Talk:God Emperor of Dune/Archive 1

Archive 1

Arafel

In the synopsis I found this sentence: "In her [Sionia] dreams she sees the various possibilities in the human future, and more importantly how in many futures humans are hunted and killed to the last person by deadly machines." I have read all the Dune Novels 4 times (including God Emperor of course), and nowhere I found a direct mention that the threat was the machines. It sure is a fair possibility, but as it was never explicitly mentioned in the original work, I think its presence in the synopsis is a pure interpretation that should be corrected. Or maybe I missed the mention 4 times? Not impossible ;-) --Fafner 21:02, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

p348 in GEoD, Ace paperback edition, where Siona receives the vision of Arafel: "No ancestral presences would remain in her consciousness, but she would carry with her forever afterward the clear sights and sounds and smells. The seeking machines would be there, the smell of blood and entrails, the cowering humans in their burrows aware only that they could not escape... while all the time the mechanical movement approached, nearer and nearer and nearer... louder... louder! Everywhere she searched, it would be the same. No escape anywhere." Elsewhere in the book Leto thinks of the Ixians attempts to develop self-guided hunter-seekers which could adapt. It seems extremely clear that if it weren't for the tools of Siona-invisibility, no-ness, and the Scattering, Arafel would have come to pass in the form of quasi-Berserkers (Berserkers in the Fred Saberhagen sense) hunting down and killing all of humanity. It is not 'pure interpretation'. -- Maru Dubshinki 03:53 PM Saturday, 12 March 2005

Ok, I found it, even though in my book it is on page 495 :-D The idea is located in a small part, too small for my failing memory :-P Fafner 08:37, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

That is true, but it is a major part: it is the reason for the Golden Path, the reason is later mentioned several times, and prior to that we were promised an explanation when we are told that all the rebels like Siona previously converted when Leto showed them the Path's raison d'etre, so you should have been looking for it. -- Maru Dubshinki

This is also referenced on p. 235 in the ace paperback version. "The Ixians contemplated making a weapon - a type of hunter-seeker, self-propelled death with a machine mind. It was to be designed as a self-improving thing which would seek out life and reduce that life to its inorganic matter." Bigdan201 (talk) 21:48, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Nayla

Any reference to her surname in the book? Otherwise should be removed, I think it comes from the Dune pedia?

Grepping through an ebook I have of GEoD, I can find no surname ever mentioned. --maru (talk) contribs 18:58, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I also did a search in my text file of GEoD, and no last name comes up at anypoint, so I've taken it out of the article. Good catch! TAnthony 18:37, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Incidentally, it does indeed come from the Dune Encyclopedia. --Gwern (contribs) 18:55, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Movie

When will be the movie available?

I don't know how well this book would translate into a film or miniseries; and I think the producers of the Sci-Fi channel miniseries (Dune and Children of Dune) have said in interviews that they may be more interested in adapting the prequels. If I find a source on that I'll leave it here ... TAnthony 20:32, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Nayla's orgasm!

Believe it or not, this fact is actually in the book! It's the last line of the chapter. But it really has no place in this article, completely unexplained as it is. If I recall, it has something to do with her religious fervor over Leto, in the context that the assassination plot is coming to fruition and she has convinced herself that it is a test by Leto of her loyalty. But even the way I've just worded it doesn't make it notable enough to be part of the synopsis. If anyone else can find a productive way to use it ... TAnthony 15:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

She had an orgasm because she believes so strongly in her Lord Leto that she sees Duncan's open defiance as extremely dangerous and erotic. Dionyseus 16:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Epigraph reference

Moved to Heretics of Dune page. Scott1329m 19:44, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Rewrite

I've started on a rewrite of this article. I really don't think it needs to be as in-depth as it is right now. For the moment, what I've done is commented out, but once I get more done, I'd like to start changing the article over. Lee.crabtree 20:50, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

are you still working on it? if not, i'd be happy to do it. Betterlucknexttime 16:46, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I had a few things happen in real life that required me to spend less time rewriting this, but I'm planning on getting back into this. However, don't let that stop you from adding to it as well. Lee.crabtree 22:07, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Cartoon Network reference

I've undone this edit because the reference isn't notable. WP:TRIVIA and WP:POPCULTURE discourage random pop culture references in articles; this one has no bearing on public perception of the subject, so shouldn't be included. Chris Cunningham (talk) 11:56, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. THAT is a justification for the deletion I can agree with. (I didn't have a problem with the notability issue; it was the "self-promotion" bit that didn't make any sense.) --SandChigger (talk) 02:37, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem. "Pop culture" references to people's random bands and so on are rife on WP, so it's forgivable that the editor who originally removed it made an assumption of such intent. Chris Cunningham (talk) 02:49, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Plot summary

In this edit in October, 2003, a large slab of text labelled a "full synopsis" of the novel was added to this article. At over 4,000 words, it was monstrously big, but the current revision of the article contains an even larger hunk of words discussing the plot, comprising nearly 6,000 words.

This is not a plot summary, but (with the exception of some exposition in the opening paragraph) a blow-by-blow account of events in the novel. It is a substantial derived work and poses copyright problems for Wikipedia. There is no prior version to revert to, so to resolve these problems I'm taking the unusual step of completely removing it from the article. This article needs a brief, encyclopedic description of the plot of the novel. --Tony Sidaway 10:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't know whether you realised but an adequate summary was commented out in what you removed I have added that back - it still needs work but is better than nothing. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 10:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

It's still pretty monstrous. I've tagged what's left for further work, because it's still over a full page of text on high-res monitors. Chris Cunningham (talk) 10:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Well spotted, Kevin. Thanks for that. I agree that it's still a little long but it's much, much better than the enormous one. --Tony Sidaway 10:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Golden Path

I like (and mostly believe) the description of the Golden Path found elsewhere in Wikipedia under 'Golden Path', a multi-part description emphasizing humanity's need to learn an important lesson regarding the price of continuing in comfortable, familiar patterns when the future actually requires a wild, adaptive and creative humanity. As such I'm not sure that the following statement from this entry is entirely accurate: "Leto's "Golden Path," as he calls it, is a millennia-spanning attempt to produce a human who is invisible to a watcher gifted with prescience ..". It's been years since I read God Emperor, however -- I'm only half-way through it in this re-read -- and so it's entirely possible that I could be wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.20.106.140 (talk) 02:26, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I read it 4 times, and I understood the Golden Path the same way as you: basically a means of survival for Human race. As I understood it, concealing people from prescience is only one of the ways to achieve that (especially given the situation in Chapter House). Fafner (talk) 07:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Heya. I haven't been keeping up with developments here the last few weeks, but that's definitely skewed as far as it goes. The Golden Path was Leto's plan for the survival of the human species. It consisted of two parts, the Scattering—which spread people so far and wide that no one disaster could threaten the entire species—and the Siona Gene, which made people endowed with it invisible to prescients. Obviously the problem text refers only to the latter. --SandChigger (talk) 14:31, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Malky

I've boldly redirected the stub Malky (Dune) to this article; it was tagged for possible deletion on notability grounds, and I have to agree he really doesn't need his own article. I'm preserving the content below so that some of it may be incorporated into this article:

In God Emperor of Dune, it is revealed that Malky is the former Ixian ambassador to the God Emperor Leto II and Uncle to Hwi Noree. Specially raised and trained by the Ixians to be a "tempter" — the "Devil to Leto's God" — the Ixians intended for Malky to manipulate Leto into doubting his own purpose. He ultimately failed because Leto was already quite aware of his own hypocrisy; indeed, it formed part of Leto's prescient plan to create the Golden Path, a plan to save humanity. When Malky proves unable to unseat Leto, the improved Ixian creation Hwi Noree is sent to seduce him instead.

Malky is later implicated in a plot against the God Emperor, and is captured and returned to Arrakis. The God Emperor is not able to bring himself to kill his old friend; he asks Moneo Atreides to kill Malky, which Moneo promptly does.

The plot summary in this article is already large, so when I have more time I intend to carefully assess what might be useful from the malky stub, but in the meantime if anyone else is feeling motivated ... — TAnthony^Talk 15:22, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

New analysis section?

I'll be blunt: I don't see much relevance in it. Can we say OR? I'd zap it right now but am distracted. Any thoughts? --SandChigger (talk) 03:40, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Right. So I had time to come back and look at it a little more. Hmm. I'm moving it here for discussion/dissection, to see if there's anything worth keeping in it. (Sorry, but in my opinion it's either pure wankery or spam.) Discuss! --SandChigger (talk) 11:06, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Analysis

The oracle: As in all “Dune”-novels, the dark sides of omniscience are a primal topic. Muad’dib was anxious of the future because he opened paths nobody walked before. Whereas his son is a pre-born and conscious of all failures his father made. He doesn’t fear the future, but is lost in it. Our greatest advantage in foretelling technology is our weather observing system. Even though we use a lot of machine power for our predictions, their inaccurate. But even those primitive systems contains a Pandora-phenomenon. Imagine a city like Vienna after a few rainy weeks. Ten thousands of Nordic-walking-freaks are blocking the freeways and spend a day on the road instead in the green. A question to ask Leto: Do I have to meet the demands of the weather-oracle? The human mind is a result of evolution. Its complex, but the only advantage an animal with our capacities has, is to react effectively on external stimulus. Awareness is a mere byproduct of evolution. So the awareness of man is a reaction gadget and not built for total prediction. You would need an inhuman brain to cope with this – that’s the main massage of the novel.

Body anxiety: Kurt Neumann’s movie “The Fly” (1958)(Author: David Weichselbaum) is an example for this primal fear. It’s the fear of mutilation and unwanted changes of the own body (like during puberty). Due to the fascination for this phenomenon “God Emperor” and “The Fly” share the same reason of success.

These fears withheld Muad’dib from becoming “the Worm” and also scatter Leto. Although Hwi seems to understand his martyr, she’s the reason for stirring up Leto’s anxiety. To have a favor for “handicapped person” like Leto is called “acrotomophilia” – a “mental disorder” Hwi is bred for. Generally such unions come to a bad end, but in the case of the Ixian it’s not sure. Possible she’s really indifferent to Leto’s physical form.

Ethical issues of cloning: The Duncan Idahos not only starve from the thoughts of being ripped out of their “hometime”, but also from the awareness of their plurality. There’s a scene at the beginning of the novel when Fish Speakers serve Duncan his favorite food for breakfast. “Who am I? Do I have to act as my predecessors acted? Do I have children?” – these are not only thoughts of an awakened Ghola, but thoughts of every human clone jet to be borne. The consciousness about a clone’s copy-function would be equal to a rape for the individual. The fact, that Leto addresses the Tleilaxu breed as “his Duncans” is an obvious sign for his ownership of Idaho’s live. The man is seen as thing, as product which you pay for. Nothing is worth this violation of human dignity. Not even immortality. Today there several serious businesses, working hand in hand with scientists and embryologists to preserve and revive the genome of pets. Companies like GSC are achieving attempts of getting into the pet-clone-branch. If you pay a monthly fee to bank your Kitty’s skin cells, its version 2.0 can be available in about 3 years. So you own the possibility to live with your beloved cat for the whole of your live. It’s a brave, new world!

Tags

Perhaps the plot summary can be considered long to some (not to me), but I'm not sure what about the article is "in-universe." The plot summary section is written in the present tense per policy for fiction (though I can see some potential tweaks) and, um, THERE'S NOT MUCH ELSE IN THE ARTICLE. Please advise. — TAnthony^Talk 23:36, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Plot sections, where they exist, should explore the plot from the perspective of a reader and the real world, not from the perspective of the fictional universe. In this case, the "Background" or "Plot introduction" section introduces basically all of the detail which is required in order to present the contents of the book to the reader. The whole "plot" section itself is little more than a narrative. As for the article being short, that's part of the point of the {{plot}} tag: articles about books shouldn't consist almost entirely of reiteration of the book's plot; they should explore the themes of the book, its real-world importance, and other details outwith the storyline presented within. That these are absent here is an issue which should be addressed. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

A plot summary should not be very long. It mearly needs to give the reader a rough idea as to what the book is about. If someone wants the detailed version, they should go read the book. Jpoelma13 (talk) 03:05, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Why shouldn't it be detailed? There's an enormous difference between 10 or 15 paragraphs summarizing a complex novel, and the 300 page novel itself. Especially when removing the plot section utterly eviscerates the article...

As a matter of fact, I know this view is an odd minority. In his book on Frank Herbert and his writings, Touponce doesn't fear to devote 23 full pages to the plot summary. --Gwern (contribs) 15:11 10 July 2008 (GMT)

As far as I know, Touponce wasn't beholden to paying attention to WP:PLOT. The "overview" section already covers the key themes in the book and how they relate to the rest of the series from an external point of view. Presenting a Reader's Digest version of the book from an in-universe perspective afterwards is not useful to examining the book in an encyclopedia. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 18:24, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

And neither are we constrained to your narrow view of matters. Seriously, how is 8 modest paragraphs in anyway comparable to the dozens or hundreds of pages actual Reader's Digest condensed editions run to? Hyperbole much?

Touponce may not've had to follow WP guidelines, but to me, that an academic is willing to devote 3 pages to 1 of our paragraphs says mountains about how impoverished this article is. Not encyclopedic? Yes, it's not encyclopedic inasmuch as your deletions render the article an incomprehensible garbled mirror of the book, of no educational value whatsoever. --Gwern (contribs) 02:27 13 July 2008 (GMT)

It is not meant to be a "mirror of the book". At all. There is no need to have a narrative whatsoever, and comparing the length of said narrative to external sources is just pointless - totally apples and oranges. While we are not contrained to "my narrow view of matters", we are expected to follow Wikipedia's policies on notability, which include not reiterating fictional content as if it were real and indeed avoiding fictional content unless it has some real-world importance.

As for "educational", Wikipedia is not here to teach subject matter. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:26, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't know where you're coming from. Your link is not applicable here, and as for your summary - if Wikipedia is not here to be educational, what exactly, pray say, is it here for?

As for apples and oranges, I have made it clear that I consider them very comparable: Both are academic enterprises which seek to usefully inform the user. If you can't see that, then I don't know how to argue with such a fanatic. --Gwern (contribs) 20:28 19 July 2008 (GMT)

Moneo Atreides article

I would like to know who is responsible for removing my Moneo Atreides article and replacing it with a brief mention of Moneo in this article. It does not seem right or responsible that someone could just erase my researched article on Moneo which actually described him and his accelerated abilities. Please show me where it is documented that my article was removed and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moneo_Atreides was pointed to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moneo_Atreides#Plot_summary because it seems a bit discouraging that one persons research and work can just be erased because some other individual or group feels the need to do so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by worldwriter 24.222.238.83 (talk) 21:59, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

While of course your efforts were appreciated, the Moneo article you mention was a stub consisting entirely of in-universe plot summary. This and other similar articles have been merged and/or redirected as appropriate in keeping with Wikipedia policy. At this point, the character is only notable within the context of this novel. If you should find adequate discussion of the character in reliable external sources that establishes notability, perhaps the article can be recreated, or the information incorporated elsewhere. Again, please do not take this redirect personally, and understand that enforcement of policy trumps any amount of "work" done by individual editors. If you're interested in writing more about this character, you should check out the Dune wiki.— TAnthony^Talk 22:11, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

No page count

Wheres a missing page total stat for this, unlike the 3 novels before. VC 17:31, 15 July 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vcorani (talk • contribs)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on God Emperor of Dune. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719211204/http://www3.isrl.illinois.edu/~unsworth/courses/entc312/s05/best80.cgi to http://www3.isrl.illinois.edu/~unsworth/courses/entc312/s05/best80.cgi

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:29, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Checked OK.— TAnthony^Talk 14:33, 20 October 2017 (UTC)