i flipped through this, and it just sounds like generic sci-fi with wacky names and dystopianness. why has this pulp gotten so many accolades?
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-01 6:17
same reason dan brown's work is popular. people are dumb
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-01 16:33
Read the original Dune.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-01 16:35
It's not generic for one thing it was the first ecologicly based sci-fi. On top of that the intertwining POVs makes it all the better, you get almost everyone involed's veiw.
Sure it has the weird names that almost all sci-fi has but cultures from other planets wouldn't use normal names would they? So far I haven't come across anyting like Dune, read through all the books and you'll see.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-01 20:18
Sadly, it progressively declines in quality from the first book.
This is true. At least the last Frank Herbert books were still pretty damn good. I've heard that the prequels are UNREADABLE. And shit. But the F. H. books are still good.
>>4
i understand the need for different names, but good lord, they sound like cliched sci-fiesque names that some geek thought would sound cool, by changing a letter here and there.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-02 12:35 (sage)
dune is not a book one "flips through".
you'd like it better if you actually read it.
and 6, the prequals are actually pretty good, so long as you pretend they aren't part of the dune universe.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-03 23:32
Frank Herbert did mention that he actually created the Dune universe as a platform for his own economopolitical drama. The spice, the Butlerian Jihad, EVERYTHING, are merely convenient tweakings of existing concepts to enable him to create the scenarios he wanted to.
Most people don't realise that Dune is less a science-fiction space-opera than it is some kind of abstruse social commentary.