Oh, and if you're only reading it to answer the question on geeky bumper sticker "Who is John Galt? It's usually stuck on the butt end of a car to express general disenchantment with big government, and a lack of heroes. Now you know, so go read something worthwhile, and if you insist on reading Ayn Rand, hit her non-fiction.
Stripped of an attempt at storytelling, she doesn't do half bad. View all 52 comments. Jul 09, Jason Pettus rated it liked it Shelves: late-modernism , character-heavy , classic. Would you like to hear the only joke I've ever written? Q: "How many Objectivists does it take to screw in a lightbulb? Here in Rand's second massive manifesto-slash-novel, we follow the stories of a number of Titans of the Industrial Age -- the big, powerful white males who built the railroad industry, the big, powerful white males who built the electrical utility companies -- as well as a thinly-veiled Roosevelt New Deal administration whose every attempt to regulate these Titans, according to Rand, is tantamount evil-wise to killing and eating babies, even when it's child labor laws they are ironically passing.
Recommended, but with a caveat; that you read it before you're old enough to know better. View all 45 comments. Feb 12, Christopher rated it it was amazing. As Ayn Rand's immortal opus, Atlas Shrugged, stands as a tome to a philosophy that is relevant today as it was in her time.
Basically, the major moral theme is that there are two types of people in the world: the Creators and the Leeches. The Creators are the innovators who use the power of their will and intelligence to better humanity. The first person to create fire is often referenced as the paradigm for these people. In the book, each of the major protagonists also represent Creators improvi As Ayn Rand's immortal opus, Atlas Shrugged, stands as a tome to a philosophy that is relevant today as it was in her time.
In the book, each of the major protagonists also represent Creators improving the human condition with their force of will. The Leeches my word are the people who create nothing, but thrive off feeding on the Creators. In Rand's view, they are the bureaucrats, politicos, regulators, etc. Throughout human history she tells us, these people have benefited through no ingenuity of their own, but merely from piggybacking on - and often fettering - the success of the Creators. Where the conflict in this book arises is when the Creators decide they have had enough and revolt.
I won't spoil the book by describing specifics, but let's just say it causes quite the societal drama. For Leeches can't feed where there's no blood. All that is fairly significant and involved and worth the read to begin with, but where this book really stimulates me is in the fact that it is still relevant. Today we have Creators and we have Leeches. Some titans of industry and technology move our culture forward and others hold it back to their own benefit. I work in Silicon Valley and I see this all the time. That's why in many ways I consider this voluminous novel to be as important to a business education as Art of War.
To cite other readers' posts, you don't have to agree with what Rand is extolling, but I think you'd be foolish to try and deny the existence of this struggle since it is ingrained in humanity. Yes, Ayn does get long winded and arrogant in parts as she draws the battle lines, but I don't think an author could have crafted such a powerful conflict without copious quantities of ego to accentuate the differences.
View all 46 comments. This book, as much as I detest it, is actually rather useful. Those who have read it tend to be those whom I most especially desire to avoid. Because those who have read it are invariably proud of the fact--ostentatiously so--it is even easier for me to keep my life free and clear of delusional egomaniacs. Thank you Ayn Rand. View all 17 comments. Sep 08, Simon rated it did not like it. Absolutely terrible. Imagine an analogous situation: A white supremacist writes a book in which all the white characters are great and all the black characters are awful.
If you were to read that book and as a result buy into white supremacy; that would make you an utter utter fool. And yet, Rand writes a book where anyone who is a raging capitalist is a veritable super-hero and anyone who pauses for half a second to consider that maybe such a system is sub-optimal is a sniveling lunatic - and lo, Absolutely terrible.
And yet, Rand writes a book where anyone who is a raging capitalist is a veritable super-hero and anyone who pauses for half a second to consider that maybe such a system is sub-optimal is a sniveling lunatic - and lo, the mindless prols think it's a masterpiece and a template for how the world should be run. The most annoying book I have ever read. View all 50 comments.
Jul 10, Meredith Holley rated it it was amazing Recommends it for: soviets. Shelves: girls-rule , utopia-dystopia , reviewed , classic-or-cannonical , motherless-daughters. I was visiting an old friend for the past few days, and she showed me this cover of Atlas Shrugged I made for her when we lived in Ukraine: [image error] It was a necessary repair, but it pretty much proves I should be a cover designer. I get that Rand is kind of loony tunes of the Glenn Beck variety, and some people maybe?
Warning: I think, to make my point, I have to refer to Dostoyevsky a lot, which I seem to always do because he really is some kind of touchstone to me. It makes people say that ideas are dangerous. It happens because people put forward too few ideas. Anyway, back to the book: First, story. The third part of this book is super weird.
My favorite part of her ending is how John Galt gives the most boring speech possible, and it lasts for about a bazillion pages, and you have to skip it or die. Nice try, liar. Second, writing. I know it made a huge difference in my reading of this book that I was living in a Soviet bloc apartment in Lozovaya, Ukraine at the time and had forgotten a little bit how to speak English.
But, we allow for the weirdness because we picture the stuff happening in Russia, where the weird stuff typically goes down anyway. No joke. Third, philosophy. Maybe I told you this story already, so skip it if you already know it. When I lived in Ukraine, I had the same conversation with three or four people of the older generation who grew up in the Soviet Union.
We had free health care, free housing, and now we have nothing. I mean, every once in a while your neighbor would disappear, but it was completely worth it. Admittedly, the problem with this argument is that it sets up a dichotomy where our only choices are the prosperity gospel and Soilent Green. From what I know of Rand, though, she had seen her neighbors and family thrown out of Russia or killed for being rich.
She was fighting something extreme by being extreme. To me, this comes from people taking her arguments too seriously on both sides. Why is it different with Rand?
Atlas Shrugged is absurd but strangely compelling
Fourth, women. I think, in this way, it was particularly important to me that the protagonist was a woman. Anyway, that kind of hegemony really creeps me out. When I read this book, I was just realizing that I had joined Peace Corps with a similarly misguided motivation. I wanted to go to the needy and unfortunate countries of the world and sacrifice myself to save them. It might sound more nasty than it really was when I say it like that, but I think it is a really arrogant attitude to have.
But I love it for the things that I got out of it, and if someone else benefited from my being in Ukraine, it was dumb luck. This would be the Hank Rearden character in the novel. I love that Rand sets up characters who destroy this cycle of abuse. I love that her female protagonist lives completely outside of it.
There are lots of other reasons to read Rand, but most of those get into the argument about her ideas being dangerous. Yes, she conveniently ignores the very old, very young, and disabled to make a specific and extreme point. Anyway, read, discuss, agree, disagree. I hear in the sequel there are werewolves.
- To Survive Game, Press COURAGE (A Romance Video Game Story Book 5).
- Raggedy Ann and Betsy Bonnet String - Illustrated by Johnny Gruelle?
- Backache: What you need to know.
- How to Survive and Thrive as a Therapist: Information, Ideas, and Resources for Psychologists in Practice.
Aug 16, Richard Derus rated it did not like it. This blog debunks some of the Aynholes' major misunderstandings about the book. Pretentious poseur writes pseudophilosophical apologia for being a sociopath. Distasteful in the extreme. View all 84 comments. Apr 10, s. There is this really great moment about halfway through where the Ents collectively decide to burn the military industrial complex to the ground and restore it back to nature.
It's this great moment of socialism defeating the pathetic capital-- oh, wait, that's Lord of the Ring, a book about people getting things done because its the right thing to do to help everyone, this is Atlas Shrugged, a book about people throwing tantrums if they aren't making enough money off the labor of others. I real There is this really great moment about halfway through where the Ents collectively decide to burn the military industrial complex to the ground and restore it back to nature.
I really like trains, but goddammit does this novel give them a bad name. Also, everyone, pardon my french. And sorry Grandma. Recently someone told me this was their favorite novel. I believe they referred to it as 'the greatest book ever written. Because who cares about Ulysses, right? No, that won't do, I'm going to have to drink and rant for a moment. I refrained from commenting to the customer, because I'm sure it is typically for political reasons that people like this book and, whatever, some people swing left, some people swing right, some people suckle the golden calf of capitalism and some love thy socialist ways and who am I to judge.
I'm not a politician and you should all thank me for that. I'd like to push politics aside but, frankly, I think it is solely for political reasons that this book managed to stay relevant and in print. However, I suppose you are all here to hear about the politics of this book and I would be boring you with talks of wooden character and language and overall juvenile writing abilities, so I'll save those for after. I don't want to argue politics, especially not while drinking, so lets take a moment to look at the plot and oh what a plot it is and see how the politics hold up within.
Besides, there isn't much to analyze in this one as the writing barely goes beneath the surface. Once upon a time there were some factory owners. These factory owners loved to preach about the pride in working for their company, and hey, maybe conditions are piss-poor and maybe you are barely scraping by to feed your growing family, but at least you can take pride in working for a great company and that should satisfy you and give you meaning some cool existentialist thought could have been added into the book for that, but Rand misunderstood Kant so I doubt she'd be able to add anything beyond surface detail and pop-philosophy.
Then one day the great evil government the government is such a caricature and it's almost a surprise she didn't have them all wearing black hooded cloaks. And really, who voted for those guys? Suddenly, having pride in what they did seemed terrible. Instead of taking pride in their company and working hard to sustain the nation they so loved, like they preached to their employees, they bitched about it a bunch and then stopped working. Nice guys, right? They set up a utopia Ayn Rand of all people should know utopia is a word for 'fake' society where competing is so cool and they say stuff like 'man, I hope someone competes with me and nearly puts me out of business', which isn't all that different from what was going on in the society they bitched out on in the most comically shameful manner possible.
Meanwhile it is made to seem like cheating on your wife is way cool and general chaos ensues. So it goes for awhile, but then, THEN, after a overlong speech that takes all the points any reader with half a mind already put together for themselves and regurgitates it out without the metaphors and into a boring speech that repeats itself many times about the points already mentioned in the novel and then makes sure you know the stuff already mentioned in the novel through a long speech, all hell breaks loose and the main characters bust into town like the goddamn A-Team.
Guns blaze, Dagny murders a few dudes and the one character who was actually worth reading about blows up the super-weapon because that guy was awesome. Screw the rest of the characters, I want to read more about that guy. He was ' about it ', like people who are apparently ' about it ' say while slugging their Mountain Dews and playing video games. All integrity of the novel was lost with the hysterically overblown rescue scene. I mean, they even got out on 'choppers' at the end. It was the worst action movie I've ever seen, and I'm not even going to go into the scene where apparently it is okay to shoot your employees in the head for going on strike.
And that, my friends, is Atlas Shrugged. People seem to really like the politics, which are 'if things aren't going your way say 'fuck my beliefs, I quit, and fuck america too. Because if there is one thing Ayn Rand can't stand, it's taking pride in your work. What I really want to talk about is the book as a piece of literature, so don't get all steamed up about politics on me here, pal! Granted, there are a few pretty lines here, particularly the line about cigarettes and how all great thinkers should have that glowing ember at their fingertips while the lightbulb of thought is burning, but other than that Rand is a forgettable sci-fi novelist that has poorly aged with time.
Not a line of dialogue rings true to actual speech, not a cough or a scoff can go without her graciously informing the reader that the scoff or cough shows their disapproval or discomfort and whatnot. Furthermore, she certainly can't let a metaphor slip out without explaining it; reading Ayn Rand feels like being a grown adult and sitting in a elementary reading class and having the teacher explain how books work.
It's as if she has no faith in her reader as a literate, thinking human being. Worse, the characters are the sort that can only exist on the page and have such narrow-minded two-dimensional aspects that one can't possibly imagine them walking around in the real world. Of course the government is terrible in this novel, its such a caricature that nobody in their right mind would bother being submissive to it. Granted, this book is satire, but come on Rand, put some effort into your creativity. However, Rand seems fully unable to build three-dimensional characters so is it that James is garbage or Rand herself?
This idea is possibly my least favorite aspect of the book because it is comically incorrect. Though maybe my English degree is as useless as it is as finding me a job totally useless , but from what I've gathered reading books and Derrida is that language is anything but exact. Language is pliable, words are an attempt at harnessing the abstract into sound, caging thought into something more tangible.
If words have an exact meaning then all the poets have been doing is creating gibberish. And how can Rand go on writing her weak metaphors if she actually believes that statement. Briefly, Ayn Rand separates people into two catagories: those that make, and the ' looters '.
I've slept on a lot of couches, but also made a lot of breakfast sandwiches. What then am I? Somehow, people still rave about this book. I will say, however, that the chapter where they kill everyone by putting a steam engine through a tunnel was incredibly well done. She could have cut the rest of the novel and simply published that chapter because all the major points are present and for a brief moment the book felt worth reading.
I also loved the bits about the pirate and the scene where the government takes over the mines to find them desolated. There are some great 'fight the man' moments but they are buried under a god-awful plot that puts the plot and politics before the writing and told through characters that are so two-dimensional that I can't even believe the scenes that have them walking down a street. There's some politics here I guess some people could get down with, and I do understand that this is a response to the horrors of Communist Russia, but she did this so much better in Anthem though even in that she contradicts herself often.
Right after a large discussion on freedom and not letting others think for you, the man names the woman character. He just tells her, this is now your name. Which seems suspiciously not like the freedom the man was fighting for and others have tackled the issue in a much more agreeable and artistic manner. All sarcasm and jokes aside, I simply do not think this book is well written. I could honestly not care less about the political aspects, its the literary aspects that cause the low rating. I came, I read, I shrugged. However, the office had AC, heat and tons of paid vacation.
Perhaps I'm just bitter about the time I was sent home for listening to a DFW interview on Bookworm because it was 'spreading liberal propaganda in the workplace. Sorry, I'm most likely the asshole in this situation. There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world.
The other, of course, involves orcs. View all 94 comments. Jan 03, Stephen rated it liked it Shelves: audiobook , , science-fiction , world-in-the-shitter , classics-americas , literature , philosophy , polly-sighs-and-pubic-policy , classics , epic. A review many minutes in the writing and several hours in the photo finding. A review so important that one Dr. Hyperbole had this to say upon seeing it This review will pull no punches as it discusses all aspects of the novel and includes opinions that run the gamut from 5 stars of love to seething cauldron's of 1 star rage It is a book of new and radical ideas being passionately expressed by someone who believes deeply in them.
Whether you agree or disagree whole-heartedly or belong somewhere in the middle, it's right and proper to respect the passion and conviction that Ms. Rand feels for her subject. Call it controversial, call it inflammatory, even call it wrong, but it is impossible to call it irrelevant. There is little question that as a book of ideas, Atlas Shrugged is a monumental book and deserves its place as one of the most important books of the 20th Century Ain't I right there Normie.
Among these detractors was one P. Whether or not you believe her vision is skewed or biased, there is still much that her book can add to the debate on the proper role of government in the life of the individual. People are people and everyone is entitled to being judged for who they are. Walk around your house and pick up the products that you use every day and that make your life easier and ask yourself how many of them were made by people who made a lot of money off them my guess is most of them. The world we be a lot worse off without the inventors, the builders and the risk takers and they deserve our thanks and not our animosity There were additional negative reactions raised about Atlas Shrugged and this review promises to tackle them in depth.
One very controversial subject deals with attacks on Ayn Rands views on sexuality which are certainly on display in the novel. This does nothing but preach to the converted and has all the persuasive power of a political attack ad. State your opinion once and that is laudable. If it is overly complex, maybe you repeat it a second, even a third time. One disgruntled reader stopped reading the novel halfway through and said simply Many found the prose less than noteworthy but were very taken by the plot.
Still others liked the passion of Rand's convictions but found her message lost in a myriad of meandering speeches. Until then View all 33 comments. Nov 20, Manny rated it really liked it Shelves: blame-jordan-if-you-like , science-fiction , too-sexy-for-maiden-aunts. In some ways, this is a very bad book. The style is stiff and clunky, and the world-view she is trying to sell you has holes you could drive a train through.
There is a nice putdown in One Fat Englishman. The main character has just been given a precis of Objectivism. He says "I bet I'm at least as selfish as you. But I don't why I need to turn that into a philosophy". Thank you, Kingsley Amis. But on the plus side, the book is a page-turner; it does a great job of helping people brought up in a In some ways, this is a very bad book. But on the plus side, the book is a page-turner; it does a great job of helping people brought up in a left-wing tradition to understand the right as not just deluded or evil my friend Gen said she had the same experience after reading it ; and it is good at voicing the frustration that competent and honest people feel when they are surrounded by incompetent and dishonest ones.
And the romance between Dagny and Hank is emotionally very satisfying. I was so disappointed when she But I fear the author's desire to push her philosophical agenda got in the way of the story. I haven't exactly changed my mind on any of the above, but, as Jordan persuasively argues, it's kind of missing the point. And, with all due respect to the other reviews here, most of them are also missing the point. Well, because we're answering the wrong question.
Some people uncritically adore this book. Guys, dare I suggest that you might want to broaden your reading tastes just the tiniest amount, and see if you still feel that way?
The Atlas Shrugged movie is not as bad as they had feared it would be.
A rather larger group of reviewers can't stand Ayn Rand, and point out various obvious flaws: lack of feeling for English prose style, lack of character development, lack of realistic dialogue, interminable sermons on Objectivism, and sundry other charges. Of course. All of that's clearly true. But here's the question I find more interesting: if the book is so terrible, how come it's been such a gigantic success?
It's been said that only the Bible has had a greater influence on 20th century American thought. It must have something going for it. So here's my second attempt. I think the book is dishonest, but it's dazzlingly dishonest, on a grand scale, and that's what readers find fascinating. As everyone knows, the basic thesis is that people should be more selfish, and that this will in some mystical way be good for society as a whole; a boldly paradoxical idea, and, at first sight, it's complete nonsense. I can well believe that my selfishness might be good for me personally, but why on Earth should it be good for anyone else?
It flies in the face of at least two thousand years of Western ethical thought, which has been largely focused on making people less selfish, not more. As has been widely pointed out, Objectivism is pretty much the antithesis of Christianity. Which does suggest the question of why many people on the American Right claim both to be Christians and at the same time supporters of Rand's ideas, but let's not get into that right now.
I don't really understand how the American Right thinks, so it'll be more productive to consider my own reactions to the book, which were by no means all negative. In particular, I find Dagny a sympathetic main character. Yes, she's the Mary Sue to end all Mary Sues, but that's exactly it.
Rand believes in her so completely that I can't help being swept along. I am aware that few real women are hypercompetent technical and managerial geniuses, who think nothing of working 48 hours straight and then looking drop-dead gorgeous in a designer gown. If the movie ever does get made, though, you must admit that Angelina Jolie was a shrewd piece of casting. Even if Dagny doesn't exist, I want her to, and I've seen many worse role-models for young women. That mixture of beauty, intelligence and passion is appealing. And sure, most of the other characters are one-dimensional stereotypes, but, when you're as self-centered as Ayn Rand was, that's how you see things.
It's a subjective view, and I find it interesting to look at the world through her eyes. Now that I've admitted that I love Dagny - I must admit that I can't decide whether I want to be her or sleep with her; probably a bit of both - let's get on to analyzing Rand's big con. A large part of the book is a lavish, over-the-top, melodramatic romance. Will Dagny get her guy? She's hopelessly in love with Hank, who feels just the same way about her. But Hank's ghastly wife, Lillian, seems to be an insuperable obstacle to their happiness.
Hank's got all these mistaken principles , see, which mean he has to stay with Lillian, who doesn't appreciate him one bit, rather than go off with his true love. The best scene in the book is the confrontation at the party. Hank has created his new miracle alloy, which is a thousand times stronger than steel and a cool blue-green color to boot.
The very first thing he makes from is it a bracelet for Lillian. And is she grateful? Of course not! She's actually going around complaining to the other women about this ugly thing her dumb husband has given her to wear on her wrist. Why couldn't he give her a diamond bracelet like a normal guy? But Dagny, in a blazing fury, goes up to her, and in front of everyone says that she'll be so happy to swap her own diamond bracelet for Hank's unappreciated present.
Honestly, if you're not on Dagny's side at this point, I fear you have no heart at all. I was certainly cheering her on, and given the general success of the novel I assume I was one of millions. Rand has stacked the deck, but she's not exactly the first author to do so. The reasonable point she's making here is that, in romantic matters, people should often do what they want to do, rather than than what they feel they ought to do.
Straightforwardly selfish behavior is better for everyone; people need love, which makes them happy, rather than pity, which ultimately makes them miserable. At least, it's true in this particular case. You're sitting there willing Hank to understand what's so blatantly obvious. And, once she's got you to buy into her idea, she switches the cards right under your nose. In just the same way, she argues, people should always act selfishly!
See, if you're given something you haven't truly earned whatever that means , it won't make you happy. Moreover, the people who are actually entitled to it will feel hurt and frustrated, just like Dagny, and in the end they'll lose their motivation. And thus, um, if you tax multi-billionaires at more than whatever the fashionable rate is, civilization will collapse. I may have condensed the argument a little, but I think that's roughly it.
As already mentioned, this is nonsense, and shows that romance authors, even quite good ones, shouldn't try their hand at political philosophy. But that needn't stop you from appreciating their romances, and I certainly did. Next week, I will be reviewing Barbara Cartland's commentaries on Kant. To be continued. View all 68 comments.
When my mother gave me this book and said, "I think you will like this; I read it over a vacation in a week when I was your age," I took one look at the massive text and couldn't believe it. She also said that I reminded her of the characters And that is exactly what I learned from this book: that pride is most beautiful thing, and to live on this earth means that one must understand its reality, and learn to use one's mind to make it what one wants When my mother gave me this book and said, "I think you will like this; I read it over a vacation in a week when I was your age," I took one look at the massive text and couldn't believe it.
And that is exactly what I learned from this book: that pride is most beautiful thing, and to live on this earth means that one must understand its reality, and learn to use one's mind to make it what one wants it to be. It is about truly loving life and all that it means to 'live' it. It is the reason why I understand myself as a man who belongs on earth It is very long almost pages , so get ready for an epic. I won't try to say it is great literature, though if the style fits the person who is reading it, it will certainly be an amazing read.
It can be long-winded and wordy at times, but what philospher isn't? My advice: stick with it through the first half of the first section: it takes it bit to get going in the book, but once it starts, it is worth it To the proposition that we all have inside of us the inherent values to be heros: we just need to learn the virtues that will bring those values out of us View all 8 comments. Mar 09, David rated it did not like it. This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here.
The first false premise is that there are only a dozen or so people in the country who are worth a damn. The second false premise is that every government employee is a lazy no-good who has nothing on his mind but pillaging the bank accounts of the lucky dozen. But beyond that, the government is inherently evil, to the point of passing laws that inflict major economic damage and suffering on virtually everyone in the country with the exception of the privileged government leaders. This evil government is all-powerful and has total control over every newspaper, television and radio station.
Fat chance. She has no concept that other governments have not tolerated the oppression that she found there. The third false premise is that the rest of the people of the U. Further, they have no ability or process to provoke change. They wander around like a bunch of sheep being led to the slaughter.
The country has a middle class composed of about 24 people who are the trusted, loyal assistants of the elite. When the elite disappear on strike , their trusted assistants are left behind to bear the misfortune of the rest of the poor slobs. These magic things were, of course, invented by the intelligent elite who use them to help wreak havoc and despair on the rest of the million people of the country in order to punish the evil government. Dagny Taggart, the heroine and only intelligent woman in the universe, has sex with three of the elite.
She dumps the only real relationship with Rearden in favor of the demi-god John Galt who she barely knows along the lines of a teenage girl throwing herself at one of the Beatles. Her favorite encounters are sado-masochistic. They think the only path to change is to take their football and go home. You have to wonder how brilliant these people really are. The author spends great quantities of print describing and re-describing thoughts and feelings of the characters ad nauseum.
The redundancy is overwhelming. This poor attempt at science fiction with a supposed moral message demonstrates how a page book can be padded to become a page behemoth. Elitists, libertarians and others paranoid about the government will undoubtedly enjoy this book. Paramilitary groups will love it. View all 23 comments. Sep 28, Nandakishore Varma rated it did not like it Shelves: general-fiction.
I read this book as a teenager while recovering from a long bout of viral fever which had left me bedridden for almost a month: I had exhausted all my other books and forced to rummage through old shelves in my house. Ironically, I read The Grapes of Wrath also at the same time. My teenage mind was captivated by the "dangerous" ideas proposed by Ayn Rand.
At that time, India was having an inefficient "mixed" economy comprising all the negative aspects of capitalism and socialism, and Ms. Rand I read this book as a teenager while recovering from a long bout of viral fever which had left me bedridden for almost a month: I had exhausted all my other books and forced to rummage through old shelves in my house. Rand seemed to point a way out of the quagmire. Almost thirty years hence, I find the novel if it can be called that - Ayn Rand's idea of fiction is a bunch of pasteboard characters put there as her mouthpieces to be silly beyond imagination.
The premise is laughable; the characters entirely forgettable; and the writing, abyssmal. The idea that governments governing the least and allowing a "winner-take-all" economy to flourish will solve all the world's woes "Social Darwinism", a word I've heard used to describe her philosophy will not wash anywhere today, I would wager - even with the hard-core adherents of the GOP in the USA. Especially when we look at Europe, where capitalism has gone into a downward spiral. Rand, sorry to say, Atlas didn't shrug: Atlas collapsed!
- Atlas Shrugged.
- Unlimited digital access $11/month..
- Quest for the Moon Orb (The Orbs of Rathira Book 1).
- Defying Destiny.
View all 30 comments. Feb 23, Ian "Marvin" Graye rated it liked it. In this novel, she dramatizes the shortcomings of her unique Objectivist philosophy through an intellectual mystery story and magical mystery tour that intertwines sex, ethics, sex, metaphysics, sex, epistemology, sex, politics, "Shagged at Last The Sequel " Written while she was still alive, but published posthumously after her death in , "Shagged At Last" is the posthumous sequel to Ayn Rand's greatest achievement and last work of fiction, "Atlas Shrugged" not counting "Shagged At Last".
In this novel, she dramatizes the shortcomings of her unique Objectivist philosophy through an intellectual mystery story and magical mystery tour that intertwines sex, ethics, sex, metaphysics, sex, epistemology, sex, politics, sex, economics, sex, whatever and sex. Reconsidering her worldview, she concludes that, in order to be truly beneficial to society individuals, sex must not be just the fun bit between the serious parts, it requires serious love action between the private parts.
In this sequel which is the equal of the prequel to the sequel , Ayn Rand abandons Objectivism and embraces Sex Activism, without endorsing either Active Sexism or Subjectivism. Where Have All the Objectivists Gone? Set in the near-future [30 years after the time of writing in ] in a U. Spoiler If you want to know who the female protagonist has deep and meaningless sex with, read the book or open the following spoiler at your own peril to avoid disappointment, don't view the spoiler. Anyway, read the book. Disclaimer: The televisualisation of the hysterical perspective is currently subject to the formalisation of contractual relations with Manny and Jessica Rabbit.
View all 65 comments. Apr 13, Monica MizMiz rated it it was amazing Recommends it for: Any reader interested in philosophy or just a good story. Shelves: favoritesforpleasurereading. The Concept: Rand follows the lives of society's movers and shakers first-handers, in her words, and business men, scientists, inventors, and artists in her novel as they resist the societal pull to become second-handers and to remain true to themselves and their live's work.
Meanwhile, something is happening that is shaking the very foundation of society. Applying Rand's ideas t The Concept: Rand follows the lives of society's movers and shakers first-handers, in her words, and business men, scientists, inventors, and artists in her novel as they resist the societal pull to become second-handers and to remain true to themselves and their live's work.
Applying Rand's ideas to my own life has made my mind clearer and has helped me to acchieve goals I thought were unreachable. Rand's ideas have been a big part of "growing up" and getting through the "quarter life crisis" for me. While I read Rand's books for her ideas and to better understand the application of her philosophy, they can also be read on many different levels.
Through reading them, not only did I read an amazing story, carefully crafted and well rendered, but I also learned so much. However, one does not have to delve deep into Rand's philosophical background to enjoy The Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged -- they are also great stories about human endurance, individualism, freedom, relationships, and integrity. The Fountainhead is a more straight forward place to start that study.
I highly recommend this book, and I have a copy to loan if you're interested. When you're reading, we can go out for coffee to talk about the book -- there is much to think about in this one.
'Atlas Shrugged' author sees resurgence - ywuvekymivex.ga
View all 7 comments. May 30, Ken rated it did not like it Shelves: masochism , fiction. This book was the most overrated piece of crap of the twentieth century. It spars only with Dianetics and in its absolute absurdity. The characters are absolutely idealized 'heroes of capitalism' action figures. I wonder if Rand imagined some of these great barons of industry coming to her rescue when she immigrated away from the vile pit of communism that she left behind.
You know, during the time where she forged her citizenship papers and depended on the generocity and kindness of a liberal, o This book was the most overrated piece of crap of the twentieth century. You know, during the time where she forged her citizenship papers and depended on the generocity and kindness of a liberal, open society. If only she had us all her irritating, long winded, repetative tales of woe for the monied class of brilliantly handsome, powerful super geniuses. She bases all of this on her objectivist claptrap, claiming rationality as her own private high ground.
But this is a general critique of her works. Specifically this book is completely overwritten and serves as flak cover for all the wrong people. The Jack Welch's and Phil Knights that imagine themselves to be the heroes of this book. This book has done more to create a generation of self interested greedy mindless zombies than any other book I can think of. View all 11 comments. If you're into sprawling, barely coherent I-are-mighty anti-Communist rants then this is for you. I suppose in our moments of weakness, we can look to Ayn Rand's philosophy to bring out our inner-super-humans.
Except that really it's just a polarized response to Marx and Lenin whom I have found equally unpalatable. What's that? You want me to separate the aesthetic elements from the philosophy? Sure thing. This book reads like an instruction manual for drawing right angles. View all 13 comments. Apr 05, Whitaker marked it as never-ever-to-read-ever. A Modest Proposal I'd give this book 10 stars, but it only gets five, because really, Ayn didn't have the courage of her convictions. The problem with Atlas Shrugged is that it doesn't go far enough. And so, to correct that, here's an addendum, a modest proposal to supplement Ayn's book.
We're taxing the wrong people. Why are we taxing rich people more than poor people? Rich people don't need government services. If they want a hig A Modest Proposal I'd give this book 10 stars, but it only gets five, because really, Ayn didn't have the courage of her convictions. If they want a highway, they'll build it themselves.
If they need electricity, they'll build a god damn dam. It's poor people that need the government to build these things for them. This will encourage those lazy bums at the bottom to slave for rich people. After all, it's by slaving away and working hard for them that they can eventually become rich too. It's coddling them otherwise. Why this tax structure? It's logical isn't it? Ergo, the more money they have, the more jobs they will create.
They are the Job Creators! Instead of taxing them we should be eternally thankful to them for even Existing. Without them, we'd all be living in mud huts and eating each other to stay alive. Yet once the reader enters this stark, strange world, he will likely stay with it, borne along by its story and its eloquent flow of ideas. A neighbor of mine who occasionally reviews books for an eastern magazine dropped in and, seeing the massive volume on my desk, asked what I thought of it. In her vision of the future, then, the liberals have brought the world to a sorry plight.
The last sparks of industrial competence are concentrated in the minds of two dozen — at most — American businessmen, who manage to hold the globe aloft in spite of the best efforts of governments everywhere to bring it down. Ayn Rand, although born in Europe is one of the finest American citizens I know. It is a massive tract for the times. Its story merely serves Miss Rand to get the customers inside the tent, and as a soapbox for delivering her Message.
The Message is the thing. It is, in sum, a forthright philosophic materialism. Upperclassmen might incline to sniff and say that the author has, with vast effort, contrived a simple materialist system, one, intellectually, at about the stage of the oxcart, though without mastering the principle of the wheel. Like any consistent materialism, this one begins by rejecting God, religion, original sin, etc. Thus, Randian Man, like Marxian Man, is made the center of a godless world….
Out of a lifetime of reading, I can recall no other book in which a tone of overriding arrogance was so implacably sustained. Its shrillness is without reprieve. Its dogmatism is without appeal. About Us. Brand Publishing.
The Atlas Shrugged Book Club Begins, Polarized but Polite
Times News Platforms. Real Estate. Facebook Twitter Show more sharing options Share Close extra sharing options. Sue Horton. Follow Us. She held a variety of editing jobs at the Los Angeles Times between and , including Op-Ed and Sunday Opinion editor and deputy California editor. Before her first stint at The Times, she was editor-in-chief of the L.