"Give as few orders as possible," his father had told him . . . once . . . long ago. "Once you've given orders on a subject, you must always give orders on that subject."
Having not read Dune myself, I was rather hoping you would quote the relevant passage, so that I and those like myself can compare it to the aforementioned military quote, and perhaps derive some insight from it.
I am almost through it and I have to say I am not enjoying it as much as I thought I would. I read books like this mostly because of their significance to the SciFi genre and while I think this books has some really great elements, the fact that Paul is basically infallible irks me. Nobody is that perfect in my experience and I wish I wasn't sure that he'd be successful with everything he starts.
I did read a critique of Dune recently that suggested that Herbert initially wanted to show how dangerous superheros are. This explains a bit about why Paul is a superhero: he has to be to make Herbert's thesis. However, then I'd be rooting for him to fail and I don't like the stories where the protagonist is evil in some subtle way and you are supposed to root for them to fail.
> the fact that Paul is basically infallible irks me.
It's supposed to.
> I did read a critique of Dune recently that suggested that Herbert initially wanted to show how dangerous superheros are. This explains a bit about why Paul is a superhero: he has to be to make Herbert's thesis. However, then I'd be rooting for him to fail and I don't like the stories where the protagonist is evil in some subtle way and you are supposed to root for them to fail.
Paul isn't evil and you aren't supposed to root for Paul to fail; insofar as the critique that Herbert is trying to illustrate that superheroes are dangerous is correct, it is correct in the traditional sense of "superhero" where "evil" is very much not part of the mix.
An evil "superhero" is a supervillain, and illustrating that supervillains are dangerous wouldn't be particularly interesting. Supervillains are useful dramatic tools because their danger is blatantly obvious.
You don't know how the GP spends his time. Maybe his day is full of saving people who stepped on landmines in Africa, in which case, it's very much not worth reading.
That answer is a bit useless when someone only asked for the relevant passage.