DUNE: For Want of Little Makers

[Arakan]

1 hour ago, Veltigar said:

Got to see it last night and posted my thoughts in the watched thread

To further add to the above, I was also greatly disappointed by the Baron in the film; He's such a good villain in the earlier stages of the novel but in the film I felt nothing. I wish Orson Welles could be resurrected to take on the mantle, just as Jodorowsky had planned. There are several characters who definitely lost out in this adaptation (Kynes, Dr. Yueh).

I guess it was in some ways to faithful an adaptation to really be its own thing.

The Bene Gesserit with their Weirding Way and Prana Bindu, plus the Voice are de facto superhuman. Furthermore they have total control over all their body functions (torturing them is useless), nevermind access to genetic memory. Your complain about how easily Jessica beat Stilgar is like complaining about Captain America beating the best MMA fighter in the world. 

Furthermore, you have to look at the Sardaukar and Fremen from a Darwinist point of view, the environment they grow up allows for no physical, cognitive, emotional or psychological weakness. Survival of the Fittest. I know that’s a concept many won’t like. 

[Veltigar]

1 hour ago, Arakan said:

The Bene Gesserit with their Weirding Way and Prana Bindu, plus the Voice are de facto superhuman. Furthermore they have total control over all their body functions (torturing them is useless), nevermind access to genetic memory. Your complain about how easily Jessica beat Stilgar is like complaining about Captain America beating the best MMA fighter in the world. 

Than I feel neither film nor book (but definitely film even more) does a good job at bringing across these two powers. The Voice is clear and employed rather well, but I wouldn't say the same of the other two.

1 hour ago, Arakan said:

Furthermore, you have to look at the Sardaukar and Fremen from a Darwinist point of view, the environment they grow up allows for no physical, cognitive, emotional or psychological weakness. Survival of the Fittest. I know that’s a concept many won’t like. 

That's a very superficial reading of how human cultures and militaries tend to work. I think some of the best debunking of this common trope can be found here:

• https://acoup.blog/2020/01/17/collections-the-fremen-mirage-part-i-war-at-the-dawn-of-civilization/ 

He's a very insightful writer on these type of things. The whole collection is well worth your time. 

[Corvinus85]

3 hours ago, Veltigar said:

Got to see it last night and posted my thoughts in the watched thread

To further add to the above, I was also greatly disappointed by the Baron in the film; He's such a good villain in the earlier stages of the novel but in the film I felt nothing. I wish Orson Welles could be resurrected to take on the mantle, just as Jodorowsky had planned. There are several characters who definitely lost out in this adaptation (Kynes, Dr. Yueh).

I guess it was in some ways to faithful an adaptation to really be its own thing.

You not liking it that much gives me hope. It's probably good. 

I got to read that blog about trying to debunk the concept about tough environments/tough people, but I am skeptical.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

9 hours ago, Arakan said:

@Ser Scot A Ellison

Scot, to drive my point home, what huge ethical and philosophical difference it makes if one predicts the future with let’s say 99% accuracy (which in practical terms basically means certainty) or if one sees the future with 100% certainty, I give you following thought experiment:

You see with 100% certainty (absolute certainty like 1=1) that all your loved ones die, and after that (and only after that) you will play the lottery and with 100 million USD. There is no other option, no way to save your loved ones. After reading Marc Aurel and becoming a stoic you might as well accept that fate and play the lottery, win 100 million USD and do some good with the money.

Now change 100% certainty with 99%. In practical matters the difference doesn’t matter but you will do hell and accept that fate and play the lottery. You will try and save your loved ones, no matter how small the chance, how irrelevant the chance, at least you will try.

Huuuuge difference. 

Sure, but how, if the future “could be seen” could Leto create a future where that wasn’t possible via the Golden Path?  And even Leto was surprised from time to time.  How could he ever be surprised if he “saw the future” with absolutely and perfect clarity?

[Arakan]

1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Sure, but how, if the future “could be seen” could Leto create a future where that wasn’t possible via the Golden Path?  And even Leto was surprised from time to time.  How could he ever be surprised if he “saw the future” with absolutely and perfect clarity?

He was surprised by Siona and everything involving Siona due to her being the first to have the no-gene, thus being „invisible“ to Leto‘s prescience. Regarding your first point: I am not sure I follow but of course there is not one future but myriad possible ones. He chose the one which will liberate humanity in the longterm. (compare with Dr Strange in Infinity War…1 in 14 Million where the Avengers suceed). 

[Zorral]

3 hours ago, Arakan said:

Furthermore, you have to look at the Sardaukar and Fremen from a Darwinist point of view, the environment they grow up allows for no physical, cognitive, emotional or psychological weakness. Survival of the Fittest. I know that’s a concept many won’t like.

Compelling mythology, keeps coming 'round, as part of the cyclical historical theorists' rise and fall of civilizations, advanced by Ibn Khaldun and many others, but does not hold up to objective examination.*  See Bret Devereaux's recent bundle on the mythology of Spartan warriors for an in depth examination of this theory: https://acoup.blog/2019/08/16/collections-this-isnt-sparta-part-i-spartan-school/

* Which theory has committed untold harm upon the psyches and bodies of young male children at military / public schools around the world.

Ooops, I see Veltigar also brought up ancient historian Devereaux's series of lectures on the subject of tough environments make toughest warriors.

~~~~~~~~~

Seeing the future vs. free will, we keep coming back to that old human thang, right?

 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

38 minutes ago, Arakan said:

He was surprised by Siona and everything involving Siona due to her being the first to have the no-gene, thus being „invisible“ to Leto‘s prescience. Regarding your first point: I am not sure I follow but of course there is not one future but myriad possible ones. He chose the one which will liberate humanity in the longterm. (compare with Dr Strange in Infinity War…1 in 14 Million where the Avengers suceed). 

He was surprised by the Face Dancer attack in Om as well.  That wasn’t Siona.  And if they see the future in a “haze of possibility” how is that different from pushing the narrative toward the future they prefer?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

14 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Compelling mythology, keeps coming 'round, as part of the cyclical historical theorists' rise and fall of civilizations, advanced by Ibn Khaldun and many others, but does not hold up to objective examination.*  See Bret Devereaux's recent bundle on the mythology of Spartan warriors for an in depth examination of this theory: https://acoup.blog/2019/08/16/collections-this-isnt-sparta-part-i-spartan-school/

* Which theory has committed untold harm upon the psyches and bodies of young male children at military / public schools around the world.

Ooops, I see Veltigar also brought up ancient historian Devereaux's series of lectures on the subject of tough environments make toughest warriors.

~~~~~~~~~

Seeing the future vs. free will, we keep coming back to that old human thang, right?

 

“Historicism” is Popper’s word for attempting to use history to predict the future.  He rails against it in both The Open Society and It’s Enemies and in The Poverty of Historicism.

[Zorral]

2 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

“Historicism” is Popper’s word for attempting to use history to predict the future.  He rails against it in both The Open Society and It’s Enemies and in The Poverty of Historicism.

One does come away from Herbert's long series of talking to himself with the sense that at least in the original/first Dune, he was a much better story teller than philosopher.  I still remain gobsmacked at how harmoniously he pulled together so many cultural modes and means from Persian spiritual and imperial history, to Bedouin and Islamic forces, to Renaissance Spain and Italian city-state cultures, particularly as reflected in Machiavelli and Jacobean drama -- to by golly! Big Oil Bidness of our times back when he was over there in the middle east and north Africa in the 1950's and 60's.  He never pulled that off again in any of his work before, or after that first Dune.

 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

2 minutes ago, Zorral said:

One does come away from Herbert's long series of talking to himself with the sense that at least in the original/first Dune, he was a much better story teller than philosopher.

 

Sometimes the best stories help to understand philosophy.

[Zorral]

3 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Sometimes the best stories help to understand philosophy.

Yet, it still comes down to free will, whether of an individual or the mass. Neither spirituality / religion nor philosophy, separately or in tandem have been able to change or check the course of history's "smoking ruins" -- to quote Walter Benjamin.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

15 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Yet, it still comes down to free will, whether of an individual or the mass. Neither spirituality / religion nor philosophy, separately or in tandem have been able to change or check the course of history's "smoking ruins" -- to quote Walter Benjamin.

Free will is always, at the end of the day, an individual choice in my earnest opinion.

[Veltigar]

3 hours ago, Corvinus85 said:

You not liking it that much gives me hope. It's probably good. 

It's better than Fast 9 for sure, but that don't mean it's great. In my mind I would compare it to the Pride & Prejudice adaptation with Colin Firth. That one is also slavishly faithful to the source material (although ironically the one scene everyone remembers is not from the book), but fails to grasp that for the story to work properly it should be told in a different way. This leaves you with an enjoyable film, after all it is Jane Austen's wit played by great actors like Firth, but you won't remember it that long.

3 hours ago, Corvinus85 said:

 

I got to read that blog about trying to debunk the concept about tough environments/tough people, but I am skeptical.

It's actually a series of 6 long-ass blog posts full of historical data tracing the history of the trope all the way to its inception. It's superbly interesting but it will take you a while. It's well worth a read, just like pretty much everything else the guy has written.

1 hour ago, Zorral said:

 

Ooops, I see Veltigar also brought up ancient historian Devereaux's series of lectures on the subject of tough environments make toughest warriors.

~~~~~~~

 

His posts on the Fremen mirage are almost as good as his collection on the Spartans you just shared. I absolutely adore all the shade he throws at the Spartans, despite the fact that I myself fell hard into their myth making as a younger man.

[Zorral]

43 minutes ago, Veltigar said:

I absolutely adore all the shade he throws at the Spartans, despite the fact that I myself fell hard into their myth making as a younger man.

I think we all did (even as young women).  It's really hard not to because with really thinking about what it means to live in a constancy of abuse and starvation, it feels so intuitively right!  When we're very young, if we're the fortunate sorts who are even able to read such things, it's highly unlikely we have ever witnessed, much experienced, such deprivation, to have any idea of what this does to body and soul.  Particularly over generations.

Lawrence of Arabia fame did so much to propagate the mythos too.  But that's the eternal golden age yearning, isn't it?  That at some period, not now, not even in our grandparents time, but some Time Before, there was purity and strength and men were all Conan the Barbarian wiping out the effete politicians and rulers, not to mention teachers.  Back Then we all lived in perfect testosterone fueled joy that we were more powerful than anything or anybody because, again, purity!

 

[Clueless Northman]

15 hours ago, Arakan said:

Furthermore, you have to look at the Sardaukar and Fremen from a Darwinist point of view, the environment they grow up allows for no physical, cognitive, emotional or psychological weakness. Survival of the Fittest. I know that’s a concept many won’t like. 

Which is explicit in the very first book. That's what freaks out some of the Imperials: when they realize that the Fremen could actually be even better fighters than Sardaukar, considering the unforgiving environment, and that Leto could use them.

Devereux's posts are good, but should also be taken with a grain of salt.

When it comes to the Fremen and Sardaukar, Herbert himself states they're the best fighters around. It's not debatable, when the all-knowing author asserts it. We just have to assume rules are bit different when applied to a galactic empire than when applied to our past history in some parts of our planet.

About Sparta, all the other Greeks and foreigners considered them the best soldiers, at the very least at individual level. You can't just make lists of victories and defeats and consider all equally and see who comes on top - some fool tried this to check who was the greatest general in history, weirdly it turns out longer-lived ones fare better. At some point, we have to admit the people living at the time knew better than what random scholars can second-guess 2400 years later. We also have to keep in mind that being better fighters doesn't mean you're going to always win. Sparta ended up losing a lot of times - which occurred more frequently, the less men of fighting age they had due to their military losses over the centuries and their foolish tendency to have one male heir so that he could inherit both parents and consolidate power. Stating Spartans were totally overhyped and weren't any better than any other Greek military is modern revisionism drawing from late-stage Spartan history and demise; no one would come to such a conclusion by reading Thukydides. The same way we tend to consider the Hellenistic phalanx to be an inferior formation compared to the legions, because Rome wiped the floor every single time, yet  Aemilius Paullus basically admitted he nearly wet his pants when he saw the (significantly weakened at the time) Macedonian phalanx marching on him at Pydna, being the most terrifying thing he ever saw or heard about.

[Kalbear]

21 minutes ago, Clueless Northman said:

About Sparta, all the other Greeks and foreigners considered them the best soldiers, at the very least at individual level.

About that...

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B089QJ17GV/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

 

[Arakan]

12 hours ago, Zorral said:

Compelling mythology, keeps coming 'round, as part of the cyclical historical theorists' rise and fall of civilizations, advanced by Ibn Khaldun and many others, but does not hold up to objective examination.*  See Bret Devereaux's recent bundle on the mythology of Spartan warriors for an in depth examination of this theory: https://acoup.blog/2019/08/16/collections-this-isnt-sparta-part-i-spartan-school/

* Which theory has committed untold harm upon the psyches and bodies of young male children at military / public schools around the world.

Ooops, I see Veltigar also brought up ancient historian Devereaux's series of lectures on the subject of tough environments make toughest warriors.

~~~~~~~~~

Seeing the future vs. free will, we keep coming back to that old human thang, right?

 

Completely irrelevant, also @Veltigar

This is Herbert‘s world, not the real world, and this is how he assessed it. His world, his rules. My last sentence exactly foreshadowed reactions like this. 

9 hours ago, Zorral said:

But that's the eternal golden age yearning, isn't it?  That at some period, not now, not even in our grandparents time, but some Time Before, there was purity and strength and men were all Conan the Barbarian wiping out the effete politicians and rulers, not to mention teachers. 

Sorry? Why do you make this a „men“ thing? It applies to Fremen women as well. Later to the fishspeakers (female exclusive). Conan the Barbarian is also not a good example, but I leave it there.

Furthermore, in Defence of Herbert, it is much much much more complicated than tough environment makes tough warriors. Much more complicated than that. I have the feeling you are speaking from a strong US bias. In the US military training the Focus is way too much on „breaking“ and „forming“, on physical toughness. And your society is obsessed with muscle monsters (American Football). 

What Herbert writes about, and what very much applies to the real world, is a toughness and flexibility of the mind. Perfection of necessary skill sets, psychological endurance, the ability to suffer without complaint (a psychological asset) etc pp. 

In the end, it’s a psychological and even philosophical thing. „The glory of life lies in the struggle itself, against all odds and in the face of certain death.“ 

I guess when you think of „hard“ Warriors, your mental picture shows you muscle-bound Marines. 

[Arakan]

1 minute ago, Kaligator said:

About that...

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B089QJ17GV/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

 

Can we leave the stupid Spartans out of here please?

[Kalbear]

The other part about the Fremen is that they, too, were Conditioned. The Bene Gesserit shaped their training and acumen and style as well, shaped what they bred for and selected for, with the notion that they would be the warriors for the future. One can quibble with this as a general concept - that breeding and cultural values are not by themselves enough, and that's totally fine - but that's how the world of Dune works on every level. 

[Arakan]

1 minute ago, Kaligator said:

The other part about the Fremen is that they, too, were Conditioned. The Bene Gesserit shaped their training and acumen and style as well, shaped what they bred for and selected for, with the notion that they would be the warriors for the future. One can quibble with this as a general concept - that breeding and cultural values are not by themselves enough, and that's totally fine - but that's how the world of Dune works on every level. 

Furthermore when it comes to the Sardaukar they were explicitly „breeded“ and selected to be as psychopathic and sociopathic as possible. The only real world comparison there might be (and even this is a huge stretch) are Dirlewanger‘s Black Hunters. They fit the psychology of the Sardaukar but of course lack most of the practical training. 

Anyway, the Sardaukar were not inspired by stupid Spartans but very obviously by the Janissary, the elite slave warrior units of the Ottoman Empire, under direct control of the Sultan (and only him), to a much lesser degree by the Mamluks and Pretorian Guard. 

The Sardaukar even suffer from the same hubris of believing their own hype too much as the later Janissary.