Tony wrote:
> Is it im****tant to consider the 60s when interpreting Dune?
Not really. Because, even now, it reads like a new release. Not dated,
at all. It would be interesting to contrast how FH was affected, and
therefore his writing, by the times, but wouldn't really bring much to
the table in ultimately understanding Dune, IMO. Of course, with the
caveat that I've been reading it off and on for 30+ years and I don't
totally understand it.
BT
>
>
|
