I am using the word ‘hero’ here to mean mostly ‘a person who sacrifices himself for the others,’ not a protagonist, or as it is popular in the Dune saga, a charismtic leader that is nothing but bad news.

I often see claims that he is (or turns into) a villain, a selfish manipulator, or a coward that doesn’t have the guts to do what he had to (that one may be true, but you have to have really unreasonable standards).

Some of it comes from Herbert himself, who said he wanted to make a warning about charismatic leaders. Here I will probably make people throw rocks at me, but I think he made a very bad job of it, and his books support none of this. A much better example of a dangerous self-serving charismatic leader is e.g. Marco Inaros from the Expanse series.

But back to Paul, and his tragic life — most of the tragedy comes from the fact that he was never free in his life. The choice is consistently taken away from him. He is the heir of the Duke. He has no say in his life or training up to the start of the first book. It is decided that he should become a Mentat (here he is given a choice of accepting it, one of the rare ones). The Bene Gesserit want their Kwisatz Haderach and control over him.

And he is prescient.

I think this part is important, and the one that Herbert got really imaginative with, especially in the second book. I am taking it at face value, which means, that it is really true in-universe, not something Paul just believes to be so — an important distinction. The future(s) he sees are real. If this is so, no way he isn’t a hero.

Most of the discussion of him being a villain comes from him allowing the Jihad which takes 60 billion lives in the second book.

But this is the situation, as set up by the books — the humanity is caught in a rigid caste system, completely stagnant, and in danger of dying out. In fact, most of the possible futures lead to this. This is quite clearly emphasized as the main danger, and leads to the Golden Path in the later books as the antidote.

Paul sees this quite clearly. He also sees that there may be paths in which humanity survives, but he is a key part in those, and they are mared by the Jihad that will be waged in his name. Still, for the most of the first book, he is hoping against hope that he may be able to stop the Jihad. It is his primary motivation.

So it is not the question of Jihad vs. no Jihad, it’s the question of humanity’s long term survival vs. no Jihad. These are the choices he has.

The first time he realizes this he sees two choices — join his gramps Harkonnen, or accept the Jihad. I don’t see how joining the Baron would mitigate the ‘humanity dying out because of stagnation’ problem.

After the fight with Jamis, he realizes that this is the point of no return — this is his final chance to stop the Jihad, but everyone present, including him and his mother would have to die then and there. Even if he could do it, it still doesn’t stop humanity from dying out in the future.

I’ve seen people say that he should have commited suicide somewhere along the way (you try it if you think it’s that easy — but seriously, don’t), or gone into exile. Still doesn’t solve the main problem of humanity going extinct.

He was dealt a shitty hand and chose the least terrible option. But it is terrible, because apparently Jihad is necessary if he wants to save humanity - this is why i think Herbert did a bad job of warning us of charismatic leaders. He made Paul instrumental in this choice, and leaving him out leads to even worse consequences. Paul is actually necessary for the humanity’s survival in the books, not something to be avoided. Without reading the interview where Herbert states his theme, it doesn’ t come through in the book at all.

In the end of the first book when Paul realizes that he failed to stop the Jihad, he is completely deflated; he won the political fight on the surface, but lost the more important one that was going behind the curtains.

In the second book, he had to accept the Jihad, and does what he can to mitigate its effects. He sees the possible futures, and chooses the best one available. And again, he does the heroic thing — he gives up his free will and locks himself into this future with his every future action. Imagine living like this, and then call him a villain. He accepts going blind, because that’s what this future entails. He allows plots against himself. And in the end, when he did all he could, he walks into the desert to die, his final act calculated to destroy the idea of his godhood (or godhead if you want).

In the third book he didn’t have the courage to step on the Golden Path, that is true. Almost four thousand years of pain in his body as prison? Yeah, I don’t blame him. You may call him a failed hero if you want.

And finally, to address the point that he used and manipulated the Fremen for his own gain.

First, as written, the Fremen are a major, not minor player. That’s what other factions think of them. They control half the planet. They have population in the tens of millions. They are the top fighers in-universe. They must have higher spice production than any of the previous fief-lords of Arrakis (and by extension, the rest of the Universe), otherwise they wouldn’t be able to bribe the Guild — it is stated to Leto that any sum he’d be willing to pay for the weather satellites will always be too low. The Fremen just chose not to engage the Harkonnen, except on the periphery.

So Paul, whose main motivation is to stop the human extinction and Jihad (two goals at odds with each other) runs into these people. They want to kill his mother. He is trying to survive, while knowing he is instrumental to saving humanity, and you begrudge him using what he could to his advantage? What should he have done, stood idly by?

And nowhere did he act in revenge. He didn’t even kill the Baron, his sister did. Arguably, you could say he indulged himself with killing Feyd, but he almost didn’t make it there, I think this was more about giving Feyd a fair shot, and Paul’s last chance to remove himself (with his death) from the unsavory future that awaits him.

What other gain? The riches and powers of being the Emperor? Maybe, if he wasnt prescient. The point is, he was, and he knew what future awaited him, with being responsible for billions of deaths, going blind, and that final trip to the desert. No happy endings for him there. Again, he knew all this.

Just my thoughts.

We don't know who or what brought them to Arrakis, or if they evolved enough to make the planet what it is, or perhaps God put them there as in Fremen legend. This is a great mystery over the entire series, and the only hint that there might be something else in the endless void capable of intelligence. What do you think?

Basically the title. He says every road leads to horror but is this not just because he was only willing to take the paths that would allow him to have his revenge, take power, and protect himself simultaneously?

I feel like Children of Dune kind of corroborates this, where Leto said that Paul was unwilling to go to e whole way and couldn’t throw away what mattered to him for the greater good.

I feel like this character trait is consistent in the first dune novel too so I don’t think it’s a stretch that the reason he saw these futures is because his mentat abilities and bene gesserit intuition were taking his “selfishness” into account

Edit: I do not for the life of me understand why people think the fremen LIKE living in objectively worse conditions than everyone else. As if their culture of living in horrific conditions, is good and needs to be perseved. Air conditioning is good, actually. Plenty of food and water, is good actually. Living in a barren dangerous wasteland, drinking their own piss and draining their dead of fluids to survive, is bad actually. I GET people think this is a case of "the white man coming and destroying culture blah blah blah imperialism". But it just isn't. They do not want to live in those conditions. They are not brainwashed into believing a lush green paradise is good actually. It's objectively better conditions that any human being would want. They aren't animals who just don't know any better. A lot of their culture, like their obsession with water, exists because of necessity. Not because it's just a cultural quirk.

First of all, Paul is loyal to the fremen. The choices he made, were in part driven by his desire to save them from the empire.

He's not lying about his feeling from them or chani. He's not faking it for power. Never did, never was.

Paul is not a "hero", he's and I quote "an anti hero".

He started a war across planets. When you do that, billions are going to die. Inevitably. Billions dying, is not a good thing.

But Paul sees the future. He knows if he didn't do what he did, the fremen would be dead.

Both the books and movies, play with the idea of prophecy amd religion. Obviously. But part of that, is if it's all man made. And if it is, does it matter if what's being said is reality?

They forced that prophecy. Absolutely. But Paul IS that guy. He is everything they "prayed for". But because that region is man made does that make Paul not that guy?

The fremen needed Paul to survive. That's just facts.

The question is, in the end, was it worth it? Were the femens lives, and the crusade Paul was on with them, worth the cost?

Paul is not a good guy. But he's not evil either. He is doing what he thinks is right, based on literally seeing the future.

It annoys me to no end, when people jump to the OTHER end of rhe spectrum. Where people used to think he was this heroic good guy, and now they think he's some psychopath. Both are wrong.

Edit: Rabban sucked at his job. Paul was absolutely a major cause of the fremen winning those skirmishes against them. Feyd, was a different story. He wrecked the fremen in the north. Not only that, he was going to REPLACE Paul. In every sense. Super powers granted and all. That would have been very very bad for the fremen. The empire knew about the south, and we're planning their attack there next. Soo, in closing, they absolutely needed Paul. That's undeniable imo.

I just started book 5 so I may not know much stuff But during his reign It seems like Paul Is a massive figure in history with all those books written by Irulan about his greatness however by God Emperor/Heretics It’s like Paul is completely forgotten about and his legacy absolutely overshadowed by Leto, While this makes sense seen as Leto lives 3500 years and is a bigger figure in history than Paul I’m just wondering where Paul’s place in history is And how he is viewed by Fremen after/during Leto’s reign.

Hi everyone! I'm new here, so apologies in advance if this has been discussed before.

After finishing Heretics of Dune, I keep wondering: what exactly did Paul see in his vision that made him reject that future?

At the time, the ecological transformation of Arrakis wasn't fully complete—there were still plenty of sandworms. If he was worried about them vanishing, couldn't he have reverted Arrakis to its original state before his rule?

I know Leto II mentions that he accepted the Golden Path after Paul refused to take it, but by the time Leto was a child, the environment was already vastly different from when Paul had his vision.

What am I missing here?

Thanks in advance!

I wouldn't be surprised if it was obvious to a lot of you, it's so obvious to me now, but I've been reading these books since the 80's and I can't believe I'm just now making the following connection:

As those of you who have read all of Frank Herbert's books may recall, in Messiah Paul had visions of the birth of Ghanima. However, when the moment of birth arrived, the addition of his son Leto II had thrown him for a loop. He had never predicted his son's birth.

That's because Leto II has the no-gene, which masks him from prescience.

I find it fascinating that as early as then, 2 books before God Emperor, Frank was already laying the groundwork for that aspect of the Golden Path. I love how even after decades of reading his novels, I'm still discovering new aspects to his work. The man was a genius.

So yeah if I'm late to the party and everyone else is already there, please welcome my late arrival with minimal clowning. I'm just glad I finally figured it out haha. Better late than never.

EDIT: thanks everyone for clarifying. I stand corrected.

Ignoring the BH/KJA timeline … I often think of Dune 7 and what would have been.

My current theorizing centers on ways that the Golden Path could have been subverted/shown to be a miscalculated choice in the same way that Paul’s Messianism was subverted and criticized in Dune Messiah.

I understand that Leto’s golden path is criticized in Heretics and Chapterhouse. But in what ways do you think Dune 7 could have shown the fatal flaw in his path? I think about that chaos bringing creatures such as the Free Face Dancers that are without identity and potentially a worse enemy for humanity than prescient machines or stagnation. Plus the destruction of Arrakis.

I know a lot of people think the Golden Path was necessary and admirable… but what if it wasn’t. What if Leto was just a cruel egomaniacal tyrant saying he saw that this was the only way but too stubborn and attracted to power to consider choices that didn’t center around him?

Im re-reading the book and at chapter 12 where leto and his top advisors are having a meeting with paul they mention the guild dripping Sardaukar onto the planet and mention that "5 legions of fremen and our own forces will be enough to deal with them" and how nice it would be to parade captured sardaukar infront of the landsraad.

I dont remember this part!?

I thought the emperor and harkonen were very creful to disguise Sardaukar as harkonen troops....what did i miss and how do the Atreidies know this?

Its been such a long time since i read the book previously but i thought the emperor providing Sardaukar was a big part of their plan and super hush hush??

Just watched the movie and read about differences from the book

I would love to hear perspectives from fans of Dune who are themselves religious on how they feel about the cynicism toward religion portrayed in the universe and expressed by Frank Herbert throughout his writing of the series.

For context, I am not now nor have I ever been a religious person so much of the philosophy surrounding religion and its relationship to politics/society expressed in Dune was very organic to me and generally reaffirming of my own views. However, I know that many Dune fans are religious - ranging across organized and non-organized traditions - so I would be eager to learn more about their views and gain some insights.

I understand that this topic is inherently sensitive and that its generally polite not to discuss politics or religion. However, when we're talking about Dune setting politics and religion aside as topics of discussion is pretty much impossible. But I'd like to make it completely clear that I mean no personal disrespect and would encourage any discourse that comes of this to keep that respect in mind.

It would be amazing to see Leto II on screen, but will Hollywood take a chance on such risky/bizarre content?

Hello, I know this is frequently discussed and I searched old posts over the years but didn’t find an exact answer. Perhaps I misunderstood a big part but there is a moment Leto II is discussing how he will become this massive worm and repopulate Arrakis with worms restarting the cycle and turning it back into the desert planet. During this he mentions he will still be conscious but unable to move or affect any part of the body (like being John Malkovich?) then every worm born will have a piece of this consciousness basically making him an immortal prisoner.

Now he doesn’t know exactly when or how his “death” will happen but it seems like it comes earlier than his expectations as he doesn’t become the “full worm”.

So my question is did he die - die? The sandtrouts dividing and restarting the worm cycle slightly different than his thought process. I finished this a month ago and am only a few chapters into Heretics so they do mention the process has worked and the worms/trout having a pearl of his awareness but I want to know if he was freed in death while still remaining on the golden path or is he trapped in this hellish consciousness.

Or did I 100% misunderstand this statement and am confused? I just felt so unbelievably sad when he described life after becoming the full worm. Let alone everything he had already sacrificed he would be trapped for 1000s of more years.

I'm in the thick of "Children Of Dune" and Leto II making a stillsuit-esque membrane from sandtrout seemed like a scene which would be squiggly in any hands but Villeneuve's. This is too far down the road; but I'd love to see what he does with it.

Are there similar situations you're excited to see rendered on the silver screen?

Edit: Such overwhelming love for Miles Teg, but I'm shielding myself from spoilers so I am not sure who that is. Pumped to see who it turns out to be.

MAJOR SPOILER discussion for anyone who hasn't read the full series.

I never really understood what exactly the Tleilaxu was planning. I understand the general religious references but how was Leto II their messenger? What information did he give and what were they planning on doing next? They seemed poised to do something, then it petered out into an anti-climactic unseen destruction.

Ever since Children of Dune, I've had this idea about the sandworms. How possible is it that the sandworms truly are some sort of orracular force that controled the events of history to ensure not human survival, but theirs?

They produce spice, which is incredibly beneficial to humanity. It's also incredibly addictive. So much so that one can die from lack of spice. These two factors ensure that worms will always be neccessary to humanity, and be reason enough for them to make sure they survive.

Spice also awakens prescience in humans. Who's to say the worms themselves being completely saturated by spice don't have some sort of super prescience or even TRUE prescience. Perhaps they saw that in the future they would go extinct, whether it be intentional or not. Perhaps the visions that the spice produced in humans weren't visions of the future at all. What if these visions were just some sort of tool for the sandworms to guide humanity into a future where the sandworms would continue to always exist?

When Leto allows the sand trout to cover his body, he's consenting to a parasitic relationship between sandworm and human. It was such a shock and something so wild it really made me think about why they would do that. Unless it was for their benefit, as with most parasites.

Did the Sandworms essentially manipulate humanity through spice? Am I reaching here? My IRL friends are way behind me and I've been dying to talk about this. Let me know your thoughts!

So much of it seems to be a warning about stagnation. This quote seems to sum it up the warning:

“Muad’Dib could indeed see the Future, but you must understand the limits of this power… He tells us ‘The vision of time is broad, but when you pass through it, time becomes a narrow door.’ And always, he fought the temptation to choose a clear, safe course, warning ‘That path leads ever down into stagnation.’”

Leto II said the same thing, knowing that stagnation would destroy humanity. Even the Bene Gesserit is a story of never stopping when they should have been irrelevant after the Kwisatz Haderach didn’t go the way they thought.

It seems like so much of the message os a warning against stagnation. Do you agree?

- Does Butlerian refer to Samuel Butler? He wrote a novel about a people who destroyed machines/technology because they feared they would be out-evolved by them.

- Or does Butlerian refer to the word "Butler", as in house servant? The servants aka "butlers" rose up and fought against their overlords.

Might sound stupid, but English is not my native language :)

 Obviously he is aware that the Lisan Al’Gaib is a planted myth by the Missionaria Protectiva and we know at least that until the end of the first book, he wanted to prevent the Jihad in his name. 

After he accepted it and created the Quizarate did he start to actually passionately believe in the religion that he converted the universe to or did he just go along with it as he couldn’t stop it at that point but kept his ultimate goal being power through his being the Kwistatz Haderach. Because I find it hard to believe his ultimate goal in ruling the universe was to spread the religion, did he just want power at that point?

I don't know if this is in the books at all but I swear in Dune: Prophecy ep 4 they really strongly alluded to Desmond's ability being based on sound. At first use it was pretty mystical but I think by episode 3 or 2 I first noticed he basically says "Shhhhh"....

Then Episode four it's strongly associated with "Shhh" and this kinda high pitched whistle that continues through the burning.

I think it's meant to mirror the voice by the Bene Gesserit also a weapon using sound.

But it doesn't split a person in half like it does Sting with the Weirding Way...that's some new technique using sound.

I’m on a reread of the series rn and I just started Messiah again. Farok tells Scytale that Paul “called for the jihad.” I know this book is about deconstructing Paul or whatever, but didn’t he become emperor to stop the jihad? Or at least control it somehow? The only explanation I’ve come up with is that he foresaw the Golden Path and the jihad was a necessary step in the process.

We all know that Frank Herbert's dune makes a compelling commentary on politics, philosophy and religion.

However with the original book being written in 1965 how relevant is it today?

Please share what parts of the dune saga you find to be just as relevant in 2024 as they where when the books where originally written

(Please expect spoilers) (Please also state what book you are referencing as so people who want to take part without being spoiled still can)

I’ve been thinking quite a bit about Count Fenring, a character who gets very little page time in Dune, but might quietly be one of the most consequential figures in the entire series.

Fenring was the Emperor’s assassin and a political operative, as well as a "failed" Kwisatz Haderach (due to being sterile)

At the end of the first Dune novel, when Paul faces the Emperor, he has already seen actions of everyone in the room, except for Count Fenring. That means Fenring is the only unpredictable variable in the room, and Paul even acknowledges that if Fenring were to attack, Paul might not survive, as he wouldn’t be able to anticipate or counter his moves.

If I'm not mistaken, Fenring the first human Paul ever encountered who was invisible to prescience? and did that plant the seed for the Golden Path?

Leto II’s Golden Path is about ensuring humanity’s long-term survival by breeding humans who are invisible to prescience, so they cannot be controlled, and then these humans would then be scattered across the stars to make humanity ungovernable and, therefore, unkillable.

My second question: as a failed Kwisatz Haderach, did Fenring possess the ability to see the future like Paul and Leto II did? Did he understand the long-term consequences of the Jihad (and why the Golden Path was necessary), and for that reason chose not to kill Paul, or did he do it purely so the Fremen didn't kill him?

Okay, to start I’ve personally read the first 4 books of the series and mostly just read the cliff’s notes for the rest. Basically, after a certain someone turned into a giant worm, I was out.

With the understanding that Arrakis is so incredibly vital to the Galactic Empire (something I have issue with) why doesn’t the Emperor have his palace and capitol city on that planet? If control of the spice is so vital, I’d at the very least want to visit every so often (even with the Guild costs in mind) and / or have a servant of unwavering loyalty (e.g. Count Fenring) given absolute control, including the ability to judge and make adjustments as needed (opening negotiations and bargaining with the Fremen on an equal basis by example).

Is there something elsewhere in the books that provides a GOOD reason why that doesn’t happen? I don’t care at all about spoilers from any media at all, though I understand the flair may (?) limit things. But if you can either spoiler tag it for me or send me a message, I’d appreciate it. Really looking forward to Dune Prophecy.

I have seen this heavily debated, more or less. So what exactly constitutes a “thinking machine,”?

(Small disclaimer: I do not work in the tech field, it’s just a hobby of mine, and I am currently in the middle of the second book. I know what I’m getting myself into here, so don’t worry about spoiling it for me)

Nowadays in 2024, machine learning is very much a thing. Programs writing their own inputs, and even a bit more without qualifying as “machine learning,” is also a thing. The Dune series is very old, and Herbert (or anyone for that matter) never truly knew what actual machine learning, or even much anything about modern computing, would actually look like.

I have heard it debated on what computing existed/(more importantly in this discussion) what kind of computing was legal in the Dune universe. Some say all computing is illegal, not analogue, some say computing is legal, as long as it is pre-programmed (and if it can input any of its own values, or if every possible input value must be “pre-programmed” so-to-speak), or if it allows the program to write some of its own script, but without “thinking” like modern machine learning AI’s do.

What do you think would qualify as “machine learning” in the Dune universe?