Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by joa8
Dune by Frank Herbert
4.0
Sci-fi meets political intrigue and for the most part the reader is very invested in the plot. It is a big book so inevitably things slow down a bit in the middle chapter. However, possibly to correct this, the plot skips significant amounts of time in the third part. But I can see past that for this is a very good book. The idea, the science, the characters are all well thought-through. The end pulls through. The “war” is a bit hurried, but there is a satisfying fight and a very heartbreaking dialogue.
Quotes I liked:
“Humans are almost always lonely.”
“The way the mind will lean under stress is strongly influenced by training.”
“The most persistent principles of the universe were accidents and error.”
“The universe is full of doors.” (This is an absolutely amazing line of dialogue for it brings a relationship between two characters full circle.)
FUN FACT: Atreides is an ancient Greek last name deriving of the name Atreus which means fearless. (Not the nicest of families, the ancient one that is).
The book has several outdated views. Its three main criticisms seem to be:
1. White saviour narrative
2. Bad lgbt+ representation
3. Outdated gender ideas
To these I say that first and foremost we have to take into consideration that it was written in 1965.
(Maybe SPOILERS)
1. Well, the book is written in a messiah/chosen one narrative. It is also pretty self-aware of it, which I appreciated. And, yes, the chosen one isn’t of the dessert. He isn’t necessarily the type of he came to civilise the dessert. He taught them things, but mainly he spends the entire middle section being taught how to do certain things. But the fact is that he is the messiah and he isn’t of the dessert.
2. I’m going to be direct. The Baron is raping young boys. This aligns with his horrible character. This as in the violence of his sexuality. Not the choice of victim. The trouble of course is that he is the only lgbt+ person as well as the only rapist (that we know of) in the book, so in this day and age you could say there is trouble with representation. But if the reader is (how to put it) not a bigot, they will not make the ridiculous association that his sexuality is at fault for his evilness.
3. I will preface his gender politics by saying that I think that both Jessica and Chani are pretty badass. They do not wait to be saved. They are their own full characters (especially Jessica because she has more “airtime”). They save themselves and the chosen one himself.
Now, having said that, the book is filled with teachings about how women behave. How they should do things, how to be with their husbands, how they should be smart and sexy. There is a concubine v. wife idea. How the Dukes love but never marry their concubines. There is also the idea that men Take and women are Give and Muad’Dib (the chosen one) is the only one able to do both. So, yes, the book is sexist. All these are severely ridiculous ideas that should be disregarded along with all the previous horrible outdated views.
Quotes I liked:
“Humans are almost always lonely.”
“The way the mind will lean under stress is strongly influenced by training.”
“The most persistent principles of the universe were accidents and error.”
“The universe is full of doors.” (This is an absolutely amazing line of dialogue for it brings a relationship between two characters full circle.)
FUN FACT: Atreides is an ancient Greek last name deriving of the name Atreus which means fearless. (Not the nicest of families, the ancient one that is).
The book has several outdated views. Its three main criticisms seem to be:
1. White saviour narrative
2. Bad lgbt+ representation
3. Outdated gender ideas
To these I say that first and foremost we have to take into consideration that it was written in 1965.
(Maybe SPOILERS)
1. Well, the book is written in a messiah/chosen one narrative. It is also pretty self-aware of it, which I appreciated. And, yes, the chosen one isn’t of the dessert. He isn’t necessarily the type of he came to civilise the dessert. He taught them things, but mainly he spends the entire middle section being taught how to do certain things. But the fact is that he is the messiah and he isn’t of the dessert.
2. I’m going to be direct. The Baron is raping young boys. This aligns with his horrible character. This as in the violence of his sexuality. Not the choice of victim. The trouble of course is that he is the only lgbt+ person as well as the only rapist (that we know of) in the book, so in this day and age you could say there is trouble with representation. But if the reader is (how to put it) not a bigot, they will not make the ridiculous association that his sexuality is at fault for his evilness.
3. I will preface his gender politics by saying that I think that both Jessica and Chani are pretty badass. They do not wait to be saved. They are their own full characters (especially Jessica because she has more “airtime”). They save themselves and the chosen one himself.
Now, having said that, the book is filled with teachings about how women behave. How they should do things, how to be with their husbands, how they should be smart and sexy. There is a concubine v. wife idea. How the Dukes love but never marry their concubines. There is also the idea that men Take and women are Give and Muad’Dib (the chosen one) is the only one able to do both. So, yes, the book is sexist. All these are severely ridiculous ideas that should be disregarded along with all the previous horrible outdated views.