Bahktin’s Dialogism and the Spice of Dune
Science fiction authors often run into a problem with language as they struggle to communicate concepts that exist in a fictitious future. The author must often invent his own vocabulary that has meaning only within the context of his universe. The author will also use words that exist outside the context of his universe, but with a radically different meaning in the author’s context. This essay will use Bakhtin’s ideas to explore how Frank Herbert uses language in his novel Dune to create a dialogue between himself and the reader, the contemporary context he wrote in, the future he wrote about, and the present in which we read his novel, which leads the reader to a new understanding of the present and our own contemporary language.
Frank Herbert uses three types of voices in Dune: contemporary, unique, and dichotomous. The contemporary voice is the language that exists completely outside and independent of the novel: rather than being a context within the novel, it is the context in which the novel itself is written. The unique language is defined entirely by Herbert’s novel: outside of the context of the novel it has no meaning. Dichotomous language has meaning both within and apart from the novel: it carries connotations and ideas from the contemporary language, but with unique definitions. These three kinds of voices shift, or translate, the unique concepts of the novel into the contemporary that can be understood by the reader who does not exist within the novel’s universe.
In order for a novel to be readable at all, it must use the language of its potential readers. Herbert is writing primarily for an English-speaking audience of the Twentieth Century, and so his novel is presented in Twentieth Century English, despite how unbelievable it is that characters from many thousands of years in the future use a language even remotely similar. The reader is asked to suspend his or her disbelief in order to open dialogue about more substantial themes.
There is little in the way of a specific example of the contemporary voice in Dune. Essentially, anything that is not part of the unique or dichotomous voice is part of the contemporary voice, though this is perhaps too vague a definition. To attempt an example, let us examine the opening lines of the first chapter of Dune: “In the week before their departure to Arrakis, when all the final scurrying about had reached a nearly unbearable frenzy, an old crone came to visit the mother of the boy, Paul.” The only word that is not defined outside of the novel is “Arrakis,” which is understood through context to be a person or place, the latter being more likely – and indeed, Arrakis is the name of a planet in Dune. No other word here represents a fictitious or unique concept, or a unique change of a contemporary concept, and the sentence serves to open dialogue with the unique word “Arrakis,” subtly defining it, at least in part, for the reader. The vast majority of the novel falls within the contemporary voice, though the themes of the novel will inevitably be expressed in one or both of the other voices.
The unique voice, then, is the contrast to the contemporary voice. It represents themes and concepts that are envisioned by the author that do not yet exist, or will never exist, in the contemporary world. These futuristic, alien, often technical terms mean nothing to a layman outside of the context of the novel, and must be explained. However, there is difficulty in translating what is essentially a foreign language. The contemporary voice gives the context that Herbert uses to explain his own ideas.
Dune has myriad specific examples of the unique voice, though I will only fully explore one: that is, the “Kwisatz Haderach.” The glossary at the end of Dune defines it thusly: “‘Shortening of the Way.’ This is the label applied by the Bene Gesserit to the unknown for which they sought a genetic solution: a male Bene Gesserit whose organic mental powers would bridge space and time.” The challenge of explaining science fiction terms is readily apparent, as Herbert must use even other unique words in the definition. To truly understand the meaning of the term, one must read through the novel in its entirety.
It should be no surprise that the sequel to Dune, Dune Messiah, also adds to the understanding of the Kwisatz Haderach: in a fantastic example of Bakhtin’s idea of “double-voiced” dialogue, the Kwisatz Haderach’s powers are explained more fully in the sequel. The powers and limitations of the Kwisatz Haderach are the same throughout both novels, but the reader’s understanding of them changes, and even if the second novel were never written, the concepts remain within the author’s intentions and still affect the novel through an inner dialogue:
“They [utterances] may engage in parody or take a “sidelong glance” at potential utterances to come, or they may engage in many other interactions in which the presence of more than one voice in a single utterance becomes essential to what the utterance is doing” (Johns Hopkins 93).
The interactivity of the novels defines the Kwisatz Haderach more fully than only the first or the second could. Herbert uses the dialogue between his own novels to increase our understanding of his themes and raise his dialogue with the reader to a more complex level.
I have not tried yet to explain the exact meaning of the Kwisatz Haderach, primarily because a full understanding up to this point has not been necessary for the discussion of its role as a unique word. However, in order to discuss it further I think a better understanding of the word is warranted. Quickly, and certainly inadequately: Paul Atreides, the main character of the novel, is the genetic product of thousands of years of breeding by the Bene Gesserit – an all-female quasi-religious sect. The Bene Gesserit have a shared, inherited memory through the use of a drug called “spice” – a dichotomous word that I will fully explore as an example of that voice. Paul is also a “mentat,” or a human trained to calculate vast probabilities like an organic computer. By overdosing on spice, Paul gains the memory of the Bene Gesserit, a feat no male has achieved, as well as fantastic powers of prescience. This complete understanding of both the past and the present is what defines him as the Kwisatz Haderach.
Kwisatz Haderach is also shown in Dune’s appendix to mean “Shortening of the Way.” A full analysis of the themes and symbolism in this definition is unnecessary here, but it is significant for discussion because it shows a dialogue within the novel. The Kwisatz Haderach is not just a person, but also a goal and a tool of the Bene Gesserit. This further double-voicing accounts for the Bene Gesserit’s view of Paul’s actions, which do not comply with their intentions: Paul is their goal, but he is also a person with free will. The tension that arises from this double-voicing will play a key role in the novel.
The final kind of voice Herbert uses is the dichotomous voice. The dichotomous words are wrought with dialogue between themselves and each other voice in the novel, as they have multiple meanings and connotations both inside of and outside of the novel. This voice serves as the bridge between the contemporary and unique, easing the reader into a strange environment. It is more easily understood than the unique voice, but still provides the alien context that the unique voice lies within. A perfect example is the strange drug in Dune known as mélange, or more commonly, spice.
The word “spice” carries many connotations from its use in contemporary English. It brings to mind any number of things; the first is probably food or cooking. Spice is used even in the novel as a flavor in everything from food to coffee. “Spice” also unquestionably sounds like a word that could be associated with drugs, perhaps because of the myriad other monosyllabic slang terms used for drugs in English, especially those associated with plants: weed, hash, coke, speed. One can easily associate “spice” with drug use even without reading Dune. Thus, the word comes “‘already populated” with the voices of others on the same topic (Johns Hopkins 92). However, spice plays a pivotal role in the novel – as a theme presented by Herbert on the control of resources, and as a significant plot item. In the novel, spice is much more than just a drug, and without that understanding of it the novel cannot function.
Overdosing on spice gives the user super-human mental abilities, as well as prolonging his or her life. The prescience achieved through spice, in Herbert’s universe, allows the interstellar travel that is essential to the political structure of the novel: this will be a major source of conflict as the antagonists attempt to prevent Paul from initiating drastic political upheaval. Also important is that spice is available from only one planet, so whoever can gain effective control over that planet – Arrakis – effectively gains control of all interstellar travel. All of these facets define spice in a way that a simple definition of “a drug” never could.
It is important to recognize the role the contemporary voice plays in defining spice: drugs are a thing that contemporary readers understand. Understanding spice as a drug leads to understanding of its further role in the novel, and without the contemporary voice of it, true understanding is lost. Similarly, without the uniqueness of the role of spice in the novel, it loses its place in the dialogue, becoming a monologic item in the novel and does not contribute much into it.
The use of the contemporary language is significant in part because it allows the novel to be constructed; however, this is not its own significance. The use of contemporary language also provides a contrast used to define our “Architectonic” self, as Bakhtin calls it. Caryl Emerson and Gary S. Morson explain in The Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory and Criticism: “This model of selfhood…would recommend we seek out the most varied and possible feedback on ourselves, absorbing the reactions and ideas of others with gratitude” (91). The unique voice is the contrast to the contemporary language that provides the feedback our psyche craves.
The setting of the novel is specifically not our culture, the characters specifically not us; however, the act of translating the very alien setting and characters into our modern context illuminates the differences which identify us. To further explain using Emerson and Morson: “Bakhtin’s advice is…: embrace as many others-for-me as possible, thereby guaranteeing for your culture a rich, inventive, diverse, self-aware, and unrepeatable self.” This “other-for-me” is the component of the architectonic self created by the dialogue with others’ impressions of and projections on one’s self. If the unique voice is the “other,” the contemporary language must be present to provide the “me.” Without this basis, the novel becomes a scientific and speculative inquiry, rather than the heteroglossic novel that Bakhtin praises, and the milieu of science fiction is, then, what attracts readers to science fiction, as each novel contains another unique voice that is the “other” to which we compare ourselves.
The setting of the novel is also not our time. The relation between the time it was written, the time in which it is read, and the time in which it takes place is very important to dialogue with the novel. Maria Shevtsova clarifies:
“But speech genres are not confined to the relation between the speaker and the listener, who is always a speaker and always ready to reply. They are determined by the time and place of utterance and, further, by the time in precise space – Bakhtin’s ‘chronotope’ – in which they are uttered” (750).
Bakhtin’s “chronotope” or “time-space” is the exact way in which an utterance fits in with the utterances around it. An utterance is a speech act – a word, phrase, or even a novel when applied literarily – that exists at a specific time and space and cannot be repeated. The utterance is always changing by interacting with other utterances: “The past is not close off and complete but open to continuous reinterpretation” (Meili-Steele 31). A science fiction novel is usually set in the future, which makes the chronotope different than most novels, though the idea functions the same: Dune tries to interpret the future rather than the past, and will prove to influence its understanding of the past when the time comes.
Ironically, Herbert is not only interested in the distant future. Dune also serves as an oblique view of the very near future. Spice, a limited resource that allows inter-community transportation, is an analogue for oil. Herbert is thus predicting a future in which one nation controls oil; Herbert is giving a warning to Twentieth Century readers about the Middle East and allowing them to gain control over the world’s supply of oil. It is important to recognize these themes as contributions to the heteroglossia of the work: “The structuralist idea of a holistic, interdependent system of a single language is replaced by multiple conglomeration of various sociolinguistic forces” (Meili-Steele 30). Each theme is a part of the conglomeration, as is each voice used in the novel, and each reader attempting to analyze the novel. Without the other parts, the novel is empty and monologic.
Bakhtin recognized that language builds upon itself and the people who use it. Herbert’s Dune illustrates how language can build the way Bakhtin envisioned it to through Herbert’s use of voices. Herbert is forced to create a heteroglossic novel when writing Dune to convey ideas that do not exist in the real, contemporary world. The unique chronotope of Dune also adds a level of complexity to a novel already “over-populated” with language from Herbert’s three voices.
Works Cited
Emerson, Caryl, and Gary S. Morson. The Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory and Criticism. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 2000. 91-94.
Shevtsova, Maria. “Dialogism in the Novel and Bakhtin’s Theory of Culture.” New Literary History, Vol. 23. The Johns Hopkins UP, 1992. 747-763.
Meili-Steele. Critical Confrontations: Literary Theories in Dialogue. Columbia, SC: USC P, 1997. 29-36.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.