Guinastasia: you have my sympathies. Having read all the novels, the play, and most of the essays by Rand, I can state categorically that you have no chance about changing your mind about how evil a [insert pejorative of your choice] she was… reading Rand is like beating your head against a rock, it feels much better when you stop.
For a number of years a few of my professors and close friends reccomended that I read Ayn Rand. They were sure that I would enjoy her works. Apparently I shared many of the same ideas as were contained within her philosophy of Objectivism. This summer I finally got around to purchasing a paperback copy of The Fountainhead. Suprisingly, it did not take me long to read. I was floored. I loved the language, enjoyed the descriptive quality, agreed with most of the philosophy.
Oh, and the relationship between Howard Roark and Dominique Francon…
grrowrrrr…
Who says philosophy must be dull?
~Mag
Ahh, now this is more like it.
As I’ve mentioned in other threads where Rand has been mentioned, my dad thinks of AS as the holy bible. He has been begging me to read it, and from all the negative criticism I’ve read about it, I have been thoroughly un-encouraged (I’m not sure if that’s the same as discouraged but whatever).
I’m not going to be able to read it anytime soon regardless, but it helps to hear some positve comments on it to at least get me excited for it.
Well, so far, so good.
It’s not a bad story, but pretty flimsy as far as credibility. The people who are supposed to be the “liberals” I guess, are laughable. They say, “Well, it’s for the public good.”
And what’s up with the “let’s make money, let’s make money, who cares what they want, let’s make money.” What kind of business DOESN’T think about the public, as in customers, and all that?
Already I can tell I’m gonna hate Hank Reardon-what a tightass.
Lady M. our milage sure varies! 
I hated the Roarke/Dominique relationship. It ruined the book for me!
The whole “I love you…so I must destroy you.”/“Yes, and I respect you for it!” thing just made me irritated with both of 'em (and vaguely nauseous).
The relationship between Dagney and Hank in the first…third? half? of Atlas Shrugged was (to me) such a better and healthier relationship…but I’ll admit that Roarke and Dominique definitly had a steamier relationship! 
Guin: Hank may grow on you. I ended up really liking him.
And yeah the “liberals” bear as much relationship to reality as the “conservatives” in Atwood’s risible Handmaiden’s Tale. That is to say: none at all. Both use the (in)famous technique of “I’ll make my opponents monsters! Won’t that be subtle?”
Can I suggest a leftie author who has beautiful prose and opinions that I hate (but she presents them very fairly)? Ursula K. LeGuin’s The Dispossessed would be a great follow-up to Atlas Shrugged. It’s kinda the anti-Atlas Shrugged. It’s an examination of what a planet run on a true communist “no personal property at ALL for anyone” principals (she keeps using the phrase “non-propertarian”) would be like. It’s obvious that she generally likes the idea but isn’t afraid to look at the problems with the system either (and, except for one John Galt moment at the end (about 3 pages) she doesn’t preach). And Shevek (the main character) is one of the most human, real characters ever…(which’ll be a refreshing change after the Avatars in Atlas!)
Fenris
Taking up Fenris’s bit about leftie writers with beautiful prose… I wish all the Randites (Randians, whatever the hell they call themselves) would take the time to read Robert Tressell’s The Ragged Trousered Philanthropist - probably the English-language “collectivist” classic.
I would also suggest that those who love The Fountainhead so much should read the Margaret Atwood short story on rape fantasies (I believe that one can be found in her collection Dancing Girls, and then get back to me and tell whether or not I should reconsider my contention that Ayn Rand was one of the most misogynistic writers of the XXth century. (Thanks again to Fenris, you sparked the Rand/Atwood connection for me.)
I think I read Rape Fantasies years ago. It was in one of my text books from a fiction course I took my first year of college.
I might point out that while I’m a leftist, I LOATHE Marx. Too materialistic and brutal for me…too cold. I don’t read a lot of fiction anymore. I hate communism. I just think it’s good to have a safety net and to make sure no one can go without basic needs and care and things like that. I think I’m just too sensitive.
It’s just so funny when I read about the Liberals-“that money you inherit is a part of helping the underprivledged.” Weird.
And what’s up with the NAMES? Dagny? How do you say it? Daj-ny? DAG-Ny? Dany?
I think I kinda like Eddie though. He’s just there, and he’s like, “hey, what’s up?”
I’ll have to check it out, Fenris. As soon as I get done with the other ten books I’m currently reading. When I need a break from Dagny and Hank, I’ll switch to my Glenn Miller bio. He and his wife Helen had such a beautiful relationship.
It sorta rhymes with “Throatwobbler Mangrove.” For interior narrating purposes, whenever you read about Ragnar, you should imagine it thundered in a quasi-germanic accent, with full reverb effects. Similarly, “John Galt” triggers a halleleujah-chorus choir hit kind of effect. That’s what I ended up doing, anyway.
Eddie, if he’s the character I’m thinking of, was interesting as one of the few folks who wasn’t either a god or demon wearing ill-fitting human skin. Sort of out-of-place, really.
I wouldn’t say misognyistic as such. IMHO (and I haven’t read the Atwood article…can’t stand Atwood), Rand didn’t hate women, she hated disagreement. Dagney was a damned strong female character given the period that the book was written in.
What I would say is that from my limited knowledge, Rand had…um…er…some unusual ideas about relationships that, while fine between consenting adults were on the fringes of the mainstream. Which is fine, except that she had the idea that anyone who didn’t subscribe to her ideas was warped…or stupid. Or warped AND stupid. It would be as though someone into bondage proclaimed that anyone who wasn’t into bondage needed to seek help. I’ll also agree that presenting Dominique and Howard’s relationship as healthy and normal was weird.
Guin: Dunno how Rand intended it to be pronounced, but I’ve always heard it as DAG-nee. (BTW: The Dispossessed has one advantage that none of the others have: it’s short, maybe 200 pages or so. After some of the doorstoppers you’re reading, that might be like a breath of fresh air! 
)
Fenris
Fenris - just to clarify: the Atwood piece is a short story (and quite a funny one at that), not an article.
I love The Dispossessed. First, LeGuin shows you a utopia – then, gradually, she shows you what’s wrong with it.
Guin, you asked, “And what’s up with the ‘let’s make money, let’s make money, who cares what they want, let’s make money.’ What kind of business DOESN’T think about the public, as in customers, and all that?”
Well, actually, I’d say most businesses. To whatever extent they can get away with it. IMO, businesses really don’t like having to take customer wants/needs/desires into account. So inconvenient. All those strange, unpredictable people making demands. Easier by far to just tune them out. Off them what it’s darn well convenient to offer. You’ll probably make out just fine; how likely is it that anyone else is going to cater to their foolish whims?
People talk about the forces of the marketplace. Well, yeah, those forces exist. And businesses large and small are working hard, day in and day out, to insulate themselves from those nasty forces.
The names are one of the things is this book that I find to be comically bad. Subtlety obviously was not one of Rand’s stronger suits. There is actually a villian in this book named “Hunsacker”.
…while still obviously liking the system, warts and all. The book is (in some editions) subtitled “An Ambiguous Utopia” and it sure lives up to that phrase! What impressed me so much was that LeGuin made me love the book (primarily because of Shevek), while all the while, her politics made my skin crawl (like Guin’s probably feeling with Rand). But despite crawling skin, I’ve reread The Dispossessed more than I’ve reread Atlas Shrugged!
And I like Dagney’s name. It’s so '50s. I cannot justify “Hunsacker” though.
Fenris
It’s just they’re so out there. The worst has to be BALPH!!
Da’hell?
Like I said, it’s not bad for a story. It’s just the absurdities-“Let’s let books only be published for 1000 copies, so others have a chance!” LOL
I did like the part where Hank gave Lillian the Reardon Metal bracelet. His mother said, “Oh, that’s so cold!” I would think that would be VERY romantic. But then, that’s me. I’m such a fuzzy romantic. Very sentimental.
Okay, so I’m on the last chapter of the FIRST section.
Thoughts so far-I’m enjoying it more than I thought I would.
I STILL think her philosophy is bullshit, that her characters are utterly ridiculous, and the situations are nonsense.
STILL, I’m finding it intriguing. I’m up to the part where Dagny is trying to find the owner of the factory and the inventer of some kind of motor-which sounds to me like a perpetual motion machine? I like a good mystery, so it’s interesting to find out who it belonged to.
Still, did she really assume liberals are like that? And do most Randites think that way? That we utter platitudes about the greater good and repeat them like a mantra?
Also, I think I have to say that she IS a misogynst, in some ways. She describes a bracelet on Dagny as giving her the ultimate feminine aspect-“of being chained.” Huh?
And I really find myself feeling for Lillian Reardon-I feel REALLY sorry for her. I know she’s supposed to be an empty-headed socialite-but something tells me that she WOULD be more than that-she’s hiding behind a facade because her husband is such a jerk. I’m sorry, Fenris-I STILL don’t like Hank.
Overall, not bad-but my fears of falling into her spell were unfounded. If anything, my liberalism is stronger than ever.
On that note, I wonder if erislover is ever going to pipe in?
I liked the SF aspects of the book and the mystery. For me the philosophy is 3/10ths “Yes. I Agree”, 2/10ths “Well, DUH.” and 5/10ths “Um…yer overstating things. Again.” I don’t hate the philosophy, but it’s too extreme.
**
**
From what I’ve read, “Yes” and “Not so much any more, but…well…the devout ones…yes.”
**
But that’s the whole Rand “romance” thing. I don’t think it’s misogyny as much as it’s confusing your own sexual peccidillos with NATURAL LAW.
**
<sob>
**
<brain eating zombie voice>
Jooooin uuuuuuuss! JOIIIIIIIN UUUUSSS!*
</brain eating zombie voice>
Fenris
*Not that I’m a full-fledged Objectivist or Randite or anything.
“Never. I’ll never join you. I am a Liberal, like my father before me!”
For what it is worth (probably less than $.02, but hey!) I thoroughly enjoyed Atlas Shrugged, and Fountainhead. I loved Hank, loved the “strength” of the female characters in both. I did actually read the whole John Galt speech the first time through, but on subsequent readings, I tend to skip over it. I loved Eddie, too, in a puppy dog kind of way.
“If you will not turn to the Rand side…then you shall DIE!”
:: Purple bolts of lightning fly out of Darth Fenris’s* fingertips, frying all the circuitry in Guin’s prothsetic bleeding heart ::
Fenris
- Yes, I know that it was the Emperor who tossed around purple lightning, but Emperor Fenris=stupid, Darth Fenris=Big Laffs!
Guin, there’s a difference between misogyny and kinky.
Rand apparantly was wildly attracted to powerful domineering men. But of course, as a domineering woman, she couldn’t actually stand these men. So she winds up marrying Frank because she could boss him around, yet ended up despising him for being weak. Ah, the classic dilemna of the bossy woman…