Problems with Bronso: Interview vs Analysis of History


Moderators: Freakzilla, ᴶᵛᵀᴬ, Omphalos

pcqypcqy
Posts: 111
Joined: 07 Jun 2017 05:54

Re: Problems with Bronso: Interview vs Analysis of History

Post by pcqypcqy »

I'm referring to the actual excerpt of Bronso's analysis that introduces chapter 1. Presumably the interview took place after he wrote it.
georgiedenbro
Posts: 1035
Joined: 11 Jun 2014 13:56
Location: Montreal, Canada

Re: Problems with Bronso: Interview vs Analysis of History

Post by georgiedenbro »

pcqypcqy wrote:I'm referring to the actual excerpt of Bronso's analysis that introduces chapter 1. Presumably the interview took place after he wrote it.
Ok I see what you mean. The excerpt from his book seems to have more definite details in it about how DM ends, versus the interview which is far more general. Maybe he wasn't actually executed and later went on to write a more complete history book, which we see excerpted here?

But if we want to accept that the history the interviewer is referring to is the very text that appears right after, then I guess we'd have to say that the interview takes place after DM. In this case we'd have to assume that it's common knowledge that Muad'dib went into the desert and that most people still believe he's alive, hence the use of his name in the present tense even though he doesn't rule any more. They would probably assume he knows and sees all even if he's off in the desert doing whatever he's doing.
"um-m-m-ah-h-h-hm-m-m-m!"
pcqypcqy
Posts: 111
Joined: 07 Jun 2017 05:54

Re: Problems with Bronso: Interview vs Analysis of History

Post by pcqypcqy »

There's a fair bit of discussion in Cod about how people wonder if the preacher is Paul. Lots of signs to suggest it, but no confirmation. So I think this aligns with a general belief that Paul may not be dead, or it could be like the Jesus analogy. Either way, I think it works.
Post Reply