If I were to tell you the story of my life, I would probably come out looking pretty good. Mine would be an epic tale filled with wild adventures and derring-do, featuring a protagonist possessing rakish good looks, a devil-may-care attitude and an incorruptible code of honor. Someone else, on the other hand, might tell my story just a bit differently. I might come off a little less like a hero and a little more like...well, like an actual human being. That narrator, for example, might choose to include the story of the time I crashed a go-kart on a family vacation, then sat there crying for a solid half-hour and refused to remove my seatbelt and exit my sad, bent little vehicle until everyone stopped laughing at me. I would probably exclude that particular anecdote from the tale, but, hey - to each his own.
The point is this: narration is everything. We encounter the world in a book through the narrator's voice, and we trust them - unwisely, in some cases - to be our guide through that world, presenting it to us as it really is. On page 51 of How to Read Novels Like a Professor, Thomas C. Foster lists the drawbacks of the first-person narrator (frequently mistaken, may be hiding something, etc.). He then lists the advantages of the same narrator, and they are...exactly the same. It turns out that, sometimes, the story benefits from a narrower, more selective narrative lens. Where Dune is concerned, this is a moot point, because Frank Herbert decided not to utilize the first-person narrator. And it's hard to imagine such a massive, sprawling story being told by a single character. At least, it is for me. But what about you? Do you think this novel could be composed with any other narrative voice than the one chosen by Herbert? And which do you prefer in general: the broader scope of the third-person omniscient narrator; or the narrower, more intimate touch of the first-person narrator? Is the reliable-or-unreliable guessing game we must play when reading works utilizing the latter something you enjoy, or do you find it overly-complicated? Either way, once you've mulled it over and answered a couple of the above questions, give me an example of something you've read which you felt benefited greatly from first-person narration. And then, when the epic recounting of my rise from pint-sized hero to...I don't know, I guess, like, gallon-sized hero?...is finally written and published, you can add that to your list.
103 Comments
Smrithi Ramachandran
6/22/2015 03:40:15 am
Dune could have definitely been written in several different perspectives based on the most important characters in each section. However, I agree that how Herbert decided to lay out the story and its respective third person point of view was brilliant. The beauty behind the omniscience is that it allows the reader to first and foremost, trust that the story is being told as objectively as possible (I don't believe 100% objectivity can be attained). Furthermore, Herbert manipulated the third person omniscient role; perspectives still exist, because sections in the book still exist. The beginning transitions from Lady Jessica's concern over the gom jabbar test, to Paul's firsthand encounter with it. Then, the next section dives into another House, with insight from the Harkonnens. Additionally, Herbert includes direct thoughts from the characters aside from their dialogue, which clarifies the character's intentions to the reader. It's a whole Harry Potter sort of deal. The point of view in both the Harry Potter series and Dune allows for the reader to take an abstract, loose form of the character the author presented, and turn it into something personal and concrete to each individual mind. To me, THAT is where the intimate touch of a reader-character connection rises from. It's based on the reader's creation of the character provided, and I believe that third person narratives allow for those (multiple) close-knit connections with each character. Other than that aspect, there's also the whole science fiction basis. Emotions and logic rarely mix. So even if I were to say that only first person allows for close relationships with one character, that still wouldn't pair up with the logic Dune is based on. It’s closer to: Science, logic, facts, data, experiments. Not love, life, passion, emotion. Herbert's approach to third person serves as a gray to the black and white logic-emotion shpeel. He allows for the reader’s connection but maintains the whole futuristic plot quite exquisitely. That being said, I still enjoy a fair share of one character insight. I’m about to go hardcore, cliché girl on you, so brace yourself. John Green. Brilliant, wonderful, and every fancy synonym to those two words. He manages to engage his readers by delving into one person’s mind. The mind is an endless maze, and because his books mainly revolve around daily happenings, the first person makes more sense. That relationship between one character and the reader also plays a part in the reader’s relationship with somewhat commonplace events happening in his books. For instance, Looking for Alaska revolves around drug abuse, young people, college life, and sexual experimentation. Sound familiar? Those things, in big part, define youth culture. Being able to be the person in the story that experiences the hard hit of the sheltered-to-independence transition namely reflects on the reader’s personal life- or at least it did for me. That sort of connection with a made up character becomes a small part of the reader, which is the greatest accomplishment authors can make with certain types of perspectives they choose to write in.
Reply
Danielle Edmonds
8/12/2015 03:15:44 am
I completely agree with what you said about John Green's use of first person throughout many of his novels. With The Fault in Our Stars in particular, I don't think the novel could have emotionally impacted as many people as it did if it wasn't told from the point-of-view of Hazel. Because of her physical constraints, she is forced to express herself more through her thoughts and words, allowing readers to experience the same aspects of teenage culture that they're used to from a completely different perspective. Spoiler alert if anyone hasn't read the book~ It also fascinates me how John Green showed her carrying on so much of Augustus's life after he died, which hits readers harder because it's described in first person as well.
Reply
Andrea Rosales
8/26/2015 11:26:36 am
I believe Herbert knew he could not capture all perspectives of the characters in first person. Due to the extent of the book, he made a crucial decision to let the reader hear what characters thought and to his benefit, that strategy helped develop the novel even more. Personally I prefer third person omniscient because it feels as though I am peeking into the minds of each character separating the good eggs from the bad eggs. Maybe I have my nosey nature to blame, but first person, although intimate, leaves many questions unanswered and strips the story of its dramatic build up. This way, the reader is more engaged and the novel becomes a series of guessing games (which are fun). A great example of the correct use of first person narration is Twilight. Stephenie Meyer captures the reader with the mysterious Edward Cullen only to make him more mysterious by letting the readers see one side of him.
Reply
Noah Lee
8/26/2015 12:59:44 pm
I think that's a pretty good point! One of the things I found was that Paul's actions often got a reaction that we got to read from someone else's perspective. I think a good analogy for that would be if someone was telling a story about a magic trick- it could be interesting to hear from the magician's perspective, but you wouldn't want to always be the magician who already knows exactly what's going to happen, you gotta be the audience sometime and share that "wow!" and "ahhh!" moment.
Shravya Arra
8/27/2015 08:36:14 am
Herbert approached this book the right way with his choice to use third person omniscient. Third person omniscient allows the reader to be exposed to all of the thoughts and conflicts that are happening at one time. The reader can relate to the character better when they know all aspects of them. Where I agree with Smrithi is how she says that third person omniscient removes all objectivity (or most). This is true because had this novel been written in first person, I think we can all agree that it would most likely be written from Paul's perspective, it would have been a lot more objective and hateful. The third person omniscient point of view keeps the story honest and versatile. Everything is properly shown through either the commentary or the dialogue, and that would not have been achievable had Herbert picked a different type of narration to write this novel in.
Reply
Kieran Smith
6/22/2015 05:49:05 am
1. The perspective that Herbert utilized for Dune was arguably the most appropriate point of view for the story. Sure, he could have eliminated the chapters perceived by other characters and merely focused on the single-track story of Paul, but in doing so he would have lost a large portion of what he was trying to say. Herbert didn’t want to tell a story, he wanted to tell a history. He wanted to give the reader a broad view of everything that was happening at the time, to provide context and impacts for everything Paul did. He used this view to add complexity to the plot, to add dramatic irony with Dr. Yueh and with Halleck’s suspicions later on. If Herbert had decided on a first-person narrative, he would have had to include first-person perspectives of each character so as to avoid losing valuable information. However, throughout the book, each character added personal opinions, viewpoints, emotions through the use of italics, and Herbert achieved all that was required internally through these asides while still maintaining the external observation that a third-person perspective provides.
Reply
Smrithi Ramachandran
6/22/2015 06:32:39 am
For your second answer, you mention that a close intimacy can only form if the author has a deep understanding of the character. Where does the reader's understanding come into play?
Reply
Sri Sridhar
8/27/2015 11:03:33 am
I would even say the physical events like June talking to other Chinese people and trying to understand the significance of the pendant was pretty intriguing because it showed her inquisitiveness and I could relate to her when she was having difficult times with different people, Overall, the Joy Luck Club was definitely one of the novels I benefited from, as well.
Reply
Luca Tomescu
6/23/2015 01:12:44 pm
Frank Herbert made an excellent choice when he settled on the third person omniscient perspective for writing Dune. I for one adore irony in all of its forms, and Herbert especially uses the third person perspective to his advantage by weaving a fantastic sense of dramatic irony into the story itself. The story would be nowhere near as intense or enjoyable for me had I not known of the Baron Harkonnen's dastardly plot against the House Atreides. That dramatic irony serves as an especially strong hook during the opening of the novel, as it draws the reader closer to Paul and his family without even getting to know them that well. On the other hand, a first person narration by Paul would not have been a poor idea because it would allow the reader to more closely familiarize him/herself with him, and it would have allowed Herbert to include additional details regarding some of the vital scenes throughout the novel that feature primarily Paul. The advantage of the first person perspective is the level of intimacy with which the reader gets accustomed to the character narrating. Another possibility would have been to narrate the novel from Jessica's point of view. She is present nearly every step of the way, and her character is a highly complex one that I would have loved to learn more about. Granted though, narration through her would have lacked a few of Paul's most vital scenes, such as the first time he rides a sandworm in order to prove his place among the Fremen.
Reply
Andrew Zheng
8/6/2015 06:25:01 pm
As for your opinion on what style of narration is superior in regards to Dune, I completely agree with your preference with the third person narrator. With such a book as Dune, the massive story line, multitude of insanely detailed characters, as well as the setting taking place across a galaxy, the presence and use of a third person narrator is absolutely necessary. Without such a narration style, there would be no truly efficient or effective way of telling the entire story to it's fullest extent as the third person narration would,
Reply
Hisham Iqbal
8/17/2015 04:58:40 pm
I agree that the dramatic irony introduced in the first few pages of Dune are an excellent way to attract the reader to the novel. From the very beginning, the reader was told that Duke Leto was to die and Paul was to take his place. How this was to happen was the most interesting. This event in the novel was told with a third person omniscient view allowing for the reader to fully grasp the details of the Duke's death.
Reply
Stephanie You
8/23/2015 10:54:25 am
I agree with pretty much everything that you have stated except for the part about how Dune could have been written in first person. Maybe I am just narrow-minded, but I believe that Dune could not have achieved anywhere near the same scope if it had been written in first person. There are so many characters and subplots that would be eliminated in a first person version of Dune, unless Herbert alternated narrators, which I also think would be disadvantageous due to inconsistency. How could we learn more about the twisted Harkonnen family dynamic? How could we even know about Count Fenring besides the letter that Lady Fenring wrote to Jessica? Paul, or whoever the narrator would be, would have to interact with every single person in this book for them to be introduced and for their story to be told. If Herbert wanted to focus less on the world and more on the individual, first person would maybe be more ideal. However, with what Herbert has accomplished through third-person omniscient (he got the best of both worlds by seeing every character he wants us to see and delving into their minds), I think Dune is perfect the way it is, at least in terms of point of view.
Reply
Noah Lee
8/26/2015 01:04:00 pm
I think the term "stream of consciousness" used in HTRNLAP is more appropriate to stick to Dune, especially considering many of the characters' almost omnipotent abilities already. Sometimes, when a chapter is centered around Paul, we will read about the intimate feelings of another character, but because we're not reading any inner dialogue, many of the emotions and feelings could still be from Paul's perspective- he's just that good! The second reason I think stream of consciousness fits better is because no events in the story are described independently of any character. We don't get to hear about a worm making his way under the sands on his own, we only get to hear things when major characters are involved.
Reply
Stella Ji
7/13/2015 12:38:35 pm
While the novel could have certainly been written in the perspective of one of the main characters such as Paul or Jessica, I believe Hebert’s choice to put the narration into the third person omniscient point of view fit Dune perfectly. The complexities that exist within the story can only be explained through an all knowing but objective voice. Dune is such a complex novel with many different layers that come together to comprise a story with many intricacies and elements that in order for a reader to understand it, everything must be mentioned and explained. Any type of first person narrator would have certainly limited the amount of detail the reader would have been given and the story would have lacked depth. Because the basis of the story is about competition between the Atreides and the Harkonnens, a subjective point of view would manipulate the reader’s perspective towards a certain side. The third person works so well in this situation because Herbert manages to merge it with stream of consciousness. Readers are still provided with all the solid facts and events that need to be mentioned, but they are also allowed to peek into the minds of prophets, political leaders and freaks of nature. People read stories because they want to experience something new, become something new just for a while, and Hebert gives readers the opportunity to do just that. However that being said, I personally prefer the first person narrative over the third person narrative. I often find that authors are unable to employ a third person quite as effectively as Hebert does in Dune. There is a clear lack of intimacy that exists between the narrator and the reader that stories so desperately need to establish in order to be amazing. The first person allows one to delve into the mind of any type of character, whether it is a character he can relate to or not. Novels allow readers to play pretend just for a while and a first person narrator helps to achieve that goal. It is also interesting to see how a character’s brain works and think. The ways a character recalls a story, describes his surroundings, and interacts with his environment are all uniquely intriguing. There exists a type of intimacy when a reader is almost somewhat intruding in a character’s thoughts and takes something away from it. It forms a connection that no other type of narrator can craft. I think that is why autobiographies are so appealing to me. Ira Wagler wrote a memoir called Growing Up Amish that documents his journey in and out of the Amish community over the span of a few decades. While not many people can say they have lived as an Amish person, the struggles that Wagler goes through are all human. When he describes his mental battle in trying to live a life of familiarity or modernity, readers can all relate to that sense of internal conflict he recounts. His story reminded me of the normal obstacles everyone faces, and allowed me to experience a different type of mindset for a few hundred pages. I felt each and every one of Wagler’s conflicting emotions despite not having experienced his experiences myself. And that is what first person provides for readers: a connection that rarely exists in reality.
Reply
Eric Tsai
8/11/2015 12:11:58 pm
I agree that the fact that Dune is written in the third person omniscient point of view fits the novel and story as a whole perfectly. However, I don't think that the story as a whole would've been told as effectively if the narrator was a single character telling the story through a first person point of view. The setting itself is huge and the plot of Dune as a whole is very complicated and has many elements that would not be as clear or would be lost completely if Dune was told in a first person point of view. Although possible, telling the story that is Dune in first person would prove rather difficult and not as effective as third person omniscient.
Reply
Noah Lee
8/26/2015 01:06:45 pm
I think Dune could have been written as first person just as effectively by taking up more chapters devoted to Paul figuring things out. It might have become much more complicated as a novel, the glossary at the end might need to be moved to another book, and the entire thing might need to have an extra thousand pages tacked on, but imagine how awesome a summer reading assignment that would have made!
Andrew Zheng
7/16/2015 07:37:01 pm
1. In deciding what narrative voice to use for Dune, I'd like to think that it was the ability of the third-person omniscient voice to more completely cover the entirety of the universe of Dune and it's characters that drove Herbert to select the omniscient voice over first person. An example of the third-person voice's superiority can be found in the style of Herbert's storytelling in which he is able to use an omniscient style to describe a multitude of events happening all across the Dune universe, such as the Atreides led raid on Harkonnen spice depots based in Giedi Prime happening roughly around the same time period as the actual skirmish at the Duke's Manor on Dune. This ability to provide the reader with information on the state of affairs not only on one world, but many, allows for a more complete and fruitful storytelling. In general, I personally enjoy stories or books that employ the use of third-person omniscient narration, over that of first person. Although it could be argued that the first person voice can be used to more articulately develop the traits and persona a character will possess, I still prefer the use of an overarching development for the "Big Picture", rather than just a narrow constricting window over a few characters.
Reply
Jonathan Wang
8/12/2015 09:31:35 am
Adding onto your preference for the third person perspective, I find that having this wider arcing view of the Dune world is possibly needed in any new fantasy world with brand new aspects and events that the reader would never possible know beforehand . If Dune was to be written from a single perspective, the reader would not only be restricted by a one-sided view, but the unknown universe of Dune would be compounded with the restriction possibly causing confusion among readers. But with third person, different cultures, societies, and objects within the Dune universe can be expanded on by the Author's commitment to the lore, and not just through a character that has to filter its own world.
Reply
Skyler Williams
8/23/2015 03:03:03 am
I agree in Andrew's second point that with a third-person point of view, the reader sees and knows all that happens in a story, and how beneficial this can be. However, I personally enjoy the shortsightedness that comes from first-person narration. It allows me, the reader, to see the narrators train of thought and enjoy the mistakes they made. It's like taking a trip through one person's experiences, and it makes the story seem more realistic and human.
Reply
Brittany Xiao
7/25/2015 01:41:25 pm
1.) Other narrative voices would not be able to cover the huge amount of content in Dune and would remove the rich interplay of contrasting opinions and awarenesses of its characters. For example, the dramatic irony created by the misinformed Gurney Halleck and Thufir Hawat believing that Jessica was the traitor would be gone since the narrative style of Dune is more unlimited compared to other styles in which the reader would not know their perspectives. Therefore, I believe the narrative voice that Herbert writes in suits the novel best.
Reply
Alvaro Iglesias
8/11/2015 04:02:02 am
I would have to agree with you that Dune wouldn't be the award-winning novel it is if not for the third person narration. Both the book and Dune universe within is simply too long to be told in first person as well as it is in third person. I do think it's possible for the story to be told by a single narrator (likely by Paul), but it just wouldn't be nearly as cultivating a story. Imagine if the story told of all the Great Houses and worlds! Now that would be impossible for a first person narritive.
Reply
Sarah Thomas
8/27/2015 08:53:20 am
I agree with you in that the third person omniscient point-of-view is best suited for this specific novel, and that is a great example to show it. If we were not able to witness the discussions between any of the main characters, and their thoughts behind each conversation, I feel like a lot of what the Herbert is trying to do would not work out as smoothly. His purpose is to include us in each of the characters views, and without the third-person omniscient perspective, that luxury would be stolen from us. Also, I never thought of first-person writing in that way. It has always made me fell more connected to the story. Do you mind giving me an example of a book that is more "informal" than intimate? I feel like the first-person allows the reader to relate to that one main character.
Reply
Jasmine Banks
8/6/2015 02:52:34 pm
Reply
Pooja Tunikipati
8/18/2015 09:32:26 am
I agree that Dune written in any other point of view would not be the same book. Such a long book requires the perspectives of other characters so that readers can understand the plot and not be missing chunks of it. The third person point if view helps us gain insight as to why the Harkonnens want Arrakis, and why Jessica gave birth to a son instead of a daughter, like she was told to. Details like these add to the story and are why Dune benefits from being written in third person.
Reply
Alvaro Iglesias
8/11/2015 05:21:49 am
1. A book of such a large scope such as Dune makes sense in a third person narration. The multiple points of view from Paul, Jessica, Hawat, and others takes the Dune universe in multiple perspectives, adding suspense and intrigue into every situation. It does seem as though a third person narration is best for this kind of book. However, I do think that this could be told in a first person narrative. I would venture to guess that it would be told in Paul's perspective, but it could be done in other points of view. This would obviously close the book to interpretation of all situations to a single character, which would likely hurt the book's reputation, as well as open interpretation of the readers to an already complicated storyline, which can be enjoyable or detrimental. Either way, Dune as told in a third person narrative seems best.
Reply
Kerry Furman
8/15/2015 05:13:22 am
I also enjoyed The Catcher in the Rye, because it explored the human condition of self control, coming to terms with oneself, realizing the difference between right and wrong. Exploring that through the eyes of Holden Caulfield was perfection.
Reply
Zach Hall
8/23/2015 03:49:20 am
I agree with Alvaro’s take on why the third person omniscient narrator is best in the vast expanse of Dune. The ability to enter many viewpoints of characters does add a more entertainment to each situation that occurs, and only being in one mind would limit that ability to truly connect with the emotions going on in each character in the scene. I see what Alvaro is saying in that Dune could be written from the first person if it really wanted to be, yet again a story this grand deserves the most powerful of narration techniques in order to make it less confusing on the audience. I think that first person narration is open to authors who want their audience to feel truly connected to their character and those that are important to the narrator.
Reply
Rithica Deepak
8/25/2015 02:46:55 pm
I also believe that the third person is best for the book Dune. This book has such a long plot line with vast amounts of characters. If the book was smaller I would like to have seen first person narrative. The third person narrative is crucial to keeping the book condensed.
Reply
Danielle Edmonds
8/12/2015 05:29:21 am
1. In my opinion, Dune would be a completely different novel if Herbert had written it in just first-person or just third-person. Part of what makes the novel so great is the balance between the two types of narrators. Without the omniscient narrator, the story would only be able to focus on one side of one conflict rather than a universe full of conflicts between the Great Houses and other societal groups. This would make Dune much more biased and much less complex and interesting, as there are so many events taking place at the same time in different locations throughout Dune. Likewise, without the sections of first-person narration, readers would not be able to connect as much to the characters or become as involved in the story. The use of two points-of-view also allows for an element of dramatic irony in the novel. For instance, readers are aware that Dr. Yueh is secretly working against the Atreides family early on, but characters like Lady Jessica and Paul do not learn this until later in the novel.
Reply
Selina John
8/25/2015 07:36:14 am
I would like to agree with you Danielle on your statement that first person narratives should be worth reading no matter what length or how difficult the story is. The famous bestseller book Twilight by Stephanie Meyer for example, writes in only Bella's point of view. Meyer could have written the book in the perspective of all vampires in the story, but instead chose to focus on Bella who was a human and was someone that most people could relate to. As we all know, the Twilight series are very big in size and length, but still successfully portrayed a first person narrative with its own unique plot.
Reply
Gabrielle Humphrey
8/26/2015 11:59:42 am
I think that you both have made a really valid point that many have failed to see. While third person omniscient does allow the reader a broad, objective view of the complex plot in Dune, first person allows for a level of intimacy and characterization other novels do not. Even if using first person may introduce difficulty to the reader, we have to consider that perhaps the increased emotional involvement of the reader would make up for this. Readers that are more invested in the story they are reading, see past any perceived difficulty because of the connections they make. As Foster says in How to Read Novels Like a Professor, arguably the most important aspect of novels is the "conspiracy" between the reader and writer in creating the story itself. So, if a reader is able to make closer connections with the main characters, they're more able to connect the experiences of the characters with their own, ultimately facilitating thematic analysis. In reading such a lengthy and complex piece of literature it's easy to prefer logic and objectivity- we simply want an interesting story to be told. Though as important as the development of the plot (which third person omniscient contributes to), are the characters and their development beyond the text. As a reader, I personally want my characters to have life- a personality of their own which I can feel emotionally connected to, or emotionally despise, that feels real. Emotional appeal is not something writers of complex novels should shy away from. This is not to say that Dune didn't effectively present it's characters, but that as a reader I may have felt more connected to Paul, or better understood the motives of the Baron if I could have experienced their lives and actions with them. Perhaps an effective alternative perspective would have been to go back and forth between the first person tellings of Paul, The Baron, and Jessica. In this way we would not have been stuck with one character's experiences for 800 pages, but still been able to see the plot develop from different angles, just at a more personal level.
Melinda Cloudy
8/12/2015 05:56:29 am
Dune could have been told by a different narrator, but it would have drastically changed the feel of the story and progression of events. Herbert’s third person narrator provides us with a look at the politics and schemes between the houses. He created an entire universe and first person narration would have majorly limited this. If the narration came from an individual, that puts a spotlight on that character. But Dune goes beyond the individual characters to the houses, empires, planets, and an entire universe. The third person narration allows for more emphasis of the book and actions on a planetary scale rather than revolving around a person. Third person is necessary to flesh out the large ideas of the book and do justice to the sheer size and intricacies that the universe in the novel deserves.
Reply
Amy Chen
8/12/2015 01:31:14 pm
As I was typing my post below, I definitely felt like this question applies to the The Great Gatsby. The story of The Great Gatsby is focused on a man named Jay Gatsby, yet told by a completely different narrator, Nick Carraway. As I said below, I feel like Fitzgerald uses Nick as a first person narrator for the story because it emphasizes his objective of the book - to reveal the materialistic mindsets of people in America before the Depression. Gatsby, the protaganist, would not have made an ideal narrator for the book because he was also caught up in the race for wealth and mundane possessions himself. Also, it would have been impossible for him to tell his story after all the events of that summer because, well, he ends up dead at the end of the book. Nick makes for the chosen narrator of The Great Gatsby because everything is tied to the plot and background; in the novel, this story is written during Nick's therapy for alcoholism and is ultimately an account of remembrance for his good friend Gatsby.
Reply
Suhrin Whang
8/22/2015 04:10:21 pm
I completely agree with Amy that The Great Gatsby is a phenomenal example of the secondary character narrator- which totally would have been my first answer. Sherlock Holmes would be an extraordinary example in which a secondary character narrator is chosen as well. The story is told in the eyes of Dr. John Watson, kind-hearted and loyal assistant of the detective. The author, Arthur Conan Doyle, utilized the second character narrator because it added more credibility to Holmes’ intelligence and brilliance at solving mysteries. It couldn't be told in Holmes perspective because he could not simply compliment himself because that would come out conceited; however, when the assistant Dr. Watson compliments the detectives astonishing solving skills, it can be taken more accountable. Often times Holmes knows the answer to the mystery so using first person would certainly give away too much information- taking out all the suspense we seek in mysteries. Thus, this mystery truly embraces the second person narration to allow credible remarks and keep the suspense alive.
Reply
Farah Hashmi
8/27/2015 12:27:35 pm
Well, there goes my Great Gatsby contribution haha
Reply
Amy Chen
8/12/2015 01:16:33 pm
1. Herbert chose to write Dune with a third person omniscient point of view to expand the scope of the entire story; his inclusion of little blurbs of individual, first person thought in between paragraphs of third person narration make the novel complex yet still engaging. In light of previous comments, I have to agree with the idea that Dune would not be the same and would not have the same impact that it does if it were to have a first person narration. If the story were told from a singular point of view, such as Paul, the reader would be missing out on so much information and background that can only be revealed through Herbert's use of third person narration along with chapters that are sectioned off in accordance to a specific person's mind and thoughts. Dune is such an intricate story with a lot going on and the third person point of view used in the book is completely necessary for the reader's understanding of the universe as a whole, which is divided into planets, which are divided amongst houses, which are made up of generations of families. In terms of plot, the omniscient narration allows the reader to understand everything happening, from the scheming of the Baron Harkonnen on planet Arrakis to the anxiousness of Duke Leto on planet Caladan and the confusion of Paul in his room, all occuring at the same time. Readers have this sort of bird's eye view over all of the story through the use of the third person account, with the ability to zoom in and more carefully see the inner thoughts of individuals that Herbert incorporates in the book through italicized sentences.
Reply
Brandon Pham
8/25/2015 03:32:18 pm
Though I agree that Dune would not be the same if written in first person, but is a complete view of everything going on at all times really necessary for the reader to understand the story? You used the example that if Dune was written from Paul's perspective, the reader would be missing out so much information, but is that really true? At the end of Dune, Paul has a near if not complete understanding of the events that have passed. Why must the reader know everything right away? Take for example knowing Dr. Yueh was the traitor. Imagine wondering who the traitor is as Paul and questioning the loyalty of the men in the House of Arteides. Could my father be mistaken? Could my mother really be the traitor? This hiding of information heightens the intensity and suspense of a situation, a trait completely absent from a third person omniscient narrator.
Reply
Maggie Cheung
8/14/2015 04:06:34 am
The best point of view that Herbert could have chosen for Dune is the third-person omniscient narrator perspective, which is the viewpoint from which he wrote the book in. Though the story does mainly follow Paul's story as he grows and fulfills his destiny that he seemingly set for himself through the actions he took, we do see the thoughts and opinions of other characters in different situations. For example, when the Lady Jessica and Paul are trying to survive in the desert and wait for the Fremen to find them, we can not only see what Paul is going through, but what Jessica is thinking and her emotions and concern for her son. If the book was told from only a first person's point of view, we would be missing a large portion of the development that comes through being able to see what the other characters' responses and emotions are. With such a large scope and so many characters and sides involved in this novel, a first-person perspective might show only the opinions of one side, which would have been effective if that was the kind of novel Herbert was going for. The fact that multiple people met their demise in the book would also be an issue if the story was told in first person. However, I prefer the third-person omniscient in this particular novel because we are able to see what multiple characters feel and think throughout the novel.
Reply
Melinda Cloudy
8/18/2015 12:14:52 am
One character who would have been a solid choice for narrator is is Lady Jessica. Her perspective would drastically change the novel. Instead of seeing how Paul feels while he is changing throughout the course of the book, we would witness it through his mother's eyes. The novel would probably have a stronger tone of concern because mothers always worry about their kids. It would also drastically limit the information we are given about the Baron and Feyd. However, the book would still be just as detailed because Lady Jessica is still extremely observant and could probably draw a lot of conclusions about what is going on in other characters' heads.
Reply
Abigail Cloudy
8/23/2015 10:11:52 am
One character that would be interesting to narrate the story would be Alia. While she was not even born yet for a large amount of the story, she does gain years of knowledge and insight from being inside of her mother during the ceremony. Alia has wisdom beyond her years and knowledge about others that would make her a very interesting narrator who could tell the reader a lot about the bene gesserits. Her knowledge of Paul and her bene gesserit knowledge would make her a very informative narrator who would bring a very different perspective to the story.
Reply
Kasey Zhang
8/23/2015 01:08:45 pm
I think Dune could have best been told from Lady Jessica's point of view (if excluding Paul) since she has made many important decisions as a mother and a concubine in the story. Also, she has been brought up through the strict teachings of the Reverend Mother, and so in terms of motivations and opinions, everything would be strongly filtered by the thoughts of the Bene Gesserits and follow a more religious outline. Her decision to become a Reverend Mother herself later on is also an important change for her, and can overall change the ways in how the story is told since she is now becoming something that will further influence the decisions of many.
Reply
Sheila Patel
8/25/2015 02:16:41 pm
I think it would be interesting if Dune was written from the Baron Harkonnen’s point of view. His bias would be almost comical. The Baron’s point of view would definitely tell us what his actual motives were in wanting to destroy the House Atreides. It would be nice to see how the Baron contorted Duke Leto’s nobility and Paul’s “goodness” to be something he could hate with such a passion. The Baron’s point of view would be a lot more aggressive at the beginning and almost fidgety at the end when he realizes his attempt to steal Arrakis is failing. It would also be interesting to see his death scene; I wonder what he acted like when he was administered the Gom Jabbar by Alia.
Reply
Arianna Carr
8/14/2015 05:24:14 am
Frank Herbert integrates two distinct but equally valuable narration styles in Dune through the usage of third person omniscient and first person. This variety allows for a broad and in-depth indulgence into the planet of Arrakis and the universe that surrounds it. Integrating the feelings, opinions, and perspectives of the main characters constructs a holistic depiction of the novel in such a way that goes beyond the limits of just one character or even an all-knowing third-person omniscient narrator. Through the scope of solely one character, the scenarios that impact everyone from the Fremens to the emperor would be described in a manner that shows the effects on only that character because it is beyond a character’s ability to be able to narrate the feelings of others; unless, of course that one person happens to be a third-person omniscient narrator. However, the fault in relying mainly on a third person omniscient narrator is the loss of sincerity and genuine feelings from the characters themselves. This is the equivalent of asking someone if they are “alright”, and someone else answers for them; no matter how accurate the answerer may be, you still want to hear directly from the person you asked or else you may be left with a sense of doubt in the reliability and the honesty in the information given. Both first person and third person omniscient have weaknesses, but combined, they produce a strong and well-developed story.
Reply
Kerry Furman
8/15/2015 05:04:52 am
I believe that the third person omniscient in Dune was just right for the story because, as you said, such a intricate and detailed story couldn't be explored through just one pair of eyes. Throughout the book we periodically switch view points, from Paul, to the Harkonnen's, etc. With this, we also get to take a miniature tour of what life is like of different planets. Since the beginning of the book began with Paul Atreides of Calladan, we saw his home planet (which can also help us with understanding how this character developed). Paul was gentle but also strong and brave, and cared for his family to the point where he would sacrifice himself for them. Since the Sardaukar came from Salusa Secundus, which had quite an unfriendly environment (and are bred for fighting), they are terribly vicious. I could go on and on about how initial setting affects a character, but you probably get the point. It helps us understand why they do the things they do, and having this third person point of view makes it a bit easier.
Reply
Caitlyn Nguyen
8/17/2015 06:26:26 am
I think that Frank Herbert's decision to write Dune from the third person omniscient point of view was the best choice. In my opinion, there are too many events in the book that need to be covered, and one person would not be able to witness all of them.
Reply
Hisham Iqbal
8/17/2015 04:55:22 pm
1. Frank Herbert's use of the third person omniscient narrator was an excellant choice for Dune. This novel has so many varying storylines that intertwine causing a first person viewpoint to completely ignore the different experiences occurring simultaneously. Towards the end of book 1, the simultaneous story of Duke Leto biting the poisonous tooth and Paul and Jessica escaping would not have been told as descriptively as it was. On the other hand, Herbert does include instances of first person narration when the characters' inner thoughts are told to the reader. This allows for a more intimate look at the character's emotions throughout the novel. This use of majority third person with frequent uses of first person narration is essential to the development and success of the novel.
Reply
Pooja Tunikipati
8/18/2015 09:23:20 am
While I enjoy reading first person point of view books that leave things to the imagination and sometimes give quite big surprises, I feel that the third person omniscient point of view was the right choice for Dune. Not only is the novel too large for one person to be narrating it, there wouldn't nearly be as much tension or suspense if the readers did not know about the Harkonnens plot. Readers would also have lost the amazing insight of the other characters that only added to the depth of the novel. Firsthand accounts from other characters helped make the book much more interesting and riveting.
Reply
Carter Heard
8/19/2015 02:54:51 am
Dune being written in third person is key to the storyline and events that occur in the novel. With multiple storylines going on at the same time but in different places it would be difficult to narrate the book in fist person. By implementing third person Herbert is able to delve into the minds of multiple characters and doing this establishes greater emotional connections between characters and also allows for greater understanding of the setting and culture which takes place in the book. An example of this is when the duke dies and Hubert constantly uses dramatic irony about who really betrayed the House Atreides. Also at this point in the book multiple characters are split up and two stories are happening at the same time with the Baron working on taking over Arrakis and Paul and his Mother working to survive and eventually meeting the Fremen. As a result of this and the vast number of character and settings in the book I prefer third person omniscient to first person because it allows for a broader scope on the story and allows for better storytelling. The great amount of tension in the book can be contributed to the way Hubert uses third person omniscient.
Reply
Eric Tsai
8/20/2015 05:46:17 am
I think that it is only appropriate that Dune have a third person omniscient narrative point of view. The scope of the story of Dune is simply too large for a first person point of view narrator to tell the same story with as much depth. If Dune did have a first person point of view narrator, the story might be significantly longer or significantly less detailed or probably be missing too many parts and not make sense at all. The third person omniscient point of view allows Herbert to tell a much more complex story more effectively.
Reply
Seamus Gildea
8/20/2015 07:14:24 am
1. Due to the complexity and spread of this novel, it would be an injustice to have a first person perspective tell the story. With so many subplots and plans within plans, the reader would be left confused trying to tie together pieces of the story ever other page. It is also necessary for the reader to know what is happening on different planets at the same time, making the omniscient narrator ideal for this story. I mean the story could have been written through the eyes of Paul or Jessica, but it would have caused a lot of head scratching for the reader and it would have taken away from the impressive proportion of the novel's setting.
Reply
Suhrin Whang
8/22/2015 03:50:04 pm
1. Dunes deliberately embrace the third-person omniscient flawlessly. In fact, to be written in any other narrative perspective then it is now would appall me. Considering the fact that there are a bunch of characters to remember and extensive information about each, this narrative allows all viewpoints and individual stories to be taken in account. Since Baron and Duke Leto/Paul are head of the household, most other characters treat them outwardly with the kindest respect; however, their thoughts beg to differ at times. This allows readers to know the character's true thoughts, memories and persona overall. Also, readers cannot also disregard that they get access to both the protagonist and antagonist's side of the story. Eventually, readers know both side of the story, anticipating how the results will end up- leaving the air ominous and full of suspense. Will Paul be able to save House Atreides even if Baron's plan turns out successful? Or will Baron sooner realize that Paul and Jessica were not dead before it's too late? By showing a bigger scope of the novel with this narrative, readers can know everyone's perspective and inner thoughts which works perfectly for Dunes.
Reply
Skyler Williams
8/23/2015 03:14:26 am
I think that Frank Herbert was accurate in writing with the narration style he did. The third-person view of the story seems to me the only logical option for a story of this massive size. While I often enjoy and sometimes prefer first-person narration, I would not have Dune written any other way.
Reply
Zach Hall
8/23/2015 03:48:27 am
The use of the third person omniscient narrator in Dune ties in perfectly with Foster’s explanation of how the longest of novels tend to be narrated in the third person omniscient. This is because Herbert cannot hide anything from the reader if the narrator can know the thoughts and motives of everyone involved in the story, and if he does try to hide things from the reader for plot purposes, the narration is not truly in the third person omniscient. With a novel with such a grand concept and expanse as that of Dune, it only makes sense that Herbert uses the most powerful narration technique that is at his disposal. This also helps to expand the novel, as the reader is not forced to only know about the happenings of those such as Paul on Arrakis, but also around the universe with people such as the Harkonnens. I do not think this novel could have been written from any other perspective because if we only knew the happenings of one or two characters throughout the novel it would be hard to keep track and there would be too many things going on that the reader is not aware of. A great example of first person narration would be Nick Carroway from The Great Gatsby, as he is able to know information about both the Buchanans, because he is Daisy’s cousin and Tom’s college friend, as well as Jay because they become friends by being neighbors. This provides us with a plateau where we know the viewpoints of most of the characters throughout the book strictly through Nick’s observation. Although Nick is not necessarily the main protagonist in the novel, he is the only one that would truly be able to narrate the story because if someone such as Jay or Tom were to narrate the novel it would be filled with bias and assumptions about the people living across the bay rather than the facts that Nick knows. I also believe that first person narration is best used in coming of age stories, as Foster pointed out. This way we can see the transformation of a young character, such as Huck Finn, into a man.
Reply
Abigail Cloudy
8/23/2015 05:06:12 am
1. If Dune were to be told by a different narrator, the novel would lose so much of its depth. Starting in the second chapter the reader learns of the Baron’s plot to use Yueh to murder the duke. That information is only available to the reader through the third person narration, and knowing that information adds so much tension and suspense while reading. In addition, the narrator is able to illustrate the transformation that Paul goes through as the story progresses that Paul would not be able to describe if he were the narrator.
Reply
Marina Zafiris
8/23/2015 09:53:14 am
Dune is a renowned sci-fi novel, praised for its close attention to recreating factual events. The benefits of having an omniscient third person narrator is to allow the novel to be told objectively as possible. Herbert provided the reader with a broader view of the series of events, and provide the cause and effect impacts of Paul and his actions. The third person added complexity to the plot, but did not lack the tune in to emotions and thought that first person narrator would have provided.
Reply
Thomas Ledford
8/23/2015 10:52:42 am
Dune was written in omniscient third person because it was, by far, the best choice for a novel as complicated as it is. With many different characters all over the Dune universe at different times, the only way that the reader would be able to understand everything that took place in the novel is to have a narrator that overlooks absolutely everything. All of the novels that I like are written in omniscient third person. Including, the entire Lord of the Ring saga and The Hobbit saga and Dune. While I believe that omniscient third person is the best route to go as far as a narrator, there are some cases in which first person is just the right choice. Consider the case of The Hunger Games novels, those novels are some of the best that I have ever read, but not my favorite. However, I cannot imagine those novels being told by anybody other than Katniss Everdeen. Also, I believe that in The Huger Game, first person was not “overly-complicated” and ended up just making the novel more intriguing. However, overall I believe that the best route to go in order to give the reader a better understanding of everything that is taking place in the novel, the novelist needs to employ omniscient third person.
Reply
Vibhav Joopelli
8/25/2015 10:39:00 am
Thomas,
Reply
Elaine Messiha
8/23/2015 12:12:19 pm
I think Herbert made an incredible decision when he decided to write the entire novel in third person omniscient. A "goldllike" vision of the plot really helped me visualize the story as it went on. It wasn't limited to the point of view of just one character and although many characters were able to speak in first person throughout the novel, it didn't interfere with how the story was told. Also third person omniscient left us room to mentally develop our own outtake on the decisions made by the characters in Dune. I could think of my own solution before the voices and ideas of the other characters took over the situation. I really enjoyed the way Frank Herbert wrote the novel, it was written like nothing I'd ever seen before and I felt it did justice to the novel. But I also have huge respect for the novels written in first-person. One that comes to mind is The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, by Mark Twain. This novel couldn't have been written any other way because no one could tell Huck's story better than himself. He was able to share his perspective and his thoughts with the audience, something third-person lacks in. Both styles are amazing and which one to use is completely up to you, but it's all about which one serves respect to the story you are trying to tell.
Reply
Kasey Zhang
8/23/2015 01:01:50 pm
Dune required explanations for many of its foreign and alien like characteristics such as the Bene Gesserit teachings and the foundations of what the planet revolves around. Due to the complex composite of the story itself, the book definitely would not work as well with a different narrative voice. I believe that it is best that Herbert used the third-person omniscient narrator scope to tell the story because it helped to analyze the story from the thoughts of many characters’ personal thoughts and intentions. We are given an intricate and elaborate understanding of each major character, which helps to ease the multiplex dimensions of this entirely new planet. I think that this scope helped made the story more interesting, as things moved faster and the readers were able to completely understand what was happening. Instead of guessing who the traitor was, the readers were able to know exactly who to suspect from the thoughts of Yueh and the Baron. This allowed for a deeper understanding of Yueh’s true motives for his renegade behaviors and greater irony for when the other characters were busy suspecting the wrong person.
Reply
Sakshi Shah
8/23/2015 01:25:31 pm
I don’t think this novel could be composed with any other narrative voice than the one chosen by Herbert for two reasons. One there are scenes in this novel which jump from one setting to another. For example, one part talks about Paul and Jessica being in the dessert all alone, while the other goes back to show what’s happening at the House of Atreides. Another reason why Herbert’s choice was the best for the novel was because the narrative voice was mostly unbiased throughout the book. I felt like I could read the book without fearing my judgment of the events occurring. Personally I prefer the third-person omniscient narrator because it makes me feel like someone is telling me a story, but that’s just me. In addition the third-person omniscient narrator always knows what “everyone is doing and thinking” which makes it better than just plain first-person narrative in which the narrator is guessing other characters thoughts (How to Read Novels Like a Professor 46). I find the reliable-or-unreliable guessing game overly-complicated because I am never too sure of whether my mind is following the right track or I’m lost in a maze. One of the books that I read this summer that benefited greatly from first-person narration was Fault in Our Stars. Having Hazel as the voice of the book, it was clear how the author wanted us to feel throughout the book. Hazels point of view seems somewhat biases during the scene in Amsterdam but believable. Therefore, I believe this book deserved its first person narration because this was Hazel’s story, and no one could do it justice like Hazel herself could.
Reply
Chandni Patel
8/23/2015 02:05:28 pm
I believe the third person omniscient was a perfect fit for the novel Dune. With the large size of the novel, it would not be as interesting and suspenseful with only one person narrating it. Herbert uses third person omniscient to allow the reader to receive multiple points of view to understand the reasoning of a vast array of characters. Knowing the thoughts and actions of many characters, the plot of the story is able to expand. For instance, the reader is able to know what is happening in different planets.
Reply
Selina John
8/25/2015 07:22:24 am
To answer your question, there is no certain answer to whether if Paul would have succeeded in defeating Fenring in battle. Let's say they did have a one-on-one battle. If one were to use context clues, we can assume that Paul would still have won because he has the power to see the future. In fact, Paul already knew that it was his fate to become the emperor of the universe alongside with the upcoming jihad which warned him. The way how the end of the book was written was done on purpose to keep the readers hanging with no solid conclusion and therefore hinting in another sequel for the story. So, maybe we will find out in the next book if Paul survives through the struggles as emperor and hopefully prevents the jihad from happening.
Reply
Caitlyn
8/24/2015 07:20:32 am
Herbert could have written from the point of view of any character he wanted to, but he chose not to for a reason. Dune's scope of ideas would be severely hindered if Herbert left the story up to only one character. In a story where complex relationships are explored, the invasion of each character's lives is necessary.
Reply
Caitlyn Wingerson
8/24/2015 07:22:56 am
by the way, this is Caitlyn Wingerson ^^^^^^^^^
Reply
Brandon Pham
8/24/2015 02:11:39 pm
I feel like Frank Herbert’s Dune could have been written in first-person just as well as it is in third person omniscient, if not better. A third person omniscient narrator is all-knowing, never hiding any information presented, but that is the problem. As a reader, I get to know everything. I knew the Harkonnen’s approach on how to destroy the House of Atreides. I knew Dr. Yueh was the traitor amongst the House. I knew that only Paul and Duke Leto knew that Jessica was not the traitor. As I begin to imagine how all this information would have been revealed through say Paul’s perspective, possibilities begin to unfold. I want to feel Paul’s grief when he learns his father is willing to go straight into a Harkonnen trap and later learning of his death. I want to see Paul’s initial reaction when witnessing Jamis’s rage and being challenged to a battle to the death. I want to view Paul’s mélange induced trance. The third person omniscient view does provide moments of insight into Paul’s mind, but it is often interrupted by the transition to another character’s mind. Take for example Paul’s battle with Jamis. In this section, there was constant transition between Jessica’s point of view and Paul’s point of view. I felt like some of the intensity of the situation was lost in the transition. If this event was viewed from Paul’s point of view, I would have been able to observe Jamis’s techniques through a well-trained, analytical standpoint rather having it pre-analyzed, then relayed to me through the narrator. Seeing Jessica’s view on the battle is nice to, but it would have been better if I saw Jessica’s reaction through Paul, hearing her outbursts and viewing the expression on her face. The fact that first person limits the amount of information to the reader allows more opportunities for suspense. I personally enjoy being initially in the dark and slowly picking up the clues. With that, I’d say I would have preferred a first person central point of view of Dune along with its “reliable-or-unreliable game”.
Reply
Nikki Gandhi
8/26/2015 12:51:25 pm
I had never thought about how things could be lost in translation. You're very correct and now I am rethinking that possibly Dune COULD have been written in first person. We didnt really get to KNOW Paul. Not to the extent we could had this book been written in first person. I as well want to know how Paul was feeling in certain moments of the book. Very rarely did he show emotion and I only thought that was a side effect of him being a mentat. The whole book feels very analytical and somewhat at a loss of tension. I felt as if I could predict what would happen next. In the end however, a book as big as Dune could not have been only 800 pages in first person view. Herberts main goal was to show us everyone's thoughts and opinions and to give them their own "screentime." If we only saw Pauls view, there would be many things we would be unaware about and the entirety of the book would seem too fake as Paul would have to be in the places that things occur. How can one man be in so many places at once? I guess Herbert would have to give him teleportation.
Reply
Selina John
8/25/2015 07:06:12 am
I believe third person omniscient was appropriate for Dune in particular because it allowed Herbert to give the readers an insight into the minds of each main character, so that they could develop certain connections between internal feelings of the characters and events that takes place in the novel. Herbert definitely many reasons for writing this way, and all writers should write the way they think would best fit in their stories. If the author did not write in third person omniscient and only wrote in Paul’s point of view, the way how the story is read would feel completely different from the original. We would not know the feelings of Paul’s mother, Jessica, when she trained her son fighting tactics and powers, or when Duke Leto died after he was captured by the Harkonnens. The book would entirely give an entirely whole different message and would not be that as exciting as it is.
Reply
Konan Mirza
8/25/2015 09:28:20 am
In my opinion the point of view in Dune was perfect. The point of view in Dune proves to be instrumental in the formation of the plot and characterization of both the protagonist and the antagonist. The narrator of the novel is seemingly third person omniscient and allows the reader to see inside the minds of the characters. In addition it allows the reader to see and comprehend crucial background knowledge about Dune as well as other aspects of this universe that seems so alien to us. Often times, especially for some of the more main characters like Lady Jessica and Paul, the narration would switch to first person which would allow the reader to see motivations of the characters as well as their feelings. Furthermore, another benefit of third person omniscient is the ability to allow the reader to trust you. Trust is integral when reading any book and is established early on in Dune. The narrator in Dune tells everything from an objective point of view, guaranteeing reliable and solid information. In general, however, I like the first person point of view. This is essentially because I feel a close connection to that character and it makes me more attached to the book. The most recent book I read in first person was The Great Gatsby. The first person point of view is what drew me in. It made me feel connected to Jay Gatsby and was in my opinion a masterpiece. All in all I thought the third person point of view was perfect for Dune and couldn’t have been done better with a first person point of view. Nevertheless, most if the books I like tend to be first person.
Reply
Donald Trump
8/25/2015 09:46:46 am
For you seniors turning 18 in the following year, I want all of you to come to the ballot and vote for me.
Reply
Vibhav Joopelli
8/25/2015 10:32:09 am
I think it would be nearly impossible for Herbert to use anything other than a third-person omniscient narrator and still tell an effective, detailed, and fulfilling story. With a plot line as complex as the one that Herbert employs, a single sided view of what’s going on from what other simply would not suffice to describe everything that happens. Additionally anything other than a third person omniscient narrator would not be able to look into the minds of the characters and see what they are thinking and what their true desires are. This effect is what truly makes Dune unique and in a league of its own, and with a 1st person narrator, that would not be possible.
Reply
Pranidhi Dadhaniya
8/25/2015 01:07:13 pm
I agree with you completely that The Hunger Games significantly benefits from the first-person narrative voice. The vicious and inhumane world of Panem has immensely far-reaching impacts on the lives of the citizens of the districts. I believe that the utilization of first-person provides us with a deep look at the struggles faced by these abused citizens through the eyes of Katniss. Even though this is a highly action-packed novel, there are many emotional aspects of it because of the devastating trauma incurred by Katniss after the Games and the relationship she develops with both Peeta and Gale. Most importantly, we truly feel the significance of the sacrifices Katniss makes for her family and the pain she feels from having to kill others in order to survive.
Reply
Pranidhi Dadhaniya
8/25/2015 12:39:18 pm
I believe that the third-person omniscient narrative voice is ideal for Dune. The highly complex plot and thematic elements that Herbert conveys in this novel were significantly benefited by the use of third-person omniscience. The omniscient element of this novel provided readers with a variety of perspectives, which gave the conflicts of the novel, such as the rivalry between the Harkonnens and Atreides, a significant amount of dimension and depth. Moreover, it is only through third-person omniscience that we are able to develop a connection with the plethora of characters in this novel. This allows for greater development of the characters because we are able to see the true motives and internal desires of each of the characters.
Reply
Rithica Deepak
8/25/2015 01:40:43 pm
I believe that the most third person narratives go into the character's brains to display their thought processes but they leave a huge space between what is happening on the outside and what the characters are thinking. For example if a character's father is dying, rather than knowing exactly what the character is thinking, the reader has to do the work to try and identify with what the character is sensing in that moment based on the character's actions. I personally believe that the first person narrative is the best way to narrate a book. The genuinely captivating first person narrators are the ones where a distinctive character is giving their take on something that is happening. By listening to what they characters have to say we truly get a sense of what the character wants. With the personal touch of the character we understand the true meaning behind the novel. But however for Dune I think that the third person omniscient was best because of the vast amount of characters. I think that the book would have been even longer if it was first person. One of the book with first person narrative that I have read before was To Kill a Mockingbird. This first-person narrator of this book is Scout Finch, who is five when the story begins and eight when it ends. With the first person narrative, I understood more about Scout’s life and what she truly felt about certain situations. The first person narrative we can empathize with the character in a better way.
Reply
Sheila Patel
8/25/2015 02:06:29 pm
In my opinion, the third person omniscient point of view was the best for Dune. Without it, we wouldn’t get so much detail on the thoughts of different characters, which were important for understanding their motives and hidden loyalties. Third person limited would have also been effective at conveying the story as the narrator would not be biased, but we still would not see the important thoughts of the other characters. It would not be enough to over all of the details that make Dune an interesting novel.
Reply
Viren Joopelli
8/25/2015 04:23:17 pm
I personally believe that Frank Herbert made an excellent choice by choosing to write Dune in the third person omniscient point of view. By allowing us to get a glimpse into the mind of all characters, we can understand what is happening with different people, and why they are acting how they are. Furthermore, because the characters are not all at the same place at the same time, a third person view is necessary for understanding what is happening with each of the characters. For example, if the story was written in first person from Paul’s perspective, although we may get a better idea of his thought process and how his prescience affects his decision making, we would not be able to witness key events such as the death of Piter and Leto from the poison gas. With the third person omniscient point of view, Herbert allows us to see both.
Reply
Ayo Shonowo
8/26/2015 05:20:31 am
Frank Herbert could have easily written the book solely fron Paul's perspective. This however would take away from the overall complexity of the novel. Herbert created an entire universe in Dune, with its own unique languages, religion, and interesting planets. By only representing Paul's thoughts as a 15 year old, the story would lose most of its wonder. Many aspects would be left unexplored, and readers would lose the wonder of learning about a new world. Giving small insight into each of the characters' minds is much more effective than focusing the story on only one mind and way of reasoning.
Reply
Ayo Shonowo
8/26/2015 05:27:03 am
Ellen Hopkins is an author who capitalizes on first-person narrators when telling stories. In many of her books for teenagers like Tricks, Crank, and Impulse, she tells the story through multiple characters, each giving their own account of what happens to them in the story. With this, the reader is able to connect on a personal level with more than just one main character.
Reply
Michael Liu
8/26/2015 07:26:43 am
Frank Herbert describes the world Dune in intricate detail. There is a complex web of politics, culture, and history between each and every House, organization, species, and planet. In order for readers to sufficiently understand how the system functions, we need to be supplied with an extensive amount of material. This is where third-person omniscient comes into play. Now with a god-like view of the universe of Dune, we can look at anywhere and anything at anytime with no restraints on our knowledge. If we viewed the story in a first-person narrative, such as through the eyes of Paul or Jessica, we would be stuck guessing at what is happening in the background. We wouldn’t know that Baron Harkonnen was planning to plot a clever scheme using Dr. Yueh as a chess piece to take down the House of Atreides. We wouldn’t know what happened to Hawat or Leto or Dr. Kynes. We wouldn’t learn from the Kyne’s discussion with Jessica about the environment and the plans of Lady Ferning and the Emperor. The most that we would learn from these isolated situations in a first person narrative would be at the end of novel during a great reveal. One character would come into contact with our narrator and “spill the beans” of what truly occurred. Still, like an historian examining a piece of art, we would be left with many questions unanswered: why did this happen, what were the motives, and how the scene came to be. Even in the third-person narrative, readers still accumulate a vast amount of questions. Taking out even more information and adding to the unknown would simply leave the reader perplexed. In addition, due to bias and personality, we would see a different truth of the story. For example, Paul could make himself seem more like a hero and Jessica might change the focus to orbit around her concerns for Paul and the goals of the Bene Gesserit. As a result, the novel would digress more around their personal lives rather than the important themes that Herbert sought to define.
Reply
Arun Sabapathy
8/26/2015 12:24:56 pm
Dune has proved to be a saturated reading, full of twists and turns serving to make such a dynamic novel. The intricacy of the novel holds many different and at times contrasting events that serve to the massive storyline. A single perspective would not do justice to serve this fantastic storyline. We see the migration of perspectives and narration to serve as tools to dissect the plot, as it is vital to understand how everything links together, as stated in HTRNLAP when Foster references the ability to hear a novel, rather than simply visually reading it. In so, I feel as Herbert could not have told the story from a single perspective for two reasons. One, the numerous first-person narrations of Paul well after he receives the full power of the Kwitz Haderach serve as insight into Paul's visions which drastically affect the course of the novel. However, it is physically and mentally impossible for Paul to be able to narrate the entirety of the story, including the gimmicks and surprises, as it would take away from the limitations that a character should have. Anyway, Paul is gifted with the strongest role and title in Dune, and even he could not narrate completely what all was occurring in his mind, much less the rest of the story. Secondly, the ability of Herbert to portray alternate viewpoints gives Dune its numerous excerpts of foreshadowing. Knowing the Reverend Mother's understanding of the Duke's soon-to-come end coupled with the contrasting exposure to Dr. Yueh's scheming mind provides literary devices and style that is unique to Herbert and also critically acclaimed.
Reply
Nikki Gandhi
8/26/2015 12:26:08 pm
Nope. Nope. Even Foster says it, large 800 page books just cant have a first person view. The limits that first person narratives give are not good for a story with such sprawling and diverse characters with their own thoughts. Plus, its obvious there are things Herbert wants us to know, for example that Kynes is the traitor or that the Baron absolutely hates everyone. Plus, all the details of Dune make it impossible to have in in first person, the book would have to be at least 1000 pages. Although this type of view does make it more confusing for the reader to keep up with who is thinking what and who is talking when, it also allows the reader easy access to information. Should this have been in first person, we would have to wait for Paul to realize things or for him to be in a certain place to experience something. However, I personally, perfer the first person narrative for most books (that are not Dune). This is because of how intimate it feels to read a book in first person. It allows me to experience what the protagonist is feeling in all its glory. Plus, it makes things mysterious this way. In Gone Girl, we see that we hear both sides, the husband and the wife. This way, we dont know things and are always on an edge. The unreliable guessing game is fun, its what makes up a psychological thriller and creates a great plot twist ending. Spoilers, how were we to know his wife wasnt really dead. Had it been in third person omniscient, the first thing we'd know is that Amy was alive and in hiding and perhaps a horrid person. Tension is a wonderful, magical thing. For books like Dune however? A sci fi action with words like crysknife and the weirding way, we need a third person view to really understand what the heck is going on. Although I must admit, I was hoping to not find out who the traitor was so that the tension would build instead of everything being so, well, anticlimactic.
Reply
Quyn Westfall
8/27/2015 09:10:10 am
I think that a first person could be successful in a sci-fi novel, albeit one significantly shorter than dune, if it follows a child as they grow up. This way we learn what everything is just as fast as they do, and we still get the suspense and connection that comes with a third-person. No examples of a novel come to mind, but I think it would be incredibly interesting to read a novel that is set up in that way.
Reply
Noah Lee
8/26/2015 12:56:42 pm
I think an interesting point in terms of narrators is that whether that narrator happens to be Paul, Jessica, or even the Baron depends upon the demands of the plot. Because Paul is indeed the main protagonist, we are offered his perspective both first and last. However, the demands of the plot become unique in Dune. Paul gradually becomes more and more adept at knowing other people's intentions and thoughts, reaching several tiers in this talent throughout the novel. As we, the readers, hit each tier, we are opened to more and more thoughts and intentions of other characters in the story while still remaining in Paul's point of view. As the need to shift point of view becomes less demanding from the plot, the reader becomes the main drives for these shifts at the end of the novel. The audience has no time to know Paul's every thought, as he is clearly beyond a normal person's reckonings by the end of the novel. Instead, Frank Herbert chose to switch the perspective at increasingly critical points by the end of the novel in order to maintain audience interest and keep an enjoyable book. When Paul faces off in his test to ride a Maker, the worms of Arrakis, many a reader could already guess the outcome; Paul's victory and passing of the test. But right before that moment of triumph, the reader is brought to the perspective of Jessica, Paul's mother, and another issue becomes apparent. A power struggle awaits Paul if he should be successful, and so the reader continues on with Paul's perspective knowing the next pages of the novel will contain more than inevitable victory, but something new, unexpected, exciting. Instead of focusing attention on the current problems or worries of a single narrator, Dune switches occasionally to keep a dynamic story in an otherwise straightforward plot line. Also related to both plot and narrator are the pace of the novel. As Paul gains omnipotence, the events of the story unfold at a faster pace- not relative to the reader, but in relation to the setting's night and day. Believable events like amassing an army or preparing for war become acceptable without extraneous amounts of detail, only a casual mention in the novel. Because of Paul's increased perception and point of view, the amount of detail the reader receives remains relatively constant, allowing for a far more relaxed and well-paced novel.
Reply
Asma Virani
8/26/2015 01:49:04 pm
1. In my opinion, Dune could have been written in first person POV (Paul’s point of view) but it would have changed the way people understood and analyzed the story. If the story were to be written in first person POV, the audience would not have been able to understand the different kinds of characters in the story. Within the book, there is a lot of conflict and in order to understand it, it is important to understand everyone’s point of view. Third person omniscient POV helps us look into the minds of several different characters and recognize their feelings and actions towards the events that occur within the story. Since the characters in the story not only influence each other but also society, it is important for the narrator to look into the story rather than being part of it. By looking into the story, the narrator is able to see the bigger picture rather than the tiny details that a first person POV would be able to notice. In third person POV, there are no limits. The narrator can fully explain himself and the things that are happening in the story.
Reply
Nimesh Patel
8/26/2015 04:00:23 pm
1. A novel of this intensity and on this large of a scale (multiple different planets), I don’t think this novel would be as successful at telling the story with a first person narrator. The third person omniscient narrator which is in the story right now, is able to give details about the story from all angles of the story to the point where we are never left simply clueless about an action that takes place in the novel.
Reply
Sarah Thomas
8/27/2015 08:37:28 am
1.Although Dune could have certainly been written in another perspective, the use of the third person omniscient fits much better with the way Frank Herbert decided to present it, in my opinion. If he had not chosen this specific point of view, the reader would not have had the chance to connect with each of the characters. The third person omniscient perspective allows the author to express the feelings and thoughts of several characters rather than one main character, which Herbert does here. In general, if the audience did not have the possibility to relate to the characters in the book, it might not be as interesting to them, ruining the point. Also, like you said, there is so much happening within the book that it would be difficult and not as clear if only one main character was telling this story. It would be a very different story if Herbert had chosen to use another narrative voice.
Reply
Kenji Chong
8/27/2015 10:33:46 am
I personally agree with you that the 1st person point of view is fantastic. And that the "head-hopping" can get confusing at times. But, even though the head-hopping may be present, we must remember that a narrator that is speaking with the 3rd person omniscient point of view, is trying to convey all of the feelings of the characters. And the way the story is formatted all depends on how well adapted the writer is to the concept and what they are trying to convey (What kind of effect do they want?). For example in Dune, the third person omniscient narrative help create dramatic (like when Yueh was the traitor and no one else knew).
Reply
Quyn Westfall
8/27/2015 09:07:27 am
Herbert's choice to utilize a third person narrator over a first person was the correct one. The third person allows for the reader to follow more than one character which is crucial in a novel with a setting so massive. His use of an omniscient voice opposed to an objective one was also a smart move because it allows the reader to fully understand the internal struggle. Battle scenes would not have been near as exciting, and the Harkonnens would not have been portrayed as maliciously. It allows the reader to have a glimpse into the thoughts of the character, which was key in Dune because it allowed for dramatic irony and kept the readers on the edge of their seat so to speak.
Reply
Geo Aickareth
8/27/2015 09:34:05 am
In my opinion, I don’t believe Dune should be or has to be limited to 3rd person. Many books are written in first person that contain huge plots or settings. An example of such would be the twilight series. Though so much is happening, the readers are still able to know and understand most of it through one set of eyes. Another good reason with having first person books is that they provide the reader with an intimate connection between reader and character which makes the story more engaging on all levels. For my own special pleasure I love to bask in books with a third person narrative. This is mainly because these tend to have books with grander plots and exquisite, detailed settings.
Reply
Robin Dimaunahan
8/27/2015 09:36:19 am
I think only viewing the story through one person's perspective wouldn't give as much depth and encompassing perspective as the third person omniscient voice that Herbert uses. Furthermore I also think that this all knowing perspective fits along with the motif in knowing more than most such as Jessica and Paul.
Reply
Kenji Chong
8/27/2015 10:07:25 am
1. For a book of great magnitude such as Dune, I don't that it would be plausible to tell the story in a different point of view. The reason why I say this is because when there is such a big plot there is much that the reader can miss, information that is skipped over due to the narrators negligence to tell that part of the story. And due to the fact that there are a myriad of people involved in this novels conflict, it is good to see what each party is thinking so that the reader will not be confused when an event occurs (it clarifies certain aspects of the novel).
Reply
Chi Phu
8/27/2015 10:15:01 am
There are several narrative voices Frank could write the story with, but I believe that he applied the voice that is most appropriate for this story. With the complexity of the story, without the third-person omniscient point of view the story would've been crazy and the readers will probably be lost in the story. With any other point of view I believe that the story would not have covered the enormous amount of content in Dune, for example Gurney and Thufir believe that Jessica was the traitor when in the end it was Dr. Yueh the entire time. Without the point of view we would never understand who was the traitor and why did he do it.
Reply
Sri Sridhar
8/27/2015 10:57:31 am
I would have preferred the third person omniscient narrator any day, instead of Paul or Jessica or even worse, the Baron. Moreover, the third person omniscient narrator makes the story more easy to comprehend because if the story was narrated by a first person narrator, the plot would have been extremely confusing and the Herbert couldn't have delivered many of his ideas/themes through a first person narrator. Although I was anxious after seeing the width of the paperback, the third person omniscient narrator made the plot very comprehensible and therefore Herbert's ideas/themes were conveyed clearly.
Reply
Jason Tran
8/27/2015 10:59:02 am
If the novel was told in the first person point of view of Paul, I think I would’ve enjoyed the novel more. The third person omniscient narration of Dune removes some suspense and intensity of the story at times, where I felt that if i were reading the story from Paul’s perspective I would’ve been more drawn in and felt as if I were experiencing what Paul was experiencing at that moment in the story. But instead of telling the novel in chronological order, I would prefer the story being told through a memory of Paul so that I could know some more background of the story since the universe of Dune is too complex to just be told through one person’s perspective. Aside from that, playing the guessing game makes the story more enjoyable to me because I am always questioning the story and it keeps me wanting to read more.
Reply
Ragini Kondetimmanahalli
8/27/2015 11:41:23 am
Narration is everything in Dune. Herbert so often switches perspectives in the novel, there is no way this could have been done in first person. The novel is so dynamic only because it is written in third person omniscient.
Reply
Melanie Lo
8/27/2015 12:32:55 pm
I agree that the first person perspective does allow a reader to connect more with a single character, however, I feel like the third person omniscent can help events connect with each other and give that "wow" impression in which we can connect with multiple characters.
Reply
Chidera Azubike
8/27/2015 12:19:40 pm
i can't really imagine a way where the Dune novel could've been written with a different narrator, and still have all the information that was provided in the novel available. but honestly i love first-person narration as since the character can be unreliable at times, i, the reader can fill in the dots and have a little "aha" moment. A book i greatly benefitted from that was first person was the "book son of the mob" by gordon korman, it was on the side of guy named vince who was the sun of a mob boss, but he himself wanted nothing to do with that life, i wouldn't have been able to understand his thoughts and why he was so vehemently against having anything to do with the the family "business" unless i was seeing everything through his eyes.
Reply
Melanie Lo
8/27/2015 12:26:43 pm
I completely agree that Dune would not have been as thrilling for me in any point of view other than third person omniscient. To try imagining the narration only by Paul’s mind would be mind-boggling all the time. For instance, to not know Jessica’s worry over the gom jabbar test would mean no mystery and no anticipation for when Paul does put his hand in the box.
Reply
Hannah Nöelle Johnson
8/27/2015 02:09:46 pm
I agree, it is hard to chose a preference between first person or third. It all just depends on the story and how it should be told to convey a point. In Dune, the author needed to use an all-knowing narrator in order to provide the reader with pertinent information to understand the novel entirely. On the other hand, the author of the Hunger Games, utilizes the first person narrative to keep the readers out of the dark, so that there are mysteries left for the to solve, keeping them interested to read on. Both examples of narrative choices are apt. So it all just depends mostly on which one would get the author's point across more effectively.
Reply
Shaheen Khimani
8/27/2015 12:28:52 pm
Herbert’s choice to utilize third-person omniscient was one of the best decisions he could’ve made. It allows for readers to get a completely different perspective to the story that wouldn’t have been otherwise possible with any other medium of narration. The third-person omniscient point of view keeps the narration as objective and unbiased as possible so that the readers can be assured that the entire story is accurately told and not actually one-sided. A first-person narration though the eyes of Paul, for example, would have lost all the insight on the other characters’ thoughts and emotions. This insight is necessary in the novel for the readers to get a proper understanding of the remaining characters. Following the story through Paul would not enable Herbert to tell the story the way he did with the third-person omniscient, including a broad context on everything that occurred. My general preference in narration, I must say, happens to be the first-person point of view. For me, the third-person omniscient can tend to confuse and overcomplicate things at times, taking away from the novel. I prefer the first-person because the author can then focus on developing a specific character and providing us with a substantial amount of depth and detail, making the book far more enjoyable to read. To Kill a Mockingbird is wonderful example of this, a book narrated in the perspective of the protagonist, Scout Finch. Hearing the story from Scout’s point of view really helps enhance the entertaining aspect of the novel because of her sense of honesty and humor while describing the events that take place.
Reply
Nithin Kakulavaram
8/27/2015 12:31:16 pm
The novel Dune, by Frank Herbert, is an elaborate story that consists of many characters conjoined with many sideline stories that arise from a single plot. Given this, it would be very difficult to fully portray the realm of this novel through the viewpoint of only one character, even though that person might be the most intricate character in the novel, the story would still be one-sided. Not only that, but by writing Dune through a first person perspective the audience will be restricted only to the thoughts and emotions of one character, in this situation if the novel were to be written with a first person narrator that person would probably be Paul Atreides, and the audience wont be able to experience different point of views through situations such as dramatic irony and plot building. For this reason, I believe that Herbert made a magnificent decision in writing this novel from a broader, third person omniscient, narrative, as this best suits this novel and it allows the readers to view all sides of the plot, good or evil. The beauty about writing a novel in third person omniscient is that it gives readers the freedom to connect with any character, thus making the reader more involved in such novels as Dune. Furthermore, a third person narrative gives the author more flexibility, in regards to how the story is told, with the benefits of relating time as an asset, and not something that is constricted to one character. In all, the novel is constructed well the way it is in the third person omniscient narrative, so changing it to a first person narrative would be needless to say.
Reply
Hannah Nöelle Johnson
8/27/2015 02:01:21 pm
1) I believe that I had the been changed to a narrator voice different than from the third-person narrative in which Herbert chose, then it would completely change the scope of the story- including how the reader feels towards the character. Although it would change the novel, the plot would still remain the same. The ending will still be the same. So does it matter? To answer the question. Yes and no. Frank Herbert obviously wanted to write using an all-knowing character because he wanted to provide the reader with the maximum amount of information needed to fully understand the story and master the art of reading this particular novel. As Foster wrote in HTRNP, author's write to give readers guidelines for reader their novel. On the contrary, the author could have wrote using the principal characters as the narrators, and the story would be exactly the same. Perhaps minor aspects may change, but the most important thing about a novel- that the author writes a book that is completely made up, follows its own guidelines, is believable to the audience, and can relate to a larger population- still remain unchanged.
Reply
Hannah Fasching
8/28/2015 10:22:22 am
No, I don't believe any other narration would have suited such a vast novel. Personally my favorite type of narration is first-person because it gives insight to the mind of the main character. So rather than reading about what's happening to them and what they might be thinking at the time, you get to experience the book with the character themselves. The best example of this I can think of is the Hunger Games. I loved how everything was told from Katniss' point of view, and there was a certain level of understanding readers got to experience that the movie-watchers did not. You could understand her anger towards the capitol, you got to experience the story in her mind- which was a never ending critical assessment and analysis of her surroundings. The Hunger Games wouldn't have been half as exiting if it wasn't from Katniss' viewpoint.
Reply
8/16/2022 12:35:09 am
Thank you for sharing informative content. It means a lot to me hope you do more articles to post.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
Blog Rules1. Keep it relevant; try not to go off-topic. Archives
August 2015
Categories |