Atlas Shrugged is a piece of junk!

Post Reply New Topic

Given that this book is somehow an inspiration to many people and the hype that surrounds it I decided to try to read it for the first time. Boy, was that about 15 minutes of pain. I read about 50 pages before I just couldn't take anymore and I don't see how Ayn Rand is such a great author. It was the most choppiest and longwinded 50 pages I ever read in any book period; most of it was a laundry list of describing what some tree or other looked and felt like in the background. The book had a lot of punctuation and grammar goofs which is one thing but it was mostly rambling by someone adding filler to a novel that probably should run maybe 100 pages tops (that was torture, like nails on a chalkboard irritating). A lot of people are saying that the characters in the book are captains of industry breaking away from an oppressive government and society; I wasn't convinced that these were captains of industry from what I read. Taggart or whatever his last name is came across to me as someone who dealt more with political and managerial fires and crap within the ranks of his own company and quite frankly couldn't run a lemonade stand in real life. Most of the other characters I read about (I think Dagny, Taggart's mother, and some guy called Eddie) were not even interesting at all, just people who would just conviently pop out of nowhere (like on a Whack-a-Mole game) and either describe how someone or something else looked and for some reason would say "Who is John Galt?" which made no sense at all as far as story goes. Is this supposed to be mysterious or edgy? Sound dorky to me. Supposedly (I didn't read past page 50 or so, this is what I have heard online) there is a huge boring lecture near the end of the novel from this guy called John Galt rambling on like your crazy old neighbor about how he and his followers are so great or something. This is considered a great work of art? Maybe by kindergarten standards it is.

Yes, I am familiar with Ayn Rand's 'ideology' and what she practiced in real life. I will put aside the fact that she received welfare despite her supposed dislike of anyone receiving it (she sure didn't seem to hate it too much when it was turned into a deposit into her checking account), or the fact that she had her cult followers hold her up for most of her life financially and personally despite the rhetoric of being a rational independent producer of wealth (she produced a lot of angry former cult members and cigarette butts judging from her lifestyle) and I will also put aside that she cast out anyone in 'Objectivism' who dared to, I don't know, actually think on their own and not agree with her on every single trivial matter that she considered important (I wonder if Ayn Rand realized that some of her favorite music might have been considered nursery rhymes even in her time). But, I do have one observation and question that I have regarding her Objectivist ideology: if rational egoism is basically the foundation of all that is human philosophy/rights/whatever, then why would someone with an ideology based on selfishness necessarily respect the rights of others, including the rights of others to be selfish or behave as Objectivism expects them to? Greed may win big money for the Objectivist, but what is to stop some other person from using their own greed to get that same money away from them? Furthermore, why would someone who believes in rational egoism necessarily respect the idea of a free market? Or freedoms of any kind? An Objectivist government may decide to take away gun rights from one person simply on the basis of one person being 'inferior' to another. The Objectivist may believe in their right to freedom of speech but not another person's right to freedom of speech. Doesn't sound very libertarian at all!

For anyone who gets their views of life from Rand and her fascist kindergarten whack-a-mole novels, they need to check themselves into the looney bin or a detox center because you've been on something wierd for waaaay tooo long!

"Selfish" can mean you like to donate money, because you want people to think better of you.

"Selfish" can mean you like to help poor people, because it makes you feel good.

I think all charity is done for selfish reasons.

That's why I use this book as toilet paper.

Most recent time I read the book was in school in the 1970s so I can't say a whole lot about it from direct memory.
what I do remember is there being occasional articles proposing that both its supporters and detractors have misunderstood its message. And that it is actually both a subtle critique of things which some praise in it, and an obvious critique of some behaviors of individual human and of organizations of humans.
Looking for a sample found an article with this on it,

https://fee.org/articles/what-the-critics-get-wrong-about-atlas-shrugged/

Rand isn't considered a great author. I've never heard her name raised in conversations of great novelists. Her work is widely derided. Even admirers of her dodgy philosophy will usually admit that her prose is weak and her stories are badly plotted and paced.

{Off topic, there were several other posts here that disappeared. What happened?}

Someone removed them because users were bickering off-topic.

That reminds me of this selfish jerk who stepped in front of me to protect me from a crazed gunman. The gunman shot him in the legs and pistol-whipped him to death while I escaped through a back alley.

This jerk got his name printed in the newspaper, received a nice funeral, and even a beautiful tombstone.

The townspeople consider him a local hero. He got just what he wanted: fame, prestige, and a place in the history books.

And what did I get? Nothing! It still angers me to this day.

Or my personal favorite; that I call a win, win for everyone involved.

Donate to the needy, get a tax write off!

I loved the Fountainhead movie. It's the best argument against Rand anyone could ever conceive.

Architect produces poor, but at the time 'edgy' design for social housing. The public committee that's about to build it adds balconies.
Architect blows up construcion site.

Because, you know, who cares if a building serves a purpose, like, in this case, serving as a home for humans.

Relentlessly making a personal statement is the job of art.
And no one hires an artist to do architecture, for a reason.

I think Ayn Rand just tried to create characters for other fountainheads to admire.

We were compelled to read Rand's Anthem in high school. I always thought the characters to be poorly developed, and the writing just plain bad. I've never had the misfortune of reading Atlas Shrugged, and from I know of it, I hope I never will.

Atlas Shrugged is Twilight for grown-ups.

Just replace the vampires with businessmen. It's basically the same thing.

I think EVERYTHING is done for selfish reasons. In all seriousness, there is no such thing as genuine altruism or selfless motives.

I’m a great admirer of Jesus, more so than Rand. But I do admit to finding her books interesting. Fountainhead addresses artistic integrity, something that is important to me as a musician, hence why I find Rand attractive in some ways. Her defense of atheism leaks like a sieve, not to mention certain other moral choices leave much to be desired, but beyond that I think she’s cool.

Jesus’ formulation of reciprocity begins with calling out the sinful nature of human beings. He points out that parents don’t give their children harmful things when they ask for things they need. If we, who are evil, know how to be generous to those we care about, does it not make sense that a good God would be even more generous to those who ask? And if God is generous, shouldn’t we be generous as well?

In practical application, generosity has the effect of drawing people close to those are generous. The reason why is because people are evil. Evil, selfish, whatever. Once you come to understand your own selfish nature, you can look beyond and see the very same nature in others. BECAUSE others, like you, are selfish, your generosity gives them the security of knowing they can get all they ask for, and perhaps more. You’ll never get rid of them. And once they’re “hooked” on you (in a manner of speaking), they will bend over backwards when you need their help.

All reciprocity is the hope of a return on an investment in others. Selflessness is an illusion created by one’s selfish desire for others in their life and withholding the pressures of any immediate expectation of repayment. It is an amazingly effective practice, so much so that’s it’s your path to wealth and popularity. Sad that so few people get it.

What if you anonymously give a large sum of money to a charity operating on the other side of the world?

Or what about giving money to a beggar while on holiday?

In neither case do you have the hope of reciprocity. There's a good chance nobody else will ever know.

Why did you do it?