Talk:Paul Atreides/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled

63.79.81.183 said that Duncan is the one asked by Paul Atreides to kill the face-dancer, but I am sure Stilgar was the one. However I think I remember that in the Dune miniseries, Duncan was in effect the one. I have not the documents right here, so could someone confirm that? I will do the search anyway if no one does it, but I will probably not be able to do it before a few days. Fafner 06:38, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

I just checked in the book, and it is indeed Duncan Idaho (well, his gohla to be more precise). Bad, bad, bad memory... Fafner 09:13, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

An image from the original film may be more appropriate and more widely recognizable. --SparqMan 04:41, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

I agree with the comment about the image. The new DUNE series was far substandard to the original movie, and the original Paul. -JX

You are in the minority then. IMDB and all Dune-related forums I know of prefer the newer films. Dionyseus 08:02, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

The page is too blue, just like Paul's eyes.. removing some less useful links.

To be honest, placing either a picture of either film is too POV as it indicates a supposed "better" film; a neutral picture, such as an artist's intrepretation of Paul would be best. That way, there is no real preference for either film as depicted through the article.

BTW the best intrepetation is Dune Messiah; I cry everytime. I love Chani, and all she does is kiss Paul in 1984; that did and still does truly bother me; at least in 2000 she is depicted more as his Sihaya. :)

Zidel333 05:31, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

“…the heir of House Atreides, a nuclear-armed aristocratic family…” Is “nuclear-armed” really a primary characteristic of the Atreides? - Ahruman 15:14, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Not exactly, but "nuclear-armed" Houses in Herbert's feodal universe are the most powerful ones, thus placing House Atreides among the most powerful ones (albeit more in the bottom that the top). Fafner 06:51, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

(spoilers about the series in this comment) There is a good deal of somewhat inaccurate information on this and many other Dune pages. For example, on this page, it suggests that Paul saw the extinction of humanity, but decided not to do anything about it. However, there are quotes from Children of Dune that suggest that he only failed to take Leto's path due to his failure of seeing the final consequences. I changed the article to what actually happened in the end of Children of Dune, but I think there's a major misinterpretation of Paul's character in that assumption.

Later Works

The way this section now reads, doesn't it imply that Chapterhouse depicts the nullentropy tube as containing cells of the whole cast of ghola characters revealed as present in Hunters (e.g., Serena Butler, Xavier Harkonnen)? This isn't right. --SandChigger 06:40, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

From my memory, the only "revealing" done in Chapterhouse about the nullentropy tube is in the flap jacket of the book in which Frank hints that Paul Atreides and all the great legends may come back. Dionyseus 06:45, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Now that I've read the the section you mention, I don't see what's the problem. It isn't saying that "Chapterhouse" depicts the tube as containing cells of the whole cast of characters that are revealed in "Hunters", it is simply saying that the last Tleilaxu Master contains the tube. Dionyseus 06:51, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Dionyseus. Sorry, I went ahead and edited it before heading out for a bit and didn't make a note of it here. That may be why you don't see the problem now; please check the history and you'll see what it was before.

As for the revealing done in Chapterhouse (emphasis added)...

Scytale rubbed his breast, reminding himself of what was hidden there with such skill that not even a scar marked the place. Each Master had carried this resource—a nullentropy capsule preserving the seed cells of a multitude: fellow Masters of the central kehl, Face Dancers, technical specialists and others he knew would be attractive to the women of Shaitan...and to many weakling powindah! Paul Atreides and his beloved Chani were there. (Oh what that had cost in searching garments of the dead for random cells!) The original Duncan Idaho was there with other Atreides minions—the Mentat Thufir Hawat, Gurney Halleck, the Fremen Naib Stilgar...enough potential servants and slaves to people a Tleilaxu universe.

The prize of prizes in the nullentropy tube, the ones he longed to bring into existence, made him catch his breath when he thought of them. Perfect Face Dancers! Perfect mimics. Perfect recorders of a victim's persona. Capable of deceiving even the witches of the Bene Gesserit. Not even shere could prevent them from capturing the mind of another.

Sorry for the confusion. :( On further thought, though, I'm not sure if a lot of the information still there is really relevant in an article about Paul Atreides. Mention that he is brought back (twice) with links to the Chapterhouse and Hunters pages should be enough, no? I may pare further.... --SandChigger 10:19, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Orestes?

Which Dune novel mentios his second name as being "Orestes"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deathmare (talk • contribs) 05:45, 23 February 2009

It's from one of the McDune books, House Corrino:

Taking his son in his strong hands, Duke Leto lifted the baby high. "Citizens of Caladan, meet your next ruler—Paul Orestes Atreides!" The name had been chosen to honor Leto's father Paulus, while the middle name, Orestes, commemorated the son of Agamemnon in the House of Atreus, thought to be the forerunner of House Atreides. Jessica looked at him with love and acceptance, smiling at her son and glad he was safe.

Eeew. Even one paragraph is enough to show, that's some nasty sh...shtuff. Anyway, I guess we're to suppose that they found the name in Frank Herbert's notes. It was never in any of his published books. --SandChigger (talk) 21:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Heh. I'm just wondering how they could remember they go all the way back without the male ancestral memories... --Gwern (contribs) 18:54 1 March 2009 (GMT)

These are people who hold grudges for over 10,000 years; surely they can maintain a family tradition about their own origins that long or longer! ;D --SandChigger (talk) 07:21, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

On the inclusion of Jessica

Hey Sandchigger. So you are stating that Jessica's DNA magically appears in Scytale's capsule after? Chapterhouse ends? I included the topic because simple grammar would dictate explaining the sudden appearance of Jessica's DNA in the next paragraph. I understand if Jessica's DNA was somehow discovered in another capsule, but the continuation of Scytals from one book to the next would indicate that the capsule in Hunter's is not a different capsule from Chapterhouse.MephYazata (talk) 01:54, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

I absolutely understand where you are coming from and agree that since Chapterhouse does not specifically mention a certain character we do not need to include it. However, perhaps more emphasis on the "uniqueness" of the cells involved that are referred to as "others" is in order. It is just a bit out of structure for me. I was seeking to provide a bit more continuity. BTW there are innumerable articles in Wiki about books and movies that are allowing to tell the point of the stories without having to adhere to a specific chronological order in every minute detail. I don't think someone reading Wiki about Chapterhouse and Hunters and Paul etc... is going to have the story ruined for them from Chapterhouse to Hunters because they learned more specifically what DNA was in the capsule that they did not know in Chapterhouse. Chances are they already know and it makes very little difference to include or exclude what characters are in the nullentrophy capsule from one paragraph to the next when a) the paragraphs are followed one by the other and b) the specifics of whose DNA is "revealed" specifically from Chapterhouse to Hunters is irrelevant compared to the capsule itself. Although like I said I see where you are coming from. Another way to change it is to simply exclude Jessica from the next paragraph too as she is not the major ghola from either book and seemed to be more for "show" than anything else.MephYazata (talk) 02:13, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

The issue isn't chronology or spoilers; because Chapterhouse was written by Frank Herbert and the sequels were written by others, we make an effort in all Dune-related articles to attribute material to the proper works. This is particularly important because the "old" and "new" works sometimes contradict each other, and the new works introduce facts or interpretations not previously covered by Frank. Most Dune articles have separate the material by sections, but in this case the Chapterhouse paragraph is merely used to set up the material covered in the sequels. You will note that the 2nd paragraph begins by noting that Hunters was written by Brian Herbert and Anderson. The mention of Jessica there may not be essential but it is fine, and does not need to be tracked back to Chapterhouse. — TAnthony^Talk 05:28, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh I understand where it is coming from, but to me it was just odd to have the capsule mentioned in the one with certain names and than Jessica just appears as one of the gholas in the next along with names from the previous para. I know everyone wants to deferentiate between FH and BH/KJA, but to me the simple fact is legal is legal. Although there are two different sets of writers between Chapterhouse and Hunters I think that since the story of Hunters pretty much continuously follows Chapterhouse, the story itself is more important. That is just how I feel. I think the amount of hostility in disputes about the subjective differences between FH and BH/KJA is just a waste of time. It did not hurt the article my way, but as I said, it was only from what I saw as the more important story continuity. No biggy. :)MephYazata (talk) 07:13, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

The section in question is entitled "Later Works". It would be inaccurate to state that Jessica's DNA is described as being included in the tube in the paragraph pertaining to Chapterhouse. Period. (Mention of "continuity" in this context is particularly amusing. Thanks for the laugh!) --SandChigger (talk) 09:17, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Please spare me and everyone else any passive aggressive posturing or your oh so witty zingers. Only wanting to talk about Dune does not make your opinions more or less than anyone elses. I used no side of the mouth language and gave every bit a consideration for your opinion. Now you tell me how it is inaccurate for us to assume Jessica is in the capsule when her ghola appears in the next book. As I stated twice before and you are hopefully willing to finally understand, I simply see this as looking more like a book report than an article, but it is a small thing that is not worth antagonizing for. Even your own chronology has Hunters following Chapterhouse so yes the story continues. That is where I am looking at it from. It is not inaccurate your way, nor do I believe it would be inaccurate my way. To me it was not apparent that the paragraph was strictly describing verbatim what was in the book like a report, but rather the story of Paul as it continued. Again and for the final time, it was a small matter that I felt did not hurt the point of the article, but if you are interested in making an issue of it go have fun. I'll be enjoying myself elsewhere okay.MephYazata (talk) 21:18, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Repeat: It would be inaccurate to state that Jessica's DNA is described as being included in the tube in the paragraph pertaining to Chapterhouse. Period. --SandChigger (talk) 02:29, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Look I am not trying to be aggressive and if it comes off as such I apologize. It is just that this was a small matter and I did not think we needed to persue it. But to kind to address the in-universe, that is a bit of what I am talking about. I don't think the whole thing needs to be changed, but the section like Later Works reads in an in-universe style because we use information in a basis strictly from the perspective of each book there. Since it is an article on Paul as a whole, I think we can dispense with this style as opposed to the seperate article for each book. Does that explain what I'm getting at? As it is the section reads from within the book where I did not think it necessary. Like I said though, it is not like this is a large issue but it may contribute as part of an overall with the in-universe tag. Perhaps taking the line describing what is in the capsule and then going "...and later in Hunters of Dune the Lady Jessica, whose DNA was also in the nullentropy capsule, is raised as a ghola." This would keep the information in a way that we are not necessarily "in-universe", but rather more documentary as I think an article about Paul himself should be. This also allows for those who do not like to confuse info from authors to keep the info from each book within its own pages so to speak.MephYazata (talk) 07:08, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Dude, let it go ... Chapterhouse doesn't mention Jessica's DNA, the sequels do, it is no big deal. The material is currently accurate and not confusing or misleading, you are sort of arguing over something that is a non-issue. We understand your point, it is just unnecessary to make the distinctions you are suggesting.— TAnthony^Talk 07:32, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry there man, but I am responding to a further bit that Sand actually persued me to my talk page for after I had basically said goodbye. I think if we try we could have a reasonable topic considering the tag. The topic of the in-universe tag came up and I was responding. If you will read my earlier posts, including original I had already stated that this was not a big deal, so please don't twist it back okay. I am as interested as anyone in improving an article that I care about, and I decided to address the tag. If you have suggestions or feel that all things Dune is now perfect and needs no improvement let me know. I personally think we should always look to adjust or improve and like the exchange of ideas. I too have my own opinions on distinguishing canon, but that has been so wrung out it hurts the eyes just reading all in everything Dune even beyond Wiki. So if you know that the tag is wrong or think it is let me know and we'll see what's up. Okay?MephYazata (talk) 08:00, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I think what the person who applied the in-universe tag (Cameron Scott) was getting at is the fact that the entire article is essentially just a synopsis of the character's role and actions in the story. There is absolutely no analysis from a meta-story (real world) perspective. --SandChigger (talk) 09:11, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I understood the tag, but I was only giving a small example of a simple word change that could herald a possible overhaul. However as I have stated it is not particularly necessary. More to the point an outside perspective could be the beleif of some that Paul Atreides closely resembles Neo from the Matrix trilogy. This could qualify as something outside of the books themselves that deals with the character of Paul. An analysis of the later effects of Paul in other sci-fi? I am looking more into credible sources for these beliefs. Again this is an example I simply suggesting to improve the real-world perspectiveMephYazata (talk) 10:10, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

That sounds a lot like WP:OR though; there's a careful balance to be had between writing about the character as a work of fiction, and about the character as if he were 'real'. Right now the article is written from the latter perspective. Coldmachine^Talk 10:54, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

How would that be OR if there are credible sources that state Paul was an inspriation or homage for Neo. I am not stating that I agree with that necessarily, but in the interest of providing more perspective of the work of fiction from without the books. I am looking for ways to probide that perspective. This is just one suggestion. The effect of this character on one of the most recognizable modern characters in screen would seem to me to fit this criteria. It may be bunk, but it may not. I am only using it as an example of the possibility to improve the article. I will look for more on the subject, but just not today. Again, I am not stating this is so, but it could be useful if indeed Dune and Paul Atreides were inspirational to that later trilogy. I simply looking for ways to improve and there is nothing wrong with a bit of collaborative brainstorming. This is simply a possibility and that is the manner in which I am suggesting it.MephYazata (talk) 17:50, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Occupation: Mentat

since when was Paul a Mentat? Andy5421 (talk) 09:25, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

He was always a Mentat. In the first few score pages of Dune or whatever they discuss how he could be a mentat, and sure enough he becomes one. --Gwern (contribs) 16:43 18 February 2011 (GMT)

At one point he was even referred to as the Mentat Emperor. Probably in Dune Messiah. 24.214.238.86 (talk) 02:35, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Preacher performer

re "Preacher Muad'dib": he might actually be worth mentioning. According to my CSE, he apparently has received a fair bit of online coverage for his world records and said coverage occasionally mentions Dune, it seems. I wouldn't want to try to make him pass N & BLP (although with offline coverage, might be possible), but something doesn't have to pass the GNG before it merits a section in a related paragraph. --Gwern (contribs) 22:28 24 November 2010 (GMT)

Too "Inside Baseball"

This article is too fannish in detail, using a lot of terminology and lingo which would be opaque to a reader who us not a fan of the works. Too many names without context of what it means. Also, it meanders off topic. One example is where it described the fate of Leto after Paul's death. What does that have to do with Paul? That's the kind of meandering that fans do.

Suggest this article needs a hard pruning. 73.162.142.30 (talk) 19:37, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

IPA discussion for "Atreides"

Please see full discussion at Talk:Dune (novel)/Archive 2#The_wrong_IPA_for_"Atreides"_in_our_Dune_articles?. Jason Quinn (talk) 06:26, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

The discussion is now archived so I've updated the link above. Jason Quinn (talk) 01:03, 24 September 2022 (UTC)