Members with This Book
Most Helpful Reviews
see all reviews
Liked It1 of 1 members found this review helpful “fantastic story about idealism and excellence vs pragmatism and mediocrity - it changed my life...” see full review » see other reviews » |
Newest Reviews
see all reviews-
“I felt as though Ann Rand could have developed her characters much faster than what she did. I felt she dragged on her character development to the point where I lost interest. I did enjoy the subtle notes on architecture history and the structure. I felt as though her character development, as an architect was spot on, but I lost interest before I was finished. So finishing the book was a task.”
Melissa M wrote this review 4 hours ago. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“another Rand classic”
Bobby wrote this review yesterday. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“ I had not really paid much attention to Ayn Rand, darling of the conservatives (very surprisingly, actually) until I began reading her biography. When I asked around to see who had actually read any of her work, I found only a few, but lots of opinions about Rand herself. Often those comments ascribed beliefs to Rand that were at opposite poles of the spectrum, from conservative to radical, individualist to Nazi fascist. Obviously another case of what I call the “De Toqueville syndrome,” where everyone pretends to have read a famous book and to know what the author stood for, but has no firsthand reading knowledge. Her biography revealed a complex and very interesting individual, so it was time to dig into her works personally.
Eric w wrote this review 9 days ago. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
The Fountainhead tells the story of Howard Roark, an architect. Thrown out of Stanton School of Architecture for his refusal to adhere to the standards of the past (the dean views Roark as a rebel who opposes all the rules of architecture and his society’s view of art that is representation of what has been revered in the past) and for turning in assignments that represented a complete break from the past. The conversation with the dean, who tried to persuade Roark to come back into the fold, represents the central theme of the book, the conflict between those who are realitycentered against those who define their lives through the eyes of other people. Roark seeks employment with Cameron, an architect whose designs tried to incorporate using the advantages of new materials, e.g., a skyscraper should look tall, not just like a twenty-story brick building trying to look like a renaissance house. Cameron began to design buildings the way he wanted rather than how his clients demanded. His business dwindled to nothing, but he was sought out by Roark.
Following Cameron’s retirement, Roark seeks employment as a draftsman in a large architectural firm, where he gets a break by sketching a house that breaks with tradition completely but is just what the client wants. Roark is a brilliant but struggling iconoclast, while his rival and former classmate Peter Keating rises to the top of his profession by using obsequiousness, manipulation, and deception. His primary concern is how he is perceived by others. He designs by copying from the past, never thinking independently. Both men are in love with Dominique Falcon, a brilliant, passionate woman, who falls in love with Roark, admires his genius, but who is convinced his genius has no chance in a corrupt world. The villain of the book is Ellsworth Toohey, an architectural critic of note, who denounces Roark for his failure to adhere to the accepted standards of the day. Toohey believes that the individual must sacrifice his independence to the will of others, i.e. society or the group. Toohey is employed by Gail Wynand, a publisher whose paper caters to the lowest common denominator to gain power. He comes to admire Roark and must then decide whether he will continue to pander to popular taste or live according to his higher standards. Rand and her novels have been vilified by the left-wing as reactionary and praised by conservatives as brilliant and influential.
Frankly, I cannot understand how conservatives can be so enamored of this work that celebrates independence and the rejection of tradition and “normal” morality. She celebrated atheism, a kind of free love, very strong women, and a rejection of parental values and social norms. She abhorred the subordination of reason to faith, of surrendering one’s own thinking to the beliefs of others. She despised the religious believer who without questioning adopts the religious beliefs of his parents, conforming without thinking. Morality becomes something practical and relative. For example, Roark dynamites a government building project that has been altered, so he can gain access to the courts since the government cannot be sued. Roark really doesn’t care what other people think. He has such strong personal will that he will just do what he thinks is right. He also pals around with one of the construction workers who admires him because he is the only architect that understands construction, and, indeed, Roark makes the point that he loves engineering and building.
That sounds more like sixties liberalism than what I hear conservatives espouse. Rand is clearly a romantic who believed that man can live up to an ideal, and reason can help them achieve the independence and the happiness that depends on that independence. What infuriates liberals, as far as I can gather, was her unfailing adherence to capitalism. I suppose conservatives latched on to her vigorous rejection of collectivism, no doubt related to her childhood experiences under Communism. This is not to say Rand celebrates nonconformity for its own sake. That is simply another form of conformity because it’s living one’s life in reaction to the standards of others. The conformist must learn the beliefs of others to adhere to them; the nonconformist must learn the standards so as to avoid adhering to them. Both groups are psychological dependents. Rand celebrates the independent thinker, the individualist who lives on his own terms. The individualist creates his own standards and adheres to them regardless of what others do or think. He has a commitment to reason and facts. Roark represents the great innovator struggling against a profoundly conservative society against the traditionalist who says, “It was never done this way, so it can’t be good.” The climax of the book is Roark’s speech to the court when he is on trial. “I wish to come here and say that I am a man who does not exist for others. . . The world is perishing from an orgy of self-sacrificing.” He represents a complete rejection of altruism, “the doctrine which demands that man live for others and place others above self.”
It’s truly a shame when books and authors get labeled as “conservative” or “liberal,” “communist” or “democrat” and then judged on the basis of the label. Read the book; make up your own mind!
”
“Very engrossing”
Lynne B wrote this review 10 days ago. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No“Brilliant potrayal of different views and takes on Life. Each character has their own story to tell. I love the book!”
Rajshree Leah Y wrote this review 10 days ago. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No“This book shows how a person with exceptional talent can get resists from foolish minds.As Einsteins says "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds" . The hero Howard Roark really encourages me”
satya j wrote this review 12 days ago. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No“Each person will draw his own inspiration from this one! it caters to the real human being within you and not to the facade that we carry publicly!”
Shilpi P wrote this review 12 days ago. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“Though the book has its moments i fail to see why it is labeled as a classic.
Nidhi wrote this review 12 days ago. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
i cannot digest the fact that the female lead dominique is focused on self destruction so that ultimately she can get together with roark. some points of views were refreshing to read. I found Roark very enigmatic but the most human,sensible and real character was peter keating.”“ayn rand must be a visionary .... a guru of sorts .... she has beautifully delivered her theory of objectivism intricately entwined in story which one is able to relate to ....
Naveen wrote this review 13 days ago. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
it is definitely impossible to be a howard roark in reality .... least on can do is to attempt view own thoughts & life as an independent observer & relate to the rand's theory ...... it is a very amusing exercise ......:) ”
“a book to read!!!!! perspective, human tendencies, society's attempts to condition us and the right and wrong of ambition, art, authority of some over the rest and the will to stick to your dreams and ideals against all odds!!! A grand tale of a man's strength of character in the face of everything life can throw at him and more. An extraordinary story about and extraordinary man. ”
shruti p wrote this review 2 weeks ago. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
