Discussions
-
It is an excellent read. Well written, great character developement, the action is compelling and the ideas are like a new wind at first glance. Then when you settle down to think of what a world would really be like if everyone did what was right in their own eyes...well, I decided it is a very dangerous book because it makes self-centeredness and self-righteousness seem wonderful.
Sorry, I don't think you can discuss this book without a diving trip, that's what the book is all about, changing the world. Humanism in a word. Glorious humanity without taking our sinful nature into account. That's what I read in the book. Who decides in this "perfect" society what people are good enough to join? Who decides the value of each contributor? What is value derived from? Do we rid ourselves of the handicapped, the immature? Some who seem to be a burden on society now, may turn out to contribute greatly later in life. Do we have omniscience to know if that one person may contribute greatly to one other life at some point?
See what a great book this is? Even if I disagree with it, look how worked up over it I am. You just don't get that with lousy writing.posted 6 years ago.
-
creakingbookshelves
I read the book when I was about 17 and in first year of engineering college. One could say that being mathematically inclined, rationalist etc I was already the converted to whom Ayn Rand didn't need to preach. However for several years, 'Who is John Galt?' became a refrain for me which helped me separate people quickly - if somewhat unfairly - into ideological camps, as also aware/unaware camps when it came to life-changing books. To me it was not an expression of despair as much as it was a way to identify people who could think for themselves.
That said I did eventually outgrow the book's idealistic stance on a world that is more complex and nuanced than the book simplistically suggests. I did eventually leave the confines of information technology to work in health and the world became a vista of greys - one in which the book does not make my top-10.posted 6 years ago.
-
phatcat
This book clearly presents a lot of Rand's philosophy as a memorable story line with strong characters, etc. I have to agree with others here though that her view of the world as black & white while attractive, does not reflect reality. The book is also longer than it needs to be... (Galt's rant toward the end almost made me put it down) partly because Rand really tried to hammer her philosophy home to her readers, sometimes at the expense of the narative. If the book was boiled down to just the story minus all the philosophical points, it'd end up much shorter and appropriately appear on an Middle School English reading list.
posted 6 years ago.
-
tsteele93
For me it was reading something that so clearly and eloquently stated things I had always believed, but hadn't been able to put in nearly as good words as Ayn Rand. Also, it exposed me to some new ideas that I hadn't even thought of before - like the idea that lawmakers pass laws they expect you to break, laws you might even have to break in your daily routine, as a way to have control over you.
Also intriguing to me was the question, "if giving to someone who doesn't have anything is good, then is receiving something from someone who is giving you something they worked for bad?" It isn't an absolute, but you can come up with some situations and rationales where that is the case.
There are flaws and exceptions, as you would find with any extreme philosophy. Heck, we don't even take capitalism to its extreme because it becomes flawed at the complete extreme. But her ideas are sound (unless you are far left leaning and HATE them) and the concepts are thought provoking.
I too wonder "Who is John Galt." He doesn't seem to exist. Bill Gates could have been, except he is a little too "dirty" to be a Galt or even a Reardon, but imagine if he told the Justice Dept, "Fine - you win. I am CLOSING Microsoft tomorrow, and users with the software can continue to use it, but we aren't supporting it. And we are destroying all the source code." Maybe someone could reverse engineer it, but if Gates retained his copyrights and patents, then it would take a massive changing of our current laws to "fix" the situation. He could almost shrugg and drop the world.
But he doesn't even seem inclined. He fights hard from time to time, but he doesn't show any sign of just taking on a government straightforward.
Anyway, the thing that makes the book so special is that it takes ideas that are often taught as being bad, and shows how they are actually good. Robin Hood was evil. Charity might be bad. Welfare can be bad. Selfishness results in good things happening. Need is not a reason to have something. Contributing to society should be rewarded. Not all of those things are commonly accepted, but Rand makes a compelling case for many of them. It is fascinating.posted 6 years ago.
-
wordwoman
Let me say this first, it isn't an easy read, but it is well worth it. Ayn Rand was an amazing writer. Her commentary on the world through her novels was so accurate and is still this way. Reading Atlas was like reading about what is happening in the world today. The characters are engaging and the ending filled you with a sense of accomplishment and relief. The bottom line is this book is a must read, it makes you think and wish for a better world full of understanding.
posted 6 years ago.
-
colorado
you could talk for days (months?) about this book...but here is a simple answer:
1-all the main characters are strong and well defined
2-society is presented as two groups:
a) the group that wants nothing for free
b) the group that wants everything for free
reading it made me evaluate where I stand on personal and political issuesposted 6 years ago.
-
Tomoko
I'm afraid that everyone's going to attack me for saying this, but I didn't like the book at all! True, it's a good read, but it's so black and white, and so are the characters. I know it's somehow tempting to think that superhuman, flawless beings exist, but...Are the people who are not exceptionally gifted unimportant because their contributions are not so great? And don't you ever wonder, how come Dagny always looks perfect and is able to think clearly after 3 hours of sleep? And isn't it convenient that all the great guys just fall in love with her and they calmly step aside when the next (even better) lover comes along? I know, this is not relevant to the ideas presented in the book, but I couldn't help laughing at that. Anyway, the ideas do not hold together either. If capitalism is in contradiction to charity, why is it that charity and volunteer work are practiced mostly in capitalist countries? Is the development of technology and industry always a positive thing? I could go on and on. We all know that utopian ideas do not make good political systems, but I'm afraid that they also don't make a good book.
posted 6 years ago.
-
Shawn S. Sullivan
I will no attack. That is crazy, everyone to their opinions. I started it once and stopped as I didn't like it. Then I began again, years later, when I had a ton of time and loved it. BECAUSE of the black and white. The whole thing IS an vivid portrait and unrealistic to drive home a point. To me, I read PASSION in the book. People who love excellence. Whe were not afraid to succeed. That said, I did enjoy your points. Thanks for sharing them, Shawn
posted 6 years ago.
-
Wendy Johnson
This book was given to me by the CPA in my father's business. She thought I needed to read it. It was the summer I decided to become a Christian - not in that warm, fuzzy kind of born-again way, but in a real, deep, meaningful relationship with God because I saw a God-shaped hole in myself that needed filling. I had been filling it with lots of humanistic things, but still felt empty.
I read it that summer and each of the 21 summers since then. It is such a well written book: complex characters, conflict, no one is really purely good or purely evil, and it is a love story about how you can live your life.
My personal gain from this book is that I see what happens when we allow ourselves to abdicate responsibility or shun credit for what we do. There is no room for God in Ayn Rand's world, but there is room for Atlas Shrugged in mine.posted 6 years ago.
-
Wendy Johnson
Don't apologize for not liking the book - a lot of people don't. It IS a hard read, but well worth it because once you get past the set up of how the world, business, government, and the passivity of people is affecting people - the real story begins.
I read not for agreement, but understanding.posted 6 years ago.
-
beadology
I first read this book about 25 years when I was young and impressionable. I thought it was great. I kept intending to re-read it again over the years but the length of the book and all of the other books wanting to be read kept me from it. I retired 2 1/2 years ago and took that opportunity to read it again. I still enjoyed the read but I see it now as mostly melodrama! Also, I read a book written about Ayn Rand. She was a nut! So that has also colored my take on the book. But I still say it's one of my favorite books.
posted 6 years ago.
-
-
The premise itself makes it unique & intriguing. We have many stories about the plight of the worker & striking for their rights.
The best ones raised questions worth looking at but many seemed to pander to 'The Crowd', so to speak, implying that just because you exist you should be given everything you need to be happy with little or no effort.
ATLAS turned that idea on its head & it made for an insightful story whether you agree with Rand or not.
I have to admit I skipped over most of Gault's speech which Aynie's Army would take as treason on my part but the story's the thing and anyone with an open mind can get much food for thought out of it while being entertained by a well structured story and a solid if elemental plot.posted 6 years ago.
-
ChestertonsGhost
WenDeeJay,
What a great response to the book! I had a very similar experience...for the very same reasons that I can fit Nietzche into my world view right next to C.S. Lewis...even when they are the most oppossed in ther views.
This book really informed my world-view, but didn't create or shape it for me.posted 6 years ago.
-
bookgrouch
The book is fiction so the characters can be however perfect or imperfect Rand wanted them to be to present her philosophy to the reader. I think its just a fun way to see what her ideas about the world were
posted 6 years ago.
-
joemmama
I first read this when I was about 14. I loved it and continue to love it to this day! I reread it every 3-4 years just to refresh my thoughts on why this is my favorite book of all the thousands of books I have read. To me it is a heroic romance. Seeing todays society, where so many want something for nothing, kids who think their parents owe them for having brought them into the world, brings the force of this book straight home. The bravery to walk away, to let the users stand or fall on their own, is a trait I have long admired. I could rave about this book forever, and usually do, but I do admire Rand for putting it down for us to either love or hate. I remember seeing her on talk shows in the 70's, and her strength of character was as astounding as her characters. When the oxygen mask in a plane falls, they say to put your own on first. If you do not take care of yourself, how can you take care of the others? At least she makes us think, which cannot be said about much of what we read.
Men have been taught that it is a virtue to agree with others. But the creator is the man who disagrees. Men have been taught that it is a virtue to swim with the current. But the creator is the man who goes against the current. Men have been taught that it is a virtue to stand together. But the creator is the man who stands alone.
Ayn Randposted 6 years ago.
-
lovemusic
This is by far one of the most important books in my life. I first read it in the late 80's and was astounded to find someone else who actually saw many of the injustices I saw. I identified with Dagny right away. I am not Dagny, but I share her ideals and some of her faults. This book has helped me make some of the most difficult choices in my life. I always think back to this book when life gets a little too difficult. I even surprised myself two years ago by "shrugging". At the time, I thought that after 25 years in one corporation and constantly "creating miracles", they were using my creations and demanding more and more. One day they put a demand in front of me that I just couldn't accept. I actually quit. I haven't decided what I want to do next. I have looked into different things, but what really excites me is finding "excellence" in the arts and promoting it. I made no money at it, and spend a lot of my savings, but I am happy. Eventually I will have to go back to earning money, but I can't believe how free I am. I thank God for Ayn Rand. Yes, I know she would not approve of my saying that, but the world she describes is only possible with deep faith in Our Lord. I have no problem with being a follower of Jesus and appreciating what Ayn Rand represents. Most Christians out there are going to think I am crazy, but some of you (WenDeeJay in particular) will know exactly what I mean.
posted 6 years ago.
-
soupersushi
The first time I read this book I was 16. I didn't even know Ayn Rand that well but I picked it up and became completely engrossed. Everything about this book completely amazed me. I just kept imagining what kind of world we would be in if we lived by her ideals. I also know that there's no way that we can live in a society such as hers---because it would never be accepted. All in all it was a great read. It moved slowly in some parts but it was definitely worth it.
posted 6 years ago.
-
DaniC
I will say that this is one of my favorite books. I agree that the book is black and white, but I feel that that is the point! Since it is a book, Rand can take the idea/the characters to the extremes to prove her point. I also think it is important to remember when this was written.....Rand lived in Russia under the Bolsheviks and at the time she wrote it the world was a lot less grey than it is now.
I don't think that her point is that the handicapped or immature should be shunned from a perfect society, but rather that laws etc. should not be passed to protect those who are not actively contributing to society (which i don't think includes the handicapped at all) AT THE EXPENSE of those who are actively producing. Being productive is what is responsible for moving the world forward (at least from a technology standpoint--although I can't even BEGIN to get into what is happening ot the Earth here) and when this happens, everybody in society (I mean America---because, like Jeffrey Sachs (I don't think Rand would agree with him in general or vice versa, btw) says in "The End of Poverty", there are people at the bottom of the economic ladder, like in the US, and there are those who are not even ON the ladder and these people should REALLY be helped to get a foothold) eventually benefits.
While Bill Gates could destroy all of the Microsoft code, all of the users could say "hey I think microsoft is crappy" stop using it and use Linux instead. This forces him to create a better product. It is a tacit agreement between the producer and the consumer (I don't think Rand only intends only producers to be consumers). However, most people (especially in america) are willing to let convenience trump quality (no digs at microsoft here--it's a fine product), which is also their decision.
Also, I don't think that one has to take the view that charity and volunteerism contradict capitalism...I think the point is that FORCED charity is "bad". A world without charity would be pretty grim indeed, but then again, so would a world of forced charity.
At any rate, CLEARLY I am a politically confused person, but I think the good thing about Atlas Shrugged is that it is a well-written, thought-provoking book and you can incoporate less extreme views of the philosophy into your personal beliefs pretty easily if you CHOOSE to do so (but you SHOULD get the choice no matter what).posted 6 years ago.
-
skrishna
This book is in no way symbolic of my life, nor do I ascribe to Ayn Rand's philosophy. That being said, this book is one of my favorite reads of all time simply because the way she writes is unbelievable. Her use of prose is gorgeous, and the character development is really good. You can still enjoy the book without necessarily ascribing to the ideas it puts forth!
posted 6 years ago.
-
Eric
What makes this book so special?
I've struggled for a long time to explain to people why this book is so amazing without diving into a deep philosophical or political discussion. What makes this book special to you? I've heard it defined as "life changing" or "symbolic of my life outlook", but I can't put my finger on why it is on my Top 10 list. What does this book mean to you?posted 6 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
Bch bunny, funny thing is, I read this book as a right wing conservative 18 yr old and it started me on my path to socialism! funny thing the unintended consequences. I loved the book, but think it is funny her and all liberterian greedy selfish ways helped me see a more love thy neighbor true Christian ideal. later read the fountainhead and found it stupid and selfconceited, but loved this one. Maybe her ego finally ruined it for me in Fountain, but here I loved the post collapse world of John Galt.
posted 5 years ago.
-
-
uplandpoet
Kati, i agree with everything you say, to bad Rand did not, she believed in the full selfishness that true libertarians hold as sacred. you must not do for others unless it is completely and only to your benefit, which is h=why they do not believe in public schools, hospitals, libraries, roads or the epa or anything else that might be construed as for the common good.
posted 5 years ago.
-
lovemusic
With all due respect, haven't you left out a key component of Ayn Rand's philosophy? She states that a "person of integrity" in doing what is best for himself, does what is best overall. That is a very important caveat that people forget. The problem with the "public schools, hospitals, libraries, roads or the epa or anything else that might be construed as for the common good" is that they are not run with integrity or by people of integrity. What we end up with is government bloating as a result. You can’t deny that private schools, for example, have a better track record than public schools. With private schools, if they don’t produce results, they go out of business; not so with anything run by the government. I think you need to go back and reread Atlas Shrugged. I have read it several times. You can not pick up all the fine points of her philosophy reading it once.
posted 5 years ago.
-
Peach
Hmm... To me, integrity means acting in a way that is consistent with your ethical principles, but is that always a good thing? There have been moral outlooks on the world that were, if not evil (can an idea be evil in itself?), then truly disasterous in their consequences. By his own lights, maybe Hitler was a man of integrity.
To be fair, though, Rand probably meant by "a person of integrity" something rather more specific than how I think of it. Her core values were reason, purpose, self-esteem— so to her there was only really one way to have integrity. Imagine I went to her and said, my core values are charity and faith and promoting these values is what is best for me— she would likely consider it impossible for me to have integrity by adhering to those values.
At least to me, whether or not human integrity is a good thing depends on on the values that give it substance. I love that part in Huck Finn when Huck decides he'll just go to hell because he's acting in direct violation of what he believes to be right— the reader knows that by betraying the values he has been taught, he's doing the right thing.posted 5 years ago.
-
-
uplandpoet
lovemusic: yes, i have studied the libertarian philosophy in detail, it is a harsh and evil code, anti christian, anti human, i have yet to see a private school that could take all comers and deliver an educated population. having attended many years in both public and private schools, i would be in favor of outlawing private ones, as they are the keepers of the flames of those who hold elitism, racism and selfishness as sacred. There are generally justicfications for private institutions of all types, but there is a tendency to run towards the worst that is in mankinds nature in all of them, just my humble opinion, somehow, i guess a free exchange of ideas is appropriate in a forum like this, but I am glad I was able to enjoy the tale without falling for her poisionous thoughts
posted 5 years ago.
-
ajinkyapawar
though i don't completely agree with objectivity, but Ayn Rand's sheer passion for what she believes in renders this work as one of my most cherished, life altering read ever.
posted 5 years ago.
-
iLoveGrilledCheese
I enjoyed Anthem, but tend to think much of what the Ayn Rand Society supports today is not really what I interpreted from her work. That being said, maybe she did mean it one way, and I just filtered it another... in any case, it probably is a key stone to building an ultimately broader world view for many.
posted 5 years ago.
-
its more like all the characters of Rand are set against a dark as coal background....so even off white looks bright...I had my college days, wanting to be Roark or Galt or Remington......at a later stage the realization came that, I might not become Roark....but I should guard being Keating or Toohey.....come to think of it.....even today am impressed by Gail. :)
posted 5 years ago.
-
-
uplandpoet
self righteousness seems to be the overwhelming theme of all her books, which makes for an uninteded comedy. sadly, too many people fail to laugh and buy into her pathetic philosophy. i guess my general hatred for architects (from experience as a carpenter early in my adult life) is only reinforced by this book. he so wants to build a building that is his vision, he fails to realize that an architect is only the servant of the one who is paying for the building. funny thing is, Rand was all about the servants serving their masters in Atlas. I am willing to bet she never saw the irony. I know her main goal was to rail against the failings of communsim, and it certainly had many as practiced by soviet society, but she was so blind to the failings of capitalism, as practiced by the robber barons she so adored.
posted 5 years ago.
-
jloucks
I very much agree with what uplandpoet wrote about this book and Rand's philosophy in general. Self-indulgence and selfishness permeate the Rand books I have read, and I know of readers who have taken her too seriously and alienated themselves from the main stream in carrying their interpretations into their personal philosophies, politics and religion. Definitely sad!
posted 5 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
You might not thinkm so,from reading the mean things I say about Rand's philosophy, but I did enjoy the book. Nice read, nice fantasy post colapse world, kinda the "last two people left on the planet" sencerio. I think if you take it as a great tall tale, it is a fast read for a big book, and generally entertaining, in spite of everything!
posted 5 years ago.
-
vinil
Great book but too long. Don't get me wrong, I am ok with a lengthy book but it's difficult to go ahead when she keeps saying the same things again and again. It was like she was beating me on the head with her philosophy. Brilliant characters and amazing storyline. A must-read. The Fountainhead is Rand's best work for me.
posted 5 years ago.
-
kick07
Actually my initial comment to the book was that she was able to incorporate an entire discourse within the book. an essay within a novel. Haha. but though it's not the perfect book to read when you want to relax, it's an excellent one for conversation. And man, she was able to get to me. For a while at least.
I liked Anthem better. I have yet to read The Fountainhead.posted 5 years ago.
-
kick07 removed this reply 5 years ago
-
-
yogsconnect removed this reply 5 years ago
-
tudd_bullul
Atlas Shrugged is another Rand blockbuster, a page turner at its best. Rand's objectivism is as unmatched as her knowledge and understanding of the railway industry in her time. A must read by all book lovers.
posted 5 years ago.
-
tudd_bullul
Atlas Shrugged is another Rand blockbuster, a page turner at its best. Rand's objectivism is as unmatched as her knowledge and understanding of the railway industry in her time. A must read by all book lovers.
posted 5 years ago.
-
satchit
what is fame & what is notoriety
look into the book & let us start discussionposted 5 years ago.
-
-
satchit
Both are good in different ways and bear no comparisons. Story of Fountainhead revolves around Roark and introspective .
On theother hand Atlas shrugged involes two strong characters who standout not taking the merit of other players in the storyposted 5 years ago.
-
-
uplandpoet
worth a read, but not one of the great books in my opinion, maybe it would have been if she could have just told us a story, and let the libertarian stuff fit into the cracks as it could, but then, i guess some folks love to be hit over the head:)
posted 5 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
yethin, atlas is much better, because, if it is heavy handed, then fountain is stupid selfish rant of propaganda proportions, it is about as entertaining and mien kamp, at least in atlas, there is an interesting story, even if is about a man who hates the people who help him make his fortune.
posted 5 years ago.
-
Hakuin
This is what I said to a friend who had just read this book and had written a gushing note about it. At the cost of recieving hate mails galore this is what I wrote to her," donot like Ayn Rand. Miss Rand appears to me have the insistent and jarring zeal of a freshly circumcized convert. And I have always been very suspicious of and had a strong dislike of any ideology which has a hectoring and an insistent attitude. Ayn Rand professes the rule of cold logic but to further her philosophy she appeals to our emotions, our liking or dislike of certain characters based on their portrayal is the basis on which we are meant to support her theories. I can probably understand that coming from Soviet Russia to the US she was plunged into a wonderful world (to her) of profits and commercialism and swept of her feet she poured out her bitterness at Soviet protectionism. But that so does not make her a Philosopher. Infact I feel that she has an RSS mentality- "Anything to achieve our Ends, the Rest dont Matter". When Logic is swayed by emotion then do we have fundamentalism and that is precisely what she is preaching.
Although, I would like you to counter me and tell me why you think she is different. I have only read her 'Atlas Shrugged' and my opinions are based on that. I felt the same way as you do for about a week and then reason returned to her throne. "posted 5 years ago.
-
Hakuin
This is what I said to a friend who had just read this book and had written a gushing note about it. At the cost of recieving hate mails galore this is what I wrote to her," donot like Ayn Rand. Miss Rand appears to me have the insistent and jarring zeal of a freshly circumcized convert. And I have always been very suspicious of and had a strong dislike of any ideology which has a hectoring and an insistent attitude. Ayn Rand professes the rule of cold logic but to further her philosophy she appeals to our emotions, our liking or dislike of certain characters based on their portrayal is the basis on which we are meant to support her theories. I can probably understand that coming from Soviet Russia to the US she was plunged into a wonderful world (to her) of profits and commercialism and swept of her feet she poured out her bitterness at Soviet protectionism. But that so does not make her a Philosopher. Infact I feel that she has an RSS mentality- "Anything to achieve our Ends, the Rest dont Matter". When Logic is swayed by emotion then do we have fundamentalism and that is precisely what she is preaching.
Although, I would like you to counter me and tell me why you think she is different. I have only read her 'Atlas Shrugged' and my opinions are based on that. I felt the same way as you do for about a week and then reason returned to her throne. "posted 5 years ago.
-
Mincartaugh
Ayn does speak with the voice of the newly converted and it is because of this that I find her books compelling. Her "new eyes" see far more of the good and bad in our society than we--who have lived here our entire lives--do. Her solutions may be somewhat simplistic, but I can't fault her on that. I hadn't seen the problem until she showed it to me.
And before you give up on Ayn Rand completely, perhaps you should read the last in that series, "Anthem". It's a small book, a quick read and here you'll see the transformation of Ayn's naiveté into the weary, over-commercialized American.posted 5 years ago.
-
-
-
-
Satya
"Rand demolished the institution of taxation and labor welfare "
I dont think so. She demolished the idea that taxes are to be paid for without question and no-ones to be questioned. Do you want to pay taxes for the rest of your life and then dont know where the Money is going ? The word demolition sounds good but check what is getting demolished.
Healthy debates on the Powers and Reviews over government institutions have come up in every country.Corruption still exists in every country .Dont you want to name these then in your argument ?
"biggest capitalists of the world take pride in their humanitarian work"
First pride is something that is to be measured by an individual by himself and by his own standards. Even beggars can be proud.I dont challenge that.
"biggest capitalists of the world take pride in their
humanitarian work"
Where does Objectivism come in clash with Humanitarians ?
Who is Human enough to give and take pride in it ? The one who gives or the one who receives?
Friend.Dont be offended. There is logic to everything. I believe that and am folllowing that. I dont think those who took pride in their charity would even be asked if they hadnt been "objectivists" puritans in their previous phases of life.
Thatz all .
Good to hear a different point of view and enjoyed reading the stuff.posted 5 years ago.
-
Peach
Hmm, Satya… I was under the impression that Rand considered retaliation to force and enforcement of contract the only legitimate government functions, which I suppose mainly leaves the police, the military, and the courts — in her scenario, everything else (from schools to the post office to road maintenance) would be privately owned, and unless the leaders of private industry found it in their legitimate self-interest to promote welfare programs, there would certainly be none.
Regarding taxes, she argued that it was economically more in the interest of the rich to pay for the military and the police force, because they had so much more to lose than the poor. Rand believed that ideally the government would be funded through voluntary donations from the rich. She even suggested lotteries as a way to promote government funding in the absence of required taxes, but she admitted she really had no solid idea of how this could be implemented. Elimination or restructuring of taxation would be the last reform to make, according to her, so basically her approach was — "we’ll cross that bridge when we come to it." Ugh.
Actually, I’m not sure how people who are really devoted to her approach can even come to terms with her beliefs about the elimination of taxation. Personally, I don’t believe a military, police force, and court system (even the minimum needed for a country the size of the United States) could be both relatively uncorrupted and adequately funded by private donation, but let’s say for the moment I’m wrong and that it could be possible. Isn’t it a bit odd, not to mention embarrassing, to propose that we’ll worry about actually funding the government once we've made all the other reforms under objectivism? I’m curious how many of her current followers actually believe that “taxes” should be voluntary and, if so, what their plan is. O.oposted 5 years ago.
-
-
uplandpoet
Rand demolished nothing, though her hot air did validate a lot of selfish people. we have always had representation to go with our taxes in this country. the truth is most americans either dont bother to vote or vote for the guys raising the taxes, so they give their tacit approval.
posted 5 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
Peach, i think you got her about right! seen any signs of the rich donating to the treasury lately?:)
posted 5 years ago.
-
saketpofali
Uplandpoet. Why should i give taxes to people who is inefficient in handling the money it gets? I'm ready to give toll for the roads and infrastructure, I'm ready to pay utility bills to all the utility companies but not the government.
posted 5 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
saket: you are ready to pay for roads to private companies, you are ready to pay utility bills to private companies, but not taxes to pay for the regulators to make sure the bridges are safe. that the power comapny and toll master dont let you start pout on their system then hold you up for a fortune to allow you continuied use, or even your personal freedom, of course the only police will be private security in your world, because they are so much more effeceint than paying taxes for a real police department. and you dont want a govt to pay for public education, so lower middle and working class families cannot send their children to school, thereby insuring there will always be a large pool of "drones" to run your machine. God forbid you have to underwrite a health care for seniors and children, the former should just go ahead and die if they did not plan well enough, and the latter should not be encouraged because poor sickly children are a drain on creating a good breeding stock of workers. oh yes Rand and you are master thinkers. brilliant, too bad jesus and buddha were such sappy idiots, they led to more idiots like ghandi and dr king. thank god for libertarians who can show mus the true way to life in harmony with natures greedy little me, me, me, me world!!!
posted 5 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
Trehan: i think what you are saying, who among us have not had to be a team player to get others on the team to cooperate. Rand likes to think of an elite group with everyone else being drones. she was a fool as are most of her followers. If one has a dream, then one has the responsibility to others to sell them on the dream if one expects others to help with the project. if galt wanted to run his factories a certain way, he was have had to done all the work himself, or sold the unions on why it was in THEIR interests to work with him, if the architect in Fountainhead wanted to build his dream building, he should have spent his own money, laid his own bricks or been able to seel his vision, both men were failures, andit was their fault, not the masses fault that they were failures.
posted 5 years ago.
-
-
dagnysidhu
the book is one of the best books i hav evr read .........want 2 read it agian nd agian
posted 5 years ago.
-
dagnysidhu
the book is one of the best books i hav evr read .........want 2 read it agian nd agian
posted 5 years ago.
-
dagnysidhu
the book is one of the best books i hav evr read .........want 2 read it agian nd agian
posted 5 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
do you realize what it means if you think this book represents higher thinmkiing? it means you are a small minded selfish person!
posted 5 years ago.
-
alokgangaramany
well we will have different perspectives for this book, but not lets be judgmental in calling others selfish who like the book. My view is that this book appreciates the achievement of an individual who his honest in his work. It is against those who hide their limitations on the pretext of doing social work.
posted 5 years ago.
-
-
ginny5
What a book?
Can read any no. of times.Its a way to live.
All time favorite.....
Plz read itposted 5 years ago.
-
-
amador
Makes you ask - Are you a mover or a scab? Are you selfish at the expense of others or selfish that benefits others?
posted 5 years ago.
-
-
Aditya
amazing book...what a story....and what awesome characters...Francisco D'Anconia u beauty!
posted 5 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
if you want great literature with a solid philosophy, read Dickens A Christmas Carol. This book, and all her books, promote a small minded selfish way of life as something to be achieved, not something to grow up from.
posted 5 years ago.
-
MysticBlueRose
After reading Atlas Shrugged several times, I realized it was not the philosophy for me. It's too narrow and too mean spirited. I have too open of a heart for this philosophy. But, she's a great writer. The words definitely hold you for all 1000+ pages. From age 18 to about 30 i read this and the Fountainhead every year.
posted 5 years ago.
-
-
anita_grt
a true masterpiece!!!
ayn rand is at her best in analysing human psyche in this book...
spirited tale of the human spirit being killed & its re-incarnation...posted 5 years ago.
-
-
debanjandey
I desperately wanted to be able to finish it, but got stuck somewhere after the railroad celebrations. Its too slow!
posted 5 years ago.
-
snuffles
Hey, around that part it really gets dull, but don't fall into the trap, just push your way forward for about 100 pages or so, I promise you it will get so exciting after that that you'll take it with you to the loo! trust me, just stick to it till it gets inetersting, otherwise u're not being fair to such an awesome book...
posted 5 years ago.
-
-
snuffles
ya i've read that... its a wonderful book. really sad end, but an awesome piece of literature nevertheless...
posted 5 years ago.
-
Girish
Wonderful book... the thoughts and reality of pursuing one's objectives in life are best potrayed in this book. The very thought of giving up everything that you have toiled all your life to achieve , just for the sake of keeping it away from the foolishness of the world , is turly amazing and would fit in even to this date for all those objective people. In all its a classic worth every word that's in it.
posted 5 years ago.
-
rajhalve
Andy, Also , I think its about the fact that once having compromised, even a "little", can you be with yourself?...if you feel guilt, you Can be a Roark / Galt/the best you can be...if you feel nothing, you are a Toohey!
posted 5 years ago.
-
-
uplandpoet
kurt c, i agree, it is a good warning at how bad the libertarians can screw up a society! notice that by the end, he has managed to destroy almost everything he touches, yet he blames everyone but himself, much like the fountainheads roark who ends in failure, not for lack of ability, but because he will not take responsibility for his actions. in that case, if he believed in the damn building so much, why didnt he build it himself? same for galt, if he could have run his copper mines so well, why didnt he get a pick ax and go to work for living?
posted 5 years ago.
-
RamSam
Reardon did go to work for a living- in a new society where the government didn't control his earnings and out put. I thought this was thought provoking- and a warning to people who think a government passing earning laws and monopoly laws is a good thing. I also found the characters fascinating and loved the dialogue. Good dialogue that is unpredictable and not cliche is so hard to find, and Rand did this well! My first Rand book, I am not a glassy eyed follower by any means, but I will read more.
posted 5 years ago.
-
-
sanchona
Considering the fact that Ayn Rand came from the old USSR's repressive communist/socialist regime, the democratic capitalist model in place in western democracies are a breath of fresh air to her. But she has idealised and caricaturised the western democratic capitalist model in a "utopian" model in her model. The people in her utopian world are perfect -- but we know man is flawed. There will those who will cheat, take advantage of those weaker than themselves. There is plenty of greed and little of forgiveness, and without forgiveness, it leads to acts of vengeance etc. All these flaws are what makes people and the world interesting. It is great material for the novelists to turn into stories for their novels.
What I love about "Atlas Shrugged" is the commitment of the main characters, to make it another fight for their ideals, to save another soul, as it were, when they have already got their safe haven.
I see this as a true reflection of what the world is today -- there are those who would tilt at windmills, fight the seemingly unwinnable cause -- the greens are at the forefront of one of these many battles and they face an opposition with real power in wealth and political might behind them, people unwilling to give up their goose that has laid them their golden eggs. :) Like most people I cheer the idealists on, lend them my moral support. I'm only sorry I haven't more to contribute. :(
We wouldn't be reading Atlas Shrugged if it wasn't well written. Many wonderful stories have been left on the wayside, as many writers know.posted 5 years ago.
-
dig d
like all the rand i've looked at, overrated. which is just this and fountainhead, not having the patience for more. why the cultish devotion from glassy eyed randites? never did get it.
posted 5 years ago.
-
nowirehangers
i've been reading this on and off for about a year. parts of it are interesting but it's sloooowwww...
posted 5 years ago.
-
I actually have been trying to read this for long.. even managed to get half way thru. But quite a terrible pace and maybe its difficult to understand Rand's viewpoints with her Socialist past.. the economic scenarios are heavily influenced by anti capitalism, maybe she never actually took over the US ideals of free market.
posted 5 years ago.
-
varghese k
I have read it, but I would consider it scandalous to put it on my shelf. It's nothing but the philosophy of selfishness.
posted 5 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
varghese, why would you not put it on your shelf? your shelf reflects your reading experience, not just the ones you are glad you read. i like having the dogs on mine, it leads to interesting conversations....though sometimes these libertarians make me rethink that:)
posted 5 years ago.
-
mrizvandi
Atlas Shrugged is a novel by Ayn Rand, first published in 1957 in the United States. It was Rand's last work of fiction before concentrating her writings exclusively on philosophy, politics and cultural criticism. At over one thousand pages in length, it was considered by her to be her magnum opus.The book explores a number of philosophical themes that Rand would subsequently develop into the philosophy of Objectivism.
posted 5 years ago.
-
Josh L
I must say that this is an intriguing tale...however, I get chills whenever I read the neoliberal, postmodern philisophical BULLSHIT that Ayn Rand writes about under the label of "Objectivism".....to me, this is possibly the most selfish and anthropocentric view of man's role on earth that I have ever encountered. Shame on Ayn Rand for empowering hoardes of Neocons with her ideals about the environment and its relative uselessness to man...
posted 5 years ago.
-
meru_pc
Josh, I would urge you to look at the essence, as the planet changes so does how we need to interact with it .. she wrote this in the 40s/50s. Pls do google Ayn Rand/ environment, i remember doing that a few yrs ago and finding some great discussions abt what her views on the planet wud be under today's circumstances and why.
posted 5 years ago.
-
-
craigo
I was the only person in my high school that I was aware of that had read this book. Back then I accidently discovered this masterpiece while browsing a used bookstore's inventory. Since that time I've re-read this book several times.
I find it both entertaining and thought provoking.
I've enjoyed reading (almost) every response from others at this site. Thank you!posted 5 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
criago, i would hardly call it a masterpiece, but it is one of the most famous novels based on the philosophy of greed and selfishness known as libertarianism. i enjoyed reading it when i was about 13, though it certainly sent me on my way from conservative Republican to Democratic Socialist, her logic was so extreme and so flawed, it made me look at why I was so close to her position. As I grew up and went to college, I moved further and further away from the hateful selfishness Rand praises in all her writings. Glad I read it, sorry so many small minded people find so much comfort in it though.
posted 5 years ago.
-
Not a bad book, but the topic this book is centered around itself is bad and frowned upon; the selfish and greediness portrayed is not believed to be acceptable in any religion, nor is it very good in general moral beliefs (even for those who don't have a religion). I agree with you, uplandpoet, in most aspects. Readers, do not be confused by the misleading concept in this book. Not for the "little ones" with minds like clay, if you follow :)
posted 5 years ago.
-
Ali M
Everyone should read this book atleast once a month :).Seriously this book will change your life and your perspective towards it even if you don't agree with her completely. This book will tear the "goody goody" face of your surroundings and present to you the real monstrosoties of it.
posted 5 years ago.
-
-
-
kavita
this book changed my thoughts about the rich and the poor for ever. now i see it practically that half of the population does not want to work at all. they want o pull the person who is climbing the ladder. this is the truth.
posted 5 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
ironically, russia is now more the model for rands philosophy than the usa. we are still suffering from too much corrupt capitalistic facism, that is to say business that has run amok in govt, but we are not quite the barbaric pure robber baron state that russia has become, i wonder if rand would be proud?
posted 5 years ago.
-
fadwa q
Bought it, but did not read it yet. I will be reading the comments to motivate me to start.
posted 5 years ago.
-
aarti d
Ayn Rand is one of the best writer both his books fountain head & atlas shrugged are the master piece. We lose on something if we don't read these books
posted 5 years ago.
-
Garland G
This book is brilliant; well thought out and very well written. Rand spent many years planning the plot and characters of this masterpiece. I have also read her book The Fountainhead and enjoyed it immensely. If you're new to her writing, her book Anthem is a great place to start. It's her philosophical beliefs told briefly in a short novella.
posted 5 years ago.
-
evelyn l
This is sooo good. This is my 4th reread already.
This about a man who promise to stop the motor of the world and he did!!!posted 5 years ago.
-
Anthony
Yes Dagny Taggart is a female and a strong one, as written by Rand. She also gets raped in the novel by her lover. So I wouldn't hold AS out as some feminist tome.
posted 5 years ago.
-
Confessions
All sex in Atlas Shrugged is consensual. All be it, Rough, but definitely consensual.
Now if you want to talk about The Fountainhead, there is room for discussion there. However, Rand stated, "if it was rape, it was rape by engraved invitation."posted 5 years ago.
-
-
Anthony removed this reply 5 years ago
-
Confessions
This book is great. The reading audience is for everyone. Even if you don’t agree with her whole philosophy anyone of intelligence would be able to find qualities that they would strive to live for! How someone can read this and not think, “Wow, I want to be a better person! I want to produce, use my mind and be of value.”
I liked it the first time and liked it better the second. Ayn Rand is a great author. I wish she had written more fiction. Way too many moochers and looters in the world, quite a few have posted comments here!posted 5 years ago.
-
abhilash m
"Every man builds his world in his own image. He has the power to choose, but no power to escape the necessity of choice"...what more about this book
posted 5 years ago.
-
abhilash m removed this reply 5 years ago
-
Pauline N
Dagny Taggert is one of her kind. I like...no!no! love her guts. She is wat every woman modern woman should strive to be like if not better.She knows what she wants in life, and goes for it with all she's got.
posted 5 years ago.
-
jon l
She's also an anti-feminist. She views women as something to be dominated sexually. Equally insulting to humanity is her view on sex itself. It is a passion devoid of emotion. I very much disagree with Ayn Rand's view of economics and esp. capitalism as the height of humankind's socio-economic development.
posted 5 years ago.
-
The Artist FKA Hoopidy Fly Pimp Mac Daddy Re-Kleiner O-19er Coming In For A Landing Boy He's A Hella Fresh Taco Bell Connoisseur
I don't agree that her view of sex as being a passion devoid of emotion. I do think she emphasizes the animalistic side of sex (the passion) without minimizing the importance of the emotional side to the equation.
posted 5 years ago.
-
Zoe
On the contrary, I think Ayn Rand is actually quite a forward thinking, sexually empowered, woman. If you read her biography (The Passion of Ayn Rand), and get a feel for many of her personal view points, you get the impression that she was actually one of the very first women to challenge societally dictated gender roles and views on romance and relationships.
Also, she was a little crazy, but you know. Great genius, and all that.posted 5 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
jon, but if you are selfish and small minded, she does a nice job of giving you a flag to wrap yourself in:)
posted 5 years ago.
-
-
Pauline N
A recommendations to all who have enjoyed reading atlas ahrugget. Trys all her other books and find out more about this exeptional woman from the internet. I find her books as not just fictions, but like a prophesy of the future.
posted 5 years ago.
-
Smita J
Everything she says in Fountainhead and Atlas shrugged, she's already said in We The Living. And We The Living is an earlier book.
posted 5 years ago.
-
fred
As a liberal, will I actually enjoy reading this? My only impression of it so far is from South Park.
posted 5 years ago.
-
Kipple
As a liberal, I absolutely hated it. It's a bunch of long-winded, ethical egoist nonsense. There's a 50+ speech in it, for crying out loud.
posted 5 years ago.
-
The Artist FKA Hoopidy Fly Pimp Mac Daddy Re-Kleiner O-19er Coming In For A Landing Boy He's A Hella Fresh Taco Bell Connoisseur
as a liberal, i absolutely loved it. it challenged my way of thinking and was so well written with some of best character development i have ever had the privilege of reading in a book. highly recommended. don't be scared of things that don't mesh with your way of thinking. you will never learn anything.
posted 5 years ago.
-
RagnarDanneskjold
It's a good book no doubt..but unlivable...she fails to draw a line when it comes to the extent her philosophy can be practiced
posted 5 years ago.
-
Irishrose
wow... can't even imagine putting South Park in the same world as Rand. Would like to see how you can draw that conclusion. I will need a dot to dot map, Uplandpoet. I am not being sarcastic... just don't see it.
I agree with those that say some of her earlier works echo in this, but that doesn't bother me. The message is presented in different manners and enjoyable.
My favorite ... very creative... is Anthem.posted 5 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
well, lets see, south park and rand's writings are both libertarian based, both are entertaining on a shallow pop culture sort of way and they both get tiresome very quickly. though i have to say south park is a little less silly than rand...
posted 5 years ago.
-
-
ken s
Ayn Rand's Antheam is the first book of hers I read and that was about many years when I was in the Army. I'm 63 now and her writtings still thrill now although I see that I have to bo back and start rereading them again. I recently finished reading Captialism the unknown iedal and the voice of reason. I still need to go back and read them again to see the south park parallel. Most philisophical ideas I find I don't think will work quite the way people think, but some of the basics will. People will be people and they won't fowllow any specific idea without changing it. Case in point is communism, It was there for awhile and now it is some what defunked. Its basic might have worked, but it was changed so much that Probably would make Karl Marc's roll over in his grave if he knew.
posted 5 years ago.
-
ken s
I must also say that Ayn Rand came from Russia and she loved America, but did become somewhat disillusioned as time went by
posted 5 years ago.
-
ken s
I must also say that Ayn Rand came from Russia and she loved America, but did become somewhat disillusioned as time went by
posted 5 years ago.
-
ken s
She became disillusioned as time went by, some of the things that she saw. But as far as I can tell she still loved America until her death dillusioned or not.
posted 5 years ago.
-
-
uplandpoet
do you not take any books seriously? i mean this is a thick book, you take it seriously, or one of the rabid fans will throw it at you and mess up your collar!
posted 5 years ago.
-
-
Melanie T
Not a watcher of South Park, but my impression of it is VERY different than my impression of this book. South Park is low humor, and sort of trashy.. I also don't see how Atlas Shrugged was 'pop culture' at all. It was a struggle to get through, and I was proud to get to the end and understand the progression.
posted 5 years ago.
-
-
Dinosaur18
This book definately shot my self-esteem through the roof. It's inspired me to achieve what makes me happy. Based on rational-self interest, of course ;)
posted 5 years ago.
-
Puzzled removed this reply 5 years ago
-
Puzzled removed this reply 5 years ago
-
Puzzled removed this reply 5 years ago
-
Puzzled
(i am yet to read "atlas shrugged" but have read "we the living", so i guess it wouldn't be irrelevant if i put my opinion regarding her ideas.)
In a world of conflicting desires being selfish makes sense to me. If someone is not selfish, doesn't its just that
1. the person's interests coincides with that of another? or
2. the person happens to be out of the competition because he/she doesn't need or want something which another pursues?posted 5 years ago.
-
Puzzled
So is it just a man-eating-man-world?
well, i can "treat another as i would expect to be treated" but to do that doesn't it take for me to recognize something of myself in another?. "the self" ?posted 5 years ago.
-
Sonny Baronia
simply, what this book and most of other books by ayn rand say is that - sometimes, by helping, you are insulting the capability of that person to help himself/herself...
posted 5 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
actually, libertarian philosophy, which inspires her work, in fact her work also inspires libertarianism, postulates that the highest most noble cause is pure self interest, which amounts, in practice to letting the poor and weak suffer while the haves are free to take all they can get and feel morally supperior while doing it.
i am sure the soviet system she grew up under would put anyone off, but those of us who have the benefit of a free western upbringing do not have her excuse for idealizing and idolizing selfishness and greed!posted 5 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
of course my previous comment is the opinion of an untrained and unreformed believer in social justice, opinions may vary:)
posted 5 years ago.
-
ReaderGuy
First, isn't five stars the highest rating that you can give to a book? Reading your opinion about Ayn Rand's philosophy, I do not understand what made you rate the book five stars.
Second, I think that Ayn Rand is quite often misinterpreted, and that may be because, according to me, she mixes up the "self" in "selfishness" (the one with the lowercase 's') with the Self in spirituality (the uppercase 'S'). Because of this confusion, she comes up with shocking (to some) titles like "The Virtue of Selfishness" etc.
uplandpoet, Ayn Rand did not idealize or idolize greed. If you read her books, you can see that it is the guy who writes that negative stuff about Howard Roark in "The Fountainhead" (I forget his name; read the book long ago) is the one who is greedy. Such people will write whatever is popular so as to be read and get more money. Howard Roark is anything but greedy. He just wants what his work deserves - nothing more, nothing less. If you believe in social justice, uplandpoet, then you should LOVE Ayn Rand. She criticizes the social injustice of mediocrity being rewarded and genius being vilified.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
katiscousinga
Dear uplandpoet, I'd hoped to be reading comments about the book itself, not bashing of other readers. You might want to think about the injustice of hurling your insults at readers whose opinions of the book and its effect on them differ from yours. Perhaps some training in social good manners might be in order. Just my opinion, of course.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Readerguy, nice post. You were able to articulate something I've been trying to put into words for about 10 years and with increasing urgency in the last 3 or 4. Thanks!
So, are they actually going to move ahead with the movie? I've heard this rumor for a looong time. By the time they make the film, Jolie will be in retirement. I think Galt should be an absolutely unknown actor.posted 4 years ago.
-
By the by, did anyone see John Stossel's report called Greed from many years ago? I'm especially curious about Katiscousinga and readerguy's response to his defense of greed as a virtue in and of itself. He depicts the good that so-called "greed" does for our society, but I'm not sure greed is the right word in his case either. I'm not sure what he's confusing it with. I only ask because I am still grappling with that particular question.
posted 4 years ago.
-
katiscousinga
Dear heather, I didn't see the Stossel Report, but I believe I did hear about it. Perhaps one way I'd describe the appearance of a conflict is in terms like this. Those who covet what someone else has are sinners. Therefore others who want to mislabel motivated financially successful people as evil sinners "equate" one who wants to achieve one's own wealth with the sinner who chooses to covet someone else's wealth. Obviously it is not the same at all. But greed is about taking more than what one earns for one's self as well as the pursuit of it (to be covetous of what someone else already has). I am speaking here in this example of financial wealth in particular. Atlas Shrugged delves into the covetous looters who are envious of talent or abilities, and build rationales such as "social justice" to take for themselves the fruits of the talented and able without just compensation. Clearly there is no justice in that, as, a person who chooses to develop themselves within their abilities, or in many cases, beyond their perceived abilities, somehow "owes" anyone other than one's Maker for that good fortune resulting from the individual's own efforts. Choosing to share is what makes a person great, not forcing or attempting to shame others to give up what they rightfully earn or were born to have at their disposal. So if that doesn't muddy things up for you more, I'll be glad!
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
drjayeshsharma
hi people.... i am a long term ayn rand fan, & believer in the libertarian philosophy. recently i have started listening to podcasts & would recommend EconTalk to anyone interested. I wanted to know about similar podcasts & people here would be as good a place as any to start
posted 4 years ago.
-
sundaytatu
well this book is sooo preachy! the same idea gets stated again & again & again & again! aaaah! & each time the speaker is very long winded... as well, her ideas, while obviously coming from a very intelligent & clever & well educated point-of-view, are so very one-sided & tunnel visioned... all people with a social conscience are presented as weak snivelling whining liars without morals or good sense of any kind & the industrialists seem to have no idea that there might be anything detrimental involved in all this endless mining & railroading & factory building... while i can certainly appreciate the idea that each person contributing their very best could indeed lead to a great society its just not true that everyone has the same opportunities to contribute despite their possible talents & motivations... her brief mention of other countries is so demeaning & insulting i feel it took credence away from her loftier ideas... i got the feeling that in her utopian atlantis she would let the blind or less gifted just die on the side of the road! so if you are less than amazing & american you are not worth much? she is so pro riches that the possession of money seems to confer a morality on her characters... i know it is so much more complex than that but even when they go out to eat every little thing they possess & are surrounded by is bettered by their presence... because they are rich? what about the guy who mines those diamonds & that gold? i guess because they were born in south africa with dark skin they are not worth as much as american industrialists? i feel its possible that many people have abilities & motives & drives & desires to succeed & do great things but less than those many have lives that opportune them to follow that energy to its fullest potential... & sometimes people really do wonderful things for other people without looting from anyone else... ms.rand gives an across the board condemnation of anyone ever doing anything nice for anyone else... hmmm... but her world is so conveniently black & white... not very much like the real world! her characters are superhuman while trying to say that we would all be that way if we only worked to our full potential... if you dont have everything you want or need you must be lazy... & dagny is ridiculous! her love life is just opportunistic... i do appreciate the idea that the truth is something to always seek & give & communicate... but this is a philosophy which seems to me it would rely on slave labor, & slave labor kept conveniently hidden away from those who "deserve" the wealth- those high & mighty self serving industrialists... there is a way to appreciate & not abuse those who have the brilliance to create & build from scratch while also being compassionate & knowing the joy of helping someone or just doing something that might benefit many- your own self & others together...
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
drjayeshsharma
ohh this is so tripe. i don't know where to begin, i couldn't even finish reading your rant, but would like to clarify what i git out of the novel. what she wants is a world where we are not held back by the society. her heroes are (usually) not born rich, & many who are born rich are the villains. So its not about how much money you possess, its about how much money you have MADE. its obviously an exaggeration, what fiction isn't? but the idea is sound. instead of society (a shorthand for either government or religious institutes, nowadays also pressure groups) controlling the individuals, wouldn't it be nice if we made our own destinies & thrive or perish based on our merit as judged by the market? this replaces government provision & control of amenities, & the control religions & sects of what they call morals. i will not sacrifice myself to others, nor ask any to sacrifice themselves for me. compassion is discretionary rather than mandatory, & charity based on merit rather than need. i.e., making sure your charity goes to people you approve of, but are unlucky, rather than giving to the most needy. whats wrong with all this?
posted 4 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
Tripe? i do not know sundaytatu at all, but the comments are so dead on it struck a nerve with yoyr little greedy selfish self! find a libertarian and you will find a hateful racist who thinks the world is their entitlement, while they bemoan any other entitlement others might demand!
keep pumping your econ podcasts, if you play them loud enough you dont have to think about the truth...posted 4 years ago.
-
-
drjayeshsharma
yeah right.... i am a doctor from india. working in a foreign country for the expatriate community here. i earn a pittance . say 50 thousand dollars a year.... i am neither rich, nor am i going to be. i was born in the indian middle class & will die in it. not the recipe for a racist who thinks world is my entitlement, is it? & all you attacked is what u think i am. its called ad hominim attack. i put forward a point of view, u had nothing to say about it, but a lot about what u presumed me to be. its kind of sad that the last word in your bilge is truth. there is no regard for truth anywhere in what you have wrtitten
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
-
uplandpoet
so i take it you think most libertarians support the positions i outlined? i think not, no matter the geography, the heart remains the same, small and selfish, or they soon leave the party adn the philosophy behind. there is room for support of a free society without jumping in bed with these cave men (and women)
posted 4 years ago.
-
To be honest I don't know of many people of any political persuasion that believe reparations (be it to Native Americans or descendants of slaves) are practical or realistic. Anarchist/Minarchist Libertarians don't support government at all so the reason they are opposed to government sponsored programs has nothing to do with race, it's a product of their political philosophy. I don't much care what you think about them otherwise (for the record I find Libertarian ideals to be impracticable), but to characterize all Libertarians as racist is unacceptable.
posted 4 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
fair enough, you dont have to accept it. but i am yet waiting to meet or read after one who isnt
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
uplandpoet
you do seem to have a serious problem with absurdity, as for me, i am getting used to it from you.
as for the others who have this book on your shelf, i apologize that this has declined into a series of name callings. i find libertarianism "appalling", i am not "ignorant" of the facts, but i do admit it gets a little "absurd" at times.posted 4 years ago.
-
Jim H
zero,
In regard to anarchist libertarians not supporting government at all, I assume this includes state and local government, not just the federal government. So how do roads and other public infrastructure get built and maintained? How are epidemics dealt with? How is public order maintained? How about traffic control? These are not trick questions, and I am not anti-libertarian, although I don't agree with Ayn Rand's philosophy.
JHposted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
Jim H
I know your comments aren't directed at me, but I would like to respond anyway. I don't find the idea of people being treated on merit appalling, but who decides what is meritorious behavior and what is not? Also, I didn't interpret lady franklin's post as a personal attack against you. I read it as tongue-in-cheek satire directed at "true believers" of any ideology.
JHposted 4 years ago.
-
drjayeshsharma
right, jim. Who decides? thats the biggest question isn't it? the answer by religious right is bible/qoran/geeta.... whatever. the socialists say government. capitalists say markets, which is a short hand for saying no one in particular, but lets each exercise our independent judgments in a free society without either coercion or subsidy. Individual decisions made by consumers & producers alike lead to a price for goods & services, how much your goods are valued determines how rich you are. Economics 101
posted 4 years ago.
-
Jim H
I agree with what you said about coercion and subsidy, although I think that free enterprise needs some controls. Apparently in the airline industry deregulation has lead to poor customer service, at least here in the U. S.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
uplandpoet
zero, you are quite correct, it is appalling that EVERY libertarian i ever met was a racist. surely there must be ONE that isn't.....
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
uplandpoet
Wow! That is a relief, let me quickly retract my previous statements. so as a libertarian, you support reparations to African Americans to compensate them for work required but not paid for by their ancestors, for opportunies denied them and their ancestors post slavery, you support restitution of indian lands and rights, and of course you respect the just rights of "mexican amercans" whose ancestors straddled the border long before there was an america or a mexico? good, and while we are at ityou believe in an intelligent form of affirmative action and a strong sociio-economic support system to correct previous injustices on all people who were exploited/repressed/oppressed and abused by robber barons of previous and current generations? if not, then you are a racist, whether you are a libertarian or not. all the libertarians i have met would oppose theese messures. i first became interested in libertarianism in the late 1970s because the "freedom" card interested me, but soon i found myself surrounded by hateful small minded people, much like the "good" folks in one of Ayn Rand's novels. I beleive that a citizen should have the right to do whatever he/she wishes, as long as they are not harming others, that is a pretty standard definition of a free society, but libertarians believe one should be able to do as one pleases without concern for the consequences for their fellowmen, this makes them greedy, shelfish, small minded and racist. sorry of your little glass slipper fits, you oughta wear it....
posted 4 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
so stephen, no, i will not be retracting my earlier comments unless you really surprise me...
posted 4 years ago.
-
Jim H
poet,
In regard to reparations to African Americans, can you offer any specifics? Should African Americans who are wealthy or at least well off, such as professional athletes, actors, musicians, and TV personalities, as well as doctors and lawyers, get reparations too? Should all African Americans whose ancestors were slaves get the same amount of reparations, regardless of income, or are you thinking of sliding-scale reparations. How would reparations be distributed? Would there be a lump sum payment or monthly payments over the lifetime of each recipient? And, last of all, what do you think about the establishment of an education fund instead of payments?
JHposted 4 years ago.
-
Jim H
poet,
Here are several other questions to consider as you draft a reparations proposal for Congress. Should only descendants of American slave owners be taxed to foot the bill or should everyone (except African American descendants of slaves) be taxed? How about the descendants of European-based slave merchants and slave transporters and slave financiers? How about the descendants of African tribesmen who captured other Africans and turned them over (no doubt for profit) to slave merchants? As a fair-minded American, I'd feel a little shafted if only American citizens had to foot the bill. I think a more appropriate venue would be the United Nations rather than the U. S. Congress. That way, the living descendants of all Europeans and Africans who were involved in capturing, transporting, and selling of slaves to Americans, or in financing any of those enterprises, would be liable and accountable too.posted 4 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
Hi Jim! Actually, I am not too concerned with the details of reparations, i think they should be negogiated by the parties inviolved, of which i would likely have a minor part as a person who had to pay something. as to wealth and sliding scales, hmm, well if i owe donald trump a dollar, i have to pay him, even if he is rich and i am not. the fact that someone overcame an unfair situation does not void the unfairness. if i rob a bank, yet the stockholders remain wealthy, i still go to jail when caught...
posted 4 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
jim, again, not sure how familiar you are with american civil law, maybe more so than i am, but one must deal with the jurisdiction at hand. certainly the brits, the dutch and many others, including africans were involved and are also to one degree or another responsible, but the primary concern i have is the ongoing system that is only now really ending and in many ways continues, not just the slavery, but the 150 yrs after. that is pretty much an american problem, though i guess you could make the case that if such and such tribal leader had not sold a certain member of another tribe to a certain dutch trader and if a certain english auctioneer had not have sold that slave at an auction house owned by a certain french tading company even though it was located in boston, then maybe a certain black child in mississippi in 1959 would not have been badly treated, causing his heirs to have an unfair position on the world, but that is pretty complex logic. i think if one can determine to what extent institutional racism, slavery and segregation has harmed a "typical" african american, then one could devise a compensation package of cash and or benefits that would have as a remedy and maybe even set aside a certain amount as punitive damages, but if the system is working hard to correct itself, then punitive damages might not apply. Same goes for native american, same goes for various groups of immigrants and for those who have preexisting familial rights to access to american resources and are yet now treated as foreigners....
posted 4 years ago.
-
Jim H
poet,
You make some excellent points. When my mind is refreshed, I may pursue our discussion. (Or not.) : )
JHposted 4 years ago.
-
Jim H
Linda,
I can't see how "individualism" in and of itself is any more (or less) a value than "selflessness." Both can have bad consequences. In the past few decades in America, individualism, self-expression, "do your own thing," and "me first" has proliferated as "community" has fragmented. This flowering of individualism doesn't seem to be based on reason. By the way, I see that you've read Castenada. Me too!
JH
JHposted 4 years ago.
-
Jim H
Poet,
I grew up among three cultures: white, black, & Choctaw. Why, I used to roll old tires down red dirt banks with Frog and Goat at dusk with the crickets ramping up and the smell of cotton poison lingering in the cooling heat haze... Ok, so I'm off topic.
Punitive damages? Off-hand I can think of two problems with good intentions: the law of unintended consequences, and I forgot the other one. The Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians has reparations, in a sense, in the form of gambling -- oops! I mean gaming. Every year the Chief & other officials of the tribe split the proceeds among all the members. It probably varies from year to year, but a man I knew got a check for $400.00 a few years ago (which is probably typical of what the rank and file get) and proceeded to drink and gamble it away. My aged mother bailed him out of jail because she depended on him for yard work but also because he was her friend. Of course it was his choice to spree the money away, and perhaps other members of the tribe used their cut in more responsible ways. Also, in Mississippi, punitive damages awarded in several lawsuits against physicians drove more than a few of them out of the state, and Mississippi needs all the doctors it can get. Liability insurance for doctors also went through the roof. But no matter. The plaintiffs were no doubt happy, and the lawyers were glad to do their part, for a modest fee, of course. So, sure -- why not? Let American taxpayers bankroll reparations for African Americans and Native Americans. But why stop there? Why not reparations for all other hyphenated-Americans? God knows the Irish (I'm Scots-Irish) were discriminated against for years and years and years. I'm thinking Congress could divert all the money for foreign aid into a reparations fund, although, as much as the U.S. government seems to give away each year, it would be a mere drop in the bucket if you're talking punitive damages. So let's go borrow more money from the international banks. A few billion more won't make any difference since Uncle Sam is already up to his eyeballs in debt, as are many of "we the people." Maybe reparations would stimulate the economy! So if there's to be reparations, let's start with Native Americans, since they were here before Europeans or Africans and have been shafted every which way but loose (as Clint Eastwood might say). Then African-Americans. But strictly a lump sum, cash & carry settlement. No punitive damages!
Okay, that's my rant and I'm sticking to it, but your arguments are compelling.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
pugnasties
As a libertarian and as someone who knows a lot of libertarians from all over the country I can only assume you've only met, what like, 3 of us in your life to say that we are all racists. I even know - as hard as it is for you to believe - libertarians that are not "white".
posted 4 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
funny thing, i have met many libertarians, read after even more and of course every libertarian isnt white, most are, but then most republicans are white, too. as bad as the democrats have gotten it from time to time since 1964, most folks of color, and most working folks in general know the one party that has not made it a policy to restrict, oppress and other wise harrass them. how many libertarians do you know? who have you read besides Ayn Rand, though she is bad enough all by her little ole dead self...
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
uplandpoet
speaking of geography, i notice that of the 30 states where the libertarians are on the ballot and mostly in the south and the west, where race tends to be at least more openly an acceptable reason to treat people differently (not that i am saying new england and the rust belt are less racist, only less obvious about it), also, somehow ron paul and bob barr dont inspire me as racist justice and open borders candidates.
posted 4 years ago.
-
katiscousinga
Two months later, you still are here spewing your memes. This is not a political discussion forum. Can you not comprehend that? What are you so afraid of? Why not let people discuss the book itself in peace? Hmmmm. Perhaps it is you who has nothing better to do but snipe at folks who desire to explore Ms. Rand's philosophy. You might want to explore your own motives for continuing to post your attacks here.
Please, give it a rest. You might want to check out some political forum boards like stormfront or democraticunderground. They like namecalling there.
Just a recommendation for something else to read and write about rather than to disrupt a book forum with disrespectful and inappropriate off-topic comments.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Libertarians? What don't you guys shake hands and agree that you all should be enslaved by this dirge of a book. I mean, it really is rubbish. Somehow it manages to make the Da Vinci Code look like high education. And thats from a fascist consuming and all subsuming despot out to strike fear into the hearts of Ayn Rand and other elitist fools hehehe :)
posted 4 years ago.
-
drjayeshsharma
very well articulated, lady franklin boltvolt the iii. Don't put any substance in the comment, & no one can attack you on the substance
posted 4 years ago.
-
Jim H
I haven't read Atlas Shrugged, but I read Anthem in college and hated it, both in regard to it's literary merit (I couldn't discern any) and its pseudo-philosophy-babble. By the way, do you always grimace when you have your picture taken or is this your "war face" that you use to intimidate fools? : )
JH
JHposted 4 years ago.
-
-
Linda B
I consider this to be my favorite book. I've read it twice. The second time I did was because I remembered how good I felt after the first time reading it. I probably will again. The way Rand depicts the effects of "selflessless" in society is nothing less than brilliant. I highly recommend this to everyone. Do not let the size of it put you off...you won't want it to end.
posted 4 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
beginning to wonder if we should take this discussion/name calling/ street fight elsewhere... the good folks who jsut want to read a book and then offer a polite comment are probably feeling a bit flooded out at the moment.
my good doc, not saying you are or are not racist, but your position certainly doesnt prevent you from being racist. in american we have racist at the top, the middle and at the bottom of the heap. i gather from an indian perspective, you have no appreciaition for a caste/class system that prevents certain segments of society from accessing all the benefits offered to other sections?posted 4 years ago.
-
drjayeshsharma
of course i know all about the caste system, & come take a look, all the government imposed solutions are making the problems worse. i can talk ad nauseam about it, but this is not the forum. the point is who do u trust to make the amends, the beaurocrats? what historical basis is there for believing in them doing the right thing?
posted 4 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
drjayeshsharma said:
“of course i know all about the caste system, & come take a look, all the government imposed solutions are making the problems worse. i can talk ad nauseam about it, but this is not the forum. the point is who do u trust to make the amends, the beaurocrats? what historical basis is there for believing in them doing the right thing?”
Well, if you love the robber baron days, then, of course you love Rand, but for those of us in america, at least, who have seen the great improvements, with flaws, of course, that the bureaucrats have wrought from say 1930 until 1980, and even more recently, it is pretty clear what libertarianism brings, iit brings unfairness, exploitation of the masses for the benefit of the few, disease, poverty and social unrest. even though the reagan/bush administrations have burdened us with 20 yrs of hard times, the new deal/great society reforms have managed to save much of what they have sought to destroy and roll back. public education, health and safety as well as environmental issues are much better than they were the last time the libertarians had long term control of the govt, which ended with the hoover admin and the great depression.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Drjayeshsharma reads the comment and finds it insubstantial. How strange when I thought it was clear what I was saying. This coffin of a book need but be the resting place for those who seek shelter in its hallowed coffers. Me? Well I'm rich enough - Rand just leads me to a further povety of thought. Be free all you like but understand in my utter and total freedom, according to your ill defined dictates, I shall utterly distraught any confusion in your arguement or even in your defence. The castle has high walls but the drawbridge is down - :)
posted 4 years ago.
-
To Jim h, I'm shrugging as I say this, but my crocodiles have got no teeth, it's the lash of the tail you have to watch out for :)
posted 4 years ago.
-
Jim H
Ms. Boltvolt,
As you sally forth from your fortress to slay dragons, fools, windmills, etc., be sure to cover your flanks. By the way, I take it that the photo of your fierce visage is inspired by Tibetan Buddhist iconography. Am I right?
JH : )posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Oh Jim, oh Jim, the dragons are fables, the fools run the countries and I buy from bread from the supermarket. Tibetan buddhist iconography? You do make me smile. If you can really work out where or who the face is, I'll give you the name of a book that will certainly and forever change your life :)
posted 4 years ago.
-
Jim H
By golly, Ms Boltvolt, the face does look familiar. Must don my thinking cap. This is going to pester me like a blowfly til I figure it out.
JHposted 4 years ago.
-
-
Mycroft
Well that was a long book and I was glad to discover that it is one of the longest novels ever written.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
uplandpoet removed this reply 4 years ago
-
J.M. Hannam
I just gotta know...is this book worth the read. I've had if for a number of years and haven't delved into.
posted 4 years ago.
-
margottt
SO awesome. Definitely wordy and redundant at parts but worth every second. I absolutely loved it.
posted 4 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
yes! i despise rand's libertarianism, but this is a pretty entertaining tale and it does a good job of laying out the philosophy so one can really decide if they but it or not.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
parinitha removed this reply 4 years ago
-
parinitha
yes definitely. u must read it or ul surely be missing out something in life! i thoroughly enjoyed every page of it.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Nate S
@luella - I wish I could meet myself a Dagny Taggart. I certainly don't think she's a twit.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
uplandpoet
it is funny, as much as i despise libertarian philosophy, i find myself reccommending this book (along with others like To Kill a Mockingbird and Dickens) to my young reading friends so they can get a good look at the philosophy behind them.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Victor P
Many of the capitalist situations that happen in this book are happening in today's world. Such as corporations controlling the government to an extent. The book is very relative in the today's society. So take it for what its worth.
posted 4 years ago.
-
David W
Its tough to say if I hated or liked the book. Yes it is REALLY repetative, I normally don't skip pages, but there was a couple times where it was the exact same premise presented again and again. Still it is illuminating and thought provoking in similarites with how our government is run currently.
posted 4 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
do you mean our government is too pro labor and is destroying the wealthy class, or that the government is in the hands of a few greedy wealthy people who are trying to destroy labor?
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Luella S
Someone told me that when this book first came out, a group of people thought it was real!
posted 4 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
well, ayn did use real folks as models, so you could say it was real, but of course she took lots of liberties to make her story and her points.
i think it is no secret that the fountainhead draws heavily on america's most famous architect, and even though the capitalists princes are a little less well known than frank lyyod wright, i believe she sketched in real people and their business philosophy.posted 4 years ago.
-
Luella S
No, I meant they thought John G. and Co were out there in the Rocky Mountains creating their Utopia :o
Kind of like "War of the Worlds" ...posted 4 years ago.
-
-
parinitha removed this reply 4 years ago
-
parinitha removed this reply 4 years ago
-
parinitha
All i can say about this book is that it is so simply wonderful that it compels you to do some very serious thinking!
posted 4 years ago.
-
Did anyone else have a rough go of getting through Galt's speech toward the end? Granted, it's just about the whole of a philosophy stuffed into, what, 50 or so pages, but PHEW! I am anxiously awaiting the resolution of the last chapter, but this speech is brutal. Does it ever end??
posted 4 years ago.
-
Abraham A
I am totally with you on that. It caused me to put the book down for a few months. Imagine someone giving a speech that long on the radio. I wonder if it'd be 8 hours or 20 hours. holy cow. somebody should read that whole thing aloud and time it (not me). And I thought the philosophy of the speech was ridiculous, that made it extra hard to swallow, all her rantings on her own issues.. whatever, its over now, i don't have to read it again.
posted 4 years ago.
-
sarah c.
i can feel for you. i skip half of the speech and and moved on with the novel. the speech was going to give me a comatose. i did not like half of this book. the Atlantis thing turned me off and i think some of the characters are too pompous.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Nate S
The first time I read this book, I couldn't stomach the speech either, and I skipped it. The second time, I got through it. The third time, I relished every sentence of Galt's speech. I've gone back and read just the speech lots of times. @abraham a, I have the book on tape, and it seems like it takes about three hours to get through the speech. Moral of the story: maybe give it another shot?
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Alexander B
Atlas Shrugged will almost assuredly remain for the rest of my life the most remarkable book I will ever read, unless lightening strikes twice and we have another genius who is both a first-rate novelist AND philosopher. There is no reference point for this book. Nothing is like it. There has never been a figure like Ayn Rand in history before - as she is both an original philosopher and a giant in literature.
I don't have to tell you to read this book because it is deep, or profound, or eye-opening, or a work of extremely uncommon genius, or of such broad scope you will never think about business, politics, money, sex or many other things the same way again.
All the above is true. But one of the best compliments I can give this book is IT IS A RIP-ROARING YARN. The plot is incredible. The story is over-the-top compelling. I found myself rushing through all the brilliant digressions (which I've then re-read several times at later dates) which aren't digressions at all but feed into the stakes at risk in the story, but I would rush through them anyway, just to find out what happens next.
If you want to experience one of the richest and most surprising combinations of plot and theme you will ever find in the English language (and probably any other) read Atlas Shrugged.
And then when its over, deal with the sadness, at least as a reader, because you will never find anything like it again. A compensation is that, if her views appeal to you, there are several non-fiction books she then wrote the following decades on every philosophical branch - Metaphysics, Epistemology Ethics, Politics, and Aesthetics (Art) that will blow your mind. As this is a literature forum, I particularly recommend "The Romantic Manifesto", Ayn Rands thesis about art. Again, remarkable.
- Alexanderposted 4 years ago.
-
Sujith U
Hello Alexander,
I completely agree with you. That book remains the most important one in my life. I would say that I learnt a lot of things including some about my own self and thinking when i read that book. It truly is amazing one.
I liked your review very much. So I thought I would drop a message too.
Thanks,
Sujith.posted 4 years ago.
-
Michelle M
"I don't have to tell you to read this book because it is deep, or profound, or eye-opening, or a work of extremely uncommon genius, or of such broad scope you will never think about business, politics, money, sex or many other things the same way again."
Very true. Even if you don't agree with everything she had to say, she certainly gets you thinking.posted 4 years ago.
-
Monica
Thank you. You have put into words everything that has been swirling around in my mind. I finished the book 2 days ago.
I am sad. I knew (when I was reading it) that it is the only book of its kind. When I finished, I mourned a little. I just keep thinking, "Brad Pitt and Angelina want to make it a movie."
Even though there is no way to give the book a good representation in a film UNDER 6 hours, I still want them to have a go at it. I want hollywood to piss and moan over the truth. I want all of those "do-gooders" to see what they ARE and what they are aspiring to.
You and I both know, only the right people will take the time to read the book. Those people that should read it, never will.posted 4 years ago.
-
Alexander B
I wanted to add that there is one, and only one, other book that has many of the same qualities of Atlas Shrugged, but of a different scope and (incredibly) is even more satisfying in certain regards. This is Ayn Rand's other grand novel, The Fountainhead. I won't review it here, but did not want to mislead anyone from exploring it. She wrote it first and is the other of her two masterpieces.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Laura W
A very valuable review, Alexander. Thank you! I will take your suggestions on her non-fiction works, as I am normally, specifically, a non-fiction reader as I cannot tolerate picking up a book and finding poor writing, composition and character development so I gave up on it years ago; my friend placed this book in my hands and ever since I picked it up I just can't put it down...except to hop on this computer and look it up on Shelfari! lol
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
-
-
Vyomin
Atlas Shrugged...no doubt...you woudn't want to read Fountainhead afterwards. All what Rand wanted to say is there in it's completeness in Atlas Shrugged. Fountainhead will seem half done or lost compared to Atlas Shrugged.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Alexander B removed this reply 4 years ago
-
Guy Paul removed this reply 4 years ago
-
-
shaihulud
Not being sarcastic, but I recommend neither. I haven't read FtnHead, but did A.S. Based on that, I don't recommend Rand. Maybe We The Living, if you haven't read that and feel like you have to read Rand. For all the glowing reviews of Rand, here is one that goes the other way. I won't go into details - send me a note if you really want to hear them. And I did write a brief review of A.S. if you want to read that.
posted 4 years ago.
-
dhiraj19
Fountainhead. Its best!!!!!! It also depends when you are reading.. In college or in job.. Good luck... I read it when I was in college. Definitely world changed after that...
posted 4 years ago.
-
Beatriz Y
I read Atlas Shrugged when I was a teen and loved it. I read it again recently and liked it even better. She was an amazing writer with great vision. Hope you enjoy it.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Avinash T
Well...Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged are both masterpieces.....one talks about individuality and originality...other about practicality...read anyone first...but both will remain in your mind forever....to take a stance...go with fountainhead first....because i don't know the feeling going other way...can try....
posted 4 years ago.
-
Confessions
I read Anthem first it was short I wanted to see if I liked her style. Then I read Atlas shrugged, because my husband keep telling my I should read it. Then I read Fountain Head because I wanted more. She is such a gifted writer. Her philosophy is moving even if you don’t agree with it 100 percent (which I don’t, I do agree with a lot of it though.) You basically can’t go wrong. You should definitely read We the Living. It’s an eye opener! Soviet Russia was so wrong. You can see where her views come from.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
narasimhan t
I've read FH first, then AS.
Here is a very crude rule - If you are more of an art person, go for FH first, you would be able to visualize things better. If you relish reading about business, industries then go for AS.posted 4 years ago.
-
anadi r
i suggest fountainhead- in case you ve not started one yet- coz as ayn rand said, fountainhead was her foundation for atlas shrugged, it d' be better to start with fountainhead.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Tim T
Well fountain head will get you into the rythm of Ayn Rand, It is a great book that precursors the world in Atlas Shrugged.
It won.t matter much but I read Fountain Head first.posted 4 years ago.
-
saulat a
read fountainhead first.. because after reading the atlass shrugged u'll know everything that to author wants to say.. its like watching the ending... and then watching the begginging of the movie... definitly start form the fountain head
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
LauraMae
Actually I would start with the Anthem, that way you could really get a taste for Rands writing style, from there I would go to the Fountainhead. Then Atlas Shrugged. That is just my opinion.
posted 4 years ago.
-
abhimanyu
fountainhead...its the framework which aynrand did to bringup her masterpiece..u'll enjoy atlas shrugged more if u read fountainhead at first..
posted 4 years ago.
-
Jerry H
I read Ayn Rand's non-fiction b4 I read her novels. Her non-fiction contains a lot of quotations from her novels. I did read Fountainhead b4 Atlas and found it less complicated.
posted 4 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
depends, the fountainhead is annoying, without social redemption and portrays a spoiled brat as some kind of martyr.
atlas is better written, a love story between a rapist and his victim, set against the world falling apart due to his and others evil ways, all this while he blames those he has victimized in other ways for the destruction he has wrought.
for my money, everybody ought to read one rand, and atlas is the better read. but anybody who falls for the glorification of selfishness is a pretty dim bulb.posted 4 years ago.
-
Michael D
Read Atlas Shrugged, I never did the fountainhead, but friends have said they are very much alike, but Atlas is more interesting and better written.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Miles F
“The Fountainhead” was written before “Atlas Shrugged” and has a better rep among some critics; however, I read “Atlas” first and am not sorry for it. Also, “Atlas,” as Confessions notes below your post, is a very topical book right now. What Rand wrote about—which once seemed unlikely to actually happen—is in fact happening.
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Confessions
Isn't it funny how this book is kind of prophetic? Actually it’s not funny it’s scary. Not that I think one man will stop the world, but what the government can do when it interferes too much. Looking at the economy and the "bail out," government says we’ll bail out this bank but not that bank. Britain has partially nationalized its banks and France and Iceland soon to follow. Yikes!
posted 4 years ago.
-
Jassu1979
If the current crisis shows anything, it's that Laissez Faire capitalism is just as much of a failure as its diametrical opposite: let's not forget that this whole mess was created by a bunch of greedy bankers who were left to pursue their "enlightened self-interest" without any government interference. Heck, they've just handed each other another bunch of golden parachutes to profit as much as they can from the current crisis.
I see the danger of putting too much power in the hands of too few people, whether they're politicians, bankers, or the CEO of some multi-national corporation. But putting LESS legal restraints on those who have the power and the money to turn the whole world into a sweat shop is certainly not the answer to that.posted 4 years ago.
-
Laura W
Confessions, I'm currently only 300 pages into this book, and I thought the EXACT same thing...I'm reading on to discover exactly what our world may look like because of our recent "bail out", since we can't count on our history to tell us what the outcome of this fiasco may be (as we normally could, but this socialist act has NEVER happened in the US), I guess the second-best place to look is to a woman from 1959 who probably thought that something like that could never ever happen! Thanks for your insight, I was beginning to think I was the only one who noticed the parallels to the modern world.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Lee M
It is amazing to me that this was written in the early 50s and yet so pertinent to today. You're right it is a bit scary when you face today's economy and all the government bailouts.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Regina L
I recently reread this book for this very reason....it is so appropos. Jane the Bane, if you apply the premise of the book to today's situation, the bail out would not occur and those profiting from cutting corners or unscrupulous dealings rather than as a result of successful business practices would fail and be purged while profitable companies carried on.
I always have problems in the beginning of the book because the characters are so rigid and extreme, but once I accept this is a needed to tool to fully explore Rand's philosophy I can settle into the read.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Ishamael N.
Who is John Galt? Ever since I read this book, that line has been cropping up my mind ever since. I love this book. But I think that The Fountainhead was better. What do you think?
posted 4 years ago.
-
saulat a
fontain head was simple.. compared to atlas shrugged... fountain head had a sole hero.. we always tend to like it when there is a sole hero , sacrificing.. we have a tendancy to like it and so most readers would find it the fountain head more interesting.. one can say atlas shrugged was like a sequal (not exactly in situation but in idea)... it picked up from where the fountain head left.. its scope widened.. it might be more far fetched .. but then definitly more realistic in terms of philosophy or what the author wants us to uinderstand.. i mean there is better description of the extent of damage that is there with the way society behaves and heading towards.. both classics and master pieces
posted 4 years ago.
-
Ranjitha P
Yeah even I think the same. The initial part of Atlas Shrugged was good but later some ow i felt it was too draggy
posted 4 years ago.
-
Michael B
I agree The Fountainhead was better. I catch myself thinking the words "Who is John Galt?" more often now with the U.S. government bailing out companies in exchange for government control. I read Atlas Shrugged first and had a difficult time getting into the book until I was about 10% into it, then I was hooked..
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
nirmalmekala
Can any of you actually identify with any of the characters ... good, bad or evil. I couldnt. Frankly speaking, some times I feel she doesnt give as much importance to real people as she gives to inanimate things produced by man just for the comfort of man.
posted 4 years ago.
-
Caleb R
I thought the characters were great...more like extreme, archetypal representations than real people, but I'm ok with that. It was nice to read a novel where people were actually competent.
posted 4 years ago.
-
uplandpoet
well, if you can imagine john galt as dick cheney, his selfish thieving lying self is so much more charming in rands story than these guys are in real life. but then, i tend to have a bias towards decent human beings and a bias against lazy parasites who suck the blood out of their workers and then complain when their top heavy creations colapse, leaving them with a slightly crumpled golden parachute on some remote island that does not have an extridiction treaty with the us....
posted 4 years ago.
-
-
Miles F
What Rand wrote about—which once seemed unlikely to actually happen—is in fact happening. There was even a story recently about a bank CEO who had not wanted any bailout money but when his bank was forced to accept it, and it turned out that there were too many strings attached, he resigned—shades of John Galt?
As to Victor P’s observation that this book is about corporations controlling the government, I think that Rand raises the question of which is controlling which. At some points it seems ambiguous, but near the end of the novel the government takes over. Also, let us not forget that Rand indicts Big Labor along with Big Government and Big Business. The Jimmy Hoffa-like labor leaders in this novel wait until the government takes over business and then Big Labor takes over the government. Today, Big Labor seems like such a junior partner to Big Government and Big Biz that this doesn’t seem so likely, but events might force us to learn whether or not Rand was right about this, too.
The comparison and contrast between Rand’s President Thompson and our President Obama is intriguing. Thompson is transparently an empty suit with zero charisma; Obama’s charisma covers the fact that he might be more of an empty suit than voters will ever realize. As our economy collapses, Obama might never be blamed even if his actions can be demonstrably shown to have contributed to it.posted 4 years ago.
-
-
JPurves
Officer Barbrady: Yes, at first I was happy to be learning how to read. It seemed exciting and magical, but then I read this Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. I read every last word, and because of this shit, I am never reading again.
posted 3 years ago.
-
-
-
Lemy P
I almost followed the steps of Officer Barbrady. Had
Atlas Shrugged been the very first book i read, i would not be reading any book again.posted 3 years ago.
-
DonDeere
if this fellow truly believes what he wrote about Atlas Shrugged, then I hope he is prepared to assimilate and work for the collective...because if one does not understand the message the Author brings by this work...they will forever be dependants on others for their needs...
posted 3 years ago.
-
Mary B
Reading Atlas Shrugged made me hate reading too. Then I started trying to think of a more hateful book - so now I have to read Mein Kampf just to compare who has a bleaker view of humanity (my money's on Rand).
posted 3 years ago.
-
-
-
BookVIM.com - Miguel Mayher removed this reply 3 years ago
-
BookVIM.com - Miguel Mayher
Correct. Magnificient speech by Francisco D'Anconia!
posted 3 years ago.
-
-
-
-
Lemy P
yes, a great dialogue on the true value of money on the perspective of GREEDY people...
posted 3 years ago.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
niflheim soundth more niftier maybe? somewhere further than niflheim, further than that Nidhogg as well... how about tartarus? but that be Greek so no can do... maybe send him to suffer the treatment of that wolf-son of mine? Do you have the following objects? Breath of seacreature, beard of female, sound a feline makes, roots of a mountain? they are hard things to come by though....
posted 3 years ago.
-
-
-
-
-
Lemy P
The worst reading hours of my life... Waste of precious time. She had better be a romantic novelist. She covered only a narrow aspect of society and in a shallow manner. She sounded like a deprived, vengeful, hurt little girl... I just had to finish reading the book for the principle of finishing what I started reading.
posted 3 years ago.
-
ashtekar29091960
Yes. Lot to what you say. I was myself zapped VERY positively the first time I read it and still find it an enjoyable read, but yes, I can see something in what you say. But I can't articulate EXACTLY what is totally WRONG in her works ... If you can help me ... ?
posted 3 years ago.
-
Timothy S
It's interesting to hear your perspective because I am having such a hard time trying to understand it. Perhaps you don't find much interest in logical arguments? If that's the case, I could see why the book would make you frown...
Could you please detail specific examples of Rand's logic and point out where her flaws go, and why that makes her Greedy?posted 3 years ago.
-
Lemy P
what EXACTLY is totally WRONG? THE WORSHIP OF PROFIT which is proudly declared as the sole purpose of her every endeavor... NO ESSENCE OF HUMANITY, another concept that i find not only wrong, but disgusting... Although, i agree about her fight about government's manipulation of the masses, still the motive is not due to humane reasons, rather due to the interference of government in achieving her purely selfish monetary goal.
posted 2 years ago.
-
-
Starfish1007 removed this reply 3 years ago
-
Petronela D removed this reply 3 years ago
-
-
-
-
Leslie E
I really enjoy reading this book. I've read it three times so far. It reminds me of the importance of a good work ethic. I do see similarities from the book and what is happening in this country today and it's a bit scary. We need to remember not to blame the government for everything. We as a society are demanding action from the government rather than holding ourselves and the corporations who made poor business decisions accountable.
In all honesty, I skipped through much of the John galt diatribe. The ending, I found to be anti-climatic. She also chose the wrong man with which to share her life. For someone so independent, she really wasn't when it comes down to it.posted 3 years ago.
-
Rajashree
I loved it. The book is not just about richie riches of the world you know. Its more about the efficient and the non-efficient. The book is a masterpiece. Throughout history we can see examples of misunderstood geniuses. When they said something they were ridiculed and now after they're dead we cherish and honour them. But does it matter to them anymore. The issues that are highlighted in the book is truely happening in the real world. So many unproductive people have tendencies to lean on the productive ones like parasites. Thats what making a sick work culture throughout the world. If all men can do it and its all bullshit then why does the term able bodied exist at all. The book truely is amazing because it totally nails the question as to what will happen to the world if "Atlas Shrugged."
posted 3 years ago.
-
Melissa A
I haven't finished it yet, but it is a good read. I love Dagny! She's so strong, but I certainly begrudge the 1,000 pages that could be spent reading several novels. That's why I haven't finished it yet. I keep wanting a new story.
posted 2 years ago.
-
rpm
A single idea hammered out into 1000+ pages. The concept of objectivism is interesting and the story is at times captivating(It certainly gets you rooting for the protagonists) but there is an absurd amount of filler. The infamous speech towards the end of the book is one of the worst sections of literature I've ever read. Rand insults the reader by having a character expound on the same concepts she was writing about for the previous 800 pages for 70 straight pages. Recommended for its importance in literature but not as an enjoyable read.
posted 2 years ago.
-
Lisa P
I never recommend this book to anyone because it is impossible to predict who will like it and who won't. I tell anyone who has plans to pick it up to skip 20 pages every time they get bored, and that gets some of them through. I used to have a copy in which I had marked all of the pages that were essential to the story (minus the overblown philosophical discussion), and I got it down to about 380 pages. The ideas are compelling, which isn't to say they are perfect but they are interesting to think about. The actual story that is buried in there somewhere is great (but only 380 pages long buried in 1000+) but I LOVE the characters...dynamic, intelligent, emotional, flawed. I still think Dagny Taggart is one of the greatest female characters in literature, and in fact my oldest daughter is named Dagny (and I am proud to say it suits her to a "t"!).
posted 2 years ago.
-
tannenbaum removed this reply 2 years ago
-
tannenbaum
I really liked this book. Rand had some outstanding character developments and suspense. I missed the characters very much when I finished the book - it was the saddest thing ever to put it down.
Although this book is well-written, I do not agree with objectivism. It is basically extreme capitalism and I think this is dangerous philosophy. I think it is heartless and too "cold." Although rational decisions are sometimes important, I still want to keep my emotions.posted 2 years ago.
-
Kevin B
This is a true piece of literature. I found the character development to be very engaging with their philosophies and behaviors simply vivid in presentation. Dagny’s strength through out the story even through hundreds of pages made it difficult to pause my reading for a single night and even more difficult to say good by in at the end of the story. The story line it self is timeless. With fewer extremes the arguments of the story is just as relevant today as the time of the writing or during any time of civilized history. This relevance makes it clear to me why the book has earned its place as literature that will continue to be read and studied through the future.
I have never seen it discussed anywhere, but I would like to know any thoughts of Dagny’s character being based on Rand’s own persona.posted 2 years ago.
-
-
vinya
any suggestions abt what to read next?i have read fountain head & atlas shrugged...dont mind reading her non-fictin literature even!!!
posted 2 years ago.
-
joe r
we the living.
a bit depressing, but it's interesting to see her heroic characters living in slavery.posted 2 years ago.
-
Nicole J
You should check out her essays in "The Virtue of Selfishness." It's a great way to explore her ideas in a non-fiction setting. "The Objectivist Ethics" is particularly clear and interesting.
posted 1 year ago.
-
-
D. Marshall
What would Rand say about the rise of workers against employers? While she would be against, I think, unions and union activity as well as strongly against miminum wage legislation, I wonder what she would say to the argument that many employers do not "exchange value for value." That is, due to the imbalance in power between the worker and the employer, it is usually the employer who can hold out the longest in a work stoppage, hence the worker is forced into taking wages below the value of their input. Now of course the heros of Atlas Shrugged, Dagny, Hank, Francisco, et al probably would not take advantage of workers in such a way, but how do the workers avoid being taken advantage of is such situations?
posted 2 years ago.
-
Mickey S
The question might also be, "How do we keep from being taken advantage of through our government?" Seldom is a capable worker at a disadvantage in an emploer / empoyee relationship.
posted 2 years ago.
-
John Grit removed this reply 1 year ago
-
Michael Keller
I think that this has been an issue for quite some time. History tells us that the common answer was the coalition of workers in a certain organization or industry. History also suggests that this concept was not perfect. It seems to me that Rand would oppose both the employer and employee in an unstable power balance. However, judging from the corporate role of Dagny Taggart as opposed to James Taggart, Rand seems to hint at a different power struggle. Rather than an employer/employee battle, Rand seems to visualize an industrial/political struggle. On one side is the foundation of the corporation, in this case Dagny Taggart, who ignores fairness between rival corporations and strives to make a profit, but respects the competition. On the other side is the political influence of the corporation, or James and the National Alliance of Railroads, who claim to establish equal corporate influence, but also try to eliminate successful competitors through political schemes. An example of this is the legal response to the completion of the Rio Norte Line, in which several political figures did all that they could to prevent success in Colorado.
posted 1 year ago.
-
-
Stephanie Q
does anyone read this book for anything other than her political message? is it too much to ask for some literary merit to help me along?
posted 2 years ago.
-
Melissa
Stephanie, I love this book, not for anything to do with politics. I love being caught up in the story, the relationships and in the character development. Amazing characters.
posted 2 years ago.
-
Jacob Ricardo Dudley
Atlas Shrugged is my favorite book of all time. The philosophy that propels the story is fascinating and I love exploring it beyond the confines of Atlas in her non-fiction books.
posted 1 year ago.
-
Michael Keller
Do you think that Atlas Shrugged was meant to have more themes than Rand's philosophy? If so, then what are they?
posted 1 year ago.
-
-
PADMAJA removed this reply 2 months ago
