Jessica tells him to drink coffee, he says, more or less

I don't take orders from a **** Harkonen spy

So he definitely suspected Jessica even then.
You might remember, when the Harkonens destroyed house Atreides they were able to do so because somebody switched off the house shields. Yueh did this, of course, but since Gurney had no reason to suspect him (it was public knowledge that Yueh was Suk School conditioned), he blamed Jessica.
Don't worry, you are not losing it. The first time I read Dune I got it into my head that Hawat was the traitor (not sure what made me think that) untill my dad set me straight.