Page 1 of 1
Dune Encyclopdia and future Dune books
Posted: 30 Nov 2008 19:43
by Bijaz
Touponce, Frank Herbert, p. 124 wrote:Although Herbert was not officially involved in the project, which in many instances is deadpan serious while spoofing certain aspects of Herbert's world, he did give it his approval and wanted to know what the encyclopedia had to say about the Scattering and Famine times so that he could plan further volumes in the series.
Posted: 30 Nov 2008 20:59
by Drunken Idaho
I always figured Dune 7 wasn't going to be the finale...
Posted: 30 Nov 2008 22:42
by SandChigger
Bijaz, I haven't read the Touponce book; what's his source for that passage?
Posted: 30 Nov 2008 22:43
by Bijaz
I thought it was an interesting quote since it proves that Frank had more than a casual interest in the encyclopedia, as opposed to Byron's claims.
Posted: 30 Nov 2008 22:50
by SandChigger
Aye, but like them floppies, ye must inquire after its provenance. Does he have it straight from FH or something he wrote? Or from McNelly, whom I count more reliable than anyone associated with the HLP, but still, he is not FH? Or from someone else?
Do you see what I'm getting ait?
Posted: 30 Nov 2008 23:34
by Omphalos
Touponce did not cite to any source in making that claim, which was odd because his footnotes were otherwise pretty thorough. But IIRC in the introduction to that book he thanked McNelly for reviewing large portions of the book, and noted that he had access to a number of unpublished interviews of Herbert, some done by McNelly himself, and others done by O'Reilley.
Posted: 30 Nov 2008 23:36
by Bijaz
SandChigger wrote:Aye, but like them floppies, ye must inquire after its provenance. Does he have it straight from FH or something he wrote? Or from McNelly, whom I count more reliable than anyone associated with the HLP, but still, he is not FH? Or from someone else?
Do you see what I'm getting ait?
He doesn't say, but I'm assuming McNeilly since he helped Touponce with his research at Fullerton (He said he didn't get a chance to interview Frank before he passed away).
Posted: 01 Dec 2008 05:01
by SandChigger
OK. ...
I'll check this later when I get home, but is there a definite (Duniverse) year given in the Encyclopedia for when it was "published"? It's supposedly based on the Hidden Journals discovered at Dar-es-Balat ... which were probably found a few centuries(?) before Heretics begins. (Sometime during that middle 500 years between then and Leto's death?)
Anyway, Heretics and Chapterhouse are set long (half a millennium?) after the Encyclopedia was published; FH could have only been curious about any interesting "historical" details McNelly and the DE writers came up with. We can't forget that "keep my own counsel" bit in the DE acknowledgment, no?
Posted: 08 Dec 2008 15:51
by EsperandoAGodot
I think the year is 15540, based on the editor's signature. Not sure if that makes sense.
The "In Universe" nature of the Encyclopedia seems calculated to guard against inconsistency, but yes, it seems plausible that Frank Herbert may have consulted it some.
We never did get to that thread analyzing the "in Universe" encyclopedia's relationship to the universe of Dune.
on The DE
Posted: 08 Dec 2008 16:18
by Sole Man
So did Frank amke any contributions to the Encyclpeida, or did he let those insects groveling at his boott do his writing for him?
Re: on The DE
Posted: 08 Dec 2008 16:53
by Omphalos
Sole Man wrote:So did Frank amke any contributions to the Encyclpeida, or did he let those insects groveling at his boott do his writing for him?
No one knows for sure, Sloey. He never claimed credit, and he is not listed in the back of the book as a contributer. He did review it, IIRC, and the rumor is that he did add to it, but there is no proof that I am aware of.
Posted: 08 Dec 2008 17:09
by Freakzilla
There was a rumor that he wrote one or two of then entries under a pseudonymn, but again no proof or idea which ones.
Posted: 08 Dec 2008 20:47
by SandChigger
EsperandoAGodot wrote:I think the year is 15540, based on the editor's signature. Not sure if that makes sense.
Thanks. I'd completely forgotten about checking that for this thread.
No, it doesn't make sense in light of what we're told in
Heretics. Adding 1,500 years to the date given for Leto II's death in the Torkos timeline (13725 A.G.) gives 15225. Dar-es-Balat was discovered and the Hidden Journals translated and available long enough for material from them to be incorporated into BG traditions.
But even statements in
GEoD about the Dar-es-Balat complex invalidate that date, so there's really no way to save the
Encyclopedia in a canonical Duniverse. Supposedly FH gave McNelly an advance copy of
GEoD to refer to when preparing the
Encyclopedia; maybe he and the others missed the clues.
FH may have referred to it, but as he writes he might in the foreword, he obviously chose not to let himself be bound by it.
And even if he did write some articles in it under a pseudonym, does that give canonical status to those parts or to the whole? As far as status, I see no difference between that and what The Hack and Fuzzhead are doing. So I prefer to exclude the
Encyclopedia entirely. (Except, as I've mentioned before, possibly that idea about the Fremen Sayyadinas schooling the people on the old form of the language. Otherwise there's no way to explain how little the Arabic has changed.)
Posted: 09 Dec 2008 10:23
by Spicelon
TRUE or FALSE
The Dune Encyclopedia is fiction
(that is, it wasn't written as a guide for fans but as a fictional encyclopedia
that exists in the Duniverse)
Inconsistencies in the DE are intentional
I've always answered TRUE to both, seems obvious. Is this not always the
case among fans?
Posted: 09 Dec 2008 10:46
by EsperandoAGodot
Spicelon wrote:TRUE or FALSE
The Dune Encyclopedia is fiction
(that is, it wasn't written as a guide for fans but as a fictional encyclopedia
that exists in the Duniverse)
Inconsistencies in the DE are intentional
I've always answered TRUE to both, seems obvious. Is this not always the
case among fans?
The first is true, but not really at all debateable. There's no question that it is intended to be a fictional encyclopedia that exists in the Duniverse.
The second premise is definitely true in good many cases, but it's unlikely that all of them are. As Chig pointed out, the dating doesn't always work.
Posted: 09 Dec 2008 11:15
by SandRider
Baraka Bryan wrote:non-canonicity (is that a word?)
Yes, it is !
Posted: 09 Dec 2008 18:24
by SandChigger
Baraka Bryan wrote:non-canonicity (is that a word?)
Is now, BooBoo.
Posted: 09 Dec 2008 18:47
by SandRider
SandChigger wrote:Baraka Bryan wrote:non-canonicity (is that a word?)
Is now, BooBoo.
no,
absolutely a word. when I posted that this morning I had just
"googled" it to see what was returned - got a whole bunch of hits from
catholic-argument pages about canon and non-canon and "non-canonicity"....
Posted: 10 Dec 2008 13:19
by Omphalos
Im pretty sure that "holy-hand grenade" is now in the dictionary. Or...was that the Anglicans? Hmmmmm.
Re: Dune Encyclopdia and future Dune books
Posted: 11 Dec 2008 18:53
by Hunchback Jack
Bijaz wrote:Touponce, Frank Herbert, p. 124 wrote:Although Herbert was not officially involved in the project, which in many instances is deadpan serious while spoofing certain aspects of Herbert's world, he did give it his approval and wanted to know what the encyclopedia had to say about the Scattering and Famine times so that he could plan further volumes in the series.
The DE was published just before HoD, so the "further volumes" would be Heretics and Chapter House, correct?
If so, then Frank could well have been interested in McNelly's take on the Scattering and Famine Times for those books.
HBJ