My husband brought back another box of books from Community Service yesterday, and among them were Atlas Shrugged and We the Living. Over the years, I’ve heard an awful lot of negative stuff about Ayn Rand and these books are not - er - short.
In nutshell, are these worth keeping and reading or do these go in the “donate” pile? What did YOU think of them if you’ve read them? Are they good stories? AM I going to have to spend hours trying to figure out what she’s really getting at (some deeper meaning or some such bullshit)? I’ve heard Ayn Rand is all about “angst” - if I want angst I’ll talk to my kid. When I read for fun, I want to be entertained - will I be?
Keep in mind I’m the poster that couldn’t get through Bonfire of the Vanities to save my life - it just sucked IMO that bad.
I read Atlas Shrugged in college and though the political message is extremely heavy-handed, the speculative elements were interesting and the story was epic enough that I didn’t mind the politics. If you like reading about dystopian near-future societies and that kind of thing, I would at least give Atlas a try. Don’t know about We the Living.
If you like Rush Limbaugh or listen to Air America Radio all day, then you might like Rand (moreso if you like Limbaugh, though.)
What I mean is if you like being hammered with the same message over and over and over again, day after day, then you might like it. Otherwise, it is just worth it to see what the fuss is about. Rand is not a good writer.
I’ve never read them, but my brother (basically libertarian, who works in the stock market), and my sister (democrat/liberal, but not exactly hard-left) both love it. In my experience, people either love it or hate it (Atlas Shrugged), and this board is heavily skewed to people who hate it, based on my experiences about when it comes up in conversations here. While of the two people I know who most like it, neither are of the political bent that detractors here will imply that it’s for. But political inclination, or perhaps more accurately, one’s perceived politics seems to be a big part of whether people like it.
My understanding of the themes of it (based on reading reviews both for and against it, as well as talking to my siblings) is that there is a heavy emphasis on people’s ability/need to pull themselves up by their own means, and not rely on social welfare. My siblings are both borderline work-aholics who are highly self-motivated and always planning ahead for future advancement in their professional careers, and I think these things might have to do with their appreciation for the book. My brother read it in his mid-20’s, and my sister read it in her early 20’s. I don’t know how the age thing is supposed to influence it, though.
I have, and I vote toss 'em. As many have said, if you haven’t read them before the age of 25, you’re no longer inexperienced enough to find them profound.
To understand Rand, it’s best to start with knowing how and where she grew up. Ayn Rand is a product of Communist Russia: one who hated her environment so much she spent thousands of pages writing allegories for it. She very much believes in the absolute antithesis of communism: every man for himself, helping the weak is an unforgivable sin, et cetera.
The major idea here is that the most intelligent and creative people in the world are those who should be in charge of it. And on the face of it, this sounds like a marvelous idea… it’s just that when paired with the “and they should refrain completely from giving a rat’s ass about anyone or anything else” it gets, in my opinion, rather risky. Regardless, I found her ideas very compelling – sort of like a twenty storey drop is compelling when you stand at the rail.
ETA: I read them when I was 15 or 16. My father handed them to me and said “These are very good. Do not believe anything she says. It’s going to SOUND like an awesome idea. Come to me when you’re done and we’ll discuss why it’s NOT.”
I’ve read Atlas Shrugged at least four times. I’m not sure why. It was just there when I wanted to read a book. It’s an ok way to pass the time, just remember that it’s a novel loosely based on philosophy. Do not make the mistake that Ayn herself made and confuse it with actual politics or philosophy.
One thing that seems to constantly be overlooked in Rand’s books is that they are only half a step away from being romance novels. Lots of smut and drama.
Her protagonists are practically gods and her antagonists are straw men.
However, I think she does a good job of articulating some very challenging ideas; the benefit of money (currency) as opposed to the notion that money is the root of all evil; her full frontal assault on the notion of original sin; the idea that pity is not a positive emotion nor the epitome of mercy; the concept that people are not to be valued for their shortcomings, but for their accomplishments and/or talents; that sexual love is a valuable act —a recognition of value between two people — and not disgusting or shameful; that no one can relieve you of your responsibilities even when they can take on your obligations.
Her ideas seem very dated and are in keeping with what might broadly be called: 50’s American Values. She does challenge religion and stereotypical marriage and relationship mores, though and she backs up her ideas with thought provoking, conceptual dialog (even when it is stilted and more than a bit goofy).
The end of the book was bit of a let down for me and the basic plot has always seemed… passive-aggresive.
I never read We the Living.
If you do decide to read Atlas Shrugged skip the 100 page long radio speech. It basically just rehashes everything Rand has hit you over the head with already.
Not really. I’m sure there are better books to debate and Atlas Shrugged has enough shortcomings that I can’t defend it, but that is not the major idea.
I read her other book, “Anthem.” I thought it was tripe. She seems to have a real hardon for individuality above all else. Yeah, we get it. Your mom didn’t love you enough when you were a baby.
It could be argued that Atlas Shrugged is a worthwhile read for a variety of reasons already discussed above. We the Living on the other hand, is utter tripe. It contains the kind of overwrought, purple prose that actually makes you embarassed for the author as you read it. Good lord, who didn’t get their leg cut off by the tram in that novel!?
As Dorothy Parker once said: this is not a book to be cast aside lightly – it should be thrown with great force.
I read We the Living when I was a non-discriminating teenager (now I’m a non-discriminating adult), and I loved it. Epic, tragic, historical romance is how I remember it.
After reading it in a literature seminar in high school, my entire class almost staged a revolt to get it removed from our syllabus. “Pointless waste of our time” was the battle cry. I’m 32 now and still a little offended at its utter shite-ness. The only thing it has to recommend it is its relative brevity.
Most, if not all romance novels are much more well written. Want an epic Historical romance? Read Outlander by Diana Gabaldon and let this sad dreck disappear into the mists of history.
