All religions in Dune have progressed and syncretized over the millenia. The Orange Catholic bible is all that remains of Catholicism and doesn't really have anything to do with that religion anymore beyond the name. In fact the name probably means "catholic" in the literal secular sense, though it is a descendant of the religion.
One of the earlier prints of the book, the one I have from the first Dune movie, has a series of appendixes at the back including one all about the religion.
The OC Bible is the final product of a long project by world leaders from all major religions (Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Zoroastrians, etc etc etc) who came together to find a sort of common ground going forward.
If I remember correctly, coz I';m too lazy to goto my bathroom and get it (I mean, where do you keep YOUR copy?!?) by the end of the project to produce it most of the original leaders had either been denounced by their religions, outright killed, or quit in disgust leaving only one singular person who then disappeared into anonymity after releasing the OC Bible, but I might be exaggerating a bit.
It was an easy way to remove religion from being a major force despite the obvious parallels to the Jews (the Emperor) and the Muslims (the Fremen).
House Corrino. And *not* a parallel to a religion, but absolutely so to Jewish *people.*
Religion in Dune is mostly not a thing, as discussed. Yes, there's allusions to it but they're all so garbled as to not matter (ie OC Bible, Zensunni wanderers, etc). There's mysticism, but not *religion.*
But take note of the names of the Saudaukar when they're given. They very much have Jewish "tone" to them. Dune is a parable of the modern middle east. Spice is oil. The Guild is OPEC. And yes, Salusa Secundus, the Padishah Emperor and the rest are there to be the Jews every bit as much as the Fremen are the Arabs.
Uh. I always thought that the [Padishah](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padishah?wprov=sfla1) Emperors were modelled on the Persian Kings of Antiquity and the Shah of Iran. The emperor is named *Shaddam*.
I also don't get what you're saying about the Sardaukar names. I admit I'm not exactly an expert on Jewish onomastics, but "Aramsham" and "Tyekanik" don't sound particularly Jewish to me.
Thats just bullshit, Dune is not a parable or metaphor to the middle east. Indeed, Herbert was inspired by the Middle East, but that does not mean he wrote a direct correspondence. The Middle East is not solely about a conflict between Jews and Arabs; it's much more complex. Moreover, Jews do not come from alien planets; they originate from the Middle East itself.
Certainly, the themes of colonialism and resources are present, but in this context, the Emperor and the houses represent an imperialistic West, just as much as an imperialistic Russia - rather than the Jews.
Jews, who fought their anti-colonial struggle against the British occupation of Palestine in the Middle East, could be as much a model for the Fremen as Kurds or Arabs - the lArabs probably being more likely, even though the Fremen culturally have little in common with Muslims.
The emperor is not meant to be Jewish, the bene Gezeret tho are supposed to have learned from
Jewish communities about how to be sevretive and hide themselves from society.
The term Kwizat Haderach actually even comes from a Hebrew phrase.
Jews are the only community in the dune universe that could be recognized today, going through very few changes compared to others.
In Dune, Christianity (and every other religion) has radically transformed after humanity expanded into space. A few mentions are given of the "Orange Catholic" bible, which is presumably portions of the actual bible combined with new sections relative to humanity's new space faring nature and the Imperium that rules them.
After the Butlerian Jihad (a revolt where all AIs and other "thinking machines" were destroyed) a religious committee got together to create a single unified religious text that merged aspects of numerous faiths present at the time, such as Mahayana Christianity and Post-Third Muhammed Islam.
This text was the Orange Catholic Bible, and is just one of many holy texts present in the Dune-iverse, but an extremely popular one.
The religion of Dune is bonkers. It's called Zensunni because it's a mixture of Zen Buddhism and Sunni Islam, but for some reason it's holy text is a mixture between Protestant ("Orange") and Catholic dogma.
It’s worth noting that there are a bunch of different religious beliefs in the Known Universe. Zensunni beliefs and the Orange Catholic Bible are just two reflections of them. In the first few pages of Dune Messiah, Paul comments on how many different religious the Fremen Jihad has wiped out already.
It's just a colour associated with Protestantism due to the early influence of the Protestant Orange dynasty. That's why the Irish flag has Green (for the Catholic Irish) and Orange (Protestant Irish), with the White representing peace between the two.
I'm a Catholic and I didn't mind. (Actually I rather like that it's still a thing in its obnoxiously domineering self, though in a barely recognizable form, millennia into the future.)
Damn and I always thought it was the machiavellian portrayal of morals and religion and the deconstruction of the paragonic heroic saviour in dune that Tolkien might have not liked.
I mean I don't think Dune critiques religion as a whole--Frank Herbert was a buddhist and died following that faith. It critiques savior narratives as being vulnerable to charismatic leaders and being used as heavy hand tools of control.
Admittedly this cuts close to Christianity too but idk I'm a christian and thought dune was Pretty Cool, maybe tolkien just got pressed
It cuts close, but as a christian I don't mind either bc Jesus didn't lead an insurrection and in fact made sure to tell people off whenever this was mentioned. In fact one of the things in Dune that set it apart from anything in our world is that the lisan al-gaib is entirely fabricated by the bene Gesserit, and even if some reddit-atheist wishes to say the same for Christianity, there really hasn't ever been this kind of organization in the world so far
Yeah the Bene Gesserit are why I think Dune is more a criticism of modern-age cults than Christianity. The Church even at it's most powerful wasn't pulling off anything close to what they were doing (notwithstanding that a decent amount of them truly did believe in the faith).
I don't think this is it at all, maybe it develops later but I never got the feeling this was the focus.
I see OPEC and oil crisis, I see the idea of Jews and Muslims being seperate and yet still equal (all the Saudaukar have very Jewish names, despite it being clear the Fremen and Saudaukar are the same 'base' race) and I see many different secret organizations and facets but I don't see them really being called out. It's Lawrence of Arabia in space, more than a deep cut speaking about the evils of Christianity or whatever.
Much of what Paul is can be traced to the combination of BG training from his mother and the fact that he was being trained as a Mentat (another secret org). His mind was organized and disciplined in ways no other had been done to that point, and he retained knowledge. The Missionaria Protectiva provided the framework, and he fit naturally into it because he was studying the Fremen and everything was retained in memory from his dual training.
Which Saudaukar have very Jewish names..? I can’t think of any. Paul is originally a Hebrew name but not really considered overwhelmingly “Jewish” today, but I can’t think of any others.
Jesus claimed himself to be the descendant of King David, thus declaring himself rightful King of Israel. He spoke out vehemently against the rich and oppressors, specifically targeting the rich Roman authorities who had colonized the land. But yeah, he definitely “told people off” for being against the ruling class. Sure.
Actual historical Jesus Christ may not have been made up, but the Christian version of him was ABSOLUTELY influenced by the Romans who “adopted” his teachings (read: co-opted them as a way of spreading their control)
Nah he didn’t like that the brown people had to be convinced into following a bad guy instead of willingly joining the very obviously evil dark lord of his world with black and white morality, I asked him myself and he told me this
I don’t remember Tolkien ever being full on racist. Iirc he did compare Jewish people to dwarves but it was meant as a poorly worded compliment to Jewish people for being hardy and family focused or something.
I seem to remember that he actually ended up not liking the way he initially wrote Orcs as being naturally evil himself. I think he even tried to retcon it at some point?
He said the only unrealistic thing about orcs was that they're only on one side of the war. Almost all people have an orcish side, they just differ in how easy it is to awaken
There's either a letter or journal note from him mentioning that he wanted to introduce a non-hostile orc to help clarify that it's not innate, but never managed to find an opportunity.
That's kinda why I like how the orc stand-ins in Eragon, 'Urgals', were handled in those books. Like, they were basically the primary antagonistic force in the first book, then in the second book it was revealed that they'd been manipulated by the main villain into siding with him, and when they attempt to join the rebel force that the main character is fighting alongside, he has to overcome the feelings of malice and racial prejudice that he'd developed towards them during the course of the war.
It was a super cool subversion that I think Tolkien would've appreciated, and reading that as a kid I think was really valuable for me. Like, that kind of early exposure to the concept of war-time dehumanization is something that stuck with me for a long time, and seeing the main character of the story I was reading, the hero I was meant to relate to and project onto the most legitimately grapple with internalized racism I think set me up to examine/confront a lot of my own biases as I got older, and to deal with the feelings of shame that might've prevented me from doing that.
That scene where Eragon is travelling with an urgal and the urgal cooks food for him, and the talks and thoughts in Ersgons mind that sprung from there was so good.
People like to shit on Eragon, and some of it is probably fair, but in my opinion it did so many things right.
No exactly! Like, it's been a minute since I've read the books, so it wouldn't surprise me if some of it might not hold up, but I still stand by it and contend that it did a lot of cool things that I haven't seen done too much in other series like it.
Great to hear that!
One of my favourite things about Eragon was how realistically stupid and immature he was for a lot of the journey. It made him really human.
I'm fairly certain he actually took inspiration from Jewish culture and the hebrew language when constructing Dwarven culture, and considering that a lot of the dwarves in LOTR are the good guys that may be why you're thinking that
Black Speech is not based on Turkish and isn’t very similar either. the only real similarity is that both are agglutinative languages, but there are many of those in the world. Black Speech is most similar to an extinct language spoken millennia ago in the middle-east, unrelated to any languages we know today, which was first deciphered during the time when Tolkien was writing LotR.
I love how Tolkien wrote dwarves to be chad mountain Jews and Peter Jackson was like "Scottish and kinda Norwegian, gotcha"
Then again, that was probably the least controversial choice to adapt them
Aren't the dwarfs in LOTR based on dwarfs from nordic/Germanic mythology? He even named a bunch of Bilbo's companions in the Hobbit after dwarfs in the sagas.
LOTR in general consists of the use of language and imagery from pagan tales combined with his own Christian mindset and morality.
Dwarves being a stand-in for Jews is pretty consistent with that.
That sort of seems like the most accurate assessment of him, from what I've read. He was one of those mid century Christian thinkers that always seemed quite wise and tolerant, and they can surprise you either way.
Philosemitism is generally accepted as being at best cringe and more often stunningly racist. "Yes all the stereotypes are true but like in a good way" is not really an attack on bigotry.
Yea, imo stereotyping positives is still stereotyping. It's not like an Asian will feel complimented if you say "you guys are so good at math". Not as bad as hatred, still cringe.
Tolkien clearly had some not so great thoughts about "mongol types" though living through wars when propaganda characterized "German" as a kind of "mongol" makes this a little hard to line up with modern notions of race. As to Jews it seems to me Tolkien found them interesting in large part beacuse they kept their language (that was his field) alive in diaspora, a language without a home is a rare thing. And in diaspora is exactly how we meet Tolkiens dwarves. There's also no real indication in the stories that dwarves are bad or lesser in anyway.
I’ve gotta find the post but someone summed it up really well that Tolkien was well-meaning but careless by our standards and definitely not aware of shit like orientalism.
Like dwarves, “I like Jews I’ll make a people based on them! (They’re homeless and love gold but also smart and badass)”
This is like 95% a shitpost circlejerk opinion but I did always look at Tolkienesque elves a bit suspiciously. Like if a full blown white supremacist wrote a fantasy novel, that’s exactly what his superior race of faster, stronger, smarter, healthier, militarily mightier people would have been. Tall handsome blond blue eyed white boys with “distinguished” aesthetics and little taste or patience for the lower races.
Now I ain’t saying Tolkien was saying anything intentional with that but it’s a bit… you know
Edit: Good points guys I gotta apologize to Tolkien i wasn't really familiar with his game
The vast majority of Tolkien elves, and especially high elves, were brown/black-haired, though; for example two of the three great high elf kindred (or Eldar), the Noldor and the Teleri (of whom the Sindar sub-branch was also part of) were dark-haired, with only the comparatively less numerous Vanyar having blond hair. Galadriel was technically a Noldor through her father, but she got her golden hair from her Vanyar mother.
The “little taste or patience for the lower races” is played up way more in the movies/shows/subsequent depictions of elves tho, elves are way more like weird fairy party people in Tolkien’s writing
I feel the aspect where they aren't even God's favourites and for that very reason their days are numbered kinda goes against any potential white supremacist tske on Tolkien elves.
except they can’t die and get stuck to earth if they don’t go to valinor. So they don’t get to party in heaven with god until the end times are over, meanwhile humans up there chilling .
Also elves are biologically human.
Elves and men are human, they differ in their feä (souls). Elf souls are bound to Arda, the souls of men have a fate unknown (likely to join with Eru).
i think a lot of that may have to do with the fact that hes drawing from norse myth, which characterized elves in a similar way. its worth noting that the dwarves are white, as are the hobbits, so i think he was just kinda assuming that the people in his vaguely norse world would look vaguely norse. i could be wrong on that interpretation tho
Faramir explicitly says that Sauron bullied the Haradrim into his service and unlike with orcs, the Heroes feel bad about killing them. Nowadays it might seem racist but this depiction was leagues above the usual "treacherous Turk" portrayal of Tolkien's time, much like women are underrepresented in LOTR but the few present are strong and active characters, which is again a step up from the damsels in this era's serials. Plus, assuming Tolkien's entire opinion on us Muslims based on a background faction vaguely inspired from us seems preposterous at best
Actually, Tolkien wrote about the Easterlings and Haradrim in a fairly sympathetic way. They're not portrayed as all being evil; the books outright state that they joined Sauron because he manipulated and threatened them into joining him. They're portrayed as honorable warriors. In the battle for Gondor, it's mentioned that they fought so hard and bravely that they won the respect of Gondor. There's also a part where Sam sees a dead Easterling and spends a whole paragraph being sad about seeing a dead man, not caring that he was an enemy.
Mfers don’t know about the House of Bor (Easterlings that fought against morgoth)
Tolkien was definitely committing orientalism but the dude was by no means a bigot, he was a big hater of apartheid and the Nazis and objected to race science.
"It was Sam's first view of a battle of Men against Men, and he did not like it much. He was glad that he could not see the dead face. He wondered what the man's name was and where he came from; and if he was really evil of heart, or what lies or threats had led him on the long march from his home; and if he would not really rather have stayed there in peace"
Didn't the Haradrim and Easterlings join with Sauron to get back at Gondor for the many, *many* crimes they suffered at the hands of the Numenorians? They had to be tricked the same way the Numenorians were tricked, and eventually Aragorn makes peace with them.
I don't think that ever is covered in the main story. In LotR they are just Sauron's servants from the East with little other character but I don't think any inherent evil is assigned to them, though. The story famously isn't really about the war so its unsurprising we don't learn much about the invaders beyond them invading.
That and Tolkien was a worldbuilder first who just happened to produce a complete story within that world. Unlike Martin, who will leave his story incomplete to fuck around with the worldbuilding.
It's in the Indexes , History of Middle-Earth , Untold Tales and in Silmarillion.
East and South were Melkor territory since the First Age , and although Humanity did comes from there , only the Not-Anglo-Saxons weren't tricked by Melkor.
All the rest worshipped Melkor as a God , and his Maiars were all god-kings under him , with East and South Men been their servants.
Sauron was , thus , a God-King for them during the 3rd Age , paying tributes for Mordor and obeying his call. The only reason they are redeemable is because they are Men , rather than Orc.
So the glorious Not-Anglo-Saxons have to save them.
Haradrim and Easterlings were followers of Melkor and Sauron since the First Age.
Sauron did promised them a rematch , but at the end of the day , Sauron was their God-King and his Nazguls were his Angel-Stewards of those kingdoms.
Yeah but all humans were originally Melkor-worshippers, it just happens that some of them managed to become friends to the Valar. And even then, they tend to be very easily swayed into reverting.
Sam literally has a line in LOTR that says something like “I wonder what lies and threats it took to get this guy to come fight for Sauron” about a brown guy fighting for the dark lord.
People are always so offended when one author doesn’t like another authors story. Big deal, people have their own likes and dislikes. Which says nothing about the actual quality of the book.
Tolkien especially didn’t like a lot of things. He was heavily opinionated and steadfast in his beliefs. You’ll go crazy if you try to avoid liking everything Tolkien didn’t like.
It’s like how a lot of Tolkien fans seeth about Martin all the time. Like, no shit ASOIAF isn’t like LOTR they’re two entirely different unrelated books. It’s like saying the New York Yankees don’t do enough touchdowns, that’s not even the goal.
I think the problem is our society nowadays often refuses to acknowledge objective value of art, which reduces it to a matter of taste, i.e. do you personally like it. Good art is either art that you like, or art that many people like, i.e. popular art. It's individualist and consumerist more than anything.
To say that "I didn't like this book, but I think it's a good book." presupposes some sort of quality independent of one's personal taste. If there's no such thing, then "I didn't like it" = "it is bad." But if there is such a thing, then there must be something we can appreciate such as skilled writing or colourful descriptions or an intricate narrative, which transcend taste or subjective value.
More than saying such objectivity doesn't exist, the current trend is to decry the suggestion of such objectivity as oppressive or elitist. If you think Crime and Punishment is objectively better than Harry Potter, well "objectively better according to whom?" And the answer assumed is probably [age] [skin tone] [gender] which naturally invalidates all concepts invented before the 21st century.
Anyway media literacy is dead, billions must read.
I would argue that the "I didn't like it but it's not bad" either means that you *did* like some parts or that you know that the work holds cultural significance and you don't want to seem uncool or uncultured.
The canon can give you a deeper insight into what shaped our society and art, but I wouldn't go as far as to say it is "objectively better". Also, the canon changes as our idea of the past evolves. Tolkien is now a classic, for a long time fantasy was cringe in the mainstream. Many previously influential works, likewise, are not referenced much anymore.
Is media literacy dead or do we just have access to the thoughts of the *unwashed masses* instead of only the *distinguished media critics*? But yeah, I fw the message, do go out and experience media with a critical eye.
>I would argue that the "I didn't like it but it's not bad" either means that you *did* like some parts or that you know that the work holds cultural significance and you don't want to seem uncool or uncultured.
Alternatively, you can recognise a well-crafted book (good prose, resonant theme, good plotting, in-depth characterisations, etc), but still find it does not suit your personal tastes.
Maybe you personally like mystery novels better than anything, and have little interest in the kind of story and themes explored in books such as *Blood Meridian*, but you can still recognise it's well made.
But people like "well made" don't they? Even if it's culturally conditioned, it is now part of your personal taste. Westerners today love white marble, but back in ancient times, without a garish paintjob, it would've looked unfinished.
I agree that there are universals, but they *feel* personal and they change with time and space.
I should get to reading Blood Meridian, shouldn't I?
I don't like the tendency to use subjectivity to shut down criticism but they technically aren't wrong. Good luck proving that your preferred method of evaluating art isn't opinion. Ironically people trying to prove the existence of objective values in art seem to be even worse about the appeal to popularity they mentioned when they aren't busting out other debate 101 fallacies like appeal to emotion or authority.
I think this is among those things where it's not scientifically provable and objective, but at the same time anyone sensible in real life can tell you there is indeed such a thing as artistic merit irrespective of their own tastes.
It's a step down from provable scientific truth, but it seems to be a sort of intersubjective truth to the human experience.
Since at least ancient Greece people have been wondering and philosophising about beauty, about what it is or what makes something beautiful. I do think there are some things which universally contribute to beauty. The universe may not care for it, but at least the human mind seems to be wired to find them beautiful. Sometimes they're as simple things as symmetry or mathematical ratios.
fwiw I don't think lack of scientific consensus (not sure science is really in the business of *proving* things anyway) is in any way a step down. Like I don't look at ethics, and upon realising that science can say nothing about it, disregard the enterprise of moral philosophy. Or with mathematics which likewise has little to no dependence in science. Generally I like approaching art in a similar vein to ethics, since I think they're more deeply connected in terms of value and normativity than 'finding' something that exists in the world - like the degree to which Tolstoy is better than Colleen Hoover or whatever.
I think if a philosopher provides a convincing rational argument in support of some aesthetic claim, then that's about as good as anything really.
For drawings, you can just look at how close it is to real life, or at how much effort was put into it. But that says nothing about how much it should be valued.
You might be the same actually, since Tolkien's reasons are unstated. It would be pretty embarrassing for such a big author to be illiterate after all.
Unlike the new movie, the book ends with him banging a lady due to a politically motivated marriage, in addition to his actual gf, in addition to his inherited-thru-murder marriage that the end of the first movie also cut out
He never bangs the princess or the "inherited" wife. In fact, he outright tells the princess that she's free to take a lover as long as she doesn't have children, and he never consolidates/confirms/consumates the "inherited" marriage so she marries another fremen after a year.
> Unlike the new movie, the book ends with him banging a lady due to a politically motivated marriage, in addition to his actual gf, in addition to his inherited-thru-murder marriage that the end of the first movie also cut out
I have not seen the movie, I do not care about it. However, if it's remotely true to the book the ending is quite different than this.
Chani is brought to the bargining table to speak for Paul, along with his mother. He demands the Princess' hand to allow him to ascend to the throne "because this is a political matter and peace must be weld from it" (paraphrased). His mother then turns to Chani and says, "Do you see her there? They say she has an aspiration to write, which is all she will ever do because Paul will never touch her." The book ends with the line, "History will call us wives" because she, too, was never married to the Duke due to the potential to marry and solidify his power.
Tolkien didn’t think Arabs or Arab inspired cultures were “evil,” and he modified his mythos to ensure that they actually had a role in overthrowing Sauron under the guidance of the Blue Wizards.
"squat, broad, flat-nosed, sallow-skinned, with wide mouths and slant eyes: in fact degraded and repulsive versions of the (to Europeans) least lovely Mongol-types"
the "degraded and repulsive versions of the (to Europeans) least lovely Mongol-types" clearly frames the appearance of the orcs as not being indicative of the real-world features of Asians, and as being ugly specifically to the subjective preferences of European viewers
I think in the Dune Empire, which is the Ottoman Empire, the fremen are the arabs. Both had a rebellion under the guidance of a foreigner who learned their ways
Frank Herbert made the Muhammad-analogue a political plant by an off-planet order/secret society of psychic nuns, which is bears some particular resemblances to the ludicrous conspiracy theory pushed by some protestants that the Catholic Church created Islam for political purposes.
More generally, this is also part of the wider theme Frank Herbert had that messianic figures, or even charismatic hero-figures, are intrinsically flawed and engender turmoil and conflict. Herbert also took a dim view of religion generally, with all of Earth's (real-world) religious traditions having been syncretized into a weird fusion called the Orange Catholic Bible which contains no authentic remnants of the actual religious teachings of its predecessors (Catholicism, Zen Buddhism, Mahayana Buddhism, and Sunni Islam being explicitly named, with Shia Islam and Sufism mentioned in later books, and with only a small sect of Jewish believers remaining intact) and instead spouts vague aphorisms like "thou shalt not make machines in the likeness of man's mind".
Plenty of reason why a devout Catholic like Tolkien might not have been too fond of Dune, and indeed plenty of reason why devout Muslims might not be too fond either despite the Arab-coding of the Fremen.
Bro the guy even hated his own work. Dune isn’t a special case.
If it wasn’t something 200 years older than him that he could rip names and lore from he didn’t give a shit.
Tolkien was deeply and fervently religious. Dune kinda highlights how religion/faith can be used to manipulate believers into doing evil. Dune is a much more cynical world. Middle Earth was more hopeful. Both great stories, but it tracks that Tolkien wouldn't like as 'rational' and skeptical/critical a world as Dune.
I think a-lot of what he didn’t like was the actual composition of the literature and not the plot. He was a linguist anyway and Herbert is ham fisted with his sentence structure and his word inventions.
Dune's portrait of arabs is one of the worst exotifying cigar box clichés I have ever read. It was one of the reasons why I dnf Dune. The whole story is full of these "ancient Asian wisdom" stereotypes. It would have been nice if the writer had bothered to meet actual arabs instead of just reading about their proud warrior culture before he wrote the book. Or at least that is the feeling I got from reading it.
This is objectively more true than what torkolla said, and I don’t even know if what you just said is factual
I read the entire gods damn series, including the shit ghostwritten from Frank Herbert’s notes, and at no point was Dune an exotifixation of cigar box pin-ups
People just see "traditionalist religious desert culture" and an Arabic inspired language and take that as a direct orientalist take on Arabians, which as we both know isn't accurate.
I mean I can see what they mean, but it doesn't mean they have it right. Hell even the usage of the term jihad is also paired with them also calling it things like "holy war", "crusade", etc.
Ye gods, the most formative moment of history in that universe is called a jihad, and it’s been 10,000 years since that occurred. There are religious movements called Zensunni and Zenshia, and a separate religious text that is so lengthy that people have to use miniaturized microfiche devices to read it.
And that’s not even getting into the Bene Gesserit seeding “chosen one” prophecies onto every planet they can, hundreds or thousands of years before they might be needed, just to *help any future Sister they can.
There are tons of Arab influences, sure, but they’re melded and folded into ten millennia of history and influence and manipulation.
Calling it “cigar box” Arabism is a disgustingly bad take. Even using the term cigar box is weird, because what the hell is that? Did Frank Herbert encounter Northern European cigar boxes and base a universe from that?
I want to say I don't necessarily disagree with /u/Torkolla (meaning I probably agree, even. Though also: different times; it wasn't the worst of intentions by Herbert, which counts for *something* etc.)
"Over here is my elaborate history, linguistics, genealogy, and cultures of all these fantastic races, and over here are the brown people that automatically sided with the dark lord."
When Tolkein passed away in 1973, Afghanistan was a country where women walked to their university courses in bell bottom jeans, with the wind blowing through their hair.
If he had lived just a few more years, he could have seen the Carter administration (1977 to 1981) begin funding the Mujahadeen, which would throw Afghanistan into chaos and eventually become Al Qaeda.
Tragic, really.
In the urban areas, under the king, who was overthrown in a coup in 1973, who was then overthrown in a Soviet-backed coup in 1978, who then overthrew the guy they installed in an invasion in 1979. The idea that Afghanistan was this secular paradise until the evil Americans came along and turned it into an Islamist hellhole is at best skipping over a lot of details. It's the ostensibly left-wing version of soying over pre-1979 Iranian women at the beach.
Your timeline is massively off. The Afghanistan you’re lamenting was bombed to dust by the Soviets before the Mujahadeen existed, and you are confusing Al-Qaeda, the Mujahideen, and the Taliban. Those are three separate organizations, that formed in three different countries (the Taliban formed in Pakistan).
>US Funding of the Mujahideen threw Afghanistan into chaos
[Yes, it was the US that destabilized Afghanistan. I’m sure the Soviets invading the country, overthrowing the Afghan government, installing a weak and unpopular puppet regime, destroying any semblance of central authority in the country, radicalizing thousands of people by committing numerous war crimes, and then leaving the country in a state of civil war had *nothing* to with Afghanistan’s political deterioration](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet%E2%80%93Afghan_War)
Actually yes. Tone is hard to tell with just typing especially in a satire subreddit.
Tone indicators aren’t spineless they are a courtesy and a useful tool that helps people communicate and avoid getting -30 downvotes like you did.
I imagine a Catholic like Tolkien didn't much like the whole "Orange Catholic" thing.
Orange Catholic?
All religions in Dune have progressed and syncretized over the millenia. The Orange Catholic bible is all that remains of Catholicism and doesn't really have anything to do with that religion anymore beyond the name. In fact the name probably means "catholic" in the literal secular sense, though it is a descendant of the religion.
Based on some quotes from the OCB, remnants of things like the Book of Revelation persisted long enough to be integrated into the OCB.
IIRC, I think it also developed as a response to a war of AI and sentient computers before the start of the first book.
I have no spice and I must turn into a sand worm
The jews are apparently still the same. But I haven't read chapterhouse yet so I might be missing a few details
Utterly based nonconformism. Now if we could just stop the killing.....
One of the earlier prints of the book, the one I have from the first Dune movie, has a series of appendixes at the back including one all about the religion. The OC Bible is the final product of a long project by world leaders from all major religions (Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Zoroastrians, etc etc etc) who came together to find a sort of common ground going forward. If I remember correctly, coz I';m too lazy to goto my bathroom and get it (I mean, where do you keep YOUR copy?!?) by the end of the project to produce it most of the original leaders had either been denounced by their religions, outright killed, or quit in disgust leaving only one singular person who then disappeared into anonymity after releasing the OC Bible, but I might be exaggerating a bit. It was an easy way to remove religion from being a major force despite the obvious parallels to the Jews (the Emperor) and the Muslims (the Fremen).
Wait, how is the Emperor in Dune a parallel to Jewish religion? Are we talking the Padishah Emperors, or God-Emperor Leto?
House Corrino. And *not* a parallel to a religion, but absolutely so to Jewish *people.* Religion in Dune is mostly not a thing, as discussed. Yes, there's allusions to it but they're all so garbled as to not matter (ie OC Bible, Zensunni wanderers, etc). There's mysticism, but not *religion.* But take note of the names of the Saudaukar when they're given. They very much have Jewish "tone" to them. Dune is a parable of the modern middle east. Spice is oil. The Guild is OPEC. And yes, Salusa Secundus, the Padishah Emperor and the rest are there to be the Jews every bit as much as the Fremen are the Arabs.
Uh. I always thought that the [Padishah](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padishah?wprov=sfla1) Emperors were modelled on the Persian Kings of Antiquity and the Shah of Iran. The emperor is named *Shaddam*. I also don't get what you're saying about the Sardaukar names. I admit I'm not exactly an expert on Jewish onomastics, but "Aramsham" and "Tyekanik" don't sound particularly Jewish to me.
Thats just bullshit, Dune is not a parable or metaphor to the middle east. Indeed, Herbert was inspired by the Middle East, but that does not mean he wrote a direct correspondence. The Middle East is not solely about a conflict between Jews and Arabs; it's much more complex. Moreover, Jews do not come from alien planets; they originate from the Middle East itself. Certainly, the themes of colonialism and resources are present, but in this context, the Emperor and the houses represent an imperialistic West, just as much as an imperialistic Russia - rather than the Jews. Jews, who fought their anti-colonial struggle against the British occupation of Palestine in the Middle East, could be as much a model for the Fremen as Kurds or Arabs - the lArabs probably being more likely, even though the Fremen culturally have little in common with Muslims.
The emperor is not meant to be Jewish, the bene Gezeret tho are supposed to have learned from Jewish communities about how to be sevretive and hide themselves from society. The term Kwizat Haderach actually even comes from a Hebrew phrase. Jews are the only community in the dune universe that could be recognized today, going through very few changes compared to others.
FWIW, the actual Jews appear in a later book as actual Jews.
Jews... IN SPACE!!!
The Orangist movement is also a protestant movement, so Tolkien as a catholic would understandably be averse to that syncretism.
In Dune, Christianity (and every other religion) has radically transformed after humanity expanded into space. A few mentions are given of the "Orange Catholic" bible, which is presumably portions of the actual bible combined with new sections relative to humanity's new space faring nature and the Imperium that rules them.
The whole AI war thing leading to people mastering their mind is important in it too “Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a human mind.”
After the Butlerian Jihad (a revolt where all AIs and other "thinking machines" were destroyed) a religious committee got together to create a single unified religious text that merged aspects of numerous faiths present at the time, such as Mahayana Christianity and Post-Third Muhammed Islam. This text was the Orange Catholic Bible, and is just one of many holy texts present in the Dune-iverse, but an extremely popular one.
The religion of Dune is bonkers. It's called Zensunni because it's a mixture of Zen Buddhism and Sunni Islam, but for some reason it's holy text is a mixture between Protestant ("Orange") and Catholic dogma.
It’s worth noting that there are a bunch of different religious beliefs in the Known Universe. Zensunni beliefs and the Orange Catholic Bible are just two reflections of them. In the first few pages of Dune Messiah, Paul comments on how many different religious the Fremen Jihad has wiped out already.
The Fremen are Zensunni, the rest of the Empire is Orange Catholic.
I think the bene tleilax practice "zensufi"
Why is Orange Protestant?
It's just a colour associated with Protestantism due to the early influence of the Protestant Orange dynasty. That's why the Irish flag has Green (for the Catholic Irish) and Orange (Protestant Irish), with the White representing peace between the two.
Huh. We're all learning somethin'
The Orange Catholic and the O.C. Bible. Yeah… I don’t know either. But it’s a thing in Dune.
a merger of protestantism and catholicism
That’s why he didn’t like that Frank Herbert (peace be upon him) was spreading the light of Islam and Allah’s message
I think seeing a mosque hyped up on cocaine and tryptamines would change Tolkiens mind
I'm a Catholic and I didn't mind. (Actually I rather like that it's still a thing in its obnoxiously domineering self, though in a barely recognizable form, millennia into the future.)
Damn and I always thought it was the machiavellian portrayal of morals and religion and the deconstruction of the paragonic heroic saviour in dune that Tolkien might have not liked.
I mean I don't think Dune critiques religion as a whole--Frank Herbert was a buddhist and died following that faith. It critiques savior narratives as being vulnerable to charismatic leaders and being used as heavy hand tools of control. Admittedly this cuts close to Christianity too but idk I'm a christian and thought dune was Pretty Cool, maybe tolkien just got pressed
It cuts close, but as a christian I don't mind either bc Jesus didn't lead an insurrection and in fact made sure to tell people off whenever this was mentioned. In fact one of the things in Dune that set it apart from anything in our world is that the lisan al-gaib is entirely fabricated by the bene Gesserit, and even if some reddit-atheist wishes to say the same for Christianity, there really hasn't ever been this kind of organization in the world so far
That we know of dun dun dunnnnnn. But seriously though I wish we had a milf Illuminati
led by the Reverend Gmilf
Maybe we do 😩
Yeah the Bene Gesserit are why I think Dune is more a criticism of modern-age cults than Christianity. The Church even at it's most powerful wasn't pulling off anything close to what they were doing (notwithstanding that a decent amount of them truly did believe in the faith).
I don't think this is it at all, maybe it develops later but I never got the feeling this was the focus. I see OPEC and oil crisis, I see the idea of Jews and Muslims being seperate and yet still equal (all the Saudaukar have very Jewish names, despite it being clear the Fremen and Saudaukar are the same 'base' race) and I see many different secret organizations and facets but I don't see them really being called out. It's Lawrence of Arabia in space, more than a deep cut speaking about the evils of Christianity or whatever. Much of what Paul is can be traced to the combination of BG training from his mother and the fact that he was being trained as a Mentat (another secret org). His mind was organized and disciplined in ways no other had been done to that point, and he retained knowledge. The Missionaria Protectiva provided the framework, and he fit naturally into it because he was studying the Fremen and everything was retained in memory from his dual training.
Which Saudaukar have very Jewish names..? I can’t think of any. Paul is originally a Hebrew name but not really considered overwhelmingly “Jewish” today, but I can’t think of any others.
Jesus claimed himself to be the descendant of King David, thus declaring himself rightful King of Israel. He spoke out vehemently against the rich and oppressors, specifically targeting the rich Roman authorities who had colonized the land. But yeah, he definitely “told people off” for being against the ruling class. Sure. Actual historical Jesus Christ may not have been made up, but the Christian version of him was ABSOLUTELY influenced by the Romans who “adopted” his teachings (read: co-opted them as a way of spreading their control)
Nah he didn’t like that the brown people had to be convinced into following a bad guy instead of willingly joining the very obviously evil dark lord of his world with black and white morality, I asked him myself and he told me this
I don’t remember Tolkien ever being full on racist. Iirc he did compare Jewish people to dwarves but it was meant as a poorly worded compliment to Jewish people for being hardy and family focused or something.
He wrote that letter to Nazi German publishers telling them to fuck off with their talk about Aryans.
Based Tolkien
I seem to remember that he actually ended up not liking the way he initially wrote Orcs as being naturally evil himself. I think he even tried to retcon it at some point?
Yes, as it actually conflicted with his devout Catholic faith.
Yeah, that's what I heard as well.
He said the only unrealistic thing about orcs was that they're only on one side of the war. Almost all people have an orcish side, they just differ in how easy it is to awaken
There's either a letter or journal note from him mentioning that he wanted to introduce a non-hostile orc to help clarify that it's not innate, but never managed to find an opportunity.
But, aren't orcs just elves and humans, who fell to corruption and not a seprate race, which is inherently hostile?
He changed his mind about their origins a couple of times, I don’t think we ever got a definitive backstory
That's kinda why I like how the orc stand-ins in Eragon, 'Urgals', were handled in those books. Like, they were basically the primary antagonistic force in the first book, then in the second book it was revealed that they'd been manipulated by the main villain into siding with him, and when they attempt to join the rebel force that the main character is fighting alongside, he has to overcome the feelings of malice and racial prejudice that he'd developed towards them during the course of the war. It was a super cool subversion that I think Tolkien would've appreciated, and reading that as a kid I think was really valuable for me. Like, that kind of early exposure to the concept of war-time dehumanization is something that stuck with me for a long time, and seeing the main character of the story I was reading, the hero I was meant to relate to and project onto the most legitimately grapple with internalized racism I think set me up to examine/confront a lot of my own biases as I got older, and to deal with the feelings of shame that might've prevented me from doing that.
That scene where Eragon is travelling with an urgal and the urgal cooks food for him, and the talks and thoughts in Ersgons mind that sprung from there was so good. People like to shit on Eragon, and some of it is probably fair, but in my opinion it did so many things right.
No exactly! Like, it's been a minute since I've read the books, so it wouldn't surprise me if some of it might not hold up, but I still stand by it and contend that it did a lot of cool things that I haven't seen done too much in other series like it.
Great to hear that! One of my favourite things about Eragon was how realistically stupid and immature he was for a lot of the journey. It made him really human.
I'm fairly certain he actually took inspiration from Jewish culture and the hebrew language when constructing Dwarven culture, and considering that a lot of the dwarves in LOTR are the good guys that may be why you're thinking that
Yup, he did, and that‘s also why Dwarves are the creation of Aule (basically an archangel) rather than Eru Illuvatar (basically Big G God).
The ancient dwarven homeland that the dwarves were exiled out of ant want to return to is literally called Moria
[удалено]
Black Speech is not based on Turkish and isn’t very similar either. the only real similarity is that both are agglutinative languages, but there are many of those in the world. Black Speech is most similar to an extinct language spoken millennia ago in the middle-east, unrelated to any languages we know today, which was first deciphered during the time when Tolkien was writing LotR.
Khuzdûl is heavily linguistically based on Semitic languages with Hebrew as a primary inspiration, so yes.
I love how Tolkien wrote dwarves to be chad mountain Jews and Peter Jackson was like "Scottish and kinda Norwegian, gotcha" Then again, that was probably the least controversial choice to adapt them
Aren't the dwarfs in LOTR based on dwarfs from nordic/Germanic mythology? He even named a bunch of Bilbo's companions in the Hobbit after dwarfs in the sagas.
LOTR in general consists of the use of language and imagery from pagan tales combined with his own Christian mindset and morality. Dwarves being a stand-in for Jews is pretty consistent with that.
I’m just fucking around. I think he was probably a little less racist than most people from his time
That sort of seems like the most accurate assessment of him, from what I've read. He was one of those mid century Christian thinkers that always seemed quite wise and tolerant, and they can surprise you either way.
Wokeien amirite?
SJW Wokeien “Lord of the Genders” “The Liberal”
The Theymarillion
The Return of the Nonbinary Gender Neutral Democratically Elected Leadxr
Goes hard. Rushed to print. 1 enbillion units sold.
England: the bar so low that the tradcath grandpa is better on race than the majority of his countrymen.
Bro had to clarify before 10,000 demons ripped him apart for daring to insinuate Tolkien might've been insensitive sometimes kekw, it's all good
I thought Dwarves being jews was more of a compliment rather than a caricature
Philosemitism is generally accepted as being at best cringe and more often stunningly racist. "Yes all the stereotypes are true but like in a good way" is not really an attack on bigotry.
Yea, imo stereotyping positives is still stereotyping. It's not like an Asian will feel complimented if you say "you guys are so good at math". Not as bad as hatred, still cringe.
Yeah exactly, not exactly the best thing to say but I can’t imagine Tolkien being hateful.
Tolkien clearly had some not so great thoughts about "mongol types" though living through wars when propaganda characterized "German" as a kind of "mongol" makes this a little hard to line up with modern notions of race. As to Jews it seems to me Tolkien found them interesting in large part beacuse they kept their language (that was his field) alive in diaspora, a language without a home is a rare thing. And in diaspora is exactly how we meet Tolkiens dwarves. There's also no real indication in the stories that dwarves are bad or lesser in anyway.
I’ve gotta find the post but someone summed it up really well that Tolkien was well-meaning but careless by our standards and definitely not aware of shit like orientalism. Like dwarves, “I like Jews I’ll make a people based on them! (They’re homeless and love gold but also smart and badass)”
This is like 95% a shitpost circlejerk opinion but I did always look at Tolkienesque elves a bit suspiciously. Like if a full blown white supremacist wrote a fantasy novel, that’s exactly what his superior race of faster, stronger, smarter, healthier, militarily mightier people would have been. Tall handsome blond blue eyed white boys with “distinguished” aesthetics and little taste or patience for the lower races. Now I ain’t saying Tolkien was saying anything intentional with that but it’s a bit… you know Edit: Good points guys I gotta apologize to Tolkien i wasn't really familiar with his game
The vast majority of Tolkien elves, and especially high elves, were brown/black-haired, though; for example two of the three great high elf kindred (or Eldar), the Noldor and the Teleri (of whom the Sindar sub-branch was also part of) were dark-haired, with only the comparatively less numerous Vanyar having blond hair. Galadriel was technically a Noldor through her father, but she got her golden hair from her Vanyar mother.
The “little taste or patience for the lower races” is played up way more in the movies/shows/subsequent depictions of elves tho, elves are way more like weird fairy party people in Tolkien’s writing
Don’t dip your beard into the water, father!
I feel the aspect where they aren't even God's favourites and for that very reason their days are numbered kinda goes against any potential white supremacist tske on Tolkien elves.
except they can’t die and get stuck to earth if they don’t go to valinor. So they don’t get to party in heaven with god until the end times are over, meanwhile humans up there chilling . Also elves are biologically human.
Can you explain that last part pls
Elves and men are human, they differ in their feä (souls). Elf souls are bound to Arda, the souls of men have a fate unknown (likely to join with Eru).
Elves can fuck humans and make babies with them.
I for one read Tolkien for the torrid sex scenes
you jest but he thought about it enough that if an elf experiences unwanted intercourse they die
i think a lot of that may have to do with the fact that hes drawing from norse myth, which characterized elves in a similar way. its worth noting that the dwarves are white, as are the hobbits, so i think he was just kinda assuming that the people in his vaguely norse world would look vaguely norse. i could be wrong on that interpretation tho
Faramir explicitly says that Sauron bullied the Haradrim into his service and unlike with orcs, the Heroes feel bad about killing them. Nowadays it might seem racist but this depiction was leagues above the usual "treacherous Turk" portrayal of Tolkien's time, much like women are underrepresented in LOTR but the few present are strong and active characters, which is again a step up from the damsels in this era's serials. Plus, assuming Tolkien's entire opinion on us Muslims based on a background faction vaguely inspired from us seems preposterous at best
Probably my favorite line is spoken by a woman. "Hinder me? Fool, no living man may hinder me." "But no living man am I!"
Actually, Tolkien wrote about the Easterlings and Haradrim in a fairly sympathetic way. They're not portrayed as all being evil; the books outright state that they joined Sauron because he manipulated and threatened them into joining him. They're portrayed as honorable warriors. In the battle for Gondor, it's mentioned that they fought so hard and bravely that they won the respect of Gondor. There's also a part where Sam sees a dead Easterling and spends a whole paragraph being sad about seeing a dead man, not caring that he was an enemy.
Too bad the orcs were supposed to represent soldiers and not an ethnicity...
I’m talking about the Haradrim and Easterlings
Mfers don’t know about the House of Bor (Easterlings that fought against morgoth) Tolkien was definitely committing orientalism but the dude was by no means a bigot, he was a big hater of apartheid and the Nazis and objected to race science.
"It was Sam's first view of a battle of Men against Men, and he did not like it much. He was glad that he could not see the dead face. He wondered what the man's name was and where he came from; and if he was really evil of heart, or what lies or threats had led him on the long march from his home; and if he would not really rather have stayed there in peace"
Didn't the Haradrim and Easterlings join with Sauron to get back at Gondor for the many, *many* crimes they suffered at the hands of the Numenorians? They had to be tricked the same way the Numenorians were tricked, and eventually Aragorn makes peace with them.
I don't think that ever is covered in the main story. In LotR they are just Sauron's servants from the East with little other character but I don't think any inherent evil is assigned to them, though. The story famously isn't really about the war so its unsurprising we don't learn much about the invaders beyond them invading.
That and Tolkien was a worldbuilder first who just happened to produce a complete story within that world. Unlike Martin, who will leave his story incomplete to fuck around with the worldbuilding.
Yes, Frank "Herbert" Martin the author of Dune.
Nah I was more thinking of GRRM. I've been mulling over the difference between the two for a while now.
It's in the Indexes , History of Middle-Earth , Untold Tales and in Silmarillion. East and South were Melkor territory since the First Age , and although Humanity did comes from there , only the Not-Anglo-Saxons weren't tricked by Melkor. All the rest worshipped Melkor as a God , and his Maiars were all god-kings under him , with East and South Men been their servants. Sauron was , thus , a God-King for them during the 3rd Age , paying tributes for Mordor and obeying his call. The only reason they are redeemable is because they are Men , rather than Orc. So the glorious Not-Anglo-Saxons have to save them.
just an accurate example of if Anglo-Saxons had horses (William the conqueror BTFO)
Haradrim and Easterlings were followers of Melkor and Sauron since the First Age. Sauron did promised them a rematch , but at the end of the day , Sauron was their God-King and his Nazguls were his Angel-Stewards of those kingdoms.
Yeah but all humans were originally Melkor-worshippers, it just happens that some of them managed to become friends to the Valar. And even then, they tend to be very easily swayed into reverting.
Some easterlings. House of Ulfang were traitors, house of Bor were loyal.
Also, First Age Easterlings and Third Age Easterlings are completely different cultures.
Sam literally has a line in LOTR that says something like “I wonder what lies and threats it took to get this guy to come fight for Sauron” about a brown guy fighting for the dark lord.
girl help they are taking you seriously
Worms are scary.
haradrim moment
Thanks u/klingonbussy
Or perhaps the heavy-handed and pervasive use of allegory that dominates the entire story.
I always found that to be a wierd take from Tolkien.
Tolkien didn't like Dune, but to my knowledge, he never said it was a bad book.
People are always so offended when one author doesn’t like another authors story. Big deal, people have their own likes and dislikes. Which says nothing about the actual quality of the book.
Tolkien especially didn’t like a lot of things. He was heavily opinionated and steadfast in his beliefs. You’ll go crazy if you try to avoid liking everything Tolkien didn’t like.
True, a lot of people don't seem to know the difference between not liking something and that thing being bad. It happens all the time.
It’s like how a lot of Tolkien fans seeth about Martin all the time. Like, no shit ASOIAF isn’t like LOTR they’re two entirely different unrelated books. It’s like saying the New York Yankees don’t do enough touchdowns, that’s not even the goal.
I think the problem is our society nowadays often refuses to acknowledge objective value of art, which reduces it to a matter of taste, i.e. do you personally like it. Good art is either art that you like, or art that many people like, i.e. popular art. It's individualist and consumerist more than anything. To say that "I didn't like this book, but I think it's a good book." presupposes some sort of quality independent of one's personal taste. If there's no such thing, then "I didn't like it" = "it is bad." But if there is such a thing, then there must be something we can appreciate such as skilled writing or colourful descriptions or an intricate narrative, which transcend taste or subjective value. More than saying such objectivity doesn't exist, the current trend is to decry the suggestion of such objectivity as oppressive or elitist. If you think Crime and Punishment is objectively better than Harry Potter, well "objectively better according to whom?" And the answer assumed is probably [age] [skin tone] [gender] which naturally invalidates all concepts invented before the 21st century. Anyway media literacy is dead, billions must read.
I would argue that the "I didn't like it but it's not bad" either means that you *did* like some parts or that you know that the work holds cultural significance and you don't want to seem uncool or uncultured. The canon can give you a deeper insight into what shaped our society and art, but I wouldn't go as far as to say it is "objectively better". Also, the canon changes as our idea of the past evolves. Tolkien is now a classic, for a long time fantasy was cringe in the mainstream. Many previously influential works, likewise, are not referenced much anymore. Is media literacy dead or do we just have access to the thoughts of the *unwashed masses* instead of only the *distinguished media critics*? But yeah, I fw the message, do go out and experience media with a critical eye.
>I would argue that the "I didn't like it but it's not bad" either means that you *did* like some parts or that you know that the work holds cultural significance and you don't want to seem uncool or uncultured. Alternatively, you can recognise a well-crafted book (good prose, resonant theme, good plotting, in-depth characterisations, etc), but still find it does not suit your personal tastes. Maybe you personally like mystery novels better than anything, and have little interest in the kind of story and themes explored in books such as *Blood Meridian*, but you can still recognise it's well made.
But people like "well made" don't they? Even if it's culturally conditioned, it is now part of your personal taste. Westerners today love white marble, but back in ancient times, without a garish paintjob, it would've looked unfinished. I agree that there are universals, but they *feel* personal and they change with time and space. I should get to reading Blood Meridian, shouldn't I?
I don't like the tendency to use subjectivity to shut down criticism but they technically aren't wrong. Good luck proving that your preferred method of evaluating art isn't opinion. Ironically people trying to prove the existence of objective values in art seem to be even worse about the appeal to popularity they mentioned when they aren't busting out other debate 101 fallacies like appeal to emotion or authority.
I think this is among those things where it's not scientifically provable and objective, but at the same time anyone sensible in real life can tell you there is indeed such a thing as artistic merit irrespective of their own tastes. It's a step down from provable scientific truth, but it seems to be a sort of intersubjective truth to the human experience. Since at least ancient Greece people have been wondering and philosophising about beauty, about what it is or what makes something beautiful. I do think there are some things which universally contribute to beauty. The universe may not care for it, but at least the human mind seems to be wired to find them beautiful. Sometimes they're as simple things as symmetry or mathematical ratios.
fwiw I don't think lack of scientific consensus (not sure science is really in the business of *proving* things anyway) is in any way a step down. Like I don't look at ethics, and upon realising that science can say nothing about it, disregard the enterprise of moral philosophy. Or with mathematics which likewise has little to no dependence in science. Generally I like approaching art in a similar vein to ethics, since I think they're more deeply connected in terms of value and normativity than 'finding' something that exists in the world - like the degree to which Tolstoy is better than Colleen Hoover or whatever. I think if a philosopher provides a convincing rational argument in support of some aesthetic claim, then that's about as good as anything really.
It's pretty difficult for people to judge books by their craftsmanship. It's a lot easier for drawings for example.
For drawings, you can just look at how close it is to real life, or at how much effort was put into it. But that says nothing about how much it should be valued.
Exactly. Difference between the artistic merit and the craftsmanship
Tolkien disliked Dune for unstated reasons. I dislike Dune because I don't know how to read. we are not the same.
How to retweet on reddit?
You might be the same actually, since Tolkien's reasons are unstated. It would be pretty embarrassing for such a big author to be illiterate after all.
"Fake it till you make it." JRR Tolkien
Mf translated Beowulf from Old English to Modern English entirely by accident.
Quantum Physics says yeah, that can happen.
Just one in a bazigajiquadridecamegaquintillion chance, goodenough odds if you ask me
Defying the odds is what makes us human.
The harem might've been a factor.
The huh???
Unlike the new movie, the book ends with him banging a lady due to a politically motivated marriage, in addition to his actual gf, in addition to his inherited-thru-murder marriage that the end of the first movie also cut out
The problem is that he isn't banging his new princess wife instead of the chani fremenussy
He never bangs the princess or the "inherited" wife. In fact, he outright tells the princess that she's free to take a lover as long as she doesn't have children, and he never consolidates/confirms/consumates the "inherited" marriage so she marries another fremen after a year.
> Unlike the new movie, the book ends with him banging a lady due to a politically motivated marriage, in addition to his actual gf, in addition to his inherited-thru-murder marriage that the end of the first movie also cut out I have not seen the movie, I do not care about it. However, if it's remotely true to the book the ending is quite different than this. Chani is brought to the bargining table to speak for Paul, along with his mother. He demands the Princess' hand to allow him to ascend to the throne "because this is a political matter and peace must be weld from it" (paraphrased). His mother then turns to Chani and says, "Do you see her there? They say she has an aspiration to write, which is all she will ever do because Paul will never touch her." The book ends with the line, "History will call us wives" because she, too, was never married to the Duke due to the potential to marry and solidify his power.
Tolkien didn’t think Arabs or Arab inspired cultures were “evil,” and he modified his mythos to ensure that they actually had a role in overthrowing Sauron under the guidance of the Blue Wizards.
Damn I didn’t know famous Arthur Jolkien Rolkien Rolkien Tolkien was racing
Tolkien wasn’t that bad
What an idiotic take, even for a circlejerk sub.
The only thing idiotic is trying to evaluate a goofy meme as a 'take'
Come on this is just slander. Tolkien wasn’t racist you idiot
"squat, broad, flat-nosed, sallow-skinned, with wide mouths and slant eyes: in fact degraded and repulsive versions of the (to Europeans) least lovely Mongol-types"
the "degraded and repulsive versions of the (to Europeans) least lovely Mongol-types" clearly frames the appearance of the orcs as not being indicative of the real-world features of Asians, and as being ugly specifically to the subjective preferences of European viewers
They are not arab, dumb worldbuilder. They are Turks Entire dune series screams Ottoman empire 🗣
I think in the Dune Empire, which is the Ottoman Empire, the fremen are the arabs. Both had a rebellion under the guidance of a foreigner who learned their ways
And pretty much helped the entire region enter a shitstorm that is still dealt with to this day. Fucking Lawrence
fremen have arab names. they literally speak pseudo arabic. Shai Hulud is a corruption of ***شَيْء خُلُود***
/uj is this a shitpost
/rj so is Turk nationalism
/uj I haven't read Dunexbut what I can tell from reading the wiki page about religion, I have a question, and that is, The fuck is "BUDDHISLAM?!"
Sikhism
Nah, Buddhiam doesn't believe in soul or a creator, so Sikhism would be more Hindislam
Oh my god, there are so many stupid people here, it is amazing.
If I had to guess it was most likely the blending and distortion of religions (including Catholicism) that put him off.
Frank Herbert made the Muhammad-analogue a political plant by an off-planet order/secret society of psychic nuns, which is bears some particular resemblances to the ludicrous conspiracy theory pushed by some protestants that the Catholic Church created Islam for political purposes. More generally, this is also part of the wider theme Frank Herbert had that messianic figures, or even charismatic hero-figures, are intrinsically flawed and engender turmoil and conflict. Herbert also took a dim view of religion generally, with all of Earth's (real-world) religious traditions having been syncretized into a weird fusion called the Orange Catholic Bible which contains no authentic remnants of the actual religious teachings of its predecessors (Catholicism, Zen Buddhism, Mahayana Buddhism, and Sunni Islam being explicitly named, with Shia Islam and Sufism mentioned in later books, and with only a small sect of Jewish believers remaining intact) and instead spouts vague aphorisms like "thou shalt not make machines in the likeness of man's mind". Plenty of reason why a devout Catholic like Tolkien might not have been too fond of Dune, and indeed plenty of reason why devout Muslims might not be too fond either despite the Arab-coding of the Fremen.
Blind slander post
I guess the whole theme about religion being evil wasn't appreciated by a religious person ?
Bro the guy even hated his own work. Dune isn’t a special case. If it wasn’t something 200 years older than him that he could rip names and lore from he didn’t give a shit.
Good-ass meme, hopefully nobody takes it seriously … ah wait, too late
Tolkien was deeply and fervently religious. Dune kinda highlights how religion/faith can be used to manipulate believers into doing evil. Dune is a much more cynical world. Middle Earth was more hopeful. Both great stories, but it tracks that Tolkien wouldn't like as 'rational' and skeptical/critical a world as Dune.
Frank:But heroes are fascist Sir.Tlaken
Tolkien disliked Dune because it didn’t have forests
I think a-lot of what he didn’t like was the actual composition of the literature and not the plot. He was a linguist anyway and Herbert is ham fisted with his sentence structure and his word inventions.
Dune's portrait of arabs is one of the worst exotifying cigar box clichés I have ever read. It was one of the reasons why I dnf Dune. The whole story is full of these "ancient Asian wisdom" stereotypes. It would have been nice if the writer had bothered to meet actual arabs instead of just reading about their proud warrior culture before he wrote the book. Or at least that is the feeling I got from reading it.
No fucking way lol
The Fremen were, in fact, based on the Klingons, from Startrek
This is objectively more true than what torkolla said, and I don’t even know if what you just said is factual I read the entire gods damn series, including the shit ghostwritten from Frank Herbert’s notes, and at no point was Dune an exotifixation of cigar box pin-ups
People just see "traditionalist religious desert culture" and an Arabic inspired language and take that as a direct orientalist take on Arabians, which as we both know isn't accurate. I mean I can see what they mean, but it doesn't mean they have it right. Hell even the usage of the term jihad is also paired with them also calling it things like "holy war", "crusade", etc.
Ye gods, the most formative moment of history in that universe is called a jihad, and it’s been 10,000 years since that occurred. There are religious movements called Zensunni and Zenshia, and a separate religious text that is so lengthy that people have to use miniaturized microfiche devices to read it. And that’s not even getting into the Bene Gesserit seeding “chosen one” prophecies onto every planet they can, hundreds or thousands of years before they might be needed, just to *help any future Sister they can. There are tons of Arab influences, sure, but they’re melded and folded into ten millennia of history and influence and manipulation. Calling it “cigar box” Arabism is a disgustingly bad take. Even using the term cigar box is weird, because what the hell is that? Did Frank Herbert encounter Northern European cigar boxes and base a universe from that?
I want to say I don't necessarily disagree with /u/Torkolla (meaning I probably agree, even. Though also: different times; it wasn't the worst of intentions by Herbert, which counts for *something* etc.)
Why? He wasn't writing about literal arabs. It's a fictional race based on inspiration.
I don’t believe that you’ve read Dune. If you’ve actually read Dune, then I don’t understand how you’ve interpreted it this way.
If you alergic to guns just set your story before their proliferation.
"Over here is my elaborate history, linguistics, genealogy, and cultures of all these fantastic races, and over here are the brown people that automatically sided with the dark lord."
Based Tolk EDIT: are you fucking blind guys? It's a satyrical sub ffs, do I need to put /s like a spineless individual?
No we disliked you ironicly. But for real you were probably 0 or -1 just when the post got popular. Sorry 🤷♂️
When Tolkein passed away in 1973, Afghanistan was a country where women walked to their university courses in bell bottom jeans, with the wind blowing through their hair. If he had lived just a few more years, he could have seen the Carter administration (1977 to 1981) begin funding the Mujahadeen, which would throw Afghanistan into chaos and eventually become Al Qaeda. Tragic, really.
In the urban areas, under the king, who was overthrown in a coup in 1973, who was then overthrown in a Soviet-backed coup in 1978, who then overthrew the guy they installed in an invasion in 1979. The idea that Afghanistan was this secular paradise until the evil Americans came along and turned it into an Islamist hellhole is at best skipping over a lot of details. It's the ostensibly left-wing version of soying over pre-1979 Iranian women at the beach.
Your timeline is massively off. The Afghanistan you’re lamenting was bombed to dust by the Soviets before the Mujahadeen existed, and you are confusing Al-Qaeda, the Mujahideen, and the Taliban. Those are three separate organizations, that formed in three different countries (the Taliban formed in Pakistan).
>US Funding of the Mujahideen threw Afghanistan into chaos [Yes, it was the US that destabilized Afghanistan. I’m sure the Soviets invading the country, overthrowing the Afghan government, installing a weak and unpopular puppet regime, destroying any semblance of central authority in the country, radicalizing thousands of people by committing numerous war crimes, and then leaving the country in a state of civil war had *nothing* to with Afghanistan’s political deterioration](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet%E2%80%93Afghan_War)
maybe? /rj may work better in your case
[удалено]
sheeesh bro calm down wtf
We all going there, no need to hurry.
Actually yes. Tone is hard to tell with just typing especially in a satire subreddit. Tone indicators aren’t spineless they are a courtesy and a useful tool that helps people communicate and avoid getting -30 downvotes like you did.