Jᴀᴄᴜʀᴜᴛᴜ - Tʜᴇ Cᴀsᴛ Oᴜᴛ

Here lies a toppled god --
His fall was not a small one.
We did but build his pedestal,
A narrow and a tall one.
-Tleilaxu Epigram

Alia investigates the body of a dead Fremen young woman, addicted to semuta, killed by a Tleilaxu poison called "The Throat of Hell" and found on the sand. Semuta addiction in a Fremen is rare so Paul sent Alia and Hayt to check it out. Alia fails to discover anything new and orders Hayt to fly her back. She comments that he flies just like Duncan did. Others have noticed this too. He and Alia talk about his emotions concearning his past self. They fly over the shrine of Duke Leto's skull, he circles back thinking closeness to Leto's remains might help him remember, which brings a tear to his cheek and Alia can't help but touch it. Alia explains to him about how she was pre-born. Hayt acusses Alia of being careless with her powers and that even though the Tleilaxu designed him to destroy Paul, Paul was doing it nicely on his own. Hayt gets Alia off balance and she's very disturbed by this. After landing the 'thoper, Hayt steals a gentle kiss from Alia, much to her guards' amusement. She threatens to tell Paul everything he's said and done, even though she admits to herself she wanted the kiss. Alia has a persistant thought of face dancers, Duncan suggests that even though there's a dead Fremen woman out there, maybe no-one has been reported missing.

The entire conversation between Hayt and Alia is incredible. I love how Frank writes a chapter with only a small physical plot extension i.e. dead woman in the desert; possible Face Dancer infiltration, yet spends several pages in fascinating characterisation.

...and though we know who she is, frank doesn't come out and tell us 2 dozen times.

Apjak wrote:...and though we know who she is, frank doesn't come out and tell us 2 dozen times.

Does he ever?

Freakzilla wrote:

Apjak wrote:...and though we know who she is, frank doesn't come out and tell us 2 dozen times.

Does he ever?

Its communicated at some points through peoples thoughts but no, not directly.

I just finished reading this chapter and i was wondering about something. Maybe I'm missing some subtle clues in the dialog because At no point in their conversation did I as the reader get the indication that she was offering herself or attracted to him other than maybe superficially. he says "I take only what is offered. Be glad I didn't take all that was offered" That may not be his exact wording but I just didn't get that. I realize that she was picking up hints from his words using her abilities but were there hints in the dialog that the reader is supposed to catch that I just somehow missed?

Not that I noticed, I think it's just meant to be taken that he read her wanting him to have sex with her, more through body language and voice than actual words. I think that's the point when she realizes she really did want him to, before that she was in denial about it.

A Thing of Eternity wrote:Not that I noticed, I think it's just meant to be taken that he read her wanting him to have sex with her, more through body language and voice than actual words. I think that's the point when she realizes she really did want him to, before that she was in denial about it.

It's also entertaining how irritated she gets when Hayt stays calm and several steps ahead of her.

He knew what she was thinking before she did. This chapter always makes me smile.

A Thing of Eternity wrote:Not that I noticed, I think it's just meant to be taken that he read her wanting him to have sex with her, more through body language and voice than actual words. I think that's the point when she realizes she really did want him to, before that she was in denial about it.

That's pretty much what I figured I just wasn't sure. there is so much going on through the conversations of the various characters that I didn't know if maybe I was just not getting it.

Thanks.

This is one of my favorite chapters in DM. I wish it was longer! Loved how Hayt toys with Alia, and I always love the bits where Hayt is on the verge of remembering something of Duncan.

I love this chapter, I can't help but laugh out loud when Alia is outraged by him taking the 'kiss HE wanted' and says, "OK, the kiss YOU wanted."

Revised, cleaned.

SadisticCynic wrote:The entire conversation between Hayt and Alia is incredible. I love how Frank writes a chapter with only a small physical plot extension i.e. dead woman in the desert; possible Face Dancer infiltration, yet spends several pages in fascinating characterisation.

I agree completely.

That's why he is 'The Master'.

Dune Messiah wrote:"He will order you executed," she said, slipping into the dome.
"Why? Because I took the kiss I wanted?" He followed her, his movement
forcing her back. The door slid closed behind him.
"The kiss you wanted!" Outrage filled her.
"All right, Alia. The kiss you wanted, then." He started to move around her
toward the drop field.
As though his movement had propelled her into heightened awareness, she
realized his candor -- the utter truthfulness of him. The kiss I wanted, she
told herself. True.
"Your truthfulness, that's what's dangerous," she said, following him.
"You return to the ways of wisdom," he said, not breaking his stride. "A
mentat could not've stated the matter more directly.

This is a bit of an expansion on the cool passage the earlier posts celebrate. I like the entire passage because it brings to light a fascinating paradox. The Duniverse is plentiful of people who plan, deceive, exploit, maximize position, and use every other trick in the book the gain power and advantage over the others. They are totally efficient, compared to modern man, at intrigue and the uses of power. And yet here we have a passage in which a member of the mighty BG, the "Reverend Mother for their Reverend Mothers," even, is blown away by something as simple as utter truthfulness. But of course truthfulness is anything but simple.

Alia calls this ability Hayt has, total honesty both with himself and others, as dangerous. His thinking process has no regard for his own life, it operates efficiently and in an unbiased fashion. And he is a mentat, which makes him all the more effective in both capacities - in gathering data, and in treating it as it is without emotion.

We may be tempted to jump to the conclusion that his truthfulness is dangerous because it means he doesn't fear reprisal for what he says, and therefore may end up saying anything at all. But might there be more to it? Nietzsche, for instance, pointed out that truth is not synonymous for that which is conducive for life. There is utility in knowing the truth, at times, but at other times - maybe not. Might not someone utterly restricted to truth be a danger to life itself?

I've said a few times before that I suspect the mentat training to in some ways emulate the processes of an artificial intelligence; that the moniker "human computer" is more than just a term. If that is so, and if Hayt was so good at removing his own bias from his thinking, then as a mentat he would be even more similar to an AI than other mentats. No doubt this would be considered dangerous as well.

What threat might a person be considered who had the detachment of a machine, and superior computing power to boot, and who could exert great effect on humans, including the Emperor? I begin to think that Alia might have been right, that Hayt really was dangerous in some way. I can't bring Ix into it, as mentioned in future books, but for those of you who've read GEoD, consider what is said of machine-minded men there in this context...

Hayt is not only a mentat but also a Zensunni philosopher.

Freakzilla wrote:Here lies a toppled god --
His fall was not a small one.
We did but build his pedestal,
A narrow and a tall one.
-Tleilaxu Epigram

this was always one of my favorite Dune quotes.

I think it would've been better written this way, what do you guys think?

Here lies a toppled god --
his fall was not small.
We did but build his pedestal,
narrow and tall.

The original passage is essentially iambic quadrameter (da-DA-da-DA-da-Da-da-DA) where in the first line the first two words each occupy two beats. The other three lines follow the meter fairly well, with the 2nd and 4th lines having 9 beats each which leaves a sort of empty ominous feeling. Your version, I have to say, retains the meter initiated by the 1st line but then abandons it completely on the 2nd and 4th lines, making the whole thing feel very weird and non-poetic compared to Frank's, whose small variations within the quadrameter communicate the sort of threatening nature of the passage. On an unrelated but still important note, I believe "his fall was not small" isn't quite right grammatically either.

Sorry man, Frank's version rules.

georgiedenbro wrote:The original passage is essentially iambic quadrameter (da-DA-da-DA-da-Da-da-DA) where in the first line the first two words each occupy two beats. The other three lines follow the meter fairly well, with the 2nd and 4th lines having 9 beats each which leaves a sort of empty ominous feeling. Your version, I have to say, retains the meter initiated by the 1st line but then abandons it completely on the 2nd and 4th lines, making the whole thing feel very weird non-poetic compared to Frank's, whose small variations within the quadrameter communicate the sort of threatening nature of the passage. On an unrelated but still important note, I believe "his fall was not small" isn't quite right grammatically either.

Sorry man, Frank's version rules.

you're right, the original is better. my thinking was to chop it down and make it more concise, but that also chops out the poetic meter, which I was honestly not thinking about.

that's what I get for questioning the master!

I still think the litany against fear could've been done entirely in present tense, but I digress.

eta: I think I was subconsciously aware of the iambic quadrameter (or is that tetrameter? I'm a bit vague on poetry), which is partly why it was my favorite. I did feel that something was missing from my version, in spite of the more concise language, which is why I posted. I appreciate the constructive criticism. after all, if I couldn't take criticism/disagreement, I might end up like that toppled god.

Frank made a mistake in this chapter, I'm surprised no one else caught it. I'm reading Ace edition, published June 1987. They find the body of the woman Scytale murdered, her body dumped in the desert. In the first paragraph:

...The sand all around bore the tracks of her brother and questors

We know about her brother, he didn't want her to marry the blind guy who refused to get Tleiaxu eyes. But then a few paragraphs later Hayt says:

We may never learn who it was died here. The head, the teeth are gone. The hands...Unlikely such a one had a genetic record somewhere to which her cells could be matched'

This is what I believe to be the 2nd editing error. I believe the first was the giant sandworm that was 100 meters long. I believe it was meant to be 100 m diameter. This tells us he was writing and re-writing and editing. Joining together parts that he'd written months or years apart.

It's something to consider when analyzing the deeper thoughts. There are themes that run in common through all the books. But I don't think Frank was remembering certain paragraphs or intros years later. Many times there is a statement of philosophy in one book, and then in another book he'll write something that contradicts the earlier meaning. I don't believe that's purposeful. I think he was human and made mistakes, and his editors made mistakes too.

the rev wrote: ↑18 Mar 2023 17:09 Frank made a mistake in this chapter, I'm surprised no one else caught it. I'm reading Ace edition, published June 1987. They find the body of the woman Scytale murdered, her body dumped in the desert. In the first paragraph:

...The sand all around bore the tracks of her brother and questors

We know about her brother, he didn't want her to marry the blind guy who refused to get Tleiaxu eyes. But then a few paragraphs later Hayt says:

We may never learn who it was died here. The head, the teeth are gone. The hands...Unlikely such a one had a genetic record somewhere to which her cells could be matched'

This is what I believe to be the 2nd editing error. I believe the first was the giant sandworm that was 100 meters long. I believe it was meant to be 100 m diameter. This tells us he was writing and re-writing and editing. Joining together parts that he'd written months or years apart.

It's something to consider when analyzing the deeper thoughts. There are themes that run in common through all the books. But I don't think Frank was remembering certain paragraphs or intros years later. Many times there is a statement of philosophy in one book, and then in another book he'll write something that contradicts the earlier meaning. I don't believe that's purposeful. I think he was human and made mistakes, and his editors made mistakes too.

Uhm...

...The sand all around bore the tracks of her brother and questors

refers to Paul. It is Alia who has these thoughts.

This is the entire paragraph:
Alia crouched, resting elbows on knees, chin on fists, stared at the body on the dune -- a few bones and some tattered flesh that once had been a young woman. The hands, the head, most of the upper torso were gone -- eaten by the coriolis wind. The sand all around bore the tracks of her brother's medics and questors. They were gone now, all excepting the mortuary attendants who stood to one side with Hayt, the ghola, waiting for her to finish her mysterious perusal of what had been written here.

refers to Paul. It is Alia who has these thoughts.

This is the entire paragraph:
Alia crouched, resting elbows on knees, chin on fists, stared at the body on the dune -- a few bones and some tattered flesh that once had been a young woman. The hands, the head, most of the upper torso were gone -- eaten by the coriolis wind. The sand all around bore the tracks of her brother's medics and questors. They were gone now, all excepting the mortuary attendants who stood to one side with Hayt, the ghola, waiting for her to finish her mysterious perusal of what had been written here.

Yep I agree. Just read it again and came back here to change what I wrote. Don't mind if an editor deletes the post, since it's wrong. Or not, mistakes are fun too...