Scan barcode
ophiuchus's reviews
6 reviews
Dune by Frank Herbert
adventurous
inspiring
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.0
My five star rating categories:
- Potential (for re-reading): 100%
- Very high. If a third Dune movie is to be made, I will be rereading this entry again before viewing it. Furthermore, this is my third time reading this novel--extremely rare for me. Even if a third movie isn't made, I will definitely find time for this guy at some point again in the future.
- Protagonists (ratio of believable to unbelievable characters): 25%
- This book suffers from mild Gary Stu syndrome in that the protagonist himself is believable given our privileged readers-eyes-only insights into his psychology, but the actions (and the reasons for them) of the characters around him are verging on the absurd as Paul (consciously or otherwise) uses his Reality Distortion Field to get his way.
- Plot (how well-structured/compelling it is): 50%
- This is a tough category to grade for this novel. From one perspective, this is a novel of epically plotted proportions, highly ambitious in scope and detail and actually follows through on its foreshadowing... mostly. The very ending of the book is one of the most infuriating ways I've ever seen a "classic" novel end--basically, "find out what happens next in volume 2". I have never read volume 2 and am (in the near term) unlikely to given that online reviews of it suggest a twelve year time jump from the end of this book to the next one.
- Premise (interestingness of the overall concept of the text): 75%
- It's difficult to list how many different concepts are introduced to the "beginner" SF reader in this text, and it would have been especially novel to audiences upon first publication. That said, upon finding out that a great deal of its political intrigue and background are loosely thefted from a 1960 fictional account of the USSR's military adventures in the middle east, I am less inclined to give this category full points for originality.
- Prose (how smoothly the prose flows/how vivid the description is/how clear the dialogue is): 50%
- There are portions of the text that are extremely enjoyable to read. There are other portions that could have used an editor. There are whole chapters that jump around inside multiple peoples' heads without a whole lot of rationale for such telling instead of showing. Still, there are no obvious "yikes" moments re: grammar or linguistic logic, so it has that going for it. Very quotable, but also large portions that are simply... prosaic.
Overall:
- I recommend this book to people who want to understand what on Earth science fiction is all about (after you've read the Foundation series, of course). Every subsequent entry in the genre, textual or otherwise, has a trace of the spice running in its blood.
- I do not recommend this book to anyone who hates the Gary Stu trope/protagonists with an unbelievably massive case of "main character syndrome". This guy can do anything and everything, largely because the story is more interesting if he can than if he can't. Don't expect realistic character arcs here.
- I 50/50 recommend this book to anyone who likes the Star Wars franchise and wants to read a novel and not a novelization related to the films. Lucas clearly stole the premise for New Hope from Dune, but don't assume the plots will necessarily be very similar. You may enjoy finding what is similar and what is different here, you mind it irritating to notice that everything is just a little off from what you'd expect after a lifetime of ingesting """content""" from a galaxy far, far away. The question is, are you Padme with her fond memories of lying on the beach, or are you Anakin with his hatred of sand? It may come down to something that petty. Dune has been called many things, but one thing it is not is "universally beloved."
Thessaly: The Complete Trilogy by Jo Walton
informative
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.0
Volition. Equal significance. Plato.
Plato’s Republic is put into action! How? Well, a little divine inspiration goes a long way… plus some literal divinity. This book is a thought experiment about a thought experiment. Get ready for a lot of talking!
1) Potential (for rereading): very low. What you see is what you get with this trilogy. Plus the third act/book has moments that *really* drag. That said, I will be reading the works referenced in this one, so there’s a plus. .25/1.
Plato’s Republic is put into action! How? Well, a little divine inspiration goes a long way… plus some literal divinity. This book is a thought experiment about a thought experiment. Get ready for a lot of talking!
1) Potential (for rereading): very low. What you see is what you get with this trilogy. Plus the third act/book has moments that *really* drag. That said, I will be reading the works referenced in this one, so there’s a plus. .25/1.
2) Protagonists (proportion of believable, people-like characters): .5/1. There are a couple of very interesting characters here. Also a couple of mind-numbingly tedious ones that could not exist in any universe except that of the author’s imagination.
3) Plot (well-structured/no holes):
.25/1. The “plot”, such as it is, is not what you’re really reading this book for. That said, it is there and has an overarching frame that is at least logical if not very satisfying. The lack of any sort of meaningful foreshadowing will really grate on some genre readers.
.25/1. The “plot”, such as it is, is not what you’re really reading this book for. That said, it is there and has an overarching frame that is at least logical if not very satisfying. The lack of any sort of meaningful foreshadowing will really grate on some genre readers.
4) Premise (interestingness): .75/1. This is the category I read this book for and it mostly delivered on the concept. There were a couple of hand-wavey / unnecessarily elided scenes that left me feeling blue-balled, but nothing seriously disappointing.
5) Prose (flow): yikes. For a professionally published book written by a veteran author, there were more than a few sentences that made me do a double take because they were so needlessly convoluted, and not in the intentional way obviously noticed at other junctures in the book. The editor really failed to do their job with this one. .25/1.
Who should read this book:
People who want to understand what on Earth is going on inside the heads of those people working at new AI companies cranking out LLMs like there’s no tomorrow (OpenAI, Anthropic, etc.).
Who should not read this book:
anyone who hates philosophy/thought PHIL 101 was too boring to stay awake for in college.
Who maybe should / maybe shouldn’t read this:
fans of speculative fiction. You could really enjoy it. You could also find it really annoying. Like Greek mythology? Absolutely yes. Find the Olympian pantheon overdone? Stay away!
Who should read this book:
People who want to understand what on Earth is going on inside the heads of those people working at new AI companies cranking out LLMs like there’s no tomorrow (OpenAI, Anthropic, etc.).
Who should not read this book:
anyone who hates philosophy/thought PHIL 101 was too boring to stay awake for in college.
Who maybe should / maybe shouldn’t read this:
fans of speculative fiction. You could really enjoy it. You could also find it really annoying. Like Greek mythology? Absolutely yes. Find the Olympian pantheon overdone? Stay away!
Content Warnings
Moderate: Rape
The rape scenes are integral to the plot and are well discussed in a reasonably detached and objective manner multiple times in the book. It’s not torture porn, but there was one rape instance that seemed like the author enjoyed writing it just a little too much.