Why JRR Tolkien Hated Frank Herbert's Dune (A Speculation)

WIth Dune part 2 coming out in a couple of days, I wanted to explore one of the little known mysteries surrounding Tolkien. That is, his severe dislike for the book Dune. I thought it would be interesting to examine this and I will post a theory as to why this was.

#lordoftherings #tolkien #duneparttwo #frankherbert

Link to Will Dune Become as Legendary as the Lord of the Rings Trilogy? video:

Music Credit:
Desert Planet - Quincas Moreira

"Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favorite of fair use."
Disclaimer: The video is under the protection of "fair use". It is non-profit and it doesn´t affect the sales of the original content. I have uploaded it so people can comment and give criticism, good or bad, of the original work.

[Marshmellow]

I’m not surprised at all that Tolkien disliked Dune. Their values were quite different; Tolkien was a British conservative Catholic and Herbert was an American liberal. Tolkien grew up under the reign of Queen Victoria, and Herbert grew up under presidents like Hoover and Harding. The themes of Herbert’s works are about religion and political power can be dangerous, while Tolkien’s works were about the triumph of good over evil, just leadership and the good deeds of ordinary people.

[trenae]

JRR Tolkien was the consummate gentleman. He wasn’t afraid to share his views, but he did not do so to be hurtful or tear down another. His reaction to Dune and Herbert shows this and makes me respect both authors that much more.

[EomerGames]

He says in the quote: "It is impossible for an author still writing to be fair to another author working along the same lines." In simpler English, "we're both working on similar stuff. I'm currently writing my stuff. That makes me way more critical of Dune (than I otherwise would be)."

Which is really easy to understand. A writer like Tolkien was very self-critical of his own work as it was. He read Dune, and he couldn't help but apply that same critical eye to Dune that he did to his own work. That made him dislike it, not because he thought the work was bad, but because Dune's author went in a different direction than Tolkien would have, despite it feeling similar... "along the same lines".

And he knew these feelings were not fair to the author of Dune. He knew his dislike of Dune grew from the mind of author still working on his own work, rather than that of reader. Which is why he said "it is best and fairest to... keep silent".

It's like... imagine you go around to someone's new house, and they've decorated it. You go "wow! this is amazing!". But now imagine that instead, you go around to that new freshly decorated house, WHILE you are still working on decorating your own house, that has a really similar layout of walls and fixtures, and making decisions about what to do. In that case, you can't really take in the effect of the whole house as a finished thing, because you keep looking at the blinds and going "hm do I want blinds like that?" or "yeah, as I thought, that kind of skirting board clashes with the chair legs".

You'd KNOW you were being unfair, because if you weren't in that frame of mind you would be able to appreciate the whole house and see that while sure, the skirting board clashes with the chair legs, both together actually look really good with the TV cabinet which dominates the space.

So I don't think Tolkien disliked Dune *because of Dune*, he disliked it because he was in "author mode".

[chrisbanbury]

I think FH was too proud and too committed to his historical approach to end the series on a positive note. Toward the end FH had some regrets on the trajectory of the series. His historical approach actually prevented him from ending on a positive note or indeed having any series spanning story-arc. Both FH and GRRM failed to finish their series for this same reason. By definition, a realistic historical narrative has no end and should just be viewed like the daytime dramas of the 80s, enjoyed for the journey not the destination.

[jamesverhoff]

I think mostly the issue with Dune is that it makes Saruman the main character. The first book is basically how you go from Istari to merely a pawn in Sauron's scheming--and Paul's not even Sauron, he doesn't have even that level of ambition or fortitude. Tolkien viewed such evil as fundamentally sterile, incapable of actually creating anything.

Further, I always remember Aragorn's statement that it's hard to tell "among such evil people" whether they're fighting outright, or scheming behind one another's back. And Gandalf's admonishment that "When the scheme is ripe it is no longer secret." Tolkien in these quotes (and a few others) seems to be expressing the view that the political intrigues that dominate Dune (and "Game of Thrones" and other similar novels) are tedious and, ultimately, boring. They diminish you, leaving you gnawing the bones of old plots and not actually growing. Contrast that with Aragorn's actions--banding together Rohan and the peoples of southern Gondor, leading a coalition force against the enemy. (There's actually a LOT of politics in LOTR, but you have to read carefully to see it.)

(Herbert's admitted use of allegory didn't help--whereas Tolkien by necessity used allegorical language, Herbert openly created an allegory. There's a difference.)

For my part, I enjoy the Dune saga. It's telling a story worth telling. But it's a really uncomfortable one--to put it into Tolkien's terms, Herbert is explaining why Melkor is necessary and even good (if you read far enough into the books). And I can see why people would dislike the book for that.

[Geronimo_Jehoshaphat]

Frank Herbert was a weirdo who wrote a convoluted series of increasingly bizarre overly complicated anthropological trivialities with no particular ending just to state a point about resenting religion.

[lipingrahman]

Dune is the polar opposite of The Lord of the Rings. Indeed I think one should read Tolkien then Herbert. The effect is fascinating.

[weaviejeebies]

I'm guessing: because Dune acknowledged the basically material and deterministic features of existence and the tendency of darkness to pervade human nature and governance. Whereas Tolkien focused on human virtues as a shield against evil.
That and spice orgy maybe. Or addiction as a gateway to enlightenment and power. Or Alia being exposed to full awareness as a fetus. Or Leto becoming superhuman by leaving humanity behind. Or any other of the profoundly weird and morally unsettling things Herbert imagined our species getting down with eons from now.

[FullPerspective]

I think this is a very good analysis and I think you are right about why Tolkien did not like Dune. In fact I would tend to agree with Tolkien, as I actually found more hope and purpose even in George Orwell's "Animal Farm" and "1984" than I do with Dune. I think Dune by comparison here focus too much on what is and has been, but with too little vision of a future. Orwell is pretty dark too and darker than Tolkien, but Tolkien also get dark, but what is different is that both Orwell and Tolkien offers a small hope in the characters, and the notion that something exist beyond the evil and corrupt world which all 3 authors introduce you to. But Dune heroic character becomes dark themselves, a bit like Daenerys Targaryen in Game of Thrones, which Game of Thrones also received a lot of criticism from. But Game of Thrones had the redeeming quality of still having characters who essentially remained true and good, this is harder to find with Dune.

[gilbo]

Thanks for sharing your analysis. As a big fan of both, I'd tend to believe that it also was because Dune was a huge critique of religion, while the faith of Tolkien was very deep and it permeates all his work.

[randlebrowne]

Narnia wasn't an allegory. It was literally a "what would Jesus do" isekai story!

[jankomuzykant]

I love LOTR, and I appreciate Dune. In my reading mind, however, I would like to see the world created in Diune more in the likeness of LOTR. The world of Dune is amazing and it's just easy to feel its 'realness' despite everything being made up. Herbert uses familiar literary tropes, the hero's journey, initiation, a kind of spiritual enlightenment, the stunning adventures of the heroes, the idea of the chosen one/messiah, and the spiritual destiny proclaimed through dreams and initiations. All these tropes constitute the classics of mythopoetic fantasy. Herbert also plays on readers' nostalgic dreams, just as mythopoeic fantasy does. It's just that Herbert's dreams of an ideal future, which he plays on, are turned into a nightmare. Similarly, he also distorts all the tropes of mythopoetic fantasy, the hero's journey, the messiah motif leads to bloody genocide, and on a cosmic scale, spiritual enlightenment leads to madness and self-loss. In the world of Dune there is no good and evil, the guiding principles in this world are power and force. Herbert plays with the universal religious symbols and archetypes of our psyche but perversely inverts them, showing how, when confronted with reality, they disintegrate, becoming the opposite of what they seem to be in our psyche. It is already easier to compare Diuna with the Game of Thrones saga, where similarly there is no good and evil, and the guiding principles in this world are power and force. For me, Diuna is science fiction unfolding on a foundation of 'anti-fantasy', or 'false fantasy' (or at least 'false hero's journey'). The message of Diuna for me is that prophecies, prophecies, mystical powers or dreams of awakening powers of consciousness only lead to monstrosity, not to the greater good. That's my opinion, but your video essay is really OK.

[JoeKawano]

"Purposed domination of the author" does seem to have a Dune vibe.

[samuellefischer]

I think the most likely reason Tolkien hates Dune, whether conscious or unconscious, is because of its anti-Christian rhetoric. Maybe anti-Christian isn’t the right word but its mockery of the faith

[pamelatarajcak]

Also, if I recall correctly, another thing that irritated Tolkien about Narnia was the mishmash of cultures, i.e. having Dryads, dwarves, and Santa in the same world. So perhaps the monoculture of Dune which is a little Eastern mysticism, a little Christian messianic message, and a little bit Islamic dogma was too much mishmash for Tolkien.

[janep.]

I have read both stories. I like them.

[anaximander]

I love great speculation videos like this. Very well done! I also wouldn't be surprised if Tolkien just didn't like the rapid POV shifts. Many, many authors dislike Dune for this.

[salvador.garcia]

In literary structure they are very different from each other; While Tolkien's work is an epic drama comparable to the works of Virgil or Homer, Herbert writes a work with less detailed characters and plots typical of a thriller.

About the message; For Tolkien, his work reflects the universal archetypes in which he believes, such as sacrifice, the downfall due to pride, the world marred, free will, eucastrophe, or the creation trough words (Logos). For Herbert, universal archetypes are part of social engineering and yet, as in a Greek tragedy, they place the characters without moral decision-making power in the face of their circumstances.

[joanwibberley]

I liked both of them and I read the series over and over again

[martineldritch]

Read the Dune series in college in 86 and I knew it was special, the sci-fi equivalent of LOTRs. There was a large generation gap between Tolkien and Herbert. Tolkien's Lost Generation were the last of the Victorians who believed in sacred duty and nobility of cause and they were hurled into the mass graves of the Great War and the subsequent influenza. Herbert's Greatest Generation were mere leaves in the wind buffeted by the competing great isms ( capital-, commun- and fasc- ) and were hurled into the mass graves of the Second Great War. Tolkien and Herbert both served and survived in their generational conflicts and were wounded and discharged.
Tolkien's views on Herbert's work could have been (on the very shallowest level) something like "Hmph, kids these days ."