To be fair, the line between science fiction and fantasy has become more and more blurred over the years. Perhaps its a better divider is to start putting the books into hard sci-fi, sci-fi/fantasy, fantasy categories instead?
I don't know. To me, the labels don't matter as long as I can lose myself in the story. Frank's original six books works for me. Some of Brian's and Kevin J. Anderson's sequels are good, especially the first six sequels - The Butlerian Jihad, The Machine Crusade, the Battle of Corrin, and the three House books.
They clearly relied heavily on Frank's notes and it shows.
I'm going to step out on a ledge and commit heresy: Dune was not all that good.
At the time I first read it, I was nine or so. Precocious little shit, I alternated between Dune and Lord of the Rings as my favorite reading. I honestly don't know how many times I read them, in total, but it was a lot.
Now, here's the thing: I was really impressed with them, the world-building, all the rest. Tolkien? I'm still impressed; the man basically created a set of languages and then wrote a series of books that hung off of them cohesively.
Dune? Not so much. It's all of a piece with the milieu of the times, the eco-freaky late 1960s and 1970s when I first read it. At the time, I was seeing none of the holes in the narrative of the times that I now perceive, and looking back? Dune had... Issues.
First of all, the eco-freak story line. One of the heroes of the story is Liet-Kynes, turned into a woman in the movies. Chani was his daughter, so I'm not too bloody sure how that's being worked out in these new movies; that little change was there just for the current sensibilities; makes no sense in the story, but then what does?
The other thing was the crazed genetic psionic BS. Supposedly, all memories from all people are encoded somehow in the genes, with little attention paid to the details of "How the hell would you know something about the life someone led after the conception of the gene-line scion passing that down to you...?" The whole thing was of a piece with the John Campbell fascination for psionics and mysticism.
Don't even get me started on the religious aspects. The Bulerian Jihad? The Bene Gesserit? Breeding their own Messiah?
I'm going to lay it out there: Dune was not science fiction. It was fantasy. The first book was a bit of inspired fantasy world-building, with just enough elements of classic science fiction woven in so that it could pass, but... Yeah. Fantasy. You can see why everyone but Chilton passed on it.
And, as far as that goes, everything that followed was just ever so much milkery, drawing blood from a long-dead turnip. The series should have ended as a one-off, there with Paul ascending to the throne.
Dune was one of those books of my youth that I tried going back to as an adult, having recommended it to someone I respect, who in turn told me they thought it was terrible and could not get into it at all. Bemused, I went back and read it again.
It wasn't the same experience I had as a pre-teen.
Clarke with... Everything. Asimov, right along with him.
The two of them are both permanently stained with the various and sundry sexual debaucheries that they got up to, right along with MZB and Walter Breen.
And, the writing wasn't all that good, either.
Don't get me wrong: Dune is a worthwhile read. The first one; all following do not exist. And, so long as you turn off any and all rational thought, because the stuff Herbert writes about in Dune is basically fantasy, colored with just enough "SCIENCE!!!" to make it plausible as science fiction vice fantasy. Call it a science-fantasy, I'd be a lot more charitable about it, but when I'm asked to suspend belief and accept giant worms, psionic powers, and the rest...? Nope; not possible. Not as science fiction.
To be fair, the line between science fiction and fantasy has become more and more blurred over the years. Perhaps its a better divider is to start putting the books into hard sci-fi, sci-fi/fantasy, fantasy categories instead?
I don't know. To me, the labels don't matter as long as I can lose myself in the story. Frank's original six books works for me. Some of Brian's and Kevin J. Anderson's sequels are good, especially the first six sequels - The Butlerian Jihad, The Machine Crusade, the Battle of Corrin, and the three House books.
They clearly relied heavily on Frank's notes and it shows.
I'm going to step out on a ledge and commit heresy: Dune was not all that good.
At the time I first read it, I was nine or so. Precocious little shit, I alternated between Dune and Lord of the Rings as my favorite reading. I honestly don't know how many times I read them, in total, but it was a lot.
Now, here's the thing: I was really impressed with them, the world-building, all the rest. Tolkien? I'm still impressed; the man basically created a set of languages and then wrote a series of books that hung off of them cohesively.
Dune? Not so much. It's all of a piece with the milieu of the times, the eco-freaky late 1960s and 1970s when I first read it. At the time, I was seeing none of the holes in the narrative of the times that I now perceive, and looking back? Dune had... Issues.
First of all, the eco-freak story line. One of the heroes of the story is Liet-Kynes, turned into a woman in the movies. Chani was his daughter, so I'm not too bloody sure how that's being worked out in these new movies; that little change was there just for the current sensibilities; makes no sense in the story, but then what does?
The other thing was the crazed genetic psionic BS. Supposedly, all memories from all people are encoded somehow in the genes, with little attention paid to the details of "How the hell would you know something about the life someone led after the conception of the gene-line scion passing that down to you...?" The whole thing was of a piece with the John Campbell fascination for psionics and mysticism.
Don't even get me started on the religious aspects. The Bulerian Jihad? The Bene Gesserit? Breeding their own Messiah?
I'm going to lay it out there: Dune was not science fiction. It was fantasy. The first book was a bit of inspired fantasy world-building, with just enough elements of classic science fiction woven in so that it could pass, but... Yeah. Fantasy. You can see why everyone but Chilton passed on it.
And, as far as that goes, everything that followed was just ever so much milkery, drawing blood from a long-dead turnip. The series should have ended as a one-off, there with Paul ascending to the throne.
Dune was one of those books of my youth that I tried going back to as an adult, having recommended it to someone I respect, who in turn told me they thought it was terrible and could not get into it at all. Bemused, I went back and read it again.
It wasn't the same experience I had as a pre-teen.
Feed this heretic to Shai-Hulud!!!! His water is unclean!!!!!
Hey, I'm the same with Clarke's Rama series. People swear its the greatest and I can't even get through three chapters without hurling.
To each his own.
Thanks for reading and for commenting!
Clarke with... Everything. Asimov, right along with him.
The two of them are both permanently stained with the various and sundry sexual debaucheries that they got up to, right along with MZB and Walter Breen.
And, the writing wasn't all that good, either.
Don't get me wrong: Dune is a worthwhile read. The first one; all following do not exist. And, so long as you turn off any and all rational thought, because the stuff Herbert writes about in Dune is basically fantasy, colored with just enough "SCIENCE!!!" to make it plausible as science fiction vice fantasy. Call it a science-fantasy, I'd be a lot more charitable about it, but when I'm asked to suspend belief and accept giant worms, psionic powers, and the rest...? Nope; not possible. Not as science fiction.