1. The basic theme is the dark side of Paul, his internal conflict which is briefly mentioned in book one. It's the known-unknown—he knows the future and is therefore burdened to be bored repeating it. It's the transfer between conquering and ruling. It's the struggle of the unmartyred messiah who stuck around too long and everybody begins questioning him—including himself. In this sense he goes from being Muadib to Paul Atreides, in a reverse of the first book. It's a messiah realizing he made mistakes, and desperately trying to find a way out of his trajectory that is not cowardly or damaging to others. And he finally concludes that uncertainty is the missing key, so he strides off into the desert sunset, blind.
2. This is fine: Herbert almost pulls off the rumination—at least he gives it an attempt that allows it to sometimes work. But it's confused and confusing. All the zensunni terminology gets obtuse and esoteric to the detriment of communication with the reader. It hides the plot, and that is a negative for me because I enjoy the thoughts raised by the plot. The esoteric import of Paul's introspection encounters interesting questions and characteristics, but is too obtuse to communicate well. I think Solzhenitsyn did a similar thing a lot better.
3. The conspiracy is dismantled by Paul, but it's not some exciting knife fight or Sardaukar showdown, but a slow unraveling through the conspirators own mistakes and Paul's prescience. As a whole, the novel lacks the level of violence the first was reliant upon, and I think that's enjoyable. But so many of the important character actions happen off screen that I felt left out of the action as the reader. This may be an attempt to keep some surprise in store for the reader at the end, and it keeps the theme of the novel—struggle with the aftermath of decisions and actions rather than the decisions or actions themselves—in the foreground. But it lacks the rollicking adventure of the first novel because it leaves the reader feeling left out of what's happening in the plot. It feels like a sequel, not another work in the series.
4. I don't want to seem like I dislike the novel, because I do like it. It is not as good as Dune, but not many novels are. The characters in this novel are great, and he finally begins to give each a distinct voice. Idaho, Alia, Stilgar, Chani, Paul—these are great characters well written. I also found the ending to be satisfying—not just because people finally do stuff on screen, but because it fit appropriately into the characters' stories.
[5. After reading the other 4 books, I did feel like this one was my least favorite because so many important things happen off screen. It leaves the reader feeling left out, much like Paul feels left out of the movement he created, of the jihad he tried to avoid, and of the government he is the face of. This one is just so strange compared to the rest. 3, 5, & 6 are consciously trying to be Dune, while 4 is more like this one than I first suspected. But this one has it's own problems that the other novels don't really have—though they do have problems of their own, they're different problems than this novel.]
No comments:
Post a Comment