Just finished reading Dune messiah. I really liked we are straightaway brought to the aftermath of Paul's jihad and the consequences. I felt the book could have been written much better that it has been, by actually explaining what the characters are talking about rather than just leave cryptic conversations and make the reader wait for the explanation. I also was dissapointed by seeing that Alia didn't have much of a role and how really weak the members of the conspiracy were. The novel felt a lot to take in, had too many variables and too much information. It also I think would have been great if they spent some part of the book showing other possible futures and how one decision if made differently lead to some other reality.

I am also very confused about some things:

1. What actually happens to the Reverend mother Gaius Helen after Paul meets with her and asks for a bargain. She isn't shown anywhere in the second half of the book and Frank herbert doesn't explain if she considered his bargain or not. He just mentions that there is a delay in the sisterhood's response.

2. If Paul cannot see the members of the conspiracy, can't he just try to see everyone's future around him and then note who he cannot see and is thus involved with the conspiracy? I feel I haven't really understood how prescience works.

3. Why don't Alia and Paul just talk with each other about what they see in their prescience visions lol? Rather than have Alia risking taking a heavy dose of spice. Even Paul sometimes wonders about what Alia has seen but is never shown to actually talk to her.

4. If Scytale had bijaz who had prescience, why did he need the Guild member to be part of the conspiracy for hiding them against Paul's prescience?

Thanks for reading till here! I think it will be a while to process what I have read and appreciate it in time. Will appreciate any explanation for above questions

(I suspect I may have misunderstood or missed something from the book that explains this)

I just finished reading book 2 and I was wondering whether Paul's exile prevents or strengthens his deification, and what he intended by making that decision. Initially I assumed the latter since it both creates a martyrdom narrative, and also makes concrete the fremen's pre existing conviction that he is the lisan al gaib.

I don't really understand the perspective of him taking this path to minimise any possible further growth of the jihad since this isn't guaranteed to result from his death and there's multiple explicit references to how paul living isn't a necessary condition for religious growth across the empire. Despite this i've seen people claim this narrative of paul choosing exile purely as a utilitarian calculated choice, which I don't really understand.

BTw if the answer to this is explained in book 3 please don't let me know since I'm reading that at the moment thanks :)