Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    401

    Default Dune novel - why did Frank Herbert reveal the traitor so early?

    I'm just finishing the first third of the Dune novel.

    I'm enjoying it so far, but I'm surprised by one thing. The first third of the plot involves a traitor in the House Atreides who is going to kill the Duke Leto. We are told who this traitor very early in the novel (2nd chapter), removing all mystery from this plot. Why did Frank Herbert do this?

    I mean without this reveal, the novel would additionally have the appeal of a mystery novel with the reader having the fun of guessing the traitor. I mean with a few small tweaks the novel would still have worked keeping this mystery. Surely, Frank Herbert must have realized this, so he must have had a reason. I didn't see any great need to reveal the traitor right at the start... he could have revealed there was a traitor, but why reveal the traitor's identity so soon?

  2. #2
    Silver Sentinel BeastieRunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    West Coast, USA
    Posts
    15,391

    Default

    We, the audience, know everything in the Dune series.

    Even their thoughts and feelings.

    Herbert would need to write the story in a first person perspective for it to work. And then you miss lots of character work and world building.

    It is an old staple of classic sci fi. Doesn't work for a lot of modern sci fi fans I have noticed.

    IMHO the prose, voice, perspectives, etc. Really click in Dune but get even better in Messiah and Children of Dune.

    Also, Herbert wanted tension between his writing, the doctor, and the reader. The tension in the mind of the doctor brings the drama. The reader asks questions, “Will the doctor really betray them?”, “Will the doctor be reunited with his wife?”, “Is his wife really alive?”

    Fear is the mind killer. It fits a theme he was going for.

    This revelation also creates tension, as the reader begins to see how cunning and manipulative the Harkonnens could be, and how naive the Atreides were.

    Paul, the Baron, and even his mom and Stiglar get whole chapters of them wrestling with the tension.

    All this fits Herbert's style of internal-monologuing. His characters do it, and so does the reader. And it is a masterclass in world building with how he did it.

    And it fits the whole series.
    Last edited by BeastieRunner; 04-04-2021 at 07:43 PM.
    "Always listen to the crazy scientist with a weird van or armful of blueprints and diagrams." -- Vibranium

  3. #3
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    401

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BeastieRunner View Post
    We, the audience, know everything in the Dune series.

    Even their thoughts and feelings.

    Herbert would need to write the story in a first person perspective for it to work. And then you miss lots of character work and world building.

    It is an old staple of classic sci fi. Doesn't work for a lot of modern sci fi fans I have noticed.

    IMHO the prose, voice, perspectives, etc. Really click in Dune but get even better in Messiah and Children of Dune.

    Also, Herbert wanted tension between his writing, the doctor, and the reader. The tension in the mind of the doctor brings the drama. The reader asks questions, “Will the doctor really betray them?”, “Will the doctor be reunited with his wife?”, “Is his wife really alive?”

    Very interesting. So we the reader wouldn't feel the tension if we didn't know exactly what the characters are thinking and that includes who the guilty and innocent parties are...

    I do like the transparency of the story-telling. Something very satisfying about knowing what's going on at each step.

  4. #4
    Astonishing Member Zelena's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Posts
    4,572

    Default

    Too bad Franck Herbert isn’t alive and can’t use this discussion forum as we can only infer his artistic choices…

    I got of rid of almost all my novels except this one as it had a significant impact on me. The interest wasn’t the plot itself although it’s still important but everything that was around: the discovery of a world, the motivations of characters, the relationships, the culture clash,… It’s hard to read Dune without thinking making a parallel with our world… what are the pillars of it? How does it function? What is its evolution?

    I agree that the sequels are still interesting but I find them more intellectual and less finalized.
    “Strength is the lot of but a few privileged men; but austere perseverance, harsh and continuous, may be employed by the smallest of us and rarely fails of its purpose, for its silent power grows irresistibly greater with time.” Goethe

  5. #5
    Loony Scott Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Running Springs, California
    Posts
    9,375

    Default

    Dune is just the first part of a multi-book saga and Herbert treated it that way. The traitor's identity is trivial in the grand scheme of what Herbert was doing. You'll see that there are lots of elements in the first book that, while cool, don't really play out very far in the saga.

    Nearest modern books I could think to what Herbert was doing is the Brandon Sanderson Stormlight Archive saga (which eventually will be ten books long).
    Every day is a gift, not a given right.

  6. #6
    Silver Sentinel BeastieRunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    West Coast, USA
    Posts
    15,391

    Default

    The other thing is Dune was originally serialized, so that probably played into the choice.
    "Always listen to the crazy scientist with a weird van or armful of blueprints and diagrams." -- Vibranium

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •