[Movie] Dune movie confirmed

[Berndorf]

The Atreides/Harkonnen feud has a LONG history, it wasn't just a recent development of Leto becoming very popular - which by itself was all by design anyway. The various factions were maneuvered into precisely this kind of confrontation by the Bene-Gesserit, with the express goal of then presenting a solution in the form of Feyd-Rautha Harkonnen marrying Leto's firstborn daughter to end the feud, consolidate the two most powerful Great Houses, and produce the Kwisatz-Haderach. He'd succeed Shaddam IV (who was purposely kept without an heir) and lead mankind to a glorious destiny.

None of it was Shaddam's doing. In fact he voiced regrets about the situation and the forces which pressured him to take up arms against Leto.

You're not wrong that this is a reflection of many previous monarchy models, though the extent of the sovereign's actual power varies depending on what culture and what historical period you look at. Of course politics is a game of compromises, but there were definitely autocratic rulers with a lot of personal decision-making power (for good or ill) as well as the more reigned-in ones subject to the tidal forces of their respective political system. That is, in part, what Herbert is putting on display here: that the idea of a monarch (and it's no coincidence that Shaddam's title is quite ostentatiously absolute) is a construct suggesting more power than is actually represented in that single person; and that even an otherwise ambitious and proud man like Shaddam can be brought to heel by the demands of those who are truly in charge. No coincidence at all that the flag he raises upon landing on Dune is not one of the Houses (any of them), but of CHOAM. Muad'dib's subsequent reign as a messianic king is another facet of this, as his entire life is effectively driven by his inability to steer his followers away from a jihad. And Leto completes the circle with the Machiavellian exercise of an un-usurpable god-king as a benevolent dictator - the consequences of what would ACTUALLY happen if there was an absolute, unquestioned monarch in charge. (As for the last few books not written by Frank Herbert himself, who the fuck knows what's going on there).

The way I view it is that what we see in the Dune universe is a galaxy that had developed into a status quo with different poles where each pole was mindful of its place in the overall order which had taken shape over thousands of years. House Corrino I believe had been essentially ruling over the political/government structure for something like 10000 years. Ever since the battle of Corrin from which it took its name. Paul and the events in Dune sort of represent humanity itself seeking to overthrow that status quo which I think Herbert went into way more detail in the books which came after which I'm guessing you have read. So I don't see Shaddam as really any less impotent or puppet like than any of the other groups which formed poles of this Empire. He is the most public form of power and the most wealthy but they all exist within this status quo that had been around for thousands of years. Even the BG has its own closely followed ways of acting though it would have been interesting to have heard more about exactly what they were going to try and accomplish by having a Kwisatz Haderach as Emperor. Whether the idea was to really make the galaxy a better place or just give them more control over it all.

[Biomega]

Even the BG has its own closely followed ways of acting though it would have been interesting to have heard more about exactly what they were going to try and accomplish by having a Kwisatz Haderach as Emperor. Whether the idea was to really make the galaxy a better place or just give them more control over it all.

Both. The BG's goal was to ensure the long-term survival of the human species. Their intended solution was to have a prescient Übermensch in charge of everything, someone who could use the collective memory of his line as well as his vast precognitive powers to steer humanity on the course that ensures its survival. To the BG, the surreptitious control they exert over humanity is not the goal, it's a means; they don't care about being in charge. That's why they never put one of their own on the throne or assumed direct control over any of the ruling elements of the known universe. They're the first to know the perils of ruling power, and they wouldn't tempt themselves with that kind of prospect any more than they are willing to use their body control to extend their lifespans (something they are entirely capable of but simply choose not to do).

They allow the Empire and its quasi-feudalist structure to continue because they believe it's best for humanity. Much like they tolerate the Spacing Guild because it's necessary, not because they approve of it. It's hard for the reader to fully grasp the way the BG think, because it's so different from our usual frame of reference. Their view is, in their own words, "the first truly long-term" one - they look beyond years, decades, centuries, even millennia. To them, the ultimate survival is the only thing that matters, not individuals, not short-term comforts, only the avoidance of extinction. They make great sacrifices, and they act with what we would probably describe as moral callousness if they think it's necessary for that ultimate goal.

That being said, the BG aren't automatically correct in what they do. They're very highly trained, very genetically advanced humans, but they're still human. They make mistakes. They have blind spots. They miscalculate. Not predicting Jessica's betrayal is the entire spark that starts the series, after all. And we don't know if their Kwisatz-Haderach (had he arrived as planned) would have really done what they thought he would. The Tleilaxu made their own Kwisatz-Haderach, for example, and it really did not go as planned AT ALL.

In a way, the Dune story is really the story of the BG much more so than the Atreides. They're just parts of that larger whole, though admittedly Leto II is a definitive nexus of events that throws everything for a loop; but he, too, understood the BG maxims and in effect he was the Kwisatz-Haderach the BG hoped for - albeit in a much different way.

[Berndorf]

Both. The BG's goal was to ensure the long-term survival of the human species. Their intended solution was to have a prescient Übermensch in charge of everything, someone who could use the collective memory of his line as well as his vast precognitive powers to steer humanity on the course that ensures its survival. To the BG, the surreptitious control they exert over humanity is not the goal, it's a means; they don't care about being in charge. That's why they never put one of their own on the throne or assumed direct control over any of the ruling elements of the known universe. They're the first to know the perils of ruling power, and they wouldn't tempt themselves with that kind of prospect any more than they are willing to use their body control to extend their lifespans (something they are entirely capable of but simply choose not to do).

They allow the Empire and its quasi-feudalist structure to continue because they believe it's best for humanity. Much like they tolerate the Spacing Guild because it's necessary, not because they approve of it. It's hard for the reader to fully grasp the way the BG think, because it's so different from our usual frame of reference. Their view is, in their own words, "the first truly long-term" one - they look beyond years, decades, centuries, even millennia. To them, the ultimate survival is the only thing that matters, not individuals, not short-term comforts, only the avoidance of extinction. They make great sacrifices, and they act with what we would probably describe as moral callousness if they think it's necessary for that ultimate goal.

That being said, the BG aren't automatically correct in what they do. They're very highly trained, very genetically advanced humans, but they're still human. They make mistakes. They have blind spots. They miscalculate. Not predicting Jessica's betrayal is the entire spark that starts the series, after all. And we don't know if their Kwisatz-Haderach (had he arrived as planned) would have really done what they thought he would. The Tleilaxu made their own Kwisatz-Haderach, for example, and it really did not go as planned AT ALL.

Again though, I think you're overstating BG power with that comment. They aren't really in a position to up end the entire control structure whether they want to or not and I think they accept those limits. The only way out they could come up with is creating a KH and putting him on the throne. As you said, they do their best to operate in the shadows but their rigid ways of acting ended up being a mockery of what they claim to be trying to do which is almost the entire point of the last two books where Leto tells them that they have made themselves inhuman. They'd lost the ability to love and lost sense of what their purpose really is. They were just as monolithic and out of touch with how to create positive change as any of the other groups they tried to manipulate despite thinking themselves above them. Sort of similar to what the Jedi had become in the sw prequels.

[Biomega]

Again though, I think you're overstating BG power with that comment.

I don't think so. Over the thousands of years that the Empire existed in this form, they could have changed it if they wanted to. There's almost nothing they couldn't do with human society given enough time (provided they have access to them, hence their trouble with the insular Tleilaxu). Their only limitation is their preference for a light touch, and their big-picture thinking. If they thought the Faufreluches system was detrimental to human survival, they'd have changed it. They quite clearly don't. In fact, it might have qualities that benefit the BG agenda: centralized systems of power are easier to manipulate, especially if they're strongly based on heredity (bloodline control being a BG specialty).

[Berndorf]

I don't think so. Over the thousands of years that the Empire existed in this form, they could have changed it if they wanted to. There's almost nothing they couldn't do with human society given enough time (provided they have access to them, hence their trouble with the insular Tleilaxu). Their only limitation is their preference for a light touch, and their big-picture thinking. If they thought the Faufreluches system was detrimental to human survival, they'd have changed it. They quite clearly don't. In fact, it might have qualities that benefit the BG agenda: centralized systems of power are easier to manipulate, especially if they're strongly based on heredity (bloodline control being a BG specialty).

Well we can disagree on that. To me the very nature of how they see themselves and their role within the galaxy makes it very difficult for them to exercise great control or bring about great change. It was beyond their nature to try and do that imo outside of their plan to create the KH. They were masters of intrigue but depended on the systems in place too much to try and do something over ambitious which could bring about their destruction due to reliance on spice, the spacing guild and other forces. There had to be equilibrium and the BG if anything just tried to maintain that.

[Berndorf]

The amount of Walken hate makes me suspect a lot of people only know him via people doing impressions and the like.

I've seen him in various things since the 80's and in some things he's great but I think all actors have their limits and then there's the age factor and just whether people think he fits the role. Just as if DeNiro had been announced I'd also be thinking 'idk about this'. I think I'd prefer some slightly older English stage actor(50-60 age range) who wasn't that well known for the role but who I think might do it better. Similar to when Lucas cast Ian McDiarmid in the role of the Emperor for SW. Totally unknown but just made for the role.

[Biomega]

Well we can disagree on that. To me the very nature of how they see themselves and their role within the galaxy makes it very difficult for them to exercise great control or bring about great change.

But there's a difference between "they can't" and "they don't want to". You don't know what the universe would be like had they NOT supported the status quo at the start of Dune. We only know everything with the BG in it; we have no idea how they already changed things. But we do know some of their methods, and their reach - and it's really only their forbearance that's holding them back. They even managed to seed some of the most fanatical societies out there to suit their purpose, like the Fremen.

The amount of Walken hate makes me suspect a lot of people only know him via people doing impressions and the like.

To be clear, I don't HATE Walken. I think he'll do an excellent job. That doesn't mean I don't think there's someone else who'd do a better one

[Berndorf]

But there's a difference between "they can't" and "they don't want to". You don't know what the universe would be like had they NOT supported the status quo at the start of Dune. We only know everything with the BG in it; we have no idea how they already changed things. But we do know some of their methods, and their reach - and it's really only their forbearance that's holding them back. They even managed to seed some of the most fanatical societies out there to suit their purpose, like the Fremen.

There is a difference but again the BG was essentially grown to serve the Empire. They aren't this benevolent force just operating in a vacuum. They developed into what they became over the course of millenia. By which time their prime motivations and directives were to be part of the Empire to some degree and its not like they were really even that trusted by the other major players in the galaxy. So they had to be very careful not to overplay their hand and careful that Mentats would sense their plans if they became too involved. So like I said I think all the major groups very much were trying to more or less keep the status quo as it was. Really I think the last two books paint a very different picture of the BG than the first four books do in terms of how I perceive them. In Messiah for instance the BG come across as sort of weak and powerless compared to Scytale who is just a face dancer.

[Biomega]

There is a difference but again the BG was essentially grown to serve the Empire.

Not sure where that idea comes from. From what I understand the BG was one of the factions coalescing out of the chaos of the Butlerian Jihad (the other being the Spacing Guild). The Empire as we know it is really the Empire of House Corrino; what's known of the old Empire in pre-Butlerian-Jihad times is limited and bears little resemblance to the following 10,000 years. We do know the BG existed in some proto form, but it really was the Butlerian Jihad that made them focus on preserving mankind. They weren't "grown" as much as they grew; i.e. there wasn't really an outside force deciding the BG would serve the Empire so much as those who would become the BG deciding that they needed to consolidate their efforts. That's a very important distinction.

They aren't this benevolent force just operating in a vacuum.

That'd be a very misguided way of characterizing them, for sure. They're not benevolent. They'd never see themselves like that. They're necessary. They do what must be done for the survival of mankind, without ego or investment. In a way they're amoral - they don't hesitate to kill or cull when needed, but they're not vicious and they're not selfish.

By which time their prime motivations and directives were to be part of the Empire to some degree and its not like they were really even that trusted by the other major players in the galaxy.

I think you're confusing cause and effect here. They have an agenda that's beyond and beside the Empire; but the Empire is a useful vessel for that agenda. Having a social structure that facilitates top-down rule makes it easy to manipulate if you insert yourself into that top. But the BG don't really care about the Empire per se; they care about humanity. The Empire is useful only if and for as long as it's conducive to that plan. In fact, the arrival of the Kwisatz-Haderach as planned would have likely reshaped the Empire on a fundamental level - not to the degree of Leto II's pharaonic theocracy, but something similar. Leto II made it a point to throw that in the BG's face on every occasion, the proverbial "be careful what you wish for lest it come true".

So like I said I think all the major groups very much were trying to more or less keep the status quo as it was.

With respect to what? The "status quo" really only emerged after the Battle of Corrin, which was after the Butlerian Jihad. They effectively came to an arrangement - the BG and Spacing Guild along with Empire and CHOAM in political control of the known universe. But that was probably not a singular event, and developed over time. We know very little of the early days of the (Corrino) Empire.

Really I think the last two books paint a very different picture of the BG than the first four books do in terms of how I perceive them. In Messiah for instance the BG come across as sort of weak and powerless compared to Scytale who is just a face dancer.

Not sure which books you're talking about. The last two as in the ones after Frank Herbert's death? But you mention Dune Messiah which is the 2nd book? I do agree that the BG in the books also undergo some evolution - the first book in particular has some incongruities with later descriptions but it's hard to tell what of that is just Herbert changing his mind, and what could have other plausible diegetic explanations. Best not to speculate, but look at a more comprehensive picture across the entire series.

Me personally, I'm pretty much only concerned with the 6 main books by Frank Herbert, and while I don't completely discard the Brian Herbert/Kevin J. Anderson novels and the supplementary materials, I prefer to involve them as little as possible. Things get WILD after Chapterhouse. Most of my academic work is focused on Dune, Dune Messiah, Children of Dune, and God Emperor of Dune; though personally, Heretics of Dune is my favorite in the series.

[Frontenac]

In fact, the whole plot of Dune - the betrayal of the Atreides - is something the Emperor didn't really want. He thinks of Leto favorably, and deeply regrets the various political machinations that lead to the events of Dune. But he can't do anything to stop them, or even mitigate them. Such is the impotence of Shaddam IV, the Padishah Emperor of the Known Universe.

I believe you overplay his impotence. It's not that he can't stop those political machinations, he actively participates in them and agrees with them. He admires Leto Atreides, he believes that he would be the best to succeed him since he has no legitimate heir and wished that Irulan would have been old enough to marry him. But he can't stand that Leto would be more popular than him. Shaddam puts his vanity above the good of the Imperium. So he conspires to eradicate House Atreides. That's why I believe he's a little unhinged. Irulan even describes him as some beast trying to escape a cage with invisible bars. I believe that Christopher Walken will be great in that role. Beside, we already have a cold, calculating and sinister villain with the Baron. I wouldn't mind if the Emperor is a bit more unstable and peculiar.

[Biomega]

Shaddam puts his vanity above the good of the Imperium. So he conspires to eradicate House Atreides.

He wasn't the one to set this all up, though. He didn't do anything to stop it (and whether he really could have is doubtful, given how he's being pressured by both Harkonnen and the BG). This was all a long time coming. The Atreides/Harkonnen feud goes back 10,000 years, and the BG used it to push their own agenda to culmination for GENERATIONS, way before Shaddam was even born. This was definitely not the Emperor's doing.

[Berndorf]

He wasn't the one to set this all up, though. He didn't do anything to stop it (and whether he really could have is doubtful, given how he's being pressured by both Harkonnen and the BG). This was all a long time coming. The Atreides/Harkonnen feud goes back 10,000 years, and the BG used it to push their own agenda to culmination for GENERATIONS, way before Shaddam was even born. This was definitely not the Emperor's doing.

I don't think the BG were behind the betrayal of House Atreides. Yes there was a 10,000 year feud between A & H that they were going to use to their advantage to put the KH into power but I think the betrayal of the Atreides was an Imperial plot(which the Baron was forced to pay for) and I think that's pretty well established in the first book(by Thufir Hawat I think when he figures out where the Sardaukur come from). Which isn't to say he would have come up with it but that his advisors(which for Royal Houses would be a Mentat plus a few military advisers and maybe a BG) would have told him to do it and he decided it was a sound move to make. Sure from a moral pov he may have regretted it(seeing as Leto Atreides was one of the more respected members of the Landsraad and his family had been for thousands of years) but from a strategic pov I think it was something he thought needed to be done. The BG wouldn't have wanted to place Paul and his family in harm's way with how that all happened. All they needed was for Jessica to still give them a girl from Leto that could be married to Feyd.

[Biomega]

I don't think the BG were behind the betrayal of House Atreides.

Not directly, no. But they knew of it, and they supported it because it played into their plans. But even if they didn't know the exact details of the betrayal, they certainly planned on the feud coming to a head - that's why they stood ready to offer the solution in the form of marriage, and that they most certainly HAD planned for generations. There's also the matter of the Imperial heir. Part of Shaddam's anxiety with Leto's popularity came from the fact that he was not allowed to have an heir, and so the possibility of an Atreides usurpation became all the more real. ESPECIALLY since Leto also had no wife, meaning his marriage to one of the Emperor's daughters would have easily legitimized Leto's claim to the throne (alongside his relation to the Emperor). Oh and guess who made sure that the Emperor had no heir and the Duke had no wife.

I think the betrayal of the Atreides was an Emperor plot and I think that's pretty well established in the first book.

If the book establishes anything, it's that it's a Harkonnen plot. The Baron used the Emperor's anxieties and the realities of the political situation between Empire, BG, and Guild to facilitate the strike against the Atreides. Shaddam is always spoken of as having little choice in the matter, and regretting having to do this (despite the obvious benefit to him); whereas the Baron makes no secret of explaining his machinations in great detail throughout the first book.

[Berndorf]

Not directly, no. But they knew of it, and they supported it because it played into their plans. But even if they didn't know the exact details of the betrayal, they certainly planned on the feud coming to a head - that's why they stood ready to offer the solution in the form of marriage, and that they most certainly HAD planned for generations. There's also the matter of the Imperial heir. Part of Shaddam's anxiety with Leto's popularity came from the fact that he was not allowed to have an heir, and so the possibility of an Atreides usurpation became all the more real. ESPECIALLY since Leto also had no wife, meaning his marriage to one of the Emperor's daughters would have easily legitimized Leto's claim to the throne (alongside his relation to the Emperor). Oh and guess who made sure that the Emperor had no heir and the Duke had no wife.

I'm not really convinced of that at all. I just reread all 6 of FH's Dune books last year so its all sort of fresh in my head and don't think the BG would have wanted it to happen. If anything, it just sets back their own plans imo.

If the book establishes anything, it's that it's a Harkonnen plot. The Baron used the Emperor's anxieties and the realities of the political situation between Empire, BG, and Guild to facilitate the strike against the Atreides. Shaddam is always spoken of as having little choice in the matter, and regretting having to do this (despite the obvious benefit to him); whereas the Baron makes no secret of explaining his machinations in great detail throughout the first book.

Its a Harkonnen plot in terms of the execution of it but it only happens because the Emperor allows it and grants use of Sardaukur dressed as Harkonnens. The Emperor most definitely did use the Baron so he could take all the blame for it. I don't really recall reading that much about Shaddam saying he had little choice in the matter either but that is a fairly open ended type of statement imo within the choices that a galactic Emperor may be forced to make. Which is to say that he ultimately will do what his advisors convince him needs to be done whether he likes it or not. The Baron absolutely did take great pleasure in it for obvious reasons and thought of himself as the real mastermind up until Hawat makes him feel stupid by explaining what was really going on. The Baron didn't really understand why the Emperor wanted Leto gone.

[Biomega]

I'm not really convinced of that at all. I just reread all 6 of FH's Dune books last year so its all sort of fresh in my head and don't think the BG would have wanted it to happen. If anything, it just sets back their own plans imo.

Eventually, yes. Once the groundwork was laid it was difficult to change course after Jessica's betrayal. They had counted on her bearing a daughter, so they could wrap the whole affair nicely with a reconciliation and the birth of the Kwisatz Haderach. Jessica certainly derailed this, but things were already in motion. That's why they said they could only do so much to salvage the situation, and that did not include saving Leto himself.

Its a Harkonnen plot in terms of the execution of it but it only happens because the Emperor allows it

Oh absolutely. As I said, the Emperor didn't stop it. But he also didn't come up with the plan. He was backed into a corner, and went along with it because it saved his ass. But he didn't like it, and he didn't plan it.

[Berndorf]

Eventually, yes. Once the groundwork was laid it was difficult to change course after Jessica's betrayal. They had counted on her bearing a daughter, so they could wrap the whole affair nicely with a reconciliation and the birth of the Kwisatz Haderach. Jessica certainly derailed this, but things were already in motion. That's why they said they could only do so much to salvage the situation, and that did not include saving Leto himself.


Oh absolutely. As I said, the Emperor didn't stop it. But he also didn't come up with the plan. He was backed into a corner, and went along with it because it saved his ass. But he didn't like it, and he didn't plan it.

What corner though? I think its presented in a way that both sides saw a common enemy and then plans were made to deal with it with the Baron paying for it all(with the cost being something like all profits from Arakkis for 30 years). At the end of the day its all just machinations so that Herbert can tell his story.

[Biomega]

What corner though?

He was faced with the reality that he might be usurped by Leto, a situation engineered and preyed on by both the BG and the Harkonnens. When the plan was brought forward to use Arrakis as a pretext for eliminating the Atreides in a plausibly deniable manner (i.e. with the tacit approval of the various factions involved) he didn't say no. But he didn't originate the plan.

At the end of the day its all just machinations so that Herbert can tell his story.

I mean, yeah. But that's a cheap out. You can end any conversation with that.

[Berndorf]

He was faced with the reality that he might be usurped by Leto, a situation engineered and preyed on by both the BG and the Harkonnens. When the plan was brought forward to use Arrakis as a pretext for eliminating the Atreides in a plausibly deniable manner (i.e. with the tacit approval of the various factions involved) he didn't say no. But he didn't originate the plan.


I mean, yeah. But that's a cheap out. You can end any conversation with that.

I don't think he was really in that much danger of being usurped simply because I don't think that House Ateides had any designs on the throne. I wasn't attempting to end the conversation with my comment about machinations either. My point is just that I don't think Herbert put that much thought into the pretexts of the story as the story itself. Which is that he wanted a hero on a desert planet who would lead a revolt that led to him being becoming a messianic figure and Emperor. He did a good job of creating a backdrop but some of this isn't meant to be that clear since the Emperor isn't a major character anyhow.

[Biomega]

I don't think he was really in that much danger of being usurped simply because I don't think that House Ateides had any designs on the throne.

Possible, but the Landsraad may have decided a regime change was in order sometime down the line. And much like Shaddam had his back to one wall, Leto might have found himself with his back to another. And it's not like "oh surely he wouldn't do that" is a great comfort to those who are in power and fear losing it

My point is just that I don't think Herbert put that much thought into the pretexts of the story as the story itself. Which is that he wanted a hero on a desert planet who would lead a revolt that led to him being becoming a messianic figure and Emperor. He did a good job of creating a backdrop but some of this isn't meant to be that clear since the Emperor isn't a major character anyhow.

I get what you mean, but that's not usually how literary analysis works. The intent of the author isn't usually a concern - for one because we rarely know it, but also because the author - as you say - may not actually have consciously intended certain things that still ended up happening. Art is a creative process, and while it often involves a lot of thought, it rarely involves the amount of thought that is put into it after the fact by interpretation. It's the proverbial "why is the door red?" kind of deal, where the author might simply have intuitively chosen the door to be red, but thorough interpretation and critique can come up with very good reasons why it HAD to be red; even though those reasons might never have been conscious thoughts that the author had while writing it.

That's what I mean by conversation ender - it's a silver-bullet statement that can shut down any discourse because ANYTHING is just "machination to tell a story" and as such it's not very useful. It's basically like saying "yeah okay but none of this is real, it's just words on a page" - 100% true, but also totally unhelpful to any attempt to discuss a story

(full disclosure, I am a literature professor so this is kind of what I do professionally, I don't mean to come across as condescending)

[Berndorf]

Possible, but the Landsraad may have decided a regime change was in order sometime down the line. And much like Shaddam had his back to one wall, Leto might have found himself with his back to another. And it's not like "oh surely he wouldn't do that" is a great comfort to those who are in power and fear losing it


I get what you mean, but that's not usually how literary analysis works. The intent of the author isn't usually a concern - for one because we rarely know it, but also because the author - as you say - may not actually have consciously intended certain things that still ended up happening. Art is a creative process, and while it often involves a lot of thought, it rarely involves the amount of thought that is put into it after the fact by interpretation. It's the proverbial "why is the door red?" kind of deal, where the author might simply have intuitively chosen the door to be red, but thorough interpretation and critique can come up with very good reasons why it HAD to be red; even though those reasons might never have been conscious thoughts that the author had while writing it.

That's what I mean by conversation ender - it's a silver-bullet statement that can shut down any discourse because ANYTHING is just "machination to tell a story" and as such it's not very useful. It's basically like saying "yeah okay but none of this is real, it's just words on a page" - 100% true, but also totally unhelpful to any attempt to discuss a story

(full disclosure, I am a literature professor so this is kind of what I do professionally, I don't mean to come across as condescending)

ok, I do get the point you are making. I'm not trying to dismiss the idea of discussing it so much as I think we need to narrow down a bit more what we were discussing. Part of which is the role Shaddam was meant to play in the story. I might have to try and reread some parts which have to do with this subject area of the book and see what I might not be remembering so I can make a clearer reply.