Why Tolkien Didn't Like Dune
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 มี.ค. 2024
- Frank Herbert's Dune is one of science fiction's most influential and impactful pieces of literature. The political, religious and ecological themes surrounding the story have helped sculpt future novels for generations. That being said, while it's primarily regarded as hugely important to the masses, there's one equally important fantasy writer who had his own differing opinions on the story -- J. R. R. Tolkien.
In 1966, Tolkien wrote a letter to a man named John Bush regarding him obtaining a copy of Herbert's book. When asked about his opinion, Tolkien gave Bush a cordial but blunt description of what he felt. According to the letter, Tolkien prefaced by saying that he finds it impossible for an author to speak about another who works in a similar subject matter. He then adds, "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." - บันเทิง
It's interesting that the Lord of the Rings story ends up being self-referential. "But what if we could use this myth to accomplish good?" When maybe the best answer is to “destroy” the myth.
@granite_4576 We don't live in a post-myth world, we just don't call them myths
"You think you were the first person to believe their war was justified??" -big ass owl from ATLA
Television was front and center in Nazi Germany, as nowhere else on Earth, what was the programing like?
Words like “truth” and “myth” are absolutist and exclusive. We need to teach people to think critically and determine what is “likely” or “improbable” and always be open to being incorrect. Our best thinkers and scientists are so often proven wrong by the next. Even referencing Tolkien’s source material, the whole story of the Bible hinges on us failing to determine what is “true” or “good” and what is “false” or “evil” and how our response to those determinations can expose human faults.
Life is gray rather than black and white simply because none of us have the capacity to fully understand and process everything.
I think there's a lot more to this discussion. For one, the Nazis asked Tolkien directly to use his work and he very politely declined. And then, between the Hobbit and LOTR, he made sure dwarves could not be used as an antisemitic stereotype. And Tolkien never publicly said why he didn't like Dune. He felt it unprofessional to say.
But I do think totalitarian will use whatever they can. It's not a reflection of defect in the original work, just whether the movement found the literature useful in shifting public opinion.
Left out a major piece of context, Tolkien was saying in the letter that no author can really judge another authors work, because they will always have stylistic and creative differences, and he used dune as an example of a good book he didn’t care for. He specifically said dune was a good book, he just didn’t like it. He never said it was terrible or anything like that.
Yes! Thank you for bringing this up!
@@disgruntledmoderate5331
“Is your favorite color blue?”
-Tolkien: “no it’s green, blues cool too tho.”
TH-camrs for some reason: “Why Tolkien HATES the color blue and thinks ANYONE who likes that color should be killed.”
That's exactly what I thought. Tolkien is a fantasy guy, Herbern is sci-fi. No hard feelings (the "intensity" aside) just not his genre, simple as.
It reminds us that there was a time when critique could be genuine and civilised. As opposed to an attack on one's character and automatically a reason for visceral rebuke.
@@klidthelid8361 To make it fair tho you would need to say you dislike blue with some in intensity
It really comes down to three reasons:
1. Tolkien was a devout Catholic, and Dune is very critical of religions and messianic figures in particular.
2. Tolkien hated allegory. Dune is an allegory.
3. Tolkien fundamentally believed that there is good in the world, and that the darkest days still have hope. Dune has a far darker take on human nature.
Nicely summarized - put it into a short video and you have this one beat by a mile.
It comes down to one reason:
1) we'll never know because he never said
Herbert does have a point. Not everything in the world is white and black. Moral ambiguity will always exist
I don't get how the messiah critique matters to Catholicism in particular
Edit: my point here was misunderstood. What I'm saying is: how is it his "devout Catholicism", *specifically,* that'd made him dislike Dune. I am fully aware about Christianity's messiah thing, but in the case of Catholics - that I know of - nothing about their doctrine makes them at odds with Dune's message.
Also, how would any Christian (Catholics in particular) would see Dune as blasphemous, or in conflict with their faith partially? It's literally NOT about Christ.
@@Gelatinocyte2Catholicism and Christianity in general are based on a Messiah figure
Don’t forget how Tolkien said he still thought it was a good book but it just wasn’t his taste. It was truly him just saying “it’s good but it’s not for me”
That seems more like him to be honest.
Tolkien never hated Dune. If we just look pass the clickbait title and statement we would be able to tell that Tolkien said he likes the storytelling and structure of Dune, he’s just not a big fan of it (sci-fi).
Past. The word you meant to use was past. Because of this your basic understanding of either author seems tenuous. You also meant to say that Tolkien liked the story rather than likes it. Are you sure you're a reader?
Past. The word you meant to use was past. Because of this your basic understanding of either author seems tenuous. You also meant to say that Tolkien liked the story rather than likes it. Are you sure you're a reader?
@@LPno.9 why did you comment twice
@@LPno.9 Oh, thanks for the corrections. Eng is my 2nd language so I still struggle with grammar and all. And yes, I do read but that doesn’t mean my English has to be perfect for TH-cam’s comment section :)
@@vivs9314 Maybe you should comment in the primary language in which you speak and read. TH-cam provides a handy translation feature. Better that than give the impression that you aren't able to grasp the material.
Remember dislike and disrespect are two different things.
Disrespect is something that people give to those they dislike.
@@J-sv9dp Tolkien didn't dislike Hurbert, he disliked Dune.
@@tylerpatti9038 I think I misunderstood: I thought you were implying that Tolkien disrespected Hurbert but didn't dislike him.
I think I understand what you are getting at now: Tolkien might have disliked Dune but that doesn't necessarily mean that he disrespected its author.
Correct me if I've misunderstood again.
Many people lack the emotional capacity to discern the two
@@supraguy4694 Many people use many words in many different ways to mean many different things in many different situations and contexts.
The evolution of language and the variety of ways in which it is used, understood and misunderstood around the world provides little indication of anybody's emotional capacity.
Language is in constant flux :)
It was very respectful of Tolkien just to send a private letter explaining the reasons rather than making public statements for publicity.
haha like it makes that big of a difference, tolkien was still like "this shit sucks bro"
Back then if you wanted publicity you had to specifically publish it in the newspapers lol
@@normifiedIt wasn't to Frank himself, rather it was a response to a friend who bought him a copy of Dune. He didn't want to criticize Frank Herbert directly or publicly since Tolkien saw him as a budding author, and didn't want to discourage him or ruin his publicity.
Tolkien was a respectful critic, as he was respectful with criticisms of his own work.
It's a dying behaviour these days and it shows.
@@normified
It's the same difference as a nowadays influencer calling another one criticizing them for something they did vs posting a hit piece about the same thing
Do you think there is a difference there?
"Which myth serves us better?"
*Who is us?*
Humanity
*What do you mean by serve?*
@@TheSergio1021 Your a slave to the banks and modern capitalism,who owns the banks and stocks of giant corporations.
Good question
Jews, the Liberal intellectual elite, the lobbyists. Anyone with a vested interest in ruining our lives
Nice way to sneak “extremist groups” in there. Everything said before can safely be dismissed
"Not a single elf in the entire book. 1/10" - Tolkien
He should've waited for Messiah
"Where are the trees?'
White people aren’t the heroes 0/10
"10/10" - any gnome
"Doesn't mention the position of the sun in the sky enough 0/10"
Tolkien hated dune, Herbert hated Star Wars, Lucas hated Jabba the Hut… so it all makes sense to me. 😂
Dune isn't based on LOTR.
Like LOTR is the base for most fantasies, Dune is the base for most science fiction stories
@@og8263 ok, good point, wrong comment, as nobody said otherwise here
@@og8263what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?
@@og8263and star wars not based on Dune. We can say Warhammer 40k based, and Warhammer Fantasy based on LOTR. But you know it is hard to create something completely unique from the start.
Star wars is heavily inspired by Dune. Read/watch both and you will see that that is undeniable. George Lucas (sometimes dexterously, sometimes hamfisted-ly) drew inspiration/directly took from tons of things, like Dune and WW2 imagery and films among others. Once again, this is undeniable and well documented. Dune and LOTR are both Mt. Fujis (look it up, it's a great quote ab LOTR) in their respective genres (Sci-fi & fantasy).@@leman7648
"dune can't be used as a straightforward rallying cry"
sigma grindset yt shorts creators: "hold my beer"
How has LoTR been co-opted by extremist groups? I genuinely dont understand how thats possible.
Because people on Reddit told him so
I mean, there were people that actually believed the "okay" hand gesture was co-opted by right-wing extremists because somebody on the internet said it was.
Some people are quite quixotic their search for villains to destroy.
Thank God I wasn't the only one wondering this, it seemed so out of pocket.
@@toxicreaper1180 same... that was weird.
This is like saying you have no idea how it's possible for extremist to co-opt Christianity yet there we were 100 years ago, 50 years ago and 5 years ago.
I think Tolkien’s devout Catholicism played a role as well. The man loved Jesus & Dune’s whole thing was a critique of messianic figures.
Edit: To clarify, being religious doesn’t inherently make you dislike Dune. As a religious person myself, I am a fan of the books, especially in our modern era in which televangelists, politicians, & other disgusting opportunists take advantage of other people’s faiths to increase their own wealth & power. However, I do think Dune’s critique in the book is not just of false messiahs & disingenuous opportunists (though it certainly addresses them). The book explicitly says multiple times that Paul & later Leto II do such horrible things in order to make people realize just how horrible the very idea of a messiah is, so that none are ever entrusted with such power again. It’s definitely a bit of a twisted self-justification that doesn’t make a whole lot of sense when you think about it, but that is how they rationalized committing atrocities: becoming a horrible dictator & jihadi so that they could be pointed at as a historical mistake to never again repeat. Also, to those saying “Dune is a critique of Islam, not Christianity,” they’re sister religions & extremely similar. The aesthetic is more based on Islam because the author thought that would be cooler & fit his setting better, but the critique can apply to either religion equally.
I thought so too. My granny for instance didn't like Dune for the very same reason.
Bro would have had a field day with His Dark Materials
perhaps, but I feel like he ought to have appreciated the notion of a false messiah that manipulates and destroys the society he purportedly saves
@@kadmiiAFAIK Tolkien was a devout catholic until his death. Dune directly criticized his faith/religion and thus his worldview (as well as other messianic religions and religion as a whole). Pretty easy to see why he’d have an innate bias against it. Additionally great authors can agree to disagree on the medium (as mentioned in this short) as well as religious matters (E.g. Tolkien and CS Lewis) without actually thinking a story is poorly written.
@@kadmiihaha, well, looks like I’m going to come in sort of in the middle here. Firstly, I’d encourage everyone to read Tablet Magazine’s review of the newest film, which does a great job conveying the complexity in Dune I think many are missing. Secondly, Tolkien was from a mixed (yes, within Christianity) faith background, which I identify a whole lot with…though now, I suppose as always really, I only identity as believing in G-d, who made a covenant with Abraham (that as a Jew I am bound to) and gave his words to Moses on that confounding mountain (I almost get some LOTR vibes from it all). Anyway that matters, that Tolkien had a very open mind and realistic view of the world from a very young age…because while he was indeed a Christian and a catholic (and I offer absolutely no scorn upon that and would find a desire to erase that fact odious)…he nearly defined his early life by a willingness to see text with new eyes, and have an open mind.
Saying Herbert fought in wwii is a bit of a stretch. He was a photographer for the Navy’s construction battalion and was discharged after 6 months when he suffered a non combat injury.
Tolkien on the other hand fought in the trenches at the battle of Somme, with him being at the front of a German gas attack and eventually getting trench fever. Most of his friends died and his battalion had been almost completely wiped out during the battle.
The two had vastly different military experiences
This point deserves a lot more recognition.
tbf he didn't say Herbert fought in WWI
@@IEVLB I mean the wording of “Tolkien fought in World War I, but Herbert was in World War II” implies it. Most people would hear that sentence and assume it meant Herbert also fought, which just isn’t really the case.
Either way it’s just a weird thing to bring up, because I don’t think their military service or what each experienced in the wars is very relevant to why he disliked Dune, but rather it’s the themes of Dune and who Tolkien was a person and an author.
Tolkien was very religious, Dune is fairly anti religious. Tolkien’s themes are about hope, love and overcoming evil, Dune is fairly dark and has more morbid political undertones to it.
@@brendan9868he literally says "Tolkien fought in WWI, but Herbert WAS in WWII". The fact that you assumed he meant that Herbert also fought is a misinterpretation on your part.
@@user-vi2dz3fk6gIf Herbert being a non-combatant photographer deserves a note as being in WWII, then Tolkien deserves it too. Tolkien not only fought on the front line of WWI where he experienced the brutality of war, but he also served as an air raid ward and codebreaker in WWII thanks to his extensive linguistic knowledge (he had also experience, he was a signals officer in WWI, deciphering both encrypted allied communication and intercepted enemy messages). Kind of unfair.
I've personally also always hated the idea of giving in to extremist groups by deciding "Okay, they appropriated this so we need to stop liking it.".
You are letting them win at that point.
I love both Lotr and Dune.
Ngl I stopped after "classical music and good v evil is hecking Fascism"
For context: Tolkien fought in the trenches of WW1 as a second lieutenant, fighting in four or five major battles, including the somme. Frank herbert was a photographer in the Navy Seabees for 6 months and went home after receiving a non combat related head injury.
So, they're wartime experiences differ greatly and may have less to do with herberts worldview.
Tolkien even served at the battle of the somme, where he lost two of his best friends at the battle
You didn't have to fight WWII for the nazis to make your head spin
@@mimimurlough
Being in the middle of the fight and hearing the news about said fight are two halfs better off separate
@@mimimurloughtrue but you would need to be in the battlefield to see the enemy shooting your friends head off
At the end of the day they had completely different experiences
I believe Tolkien's Catholicism plays more of a role than their World War ideas.
But yes, those are quite different experiences and mindsets.
In the letter you're talking about, Tolkien said Dune was a good book, but he just didn't like it.
I think that's the best form of criticism. You can recognise the merits, but it just doesn't work for you. Like he didn't just shit on it to be a dick.
It's easier to just say Tolkien "hAtES DuNe" because it baits people and generates more engagement
It’s funny, I’ve said the opposite about a lot of things. Like critically, I can poke enough holes in things to make Swiss cheese look like an airlock seal, but like it still makes me happy.
@@JustinTK416 same thing, basically recognizing the quality of the work is not related to your enjoyment of it. Wish more people had that kind of awareness. Too many think “I didn’t like it” = “bad”
So the idea of "thanks, I hate it."
Something can be meaningful, useful and important, but unpleasant. It may have been too close to home and challenging to enjoy, where say McCaffrey's Pern saga is more palatable to a "fantasy as moral play and escapism" mindset, as opposed to a Herbert/GRRM "fantasy as an allegory for society and the foibles and weaknesses of man, and the challenge of being imperfect but striving to be better".
You could even argue it's the same as Marvel vs DC - Marvel focusing on the humanity of superhumans, DC focusing on the challenges of always being beyond reproach and not human.
That’s not what the letter Tolkien wrote said but I guess those clicks don’t come on their own huh
how is a movie about radical religious groups rallying around a single man not usable by extremists? the movie ends with them goin to holy war...
Ya, Dune is way more easily used as a story for extremist groups. This guy is crazy.
read the book. the movie losses a lot of the nuissance, especially if you watch just the first part (which is like less than half of the first book)
@@spooney6388 Have you read the book? Paul is a messiah that initiates a Jihad (exact term used and it means "Holy War" even in the duneiverse). There is no nuance, as its very straightforward, boring, and stupid by the third book.
its simple really. Paul is a drug addict. and the Fremen are not white. so i don't see the alt right coopting dune anytime soon.
Dune is an allegory. Simple as that.
"I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations..."
Part of a longer quote by Tolkien.
Yeah the dude was either too lazy or afraid of actually looking up Tolkien's point of view or simply reading the letter for the short and instead spelled out his own headcanon of whatever he thinks happened trough Tolkien's mind.
LotR is an allegory so…
@hz.kemalpasa2997 Right? I mean, almost any creative work can be interpreted as an allegory 🤷♀️
Another Tolkien quote elucidates this a bit: “I dislike Allegory - the conscious and intentional allegory - yet any attempt to explain the purport of myth or fairytale must use allegorical language."
He also says that: "The only perfectly consistent allegory is a real life; and the only fully intelligible story is an allegory. And one finds, even in imperfect human 'literature', that the better and more consistent an allegory is the more easily it can be read 'just as a story'; and the better and more closely woven a story is the more easily can those so minded find allegory in it."
Finally, he states elsewhere that LOTT isn’t an allegory of atomic power, but of power in general, of war but not a specific war.
In sum total, I think he’s saying that what he hates is intentional, deliberate allegory. He hates allegory that can only be mapped one way, to offer only a single interpretation. To him, allegory occurs naturally and can be interpreted universally.
@@madhoney2766 yeah this short feels deliberately disingenuous.
"Dune cannot be co-opted by extremists" is a very bold take
Exactly what I was thinking.
yes, i for example do it all the time
How had LoTR been co-opted by extremist groups? I'm so confused about that
What extremist groups use lotr as a rousing cry? I genuinely don't know what this guy is refering to...
@@ModeratelyCool The italian far right views LOTR as a metaphor for their fight on foreigners - the rhetoric by the leadership is very cultured and soft, but go to the rallies and you can hear people of certain ethnicities and skin colours being described as orcs and goblins and trolls invading the 'pure' west.
They read the book as a vindication of higher cultures' rights to fight and destroy lower cultures, and protect themselves from them.
The leadership has been pushing it, and encouraging the media to discuss LOTR through this viewpoint, and have been co-opting LOTR events in Italy.
This is the most reddit brained take I've seen in a while
If you ask me, lotr is peak reddit, you have to go back now sir
The chubby white guys have turned on tolkien
@@Art-bk6vv It has elements from christianity and it's written by a catholic. Reddit is full of obnoxious atheist who reeeeeally want you to kys or debate them
“Lord of the rings has been appropriated by all these extremist groups…”
Okay, buddy. My guess is that according to you, the good guys never rebel against authority or call out evil for what it is.
It seems like you are the one who is not OK with people rebelling against The Lord of the Rings or calling out parts of it as dark & evil.
@@_magnifyBrother believing there is good and evil in the world is not controversial.
The charging cable as a nasal moisture collector really had me there 😂
It’s not a nasal moisture collector, it’s a tube to drink water from
@@kevinbeck8836He looks identical to Gerrard from Peep Show
I was super confused by it at first! I didn't realize what it was supposed to represent at first!
@@kevinbeck8836what? No it IS a nasal moisture collector. It’s called a catch tube. The Fremen breathe through their noses and the tube reduces the amount of water they lose from their breath.
@blueberries254 that's what I was saying!!
Y'all simplify Tolkien too much. Evil in his works is a constant repeating threat to the world, that average people must endlessly overcome and hold faith in goodness. Complexity does not equal nuance
But the """characters""" in Lord of the rings aren't nuanced. There are no good parts of Sauron or Saruman, they're just flat evil placeholders. There are no evil parts of Gandalf or Frodo. The only evil thing about any of the good guys is when they have the evil ring on them. The bad guys are personality-less orcs who do what Sauron says because.....
While this is partially true, it is worth noting that nuance and some complexity is required when analysing what truly is good or accurate.
The issue is individual people in LotR don't wrestle with good and evil as much as entire peoples do, as a communal whole. And 'wrestle' is a VERY generous word. See the orcs.
@@logantotman1574Boromir? Faramir? Isildur? The Haradrim? Ringwraiths?
Everyone seduced by the ring or corrupted by Sauron has some bad in them that is abused by him
@@logantotman1574yeah, because Sauron is the embodiment of evil. As for nuance, it is just an excuse for people who want to do morally questionable things.
"Maybe the best answer is to destroy the myth" is a terrible idea stated in the most unmanly way possible.
Thank you
The Lord of the Rings is objectively inspiring
"Herbert was in world war 2" yeah... I don't think you can compare his 6 months as a navy photographer to what Tolkein did in the previous war.
We can
Participation in a war does not equal credibility.
motherfuckers are powerscaling writers now, it doesn't matter how long when it's still a fucking WAR
Herbert saw tons of corpses too, no?
@@prometheus5405seeing corpses, while incredibly traumatizing does not equate to actively fighting in the war and watching dudes get killed around you.
guy literally told half the story and concluded something Tolkien never said
I am not surprised coming from this channel...
How smart you have to be to not understand a short is only 60 seconds?
That simply isn't true. The only thing he attributes to Tolkien is the quote "I dislike Dune with intensity"
His conclusion is not framed as something Tolkien said, but as his own opinion (shared by others)
@@Grawlix-P Tolkien is more right on this. This guy, like other "critiques" channels just spread misinformation over art pieces to compel their political narrative agenda.
@@user-ph8dk3hk6o I feel like this content is ai generated, are you perhaps getting this same feeling??? lmao
You think World War 2 was more morally ambiguous than WW1? That's a bit of a hot take. I'm full on board with Tolkien on this.
Virgin grey morality vs Chad heroic morality
Who gets to be the hero in your world?
@@shinjite06 me
@@krulak292Based
Hell yeah 🍷🗿
@@krulak292 You're the villain in mine though, so how does that work?
"Which myth serves us better?"
Huh? I thoguht we were talking about why Tolkien didn't like Dune
Both serve us well. It is vital that we all hold in our hearts that good can triumph over evil as long as those who are good stand. It is also vital that we understand that the world is a complex place and that food and evil are not always what they appear and charismatic leaders are not necessarily a vector for good.
It's such an idiotic non-sequitor that I felt compelled to look through the comments, lol.
@@M4TCH3SM4L0N3 yes exactly
Yeah, dude didn't actually explain why Tolkien said he didn't like it, just "art changes over time"
Like no shit lmao
Video should have been titled "Why I think Dune has a better worldview than LOTR."
He once said fantasy should uplift the reader, not depress them
To be fair. Dune is Sci Fi aka Made to make you think and depress you. Lovecraft is to make you never sleep again.
@@arnowisp6244 i really enjoy Lovecraft lol. Not really spooky so much as it is interesting.
@DisPater-xs2pu how so? Tolkien was a highly educated combat veteran of 1 world wars and he lived through another. He spent half his life knee deep in the bloodiest most violent period of history this world has ever seen. Is it so hard to believe that he'd want his fantasy realm to be a place that shows the good in people and the hope that we as humans can be better?
@@SigismundSonOfDorn Same here! I'm a particular fan of his dream cycle, especially the dream quest of unknown kadath. The idea of an alternate dimension you inhabit when you dream, if you're aware of its existence or stumble into it; and can live an entire life separately from your own. Randalph Carter seemed to be a much more elderly man in the dreamlands due to his experience. The ghouls! They get so much lore in it. They have a whole society, tunnel into our world from the dreamlands, they're capable of communicating and speak an actual language that Carter understands, and uses to recruit them for help on his journey. I really vibe with Lovecraft, the dude has this almost punkish/teen vibe I guess. Like the fact the ghouls use tombstones as weapons, it goes so well with their aesthetic.
@@ghoulishgoober3122 that's one of my favorites too actually. Such an interesting concept that people don't really play around with these days despite how much you could do with it.
I sense a special motive behind this video and it seems other people in the comments are noticing the flaws with this short.
Which myth serves us better? Both Sophie Scholl and Graf Staufenberg, two of the most well-known heroes of the resistance against the Nazis were inspired by Christianity and heroic stories. Yes, it is true, the Nazis had their own mythology. But it's the tired old fallacy. We do not believe in good and evil. Because being judgemental would make us fascist. But what does fascist even mean? Nothing practical as far as I can tell. It fulfills the same purpose as accusing someone of heresy or witchcraft. But this isn't about that.
The world needs people who are so morally solid they are willing to face down a crowd. Growing up in Germany it was painfully obvious how messed up the world is in that regard. The lone hero going against the crowd was glorified until he was the archvillain (COVID cough cough) but then again others came out heroically glueing themselves to the streets to stop traffic. Was that good? YMMV.
The thing is the "hero" needs more than courage. They also need introspection, compassion, humility (and other things). Tolkien understood that. And he constructed his heroes that way. Herbert's deconstructionist work certainly has its points, but, as the saying goes, it's easy to destroy and hard to build up.
TLDR: If I was stranded on a lonely island with only one author I'd take Tolkien over Herbert any day.
Well written 👏
I just wrote a comment to the maker of this video.
Fascists being defined as authoritarian makes them fundamentally against tolkiens entire message. He believes god gives free will (secret fire). Fascism leaves no room for choice.
Just because bad people use good art, doesn’t mean you should stop making that art.
Don’t cede ground to evil.
Yeah I hear you in that just because the cartels drink coconut water doesn’t mean coconut water is bad. However when a story is routinely used for dehumanization and violence, it is good to ask whether they may be something in the story that is not bringing out the best in humanity.
@@_magnify any story which has good guys and bad guys, or even a story which has only various levels of bad guys, can be used in the way you’re describing. It’s basically an extension of Godwin’s Law. “I have some issue with you, therefore you’re like the Orcs, or Voldemort, or The Empire, or the Harkonnen, etc. Therefore you’re a villain, therefore I can hate you.”
So long as any one or any thing in a story or historical event displays any obviously negative traits, someone will compare someone they don’t like to it.
It seems to me less an issue with any particular story, and more an issue of human nature.
@@_magnifyyou sound like a fed
@@_magnify Well, "the best" according to the post-modernist harm-avoidant directive, that would be "extremist" in relation to most ways of thought that came before. Conflict is a fundamental part of nature, it's not "good" or "bad". It's ironic considering a binary "good" and "bad" such as in LOTR is considered simplistic.
@@_magnify Link? (routinely used for dehumanization and violence)?
The idea that Dune couldn't be co-opted by extremists is totally bonkers.
I think the difference is that extremists who might use Dune as a rallying cry would fundamentally be ignoring the message of the source material, whereas those who co-opt LOTR could actually make an argument (however flawed) that the message of Tolkien’s work supports their worldview. The same can’t really be done with Dune.
It’s almost like a challenge.
Read Dune Messiah and get back to us on that.
Alia is very likely science fictions original depiction of woke. Non binary, maddened by anxiety and paranoia. Dead father/hero, neglected by mother, surrounded by sycophants and with a complete aversion to reality/truth.
No heroes, only monsters to kill.
Frank Herbert described the Abomination 50 years before their widespread emergence.
@SarastistheSerpent I really don't see how anyone could misconstrued LotR and have yet to see that. Can you give an actual example of people seriously doing this or is it along the same line of cops getting a punisher tattoo despite punisher killing cops.
Funny that WWII was good vs evil, WWI was more balanced in terms of the guilt of both fronts
Ww2 wasn’t exactly good vs evil, the Soviets committed atrocities during that war.
@knight_561 As did the Americans and British.
@richarddehnel7437 in smaller amounts but not on the same scale. Although Dresden was pretty bad
Wait.....did you really say that because Nazis played Beethoven and displayed beautiful art that we should hate on both of these things?!? And that LOTR falls into Nazi adjacent territory?
I can't even bro
Yes hes stupid
no he didn't
That is in fact not what he said
@@bahaman19901he implied it, who does it serve to be this dense? I don’t even know what this guys take is other than “dune good” because a movie just came out, and he sustains himself on shiny cgi horseshit
Dune is used as a rallying cry by people who don’t get that, even though Paul is the protagonist, he’s not the hero.
That's not exactly accurate. Paul is definitely a hero, in the context of the first novel, but the entirety of Dune(the 6-book series, not just the initial entry) is a critique on the dangers that any society faces when anyone is placed in the role of "hero."
@@SyniStar616 Paul is not a hero in the first novel. Herbert wrote the rest of the series almost in spite of that notion. The Arteries accept Arrakis from the Emperor with the expressed deliberate effort to USE the Fremen, despite their honorable status among the other houses. At the end of the day, they operate and thrive in the same dangerous and treacherous political landscape. And at the end of the novel, Paul exploits their religious fanaticism and the false prophesy of the Bene Geserit as well as their very own planetary recourse (spice) to dominate their culture. Chani represents the only path and where Paul COULD be a hero which he abandons for power
Pauldidnothingwrong
@@SyniStar616 He starts as the hero, but by the start of Dune Messiah its clear he's become very much a galaxy shaking villain, much much worse than the Harkonnens or Shaddam.
@cirian75 right, that's what I said. In the context of the first novel, he's a hero. Dune, as a series, however, is a critique on the danger posed to society by "heroes."
I suspect another reason that Tolkien didn’t like Dune is the fact that Dune isn’t “literary.” That’s not to say Dune isn’t well written, but rather that it has a more straightforward style of storytelling that focuses on delivering the plot and less on setting the stage.
When I read Dune, I was quite surprised how modern it felt. It didn’t have a lot of the artistic flourishes I noticed in LotR.
It's exactly why it IS "well written" the whole devotion to this classical form of writting was a mistake to begin with. I like Hobbit, it's okay, good, great maybe. But going through Tolkien style in LotR was just such masochistic form of pleasure, it's boring when you read it, though interesting when you stop and appreciate. But still it's pain.
This is a great point. I read both in high school. LOTR feels like someone eith vocal talents and a lute could practically SING the story as a performance.
Dune is certainly more of a realistic sounding narrative just giving us the facts and political machinations.
I think Tolkien probably didn't love the hints of Abrahamic religions being violent and manipulative, but I can also see the story being too blunt, cruel, and cynical for his tastes!
@@Garvin285 As soleone who grew up with the hobbit and similar writings, let me tell you, when I first tried to read the more "modern" stuff, I was in pain ("I have to read through everyone's inner monologues? So cringe!") It is pretty subjective but I do admit in this day and age, I'm in the minority here
@@anonymousstacker2044 Yeah, of course, it's just my subjetcive opinion. I admire both writters in a way
@@aazhieFrom my understanding Tolkien probably didn't like anything that didn't have a somewhat positive ending or uplifting section as he was very much affected by the war. This was a big reason (along with catholicism) why Tolkien was so keen on good vs evil narratives with good prevailing in most instances.
LOTR as an idea and Dune as a reality check to keep us humble (like both)
Lord of the ring: lets defeat the bad guys with the power of friendship
Dune: lets save our family by manipulating everyone around us with the knowledge we gain from drugs
Guys not liking something doesn't make you a bad person. Just thought I needed to say that.
No, but liking something too much means your a nazi. Oh and the only reason we have abstract or expressionistic art is because of Trump support- sorry I mean nazis or just generally people I disagree with or think are wrong.
Not according to Reddit and social media 😂
Actually, the fact he sent a contrucive letter and explained why he didn't like it shows he still has some level of respect for the Dune book and author...he basically said "Not for me, but good work"
This video seems to ask the question “is it better to believe a beautiful lie or acknowledge a painful truth?”
The truth is that it’s a lie of omission that people’s only options are to choose between those two absolutes.
I can’t say much for dune except that I was counting the seconds till it was over and I could do something else (both the book and movie) needless to say, this has not been the case with LOTR.
It is a pet peeve of mine when people try to make a connection between extremists and Tolkien, or accuse his fans of being nazis.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
You could say Tolkien “strongly disliked” the nazis. He even went as far, on one occasion, to lecturing them about what “Aryan” actually meant. And Hitler was a person he referred to only as “That Man.”
@@Lumosnight Imagine people comparing Dune to "edge lord philopshy." That would be silly.
Tolkien's is the world we want, Herbert's is the world we get.
We don't want either of them. Tolkien's world really sucks when you look close at it.
@@tsm688oh for sure. i just meant that most people want to have a simpler black/white, evil/good world. but reality is complex and full of shades of gray.
it's not about the world in its entirety, it's about hero's, in LOTR, like he said good and evil are clear, so hero's are good, there is hope, the good guys can win. Meanwhile in dune, the apparent hero starts a genocidal war even though he can see the future which means that's literally the best path, the golden path
Idk if I want to live in Tolkien’s universe it’s kind of a sausage fest
@@caspermcgonagle1532 at least someone has his priorities straight :D
You implicitly critique clear models of morality then reference the Nazis because they’re self-evidently evil. You prove one of the greatest messages in Tolkien’s work: evil can be obvious, but the good response is more complicated - but not non-existent.
Overall Tolkien serves us better. The very reason why different groups are tempted to use his story for a nefarious gains is the reason why, his story is potent, powerful, and meaningful. That can be dangerous, that's why it's useful.
LOTR being appropriated by “extremist” groups just feels like a pointless thing to bring up when talking about the value of the work. Any story with good vs evil could be appropriated by bad groups of people. It doesn’t take away from the beautiful messages and themes of LOTR.
What even are these extremist groups that supposedly center their ideology around LOTR?
@@mikethered4864 they don't center the ideology around LOTR, but LOTR indeed has a lot of elements from Christianity and Royalism in it, so it naturaly attracts people who like these things.
That's the point, art is propaganda. Postmodernists want to remove films with crazy ideas like "good and evil" from the public consciousness. That's why they ruin all of the classics. Stars wars, lotr, etc.
@matthiasdarrington3271 what an insane time to be alive when Christians are labeled as extremists simply for holding views which have been accepted in society for hundreds or even thousands of years.
Yes but that's also the difference with dune, it's harder for extremists to use a morally ambiguous character
More obscure fun fact for y'all:
Tolkien read some of Shakespeare's plays and stated that he felt "bitter disappointed and disgust".
But I think that this is exactly why he was able to write what he wrote - because he found his own voice and stick with him
No, he was just disappointed and saddened that the trees didn’t move in Macbeth. Hence the Ents.
As a person who did a Shakespeare play and found it not worth the hype, I can relate
@@Toramai-pi8wx That's true, however he also disliked his work as a whole. Look up letter 163
Catholics, smh
@@Toramai-pi8wxGenuinely laughed out loud at how silly this post was 😂
If you think Tolkien's universe presents a perfectly clear definition and separation of good and evil, then you must read his books again.
You did not answer your question
Your conclusion is a huge reach
Dune is about Worms. Tolkien hated worms.
Well said :-)
And Spiders
@@LeviathanSpeaks1469Fuck spiders
Large numbers of scholars are studying the Lord of The Rings as well as Tolkien's other works because of the deep parallels to reality and the patterns that match the great mythologies that have lasted thousands of years. He is coming to be recognized as important to the development of literature as some of the greats of the past, like Shakespeare. Dune is a politicized story idea most relevant to a limited time and societal movement. Dune was made famous because readers misunderstood the story and believed it was a hero’s journey (another mythical archetypal tale that speaks to human nature across thousands of years) when Herbert didn't intend that. Tolkien’s work will be remembered and studied long after Herbert’s work is lost to the sands of time because Tolkien knew what he was doing when he wrote a thousand-year story.
Sometimes curtains are simply blue. Maybe Tolkien just disliked Dune
with respect, unlike what this video is implying things like post-modernism and dadaism, the avant garde, started after ww1 not ww2. if anything mainstream art post-ww2 was more reactionary and traditional as a consequence of the culture war of the cold war, with the avant garde becoming steadily more commercialized as time moved on.
Yes the more detailed version would be that WW1 started the avant garde, and then with the Spanish Revolution and WW2 you had people experiencing the totality of war for the first time from the perspective of the avant garde-- and also able to access a wide variety of photographs and videos of the adversary.
@@_magnifyThe pattern of art falling is far older than that.
The Renaissance saw the rise of this intensely beautiful, integrated artwork. In the middle ages, you often don't know who the artist is. In the Renaissance, you ALWAYS know who the artist is.
And, so the cult of the artist began, where people started seeing this embodied beauty as being *from* the artist.
It's a deep, big picture, subtle point.
Lucifer was the most beautiful angel in Heaven, as the story goes. His mistake was to confuse his own beauty with himself, seeing himself as the source of that beauty, rather than something that was granted to him.
Modern art is very much the result of the belief that the art itself is from the artist, and not this dance that the artist does with all of these other beautiful patterns of nature, of reality.
Crediting yourself when you've learned from thousands upon thousands of people, and from nature yourself is extremely arrogant. It's EXACTLY what we did, and that's why it's extremists who are the only ones using these classical forms today.
I would argue despite that the struggle for good over evil has inspired many more people to do small acts of kindness rather than extremists. "I have found that it is the small everyday deed of ordinary folks that keep the darkness at bay. Small acts of kindness and love" - Tolkien
As much as I love that quote, it’s not from Tolkien. It’s from the Hobbit movies, not any of his own writing. I still think it applies here though!
I disagree. Hateful, prejudicial people usually follow a “good vs evil” narrative, where they are the good ones
@@vicentedongo5575 At the end of the day, everybody has their own conception of “good” vs “evil”. You can be rational and postmodern as much as you want but you still believe in good and evil. Rather than denying the entire concept itself its better to figure out what exactly good and evil means.
@vicentedongo5575 so did the communists who killed millions. Nobody thinks they're the bad guy.
@@isaiah-6-8 It definitely applies, as Galadriel, and Gandalf have shown this sentiment in other words.
Damn bro I’m just never gonna do anything ever cause some extremist group may project themselves on something i do. I will just sit in a dark room and do nothing.
Herbert did NOT participate in WW2 in any way whatsoever.
Tolkien: yeah, it doesn’t really do it for me.
TH-cam content creators: WhY dId ToLkEiN hAtE dUnE!!!!???
Damn you Old bri"sh!
"dislike with intensity" is the definition of hate
dislike intensely means hate
@@12DAMDO No
@@88happiness NO
"Dune can't be used as a straightforward rallying cry"
It absolutely can, all you have to do is miss or deliberately ignore the point. Some reactions to the movie would indicate that's easier to do than you might think.
Oh it's incredibly easy to do with Dune. I can't do it on here but I could totally show you how easy it would be to coopt Dune
@@ManiacMayhem7256 My point exactly.
Well, the movie itself is also way WAY more binary than the book is.
I mean, for exemple, simple as that: the emperor is the one who made the plot against the atreid in the movie, not the Harkonnen who then bring up the emperor to back them up (with the intent to screw him up later in the process), plus they even made the emperor look an awfull lot like fucking palpatine in SW 1, 2 and 3, when he should more likely look like the God-Emperor from WH40k (abeit older).
The movie is somewhere in between between Herbert and Tolkien's work.
On another hand, it's still an incredible movie and I still don't think it's possible to adapt Dune into a movie because of how dense in data the books are.
@@kur0shir060
The miniseries is as close as it got and it was good despite the effects.
@@ManiacMayhem7256 Didn't see the miniseries, just talking about the movies, so, maybe. Can't speak of what I didn't see. :)
Ironic because WWI was the more complex conflict while WWII is more good vs evil.
😐............................... sure.
LMAO American education strikes again
@@brodie8040 not even american but I agree, there was already an existing web of alliances. WW1 started because the heir to AH was shot. WW2 started because an Austrian Painter wanted revenge
@@mandategaming the two guys who disagreed with OP are Nazis bro. They believe that moustache man and the Failed Reich weren't the bad guys for trying to exterminate a large part of the world
A truly insane take to suggest that the Dune myth serves society more than LOTRs.
Your summary of Tolkien doesn't do justice to his serious wrestling with evil and the corruption of the human heart. Though he believes there is moral coherence in the universe, he's just as skeptical of power as Herbert.
The entire LOTR series can be boiled down to a message of "power corrupts, no matter how good your intentions are."
There is literally no other possible way to interpret it.
The problem is there really is no evil or good. Nevermind how rare it is that someone would paint themselves as evil. The very idea is absolutiist and removes the idea of self interest from the discussion.
I imagine you find it very hard to understand why things happen.
@@koc988 Saruman firmly believes he is doing the right thing throughout the story.
Your point is incoherent. It's like saying there's no math because some dude says that 2+2=5 and thinks it's correct.
Almost like this guy is just pushing a narrative
@@koc988 evil in lord of the rings is defined as self interest.
Boromir's interest in protecting his people.
Frodo's interest in holding onto the ring.
Gandalf's interest in guiding mortals.
All of these are good things as long as the heroes are not blinded by that self interest which is what the ring does. How it corrupts.
You have read 'good' and 'evil' and ignored the definitions and then pretended there were none offered.
You literally never answered the question you posed
It's a short though
It’s answered subconsciously. The OP (rightly) rejects nazism on a good-evil moral dichotomy more akin to LOTR without reflecting on that
@@michaelmurphy3976 i didn't come here for his conjecture on Tolkiens opinion.
_"Give me facts, or give me death!"_
~Patrick Henry
It's because Tolkien apparently never stated his reason for disliking Dune. He only wrote a friend that he didn't like it and couldn't get himself to read it through. That's basically it.
@@michaelmurphy3976 Mans really rolled up and said, "OP is right, Nazis are bad, so OP is right that LotR isn't as good for society as DUNE." Aight cool, Watchmen is bad because people might align themselves with Rorschach. You see how that's a reach there? I _also_ think Nazis are bad, it's the coldest take since 1940, however I don't think we should act like Volkswagen is an inherently lesser car company than Ford because of that.
The fact that no group can or has used Dune as a metaphor for itself was PRECISELY the point of the story: Herbert specifically wrote the character of Paul, and especially his son Leto II, as cautionary warnings about putting blind faith in charismatic leaders.
Even the ones that genuinely care about their people can often make terrible decisions, and if nobody thinks to question or to challenge those decisions, THAT'S how you get atrocities.
The problem here is that this was not the reason he claimed to hate Dune. As a matter of fact, he gave no such reason in this letter.
Second, this portrayal of The Lord of the Rings’ ethical argument is inaccurate. There is no such thing as a story *about* “good vs evil.” The Lord of the Rings actually deals heavily with questions of grey morality and manipulative authority, the allure of power, and the manipulation of art, beauty, and “sacred” things. That exact message is all over the story. Tolkien’s idea of heroism is only challenging to Dune in that it assumes that a somewhat Platonic “good” can exist within the hero, even a flawed hero. So many TH-camrs wax philosophical over The Lord of the Rings, yet fail to miss the fundamental reason that the story’s mythos is challenging to postmodern moral tastes; it’s not the lack of grey and mixed morality - it’s the insistence upon some absolute moral good that *does* exist and *can* prevail, and must do so only in the midst of darkness.
Men, elves, and dwarves are all corrupted in his story, and the Orcs are the “White Walker” juxtaposition. But, to continue with this other metaphor, he includes some insistence upon an absolute good, something GRRM refuses to assume, likely for his own reasons. ASOIAF included the entire moral spectrum (even absolute evil) *except* for absolute good. This makes it congruous with postmodern tastes.
It’s not that you’re wrong to like Dune, or even to prefer it, it’s that your deconstruction of both stories by such a massive stretch misses the point of both, especially in juxtaposition. To complicate things further, this is only *speculated* to be the reason Tolkien hated Dune, usually by Dune fans, for that matter.
Dune, for all of the hype, is absolutely a rallying cry of its own kind. It’s playful, but nevertheless triumphalist for a sort of low-brow atheism that refuses to grapple with the obvious flaws Herbert intentionally portrays in this viewpoint. Imbedded in Dune’s message is a cry for help, and I don’t think this was an accident. Herbert would certainly disagree with Tolkien’s eucatastrophe, but would pine for it, nevertheless. This, in itself, is a powerful point missed by those who continue to hammer on about this debate on the internet.
Is it also because Tolkien was a devoted Christian and Dune is skeptical towards organized religion?
Yeah Tolkien was devoted catholic, makes sense why he hated it
That would also explain Magnify’s point about morality in both stories. Morality in Christianity is very much good vs evil, which then in turn affects the stories told by its constituents.
@@michaelflamel2611Also as I heard from others: Paul is basically a manufactured messiah, formed by centuries of eugenics and human meddling. How do you think a devout Catholic gonna react to that?
yeah because dune is dumb
I like that you said "skeptical." I've seen quite a few people try to make Dune out to be anti-religous propaganda recently and I think that just isn't a fair or reasonable approach to it. Much like other sci-fi, it's intent is to warn you not to tell you what to think.
The idea that artists must cater how they write in order to not be used by evil people is not something anyone should give a damn about
Evil is non-negotiable, they will use anything they can in any manner they can no matter what it says or does
Consider how the Ukrainian army is currently dehumanizing the Russians by calling them "orcs" in slang. This is not a misunderstanding of Lord of the Rings, it is a direct application of Tolkien's exact worldview.
@@_magnify you think that is Tolkiens fault? Slurs for enemies have existed since the beginning. During the American revolution American soldiers would hang British sympathizers and say it didn't matter because they "were torys not human". During ww2 people came up with a name for their enemies like Jerry for the Germans, and would refer to them as such. If anyone is fighting anyone else they will either believe themselves to be the good guy, or they wouldn't fight
@@_magnify the Russians can stop acting like orcs in Ukraine, then.
@_magnify . Insulting your literal enemy in a war is not extremism. Wanting to cancel other people for saying something that offends you is extremism though.
The Ukrainian example is just one of the more recent and troubling ones. There are plenty of other examples of extremist groups using Aragorn's "Men of the West" speech, or Italian neo-fascist youth in the 1970s calling themselves "the order of the ring." When a story is routinely used this way, I think it is fair to ask whether there is something in it that does not bring out the best in humanity. If so, I don't really believe it should be censored and banned. But it would make sense to hold it at arms length and take it with a grain of salt. @@laslov7812
For the critical thinker, both serve a purpose. One as an example for idealistic good, and the other as a caution against the end justifying the means and the shirking of responsibility.
Why are people so interested in what 1 author has to say about another author's work... Tolkien is allowed to dislike Dune, and that does not mean anyone has to (dis)agree with him.
It’s also pretty interesting because Tolkien clearly uses a lot of Christian stories and beliefs as influences in his writing and world building, while Dune has a lot of similarities with certain Islamic beliefs in certain areas. It’s very fascinating comparing the two, to be honest.
Yeah but in a caracateur type of way. Dune is honestly insulting to Arab (both Islamic and non- Islamic) culture(s).
@@kightsunboo hoo
@@kightsun it's kinda not that insulting. As an Arab Muslim Iraqi male, I read the books and watched the movies of dune. The book talks about not trusting outsiders, taking care of the land, faith is different from tradition and don't wait for someone to save you, save yourselves. Literally Islam. Lol
a large part of the story is about not trusting messiahs as it can lead to things like genocidal holy wars, that is a critique of religion for sure
@@kightsunwomp womp
LOTR had its share of grey characters e.g. Denethor. It was not just good vs evil.
See people are also putting these books into absolutes. Tolkien only deals in black and white and Dune only deals in shades of gray.
Part of what makes Denethor one of the most compelling characters in the series I think.
LOTR had grey characters but it had a clearly defined grammar of morality.
Dune does not share a similar moral landscape and in the later books the God Emperor is an intergalactic tyrant and an inhuman abomination who also happens to be guiding humanity towards its best interests and away from cataclysmic disaster
@@jessl1934 yes Denethor does have conflicting motivations, but at the end of the day Tolkien’s moral assessment of him is very clear, that Denethor is a guy with noble intentions who tragically succumbed to despair and pessimism.
I’ve always thought he killed Borodin off too soon who might have successfully challenged him for the throne and for the use of the ring. It would’ve been a very interesting conflict.
Taking a sentence out of context and making a very foolish statement.
He just took a 5 word sentence and then extrapolated his own conclusions of the reason behind tolkeins statement to push his own weird political-philosophical mush idea, weird ass video
LOTR and The Dune Chronicles are two of my favorites! Such incredible gifts Tolkien and Herbert were given to write as they did.
Neither serves better, but both serve. Lord of the Rings warns us about the promise of powers and how little things can corrupt and destroy us, The Ring and Golem being prime examples. Dune on the other hand warns about different dangers, about zealotry and grand plans spinning out of control, which is just the start of things. Which I think is one of the major reasons Dune can't serve as a rallying cry, part of it's message is: Beware of Rallying Cries. Basically.
So, all we have from Tolkien is that he "disliked it with intensity". No statement from Tolkien as to why he disliked it. So the rest of the video is simply conjecture on someone's part.
yes. sometimes it’s interesting to think about why things are the way they are even if you don’t know for sure.
I bet he was just annoyed the main character had a boring normal name like "Paul" despite being 20,000 years in the future.
I mean come on Frankie, even by Dune standards that's pretty lazy.
@@HellbirdIV His second name is pretty cool, though😂😂😂😂.
It's not a well written novel, particularly for the time, that would have turned Tolkien off immediately.
It’s speculation
Right like the allies weren't the Kings of propaganda and atrocity
“Lord of the Rings has been appropriated by extremist groups…” no. Lord of the Rings has many fans who love fantasy and stories.
if tolkien was alive he would be considered a extremist by most ( not a natzi, but he was a devout catholic, not just a devout catholic a traditional catholic because he was upset with vatican 2).
The fear of creating something good because it might be used for evil is the best way to excuse oneself from creating anything. What good will that do?
I don’t think this is a case of good things in Lord of the Rings being used for evil, it is a case of inherently violent and dehumanizing parts of Lord of the Rings being used for violence and dehumanization.
I don't know what you're referring to. There are some parts within Tolkien's legendarium that do not fit with today's standards of racial sensitivity, but his portrayal of evil races had more to do with long term manipulation by entities with power than the mere concept of good people and evil people.
@@_magnifyWhen you simplify everything in the matter that you do, I can see why you find so many issues. Would you remove the concept of orcs and goblins then? Dross take
@@xaoc6084 Yes, there being inherently "evil races" was terrible and Tolkien himself said he regretting writing them that way.
@@_magnifyyou clearly didn't read the books and just going of the things you read on your beloved reddit, what a basement dweller
I don’t think you can really call Dune a myth because it doesn’t really match the criteria of a myth found across cultures. Tolkien, on the other hand, consciously made his stories as a mythology.
Funny enough, Dune itself addressed this in multiple books. Its refers more to 'prophecy' but myth isn't a far separate concept. And prophecy was both indoctrinated and used by the powerful in ways best understood through reading Chapterhouse and God Emperor. Basically it was all a set-up to take advantage of public support.
This is the only sensible comment in this entire section. I’m always dubious of the “know-it-all” channels, but this guy really shouldn’t delve into literary analysis based on a private letter without analyzing the content of said letter.
Dune isn’t « a myth », but it is based on myths just as much as LotR, just moreso religious myths and myths about savior figures than fairy tales or pagan European mythology.
LotR has its meta foundations built on IRL myths, whereas Dune uses myths explicitly within its universe, built off of various IRL ones.
@@NotYou3005Or try to do literary analysis of two such dense works as LotR and Dune in a goddamn youtube short. There are entire channels and communities dedicated to just ONE of those series. I've watched hours long videos examining the morality and motivations of Sauron 😂
@jetblack4108 not really, he subtly sprinkles in with his own political leanings just enough so as to appear neutral. Remember that weird rib video he did back then?
So many comments are claiming Dune is a condemnation of messianic figures and religion, which is why Tolkien didnt like it but its hard to see how Tolkien could see it as an attack on his religious beliefs.
Dune shows how a messianic figure can be dangerous because they can command their followers to commit acts of violence and war, but its hard to see how Tolkien could view this as an attack on Jesus (considering Jesus was a poor carpenter who wouldnt even let his followers pull out a sword, nevertheless start a war). Seems like other explainions (like his dislike for allegories) is more likely.
I like the part where he explained why Tolkien disliked it
"Dune... can't really be used as a straightforward rallying cry"
My friend you underestimate Nazis on Twitter.
Yeah, it‘s not difficult to say „Paul leading the Fremen Jihad was actually good“, given that Nazis don‘t view „many people died“ as necessarily a bad thing. + Dune is a universe in which eugenics actually work.
Nazis today wave a red black and green flag. And they're usually on the keft
Now dune is entering pop culture through the movie medium, im sure ppl would find a way to rally behind Lisan Al Gaib
Fr, they already do with extremely blatant anti-nazi media, Dune is much easier.
E
I looked it up. The text of the letter (to a fan who sent him a copy of the book) is as follows:
‘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. Would you like me to return the book as I already have one, or to hand it on?’”.
He sounds so nice
the OP made him sound arrogant...
@@rolas2700 it's hard to fully flesh out your message in a short format. It could be completely unintentional.
what a polite man
@@tenhauser Absolute fucking lie, that. He could've just continued with it, but instead decided to use his platform to say that Tolkien's work helps support extremism.
This guy's a twat.
Just muddying the water on morality doesn't make you cleverer. It does make you more confused. Myths are not, by definition, real life stories. They are sign posts. Tolkien didn't like it, he didn't say you'd shouldn't read it.
Now that dune has been made into a movie I guarantee that in the next few years we'll have extremist a-holes saying "Paul did nothing wrong" and romanticizing dune as a self destructive romantic epic about the burden of greatness or claiming that his only mistake was "trusting women" or some bs like that. The problem isn't always the story. The problem is that people prefer to take art and warp it to match who they already are as people rather than as an opportunity to think and reflect and learn.
"Dune can't be used as a straightforward rallying cry..."
Meanwhile, half the Internet:
LISAN AL GAIB!!!
The Internet users that keep parroting that line definetly missed the point of Dune.
LOTR inspires us to be better. Dune inspires us to not be worse.
Thank you. How wonderfully succinct and to the point.
I love being an extremist Giga Lord of The Rings Chad and also appreciate Dune for what it is! 🗿
"which myth serves us better"
this line of thinking is the bane of my existence. man is for art, art is not for man
LotR serves us better. Dune is lame.
@@PixelPixie86we should become lotr not dune.
@@PixelPixie86 serves YOU better. They both entertain me very well
art is a Hu'man' construct you plank
@@BaldKiwi117 Me too ... why do people always compare things and can't just appreciate both.
One thing that is often overlooked here, is the first book. The Silmarilion had the elves commit atrocities, betrayal and all kind of evil deeds. The elves we see in Hobbit were the remains of once great people, but those that were old enough to remember those times don't talk much about it, because there was quite a bit of horror involved. Elrond watched his people being cut down by another elven party in the war of Sirion (he was not of age then) and lost both his mother and father that day. Galadiel? Holy crap she has seen so much war and murder it is a wonder she is still mentally stable. And Thranduil, who is simply known as the Elvenking in the Hobbit, lost his father Oropher in the war against Sauron.
And then there is LotR itself, which ends with the elves more or less leaving. Some earlier, some later. It is not really a happy ending, not really. It is more a story of people being corrupted and the battle against said corruption. But Hobbit and LotR were bot more hopeful than Silmarilion which was the story of how said corruption began. But also remember, those dwarves, that survived Hobbit, we see a few again, as corpses in the mines of Moria... what a happy ending they had.
I don’t think he even really answered the question. He vaguely mentioned that maybe it was because LOTR was a morally simplistic world(Characters like Boromor and Denethor go against this narrative btw) and Dune is morally complex, before going on an unrelated tangent about Modern vs Traditional art and “culture wars”, and… that’s it? What does the latter have to do with the question???
Dune being morally gray didn’t prevent it from being appropriated by extremist groups, in fact there was a (ofc quite tiny but still) radical group that made a Dune-themed propaganda video where 9/11 was photoshopped into Harkonnen structures getting destroyed. LOTR got it worse but maybe the myth isn’t the issue, maybe the issue is the underlying views of the myth or the lack thereof. If there’s a clear message to the myth like in Nimona than it’s borderline impossible for the wrong people to exploit it.
You are giving LOTR too little credit. Smeagol/Gollum shows that a person can be simultaneously innocent and wicked.
Boromir shows that assumed virtues like loyalty and patriotism can be turned to bad ends.
And Frodo shows that no person can be entirely virtuous. Even he succumbs to the ring in the end.
I would disagree slightly about Boromir, he’s a courageous and honorable man who desires to do good, but he doesn’t understand that the ring would corrupt these ideals and cause him to replace Sauron as a tyrant. In the end, he acquires understanding, repents and dies a hero defending people weaker than him.
Destroying the ring is saying that the only way to defeat evil (sin) is to resist it entirely
that's an extremely silly interpretation of Frodo: his purpose (similarly to Boromir's) is to show that the Ring can twist anyone including the virtuous.
And we see, specifically, how: he begins to grow possessive of "His" burden, clutching and (sort of nobly) preventing any other from holding it, even as it destroys him.
It's not to show that Frodo is himself "evil" in some way, but that no person is beyond being twisted to do evil under the right circumstances. Think of what Gandalf and Galadriel said when confronted with the choice to have the Ring.
exactly! this dude seems disingenuous af
Gee whiz @@bumfricker2487 , I think "no person is beyond being twisted to do evil under the right circumstances" sounds pretty similar to "no person can be entirely virtuous". Or at least, similar enough not to be called "extremely silly" by your righteous self. Sheesh...
Moreso, SARUMAN. The literal angel and The White Head Of Council, the ultimate authority, becames extra evil and resembling Sauron. Like... How is it not nuanced?
This guy reads a Twitter thread from an amateur literary critic and made it into a short. He's putting words into Tolkien's mouth. Tolkien never elaborated his reasoning on Dune, and Tolkien's works are not as shallow as "good guys win".
There’s not a lot of ambiguity about Sauron to be fair though? You never think, wait the dude could just be misunderstood.
@@agin1519 there is a clear "side" on Tolkien's ideals, but there's so much reduction on The Lord of the Rings' philosophy. Especially when you take into context the whole Middle Earth Legendarium.
@@FrostDirt yeh. I’ve made it a page into the Similarion about 3 times…so I find myself unable to comment about the Valar et al! I feel either the answer is much more complicated than a short. Or it’s that Tolkien really liked his own work and that which he studied, which is why he went into it in such detail, and tended to look down on everything else to a greater or lesser extent because it wasn’t what he liked which was his stuff!
@@agin1519 You're right, Tolkien engrossed himself in classical texts, especially of European origins. Naturally he is estranged from more modern genres like Herbert's sci-fi and other stuff, so developing a kind of of dislike for it is par for the course. However, I wouldn't call him "looking down" on other works. He was, after all, a man of class that keeps opinions to himself (or his correspondences).
@@agin1519 I think it could be said that Sauron has a bit of ambiguity to him, in a way. Sauron wasn't always bad, he was once a servant of the Valar but got drawn into evil by Morgoth. After Morgoth was imprisoned by the Valar, it seems like Sauron may have been legitimately sorry for the harm he had caused, and wanted to help rebuild after the end of the War of Wrath. But you see, he got rather resentful of the Valar and of the Creator God Eru Illuvatar. He felt like the Valar came, caused a bunch of destruction in their attack and capture of Morgoth, and then left people to clean up the mess. He felt as though the gods had abandoned Middle Earth, and was determined to establish order and prosperity. He genuinely started with a desire to bring safety and order to Middle Earth, but he fell back into his dark ways as he began to come to the conclusion that the only way he could do that was through force and control, deciding that if the gods had abandoned them, then he would make himself the god of Middle Earth. So while what he does is unambiguously bad, his motivations are a lot more complex than just "power for powers sake" or "because he's evil".
I wonder what Tolkien would have thought about Starship Troopers then
Tolkien also said that a large part of it was his own preoccupation with LotR, and that he didn’t think he could fairly critique another work
Fascinating point about artists in WWII. I was struck that Herbert’s characters become machines, using spice to function like calculators, and navigators and soothsayers. Whereas Tolkien’s characters are wary of machines and destroy the items that make characters more powerful than human.
That is one of the core themes of Dune. In its lore, a long time ago, there was a human-machine war, and thus, there was a commandment NOT to develop any advanced machines beyond the basics. This means, all development happened via genetic engineering and the human body became the tools or instruments instead of machines.
What are u talking about??? That’s the entire story of dune. No computers. Go read for once ???
@thedude4594 Just because they don't know the entire lore of Dune does not mean they don't actively read? What do you get out of being rude
@@thedude4594 I can't speak for OP, but I feel like the word machine here is being used in a more abstract sense than 'computers'. Either way no need to be hostile about it sheesh
I've never read Dune or LOTR (I was the turbo nerd in school who read nonfiction like Shattered Sword), and your comment brings up an interesting tidbit mentioned at the end of the short. Some of the earlier ideas of German fascism are luddite in nature, particularly in its ideas regarding a worker's place in society. Where the communist's ideal answer to industrialization is to seek the rights of the workers and form collectives, in this sense fascism initially sought a return to the artisanal craft of skilled workmen. LOTR's messaging of shunning machinery could be appealing to an extremist group that idealizes fascism. Of course, this is entirely conjecture. Personally I feel fascism is more of a phenomenon than an actual ideology, limited moreso to vague ideas of nationalism, authoritarianism, and anti-communism. I just thought it was an interesting dichotomy. Also, I'm not saying Tolkien was a fascist, he was pretty clear on his stance of the inherent evil of Nazism.