Personal Thoughts

“The Lord of the Rings” reads as one novel divided into three parts. The Frank Herbert “Dune” collective reads — to me — as separate novels written in separate times. Indeed, time jumps are di rigueur from “Dune” novel to “Dune” novel, unlike the other.

“The Lord of the Rings” largely reflects Tolkien’s mythological research, while “Dune” as science fiction is a king of invention.

From www.Dune.Fandom.com: Earth, also called Old Earth or Old Terra, is the third planet located in the Sol star system. The human race originated here. It was where the Commission of Ecumenical Translators converged to assemble the Orange Catholic Bible after the Butlerian Jihad.

“Dune” is our real world as earth is part of its universe. Ditto “The Lord of the Rings,” as Middle-earth is the north continent of earth (Arda) representing a fictional period of earth’s past.

To me, “Dune” is the more interesting work, while “The Lord of the Rings” is the more consistent, and human. There is far more emotion in the latter.

For an excellent article on the influence of “Dune,” see here:

For an older (2005 revision) academic piece on the influence of “The Lord of the Rings,” now publicly available, see here:

Books 2–6 of Frank Herbert’s “Dune” saga were not as well-received as the first, nor has their stature proved nearly as influential. However, they have all become popular works, and the current sequel series by Brian Herbert and Kevin Anderson have as well.

But none of the them was the science fiction game-changer, nor could they be, as the first.

Several filmmakers had unsuccessfully developed “Dune” as a feature, most notably among them was Alejandro Jodorowsky’s development period from 1971–1982. A documentary on the making of the long-awaited film (that never was) was released in 2013.

The first produced “Dune” film, directed by David Lynch and produced in 1985, has attained cult status but is largely considered a critical (and commercial) failure. The source material was so strong, however, that since its release the film has been increasingly appreciated as an original vision. SyFy (then the Sci-Fi Channel) aired a three-part miniseries based on the first book in 2000, followed by a second three-parter, “Children of Dune,” in 2003. Both achieved fair to good reviews, but were not in any way considered groundbreaking.

Peter Jackson’s “The Lord of the Rings” trilogy was, by far, the better received production. Years following a 1978 Ralph Bakshi animated version, the final film in Jackson’s trilogy, “Return of the King,” won the Oscar for Best Picture. His films based on “The Hobbit” did not fare as well, expanding the relatively short work into three films of (what many critics and fans have called) excessive length.

An Amazon series beckons.

Denis Villeneuve’s (“Blade Runner 2049”) two-part “Dune” remake is scheduled for release in 2021. A new “Dune” series is also scheduled to premiere next year on new streaming service HBO Max, spearheaded by Villeneuve.

My two cents: As a fan, I prefer the “Dune” books to “The Lord of the Rings” as they better match my sensibilities, but “The Lord of the Rings” is the more influential work.

As far as who was the better writer, Tolkien or Herbert? Even attempting an answer is a fool’s errand. I’ll call it a “tie,” and add that it’s too bad Tolkien did not appreciate Herbert’s rich work.

There’s room for more than one epic genre masterpiece in the universe.

What are your thoughts?

Thank you for reading.