I rewatched Dune part 1, hoping to take away a better impression than I had when I saw it in theaters. Unfortunately I still don’t find much of value in it. I still need to rewatch part 2, and maybe that could still change my mind. But I’m not holding my breath.
In brief, Dune seems deeply misanthropic. The message is: the masses are irrational and easily duped by conniving populists that promise revolution. Simultaneously Horseshoe Theory and Great Man Theory. It is a diatribe against democracy and the intelligence of the underclasses.
Am I massively missing the point of this story? I have sought a Marxist analysis of these movies, and the ones I have found only ramble aimlessly the cleverness of Villeneuve for subverting the spaghetti-western hero trope and for being “self-aware” about Orientalist and colonial themes. As far as big-budget media goes, I think Andor is far more useful for leftist agitation than Dune could be.
Uh oh, an effortpost appeared!
For the record, as much as I love Dune...
…it is Science Fiction and thus needs to be taken with massive grains of salt. Literally the Bene Gesserit say magic words that make people fight each other!
The Dune saga originally by Herbert does the SciFi thing of taking a thing and just running with it, here that thing is Ecology[1] and how that shapes everything from people to culture. Literally Herbert’s reason why the Sardaukar and Fremen are so good at fighting is because both are raised on incredibly harsh planets so only the strong people/ideas/culture/etc survive and (somehow?) give them extremely great fighting abilities. Like I said, giant grains of salt. It’s a fun thought experiment, but taking the idea seriously leads to the Fremen Mirage. The book Dune is also notoriously difficult to adapt because it goes on long digressions that work for books but are terribly boring in Cinema.
As far as big-budget media goes, I think Andor is far more useful for leftist agitation than Dune could be.
I would also not take Dune as a Leftist or Emancipatory story. Instead it should be a warning against Mythology, Prophecy, and Hero Narratives because a tyrant and colonizer (including Paul Atreides) can enslave you through looking like a savior. It’s very hard to see from the movies and book, but the overarching theme for the first several Dune books is that Messiahs and Heroes are actually dangerous and can hijack the natural course of events to their own benefit. When I first read the books, it took the Appendix to convince me this was Herbert’s actual message, specifically this passage:
The course had been set by this time. The Ecological-Fremen were aimed along their way. Liet-Kynes had only to watch and nudge and spy on the Harkonnens… until the day his planet was afflicted by a Hero. - Appendix I
Afflicted is not usually associated with Hero.
In the first book, the Fremen mostly want to be left alone. They have a very long term project to terraform Arrakis by capturing water, planting desert resilient flora, introducing adapted wildlife, etc. The Fremen harvest spice themselves and bribe the Spacing Guild to keep Arrakis free of satellites and other spy equipment so they can remain unseen and unbothered. They manufacture rumors about the barren and lifeless south of Arrakis to keep curious eyes away. This was an entire civilization that felt colonized by the Emperor and the Great Houses, but also adapted to the planet themselves (as opposed to the Northerners) and thus could use the Planet and its ecology as a shield from large-scale incursion and domination. This is evidenced by the massive underestimation of Fremen population by the Harkonnens. While the Fremen were certainly capable of completely overwhelming the North at any time (as seen by the end of the book/movies) they were content with containing their ‘oppressors’ at the north pole while they went about their business. In short they wanted to be left alone to build a paradise for themselves. By the events of the first book, the Fremen needed only three centuries until they reached an ecological tipping point if they continued apace, as reference by my quote above.
Enter the Bene Gesserit and Paul Atreides. tl;dr: the BG created the entire religion around the Lisan’al’Gaib for their own purposes, and Paul deliberately used his visions to step into that Messiahood and manipulate all the Fremen to fight for his own revenge.
Deconstructing the Prophecy of the Hero: Think about this for a moment; how many stories we consume begin with a prophecy of a hero? Where did that prophecy come from? In Dune, the Bene Gesserit manipulate everything they can touch, even if it’s just a contingency on contingency. It was no different for the Fremen. BG sent missionaries, the Missionaria Protectiva, to create a religion the BG could manipulate in case of emergencies[2]. Every religious view the Fremen have (outside their terraforming) is a result of deliberate BG manipulation for the BG’s benefit. Paul calls this out several times. However, and especially in Act III of the book, Lady Jessica is also actively preaching and linking Paul to the Lisan’al’Gaib in her own plans. In short, the BG have built a lever out of religion they could use to manipulate the Fremen. Even Gurney Halleck is trying to compel Paul to use these religious views to their advantage. Is it really ‘prophecy’ if it was designed to be arbitrarily fulfilled at the convenience of another?
Deconstructing the Hero: Paul, through centuries of BG selective breeding and hardcore offscreen training[3], becomes the dude that can see future and past by huffing a bunch of brown cocaine and thinking really hard[4]. Although reluctant at first[5], throughout the course of the book and movies he gradually gathers more and more power to himself. It starts with him going native and helping the Fremen fight the Northerners. He would deliberately link the Fremen fight with the Harkonnens with the longstanding feud between Harkonnens and Atreides as a kind of kindred spirit. He would also deliberately invoke the other Fremen wish of building a better Arrakis to his own goals[6]. Let me call out Paul here: He could have easily melted into Fremen culture and simply be a thorn in the side of the Imperium from then on, but that’s not what happens is it? No, he gradually manipulates all of the Fremen into a fight with the Emperor and the Harkonnens, using his visions and abilities to ‘prophesize’ in order to make believers of the Lisan’al’Gaib and thus Paul himself. The entire final battle is one giant manipulation by Paul of everybody from the Emperor on down by simply looking at the future possibilities and walking the path that leads to the outcome he wants, not the desires of the Fremen. This is called sharply to attention in-universe by his future-wife-empress in the book.
Prophecy and Prescience - How can they be put to the test in the face of the unanswered questions? Consider: How much is actual prediction of the ‘wave form’ (as Muad’Dib referred to his vision-image) and how much is the prophet shaping the future to fit the prophecy? What of the harmonics inherent in the act of prophecy? Does the prophet see the future or does he see a line of weakness, a fault or cleavage that he may shatter with words or decisions as a diamond-cutter shatters his gem with a blow of a knife? - “Private Reflections on Muad’Dib” by the Princess Irulan
From a traditional Hero Narrative we might congratulate the Hero for rising up and vanquishing the bad guys, but if we consider the larger perspective of the Fremen, all of their own goals and dreams for themselves and Arrakis were eclipsed in following the Lisan’al’Gaib[7].
In the movies this arc is entirely contained within three scenes from each movie. In the first movie in the bunker with Liet-Kynes, he promises to lead the Fremen to paradise. Paradise being the dream of an Arrakis that could sustain life without the harshness. In the middle of the second movie he declares himself Lisan’al’Gaib and promising to lead them to paradise. Paradise here is no longer the paradise of a life-filled Arrakis but the Missionaria Protectiva paradise of liberation of oppressors, but only by following the Lisan’al’Gaib, of course! Finally, in the final scenes of the second movie, he says to Stilgar “lead them to paradise”, which is now no longer about Arrakis or the Fremen at all, but the violent war that puts Paul in power. By the end of the movies and book, the Fremen lost themselves in Paul.
When religion and politics ride in the same cart, when that cart is driven by a living holy man (baraka), nothing can stand in their path. - Appendix II
EDIT: I FORGOT ONE OF MY FAVORITE QUOTES!
No more terrible disaster could befall your people than for them to fall into the hands of a Hero. - Hallucinated to Liet-Kynes as he dies.
There is a second theme of a future devoid of the usual sci-fi trappings, but that’s a whole different post. ↩︎
All of the prophecies and mythos about the Lisan al-Gaib are designed to compel the natives to help any BG that was stranded or other such problem. It wasn’t unique to Arrakis or the Fremen, and the religion was already centuries old by the events of the book. :lisan-al-gaib: ↩︎
Seriously we don’t even get a montage, just a “You’re a
WizardMentat,HarryPaul” ↩︎You think I’m kidding, but he is trained as a Mentat (human supercomputer) and as a Bene Gesserit (weaponized flirting) before the events of the book. He’s such a prodigy it’s a miracle he didn’t produce English dance music. ↩︎
Paul can see the Galactic-wide war early on, seeing the slaughter on a scale unheard. While he attempts to veer away from that outcome, his other goals (revenge against the Emperor and Harkonnens) bring him closer to that future, and he’s not exactly resisting… ↩︎
He spoke “I could make Arrakis a paradise with the wave of my hand.” to the very same Liet-Kynes I quoted above. ↩︎
This last point goes harder in the later books because water kills the Sandworms, thus the Fremen dream of a lush Arrakis would be the end of Spice Melange. I wonder how a Spice-addicted civilization might take that? (hint: badly) ↩︎
GOOD post
Great detailed analysis
Great post
it’s weird to me when I see (and you haven’t done this) people complain about the white savior thing in Dune. Paul is an unmitigated disaster for the fremen and it’s really explicit that he’s destroying their culture before he leads them on infinite war (I did not read the following books)
edit: realized this was possibly off topic cause I can’t remember the movies vs the book, let me know if I should delete.
I’ll have to reserve any detailed comment about the white savior thing since I barely remember part 2. But from memory I remember it depicting the Fremen as being uncritical religious fanatics rather than a planetary civilization motivated by political economy. It doesn’t make sense to me that they can, at once, be responsible for perfect adaptation to the harsh desert environs, but lacking the collective intelligence to liberate themselves without a savior.
The books do a much better job of depicting this, but if I remember correctly, part of how the Fremen survived the occupation of Arrakis by the Imperium (who have massive spaceships capable of orbital bombardment) was by being fractured, secretive, and isolationist. I don’t think their lack of revolt, which ends horribly and is actually a condemnation of the white messiah trope, is meant to show their lack of collective intelligence, it is simply a byproduct of their survival methods and the technological gap between them and the Imperium.
Also, prior to Paul, I think their ultimate goal was the terraform Arrakis to a lush green planet, which is why they store water in their sietches. They did not have any ambitions beyond Arrakis, which is what it would ultimately take for them to secure the planet ironically.
The Fremen are portrayed with more agency and intelligence in part 2. But it’s just the believers and non believers.
Yeah my critique of it isn’t that vellenevue wants to make a white savior, and Herbert didn’t either. But that the gaps left by subtext and lacking material explanations leaves a gap which can fill its opposite intended narrative easily. We can blame conservatives and libs for misreading art, or get serious that responsible art shouldn’t allow itself to be useful in any way by enemies. Andor has no way to be read as positive to empire or settlers.
I just finished reading Dune for the first time and I’m going to watch the movies soon. All I have to say is; I can see how someone could read this, then watch the original Star Wars trilogy and be like, “damn, this shit sucks ass”.
I am not a fan of the movies, the Sci Fi Channel miniseries from 2000 is where its at
That’s the only one worth watching
The David Lynch movie is pretty cool
Dune 2000 and Children of Dune launched me into the books. I miss the old SciFi channel :(
The theme of Dune isn’t so much that the masses are irrational as that authority is irrational. Even with precognitive sight and the combined memories and wisdom of all every ancestor, it’s never clear if Paul or Leto are actually doing the right thing - or - if the bene-gesserit actually just genetically engineered the perfect lineage of self-gaslighting leaders.
It’s not certainly not leftist, but it’s a bloody good story for a 1960’s scifi written by a libertarian.
There’s certainly no lack of real leftist scifi out there.
I’ll hold my judgement till part 3. He shows more contradiction and trouble brewing in part 2. I think he knows the themes of the material well, so if he doesn’t focus on this then it’s intentional. It’s pretty well known that Herbert wanted to tell a story of why people shouldn’t follow a Messiah figure.
That gives me some hope. Does his warning about Messiah figures translate into fearmongering about demagogues as in Animal Farm? That’s my basic fear about this story, that its message is about the danger of revolutionaries and the irrationality of the masses
Does his warning about Messiah figures translate into fearmongering about demagogues as in Animal Farm?
It’s more like “a movement with a figurehead holding absolute power is an unstable thing, and the only thing that will keep it going is violence. Lots of it.”
At least that’s what I remember from reading the books ages ago. Paul rises to absolute power through violence because it’s what he needs to do to stay alive, and once he’s at the top, he wields that violence extensively to ensure his (and his people’s) survival over and over again.
Herbert wasn’t so interested in asking questions about the nature of political economy as he was in asking questions about individual’s relationships to religion, ambition, community, and death.
Dune isn’t really leftist I do t think, Herbert was a weirdo who opposed the Vietnam war but was a speech writer for Nixon at one point. I think if anything he was a libertarian writing about the danger of totalitarianism
What i didn’t understand when I saw part 1 in theaters (i read the book first) is that the movie was way too long and somehow they still decided to skip parts of the story that made the dramatic parts make sense like why the one fremen even wants to fight Paul
It gets worse in the second.
