NationStates Jolt Archive

Dear God, it's a sign of the Apocalypse! The end is near! We're all going to die! For this is a thread not about Isaac Asimov! Oh, the horror! The blackness shall soon swallow us whole! AAAHHHH!

Okay, now that we've all come to terms that the Apocalypse is near let's get on with the thread.

As I said in the opening paragraph, this is a thread not about Isaac Asimov. Yet it has the words 'Masterpiece' and 'Science Fiction', so what else could I possibly be talking about? I think the answer is rather obvious. Frank Herberts Dune.

I read Dune a long time ago and I loved it from the very second that I started reading it. I am a large reader and read many good books, but this one does stand above the majority. But here I am faced with an internal problem: Dune is good, but it's not that good. It's great, I love it, but I don't think it is the Masterpiece of Sci-Fi. Don't get me wrong, it is a phenominal piece of work that sets a new standard for Sci-Fi and it is definitely one of my favorites, but there are others that I feel are superior. So, I seek the wisdom of the members of NS General.

Now, after the ambulances cart off the ones who suffered a heart attack over the last sentence, here's the point of this thead. I'd like to know why Dune is considered the Masterpiece of Sci-Fi. What sets it above all else? Or rather, what do you think sets it above all else? Is it because it combines both advanced and ancient technology, because of the shocking detail with which Herbert constructed the Universe of the series, or do you just like knife fights? Whatever the reason, tell it here.

P.S. This is a thread about Dune and only Dune. Please do not take the time to state why you think other novels are better than Dune, I've got more than enough threads about that already. Please keep this thread to Pro-Dune posts. Thanks.

Ive read Dune and I really think it is the best, just the whole situation, and then the other books in the series. Frank Herbert really creates a masterpiece.

Surely the Masterpiece deserves more than one post in an hour.

The reason I find the Dune series so appealing is it's complexity and thought-provoking treatment of social, political, ecological, and evolutionary systems that speaks to the very humanness of those things. I can't really say it's the Masterpiece though, as I haven't read all sci-fi works. I hope I'll be able to read the Foundation series over Christmas break. I've been meaning to have a look at it for a long time.

Dune is complex in the systems it uses, which, unlike Asimov, include ecology and eastern religion/philosophy.

Both authors are clever enough to work well not just with tech but with history, sociology, psychology, art, and even p-lain ol' sex.

I have other favorites because I think they write better (Moorcock, Brunner, Vance) but those two have the widest ranging imaginations, weaving together influences from many diverse fields.

The original book was fine, but the fully developed social system didn't come about until later. Although I saw you exclude these, but both The Jesus Incident and The Dorsadi Experiment had much more fully developped and fleshed out social constructs than Dune did. It was more story driven than most of Hebert's other work though, and therefore more readable.

The original book was fine, but the fully developed social system didn't come about until later. Although I saw you exclude these, but both The Jesus Incident and The Dorsadi Experiment had much more fully developped and fleshed out social constructs than Dune did. It was more story driven than most of Hebert's other work though, and therefore more readable.

It was The Dosadi Experiment, not The Dorsadi Experiment. And it was excellent.

So nobody thinks Dune is the Masterpiece of Sci-Fi except for Of the Abyss? Good to know

I think this free online book is a pretty good explanation of why Dune is so great: http://tim.oreilly.com/sci-fi/herbert/

I did some English Literature, and if it weren't for the snobbishness of English Lit. academics (not all of them of course) regarding science fiction, I honestly think that the Dune series would be better regarded. Actually there's a good book explaining how that came about: The Intellectuals and the Masses by John Carey.

It was The Dosadi Experiment, not The Dorsadi Experiment. And it was excellent.Sorry, it's been a few decades. I prefer The Dosadi Experiment to Dune myself, and it's a fine book, if not Hebert's best, it is certainly a contender.

Of course, I forgot to mention, what really limits Frank Herbert's writing is his often strained use of language. Personally, I sometimes find it really hard to figure out what he's writing about. And his characters often leave a lot to be desired. They're more often vehicles for his plot and ideas than actual people (lots of science fiction authors have this problem).

As I said in the opening paragraph, this is a thread not about Isaac Asimov. Yet it has the words 'Masterpiece' and 'Science Fiction', so what else could I possibly be talking about? I think the answer is rather obvious.

Yes, indeed it is - Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, surely?

Klonor, while I won't dispute Frank Herbert's talent - I once wrote a term paper on 'spirituality & the writings of FH', and in the course of researching his work, I managed to read (as I recall) his entire catalogue.

Dune and its' sequels were not, IMHO, the end-all, be-all novels that they've been made out to be. I know this flies in the face of the stated purpose of this thread, and I know I've voiced my opinion in this particular subject before, but I do feel (well, somewhat) strongly in this regard.

I look at the entire series less as a stunning masterpiece, and more as a barometer of FH's fiscal needs at any given point in his writing career. Ebbs are marked as likely junctures for furthering the interminable, rambling future history of Arrakis. The recent prequels put forth by son Brian smack of the same need.

I won't go on at length. One man's masterpiece is another man's bathroom literature. I would urge people to read FH's other works of fiction, however.

Dune is the masterpiece of Science Fiction. The sequels, however, are poor, half-wit offspring. Just as it is best to watch Godfather I and II and pretend there never was a III, readers of Dune should overlook the other books on the shelf that happen to have the same name and pretend to continue the story.

dune is a great book. im thinking i read it in my teens. (yeah i just googled it and it was published in '65) ive always liked the way it created a unique world that was utterly believable. empire, drugs, religion, worms, it has it all.

you dont notice in the first book how utterly awful herbert is at plotting out a book. it gets worse and worse as the saga goes on. i HATED the way the 2nd book started out after the jihad, as if that would be an insignificant part of the story. now that i think about it, the rest of them are crap and only the original book is worth any praise at all. the other 5 must have been his need to have enough money to send his kids to good schools

i havent bothered to read any of the ones written by his son.

There was a series of three trilogies about an "alternate universe" and a modern day leper who was transported there which I consider to be among the best SiFi ever written: The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant The Unbeliever. I highly recommend these, although I don't know if they're still in print.

as far as The one and only Masterpiece to define all science fiction, I do not believe that such a supurlative can exist in a universe where everything has yet to be written.

Frank Herbert's novels, especially the first of the Dune series, wreak of the compexity that stammers so many when they first read Lord of the Rings.
I for one, loved Lord of the Rings, and Dune.

The plot of the book does not feel like a vehicle to introduce some neat-o sci-fi ideas, nor did the characters seem entirely generic normals (both qualities that hurt the novels of Larry Niven and others) They each have their own intentions, deceptions, insidious plots and scemes etc. And they never step out of character in order to furthur the purpose of the plot.

But the real point of greatness is that while there is obviously much thought put into the background of the Dune universe, Herbert decided that he didn't need to tell you everything. The first novel evidences this most strikingly and the result is a universe that feels real, where small things and people actually have their own stories even if you aren't told about them.

Lord of the Rings does this extraordinarily well, and that is why it is the undisputed masterpiece of fantasy. (you can tell because almost every new fantasy novel is somehow compared to LotR)

Dune makes the universe feel real, nearly to the extent of Lord of the Rings. That is what makes it great. It isn't just the detail he put into the universe, but the feeling that this universe could exist. Technology, polotics, religeon, spirituality, terrain, culture, race and drugs are aspects of this universe, and none of them alone can explain what makes Dune great, but rather all of them together compined with older conventions of plot and character.

oh, and for the record, I didn't care for the sequels all that much.

as far as The one and only Masterpiece to define all science fiction, I do not believe that such a supurlative can exist in a universe where everything has yet to be written.

Agreed, but I certainly think that some of the acknowledged masterpieces which have stood the test of time in the field are being short-changed here - for example, War Of The Worlds anyone?

I love Dune, the concluding books were not as good and the Prelude books by his son are sufficient though slightly contradictory with established plot.
But on the whole, I must say that the universe Herbert created was a masterpiece.
The recently televised version (2000) is also the best attempt so far to bring it to the screen.

Not really related to the subject of this thread, but I find it interesting that today (the day after I make this thread focused on Dune) my roommate brings to our dorm the recent Sci-Fi Channel video adaption of the book. An odd coincidence

So nobody thinks Dune is the Masterpiece of Sci-Fi except for Of the Abyss? Good to know

Well, I've just started reading dune, but as far as I've read that book its one of the best, if not THE best scifi story I've ever read. I mean unlike some other scifi stuff I read, the dune universe within its borders is strictly logical constructed and the style of writing creates, in my view, a very tight atmosphere. It's one of those books where I want to know what happens on the next page, before I'm finished with the current page. So, until I've read something better I guess to it will be THE masterpiece... at least to me...

There was a series of three trilogies about an "alternate universe" and a modern day leper who was transported there which I consider to be among the best SiFi ever written: The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant The Unbeliever. I highly recommend these, although I don't know if they're still in print.
If Donaldson's goal was to make a 'protagonist' who was so unlikable, that the reader was so revolted by him that the reader would wish him dead, then, yes, it's probably a great book. Frankly, I couldn't see much past the dirty rapist who is entirely unrepentant and unpunished.

Hard to defend "Dune" as THE Masterpiece of Science Fiction...

There are great redeeming features: A strong character voice for Paul Atreides is obviously what got the work published in the first place, and there is sufficient depth of spiritual analysis, religious metaphor and social commentary, to keep the work fresh for generations.

Someone else on the thread has suggested that Dune was the only original in the series... and I pretty much must agree... although some lovely texture was added in later volumes, it is just that... just texture. All of the later works lack something of the depth that the first acheived.

So, perhaps "Dune" is Herbert's Masterpiece... but I can't really see any justification for it as THE Masterpiece of the genre... certainly not in the face of (predictable) Asimov's Foundation series... which DID (unfortunately) contain some 'turkeys', but which hits originality and brilliance far more often than it falls flat.

Of course, neither of those two make it into even my top three science fiction titles...

THE best? Have to agree and say it's dificult to classify it as THE best, but it's without a doubt one of the best. Ditto about the sequals, though some do help to weave the overall tapestry.

Anyone ever read Herberts "The White Plague"? A fine apocalyptic read, especially with the current events of our post 9/11 age.

Dune the movie was something awesome.

Dune the book is not IMHO the masterpiece of SciFi.

Agreed, but I certainly think that some of the acknowledged masterpieces which have stood the test of time in the field are being short-changed here - for example, War Of The Worlds anyone?

Or Brave New World, or 1984. There are also, in my opinion, better works of contemporary literature, like M. John Harrison's Light.