Rating: 
Summary: Who is John Galt? He's Captain Nemo, that's who!
Review:
This book is too long (Kurt Vonnegut took only a few pages to make the same points in his excellent short story, "Harrison Bergeron"), totally unoriginal, and is little more than an overly-elaborated version of Rand's much better novel, _The Fountainhead_.Jules Verne's Captain Nemo (_20,000 Leagues under the Sea_) is the obvious model for John Galt, and, to a degree, Galt's friend Ragnar. Nemo was the original anarchist scientist who led a strike against the world. Nemo invented a submarine; Galt invented an engine that would run for a long time on only a drop of fuel. Nemo attacked warships; Ragnar attacks foreign aid ships. Both Nemo and Galt had secret operation bases. The only differences between Verne's Nemo and Rand's Galt is Verne cast the character as the villian. Also, Verne was a better writer; when he wrote _20,000 Leagues under the Sea_, he was breaking new ground. _Atlas Shrugged_ is also not the first time Rand did something like this, either. Her novella, _Anthem_, is little more than a rewrite of the Russian dystopian novel, _We_, by Yevgeny Zamyatin (in the long run, all Rand did was give the story a happier ending). Nearly every idea Rand had was originally someone else's -- compare her writings to those of her fellow Russian Mikhail Bakunin (who spent time in prison for acting like an Ayn Rand hero), Max Stirner, Ragnar Redbeard (for whom Galt's friend Ragnar may have been named), and Robert Heinlein, and you'll see what I mean. That they were good ideas doesn't change that. Rand certainly was right about totalitarianism, collectivism, and altruism being evil, but she wasn't the first to say these things, nor did she say them best. For good libertarian fiction, stick to Robert Heinlein and L. Neil Smith.
Rating: 
Summary: Great ideas - problematic plot
Review: Ayn Rand is very passionate about her ideas, and this book outlines them in great detail.
To bad most of the characters are one-dimensional super-heroes or mega-villains that cause the plot to be a little thin.
That is a problem in a 1000+ pages novel. I found Fountainhead to be a better book. That said, no one can read Ayn Rand and remain unaffected.
Rating: 
Summary: This book is wonderful. Give it a shot.
Review: First off. Never take advice on books from a guy who can't even properly spell out his critique (no names mentioned). Atlas Shrugged is a wonderful book about politics, philosophy, morality, etc... And all of these aspects are tied together by a common philosophy; Objectivism. Reading this book was the most life-changing experience I've ever had and if you spend the time to actually read it you will gain a very interesting, exciting and happy prospective on how to live life. Even if you disagree with the philosophy, as you have a right to do. It's worth reading. You don't have to take my word for it, but I'm fairly certain that many of you will enjoy the book for it's story-line alone even if you're not philosophy buffs. Take care.
Rating:
Summary: An amazing book!
Review: I picked this up after reading CONQUEST OF PARADISE, a novel with similar themes that simply blew me away. I remembered reading this in high school and decided to re-read it. Ayn Rand writes so beautifully and descriptively that it is difficult to put her books down. While the FOUNTAINHEAD was a masterpiece, ATLAS SHRUGGED, though long and at times tedious, is one of the finest written books I've ever been lucky enough to read. The characters are masterful, and the intrigue is gripping. Dagney Taggart and Hank Rearden are admirable characters who truly come to life. The book touches on subjects which apply today, over forty years later. They include: Big business and the role government; what happens when big government overtakes big business's ability to create and succeed. In many ways, it predicts the collapse of the Soviet Bloc. The book is deep, yet fun. I've never enjoyed a book more, and highly recommend CONQUEST OF PARADISE as complimentary reading.
Rating: 
Summary: Shrugged?
Review: I'm sorry i have been reading for over 30 years ,and this is one of those books that I put down twice.I normally really push to finish any book I start but this book after 300 pages is just a bore.The lead charters are a bore.Safe your mony or get it used maybe you will like it.
Rating:
Summary: Powerful, Witless, Philosophical & w. Female Protagonist
Review: Everyone says that this book is about a man who invented a metal. But it isn't. It's about Dagney Taggaret, a woman who runs a transcontinental railroad company and is caught in a losing battle between creators such as herself and parasitic money looters. The man who invents the metal is just one of Dagney's heroic admirers. It's unusual to find a book with a female protagonist that is not about the rip-ability of bodices or some cozy view of being a mom. Atlas Shrugged is worth the reading just for that fact. Ayn Rand created a philosophy that had a basis in reality. Her observations about "secondhanders" and "looters" ring true for our society today. But she also required a world of cold intellect in which people do things solely to benefit themselves. It takes twisting sometimes for her to get her philosophy to fit the novel's developments. And it's worth looking at Ayn Rand's life. She truly walked her talk and her philosophical movement ended catastrophically when her best pupil decided that he'd rather be happy with a happy woman than continue to have a sexual relationship with the much older creator of Objectivisim (Ayn Rand herself). So if you read Rand's fiction, take some time to read her biography and the autobiographies written by her movement's adherents. Altogether Rand's work, fiction, and life make an illustrative tale.
Rating:
Summary: One of the most influential books of the 20th century
Review: This has to be one of the most influential books of the 20th century. Despite having been either ignored or vilified by the cultural "elites" of the day, it became a huge best seller and propelled its author and her ideas onto the national stage. Even today, nearly a half-century later, it continues to sell briskly. What made this book such a sensation? Well, quite simply, it was the boldness of her ideas and the sheer bravado and confidence with which she presented them. Back when it seemed that collectivism, in one form or another, was all the rage in intellectual circles, she dared to write a bracing celebration of individualism and capitalism that must have been seen as downright scandalous, yet today, with Soviet Communism dead, China embracing free markets, and Marxism mostly a relic preserved only in the classrooms of moldy old professors, it can be seen as prophetic. So, how to best assess this work? Well, for starters, it helps to see it as operating on several levels. First, and most obviously, it's a work of fiction, a novel. Second (and, from Rand's perspective, far more important) it was a vehicle to promote her philosophical views, which in time became known as Objectivism. Finally, it served as a work of social criticism and commentary, in which Rand took a biting and highly critical look at the intellectual, political, economic, and artistic trends of her time. Judged purely as a novel, it's decent but hardly great. On the negative side, the writing itself leaves much to be desired, the characters are mostly one-dimensional, the dialog clunky, and the love scenes are, there's no other way to put it, horrible. They are neither romantic nor erotic, in fact, they come off as downright bizarre at times. Lovers of literary style, emotional richness and subtlety will find little to like, the writing is clear and easy to understand, but it's also cold and sterile. On the plus side, however, is a plot that is brilliantly original. It involves a mystery that takes over half the book to reveal, so those who don't know what it is should skip the rest of this review. The story, set roughly in mid-20th century America, has the following premise - the country is in bad shape and is going to ruin in a rapidly accelerating downward spiral. Why? Because the productive and creative people in the world are going on strike in a dramatic move to 1) prove to the world how indispensable they are, and 2) to break, once and for all the notion that people have a "right" to use government power (translation: socialism) to force the producers to support others simply because they are "needy". Rand's brilliance and audacity was quite simply that she took the Marxist credo "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" and stood it on its head. Her view was the exact opposite, that no one has a moral right to claim entitlement to the products of another person's efforts. But this book is more than just a vigorous defense of laissez-faire capitalism, it is, as indicated before, a means of presenting an entire philosophy, Objectivism. What is Objectivism? At the risk of oversimplifying, it is the notion that man is a rational being and is morally obligated to deal with others based on reason, not emotion or force. This philosophy has considerable appeal, it envisions a world in which people can rise to the level of the best within them, where individual rights reign supreme and where it would be considered abhorrent to attempt to gain power over others by either the threat of force or by appealing to our baser emotions such as envy, guilt, resentment and fear. Indeed, Rand gives us a taste of her vision of utopia in the form of Galt's Gulch, a hidden valley in Colorado populated by the strikers and named in honor of the strike's leader, and even her fiercest critics would be forced to concede that it is an eminently decent and civilized place to live. Her principal flaw, however, was that Objectivism seemed to work better in fiction than in real life. Her book ends famously with the postscript: "And I mean it!" which referred to the notion that she lived by the same philosophy that her book advocated. Well, in reality, there were some contradictions she failed to resolve, both in her personal life and in what became the Objectivist Movement (for details, read Barbara Branden's insightful biography "The Passion of Ayn Rand"). If Rand's credentials as a novelist and a philosopher are still up in the air, how then to explain her tremendous success? Well, as previously stated, I think it's due to her role as a critic and commentator. I don't think anyone has ever done a better job of pointing out the moral contradictions of collectivism and defending the virtues of free enterprise on fundamental moral principles than Ayn Rand. It is impossible to deny the sheer guts it took to fly in the face of the intellectual establishment of the time and get this book published. Ultimately, THAT is what made her so influential a writer, the fact that she asserted that people have the right to be free; free to create, produce, and live to their highest potential, all without being forced to kowtow to "altruists" willing to impose their morality via the government at the point of a gun. Call her a radical - she was, in the best sense of the term. She's a person who dared to challenge conventional wisdom and present new, controversial ideas. Today, Communism is dead and support for free market economics and the concept of limited government have become very much mainstream concepts. It is hard to doubt that this book played an important, if largely uncredited, role in helping bring this about.
Rating:
Summary: Unoriginal, Bloated, Short-sighted
Review: In writing a review of Ayn (pronounced like 'mine') Rand's Atlas Shrugged, one almost feels compelled to write two reviews. Certainly, after an 1100+ page tome, a reviewer should say something about the quality of the book as pure novel. So I will. Atlas Shrugged is Bloated, with a capital B. In reading the book, it is clear that Ayn Rand had talent and could have written a marvelous novel. It is also clear what she didn't have was an editor with any guts. This book should have been only a third it's size. The author would have been able to tell the same story and make the same philosophical points in that space. Instead, the reader is treated to sililoques that go on for 50 or more pages and a seriously sluggardly pace of book. Other problems with this novel were majorly shallow characters, highly unrealistic fictional world, and too much whining by the author over the characters she clearly didn't like. As for the philosophy that is supposed to be expounded in this book, there are many and varying opinions about it. Mine is that it is evil. I am not an educated philosopher (incidentally, niether was Ayn Rand) but I can easily write that any philosophy that purports it an evil for a mother to feed her child out of duty, rather than buy a hat that she wants, is evil (for more on this read the radio address near the end of the book). Even that aside, her work is hardly original. Any serious book on various schools of philosophy would clear up that misconception. And, her ideas are extremely short-sighted. She takes no account of what would happen in society if ALL seemingly altruistic endeavors stopped. Ayn Rand is also a coward. In Atlas Shrugged, she creates a Utopian world where she can manipulate everything to create the outcome that she wants. The fact is, this world is CREATED. By using the tool of a novel, she does not have to make her philosophy work in the real world. In her book all of the 'good guys' are beautiful, hyper-intellectual, rich, and super-moral according to their own standards, they never allow their emotions to take control of them, ever. All of the 'bad guys' are ugly, stupid, moochers, who are running around ruining the world with their over-emotionalism. No one in this book has children - any reader who has children will appreciate how different that makes things. I just can't help think it cowardly for Ayn Rand to have created this perfect situation to put out her philosophy, especially since the situation that she creates is sooo contrived. Ayn Rand was not a philosopher. Because of her insistence in repeating the same message over and over to her readers, she ends up not being a good novelist, either. Read her book only if you feel that you 'should' in order gain a broader knowledge of what is out there in the world. For those interested in more information about Ayn Rand there are many biographies in print that you can find at Amazon. Some love her and some hate her, but you should probably read some stuff about her personal life (way juicier that her books) before you seriously consider hopping on her philisophical-wagon.
Rating:
Summary: an ideological revenge fantasy
Review: This novel is a regression from what was achieved in Rand's earlier fiction. "The Fountainhead" is suffused with some of the same fantasy elements that twist and turn this novel's plot -- paranoia, absurd villains, instant intimacy at first glance between heroes, irrefutable speeches, clever repartee at dress-up galas, formulaic humiliations for the enemies, etc. Nevertheless, "The Fountainhead" has a richer feel for people and develops a more solid fictional world. The characters are interesting and almost realistic -- call them two-and-a-half dimensional. "Atlas Shrugged" lacks even these endearments -- the book is mainly filled with cartoon cut-outs. They might as well be talking to one another with speech balloons. I can't say for sure which is worse, the heroes who chatter back and forth repeating the *exact same philosophy without a single variation* (this, in spite of the author's supposed devotion to individualism), or the uniformly mealy-mouthed villains who have nothing whatsoever to do with their lives but attempt to destroy the heroes. You get two of these for the price of one in those scenes which pit a hero against a villain -- Rand devastates her opponents with clever turns of phrases that are the verbal equivalent of "Kapow!". What happened? Simply this: Rand ceased to understand human beings. Everything is (either good or bad) ideology to her, and the poor robots in the novel must spout it incessantly. Sex, music, money, marriage, cigarettes, love, religion, a good-tasting hamburger, a train wreck -- all is connected in a total system in her mind, all is reduced to "bare essentials", premises, syllogisms, conclusions. This black-and-white approach is the source of the gray drabness of the novel. Literature, Rand's first-born child, has been immolated on the altar of her intellectual system. "Atlas Shrugged" culminates in the standard Rand piece de resistance, a speech which turns the plot on its ear by dumfounding all the foes with its unassailable logic. If witty put-downs are the fists ("punch lines") of the novel, The Speech is an atom bomb which, by its simple proclamation, obliterates all opposing thoughts in its blast zone (in "The Fountainhead", this zone is a courtroom; in "Atlas Shrugged", by a plot trick, it is the whole world via radio). This is the "revenge" part of the fantasy -- Rand is smashing her ideological foes. Naturally, the stick-figure bad guys in the novel haven't got a chance after that, and they know instantly that they've been beaten by a master. The funny thing about a Rand novel is how every character agrees in the end with her *entire* philosophy. First, there are the good guys; of these there are a) child prodigies who always knew it from age nine and never lost sight of it, and b) ninety-nine percenters who aren't too sure if they agree with *all* of it at the novel's start and whose complete conversion to the Truth will be the story's only character development. Then there are the bad guys; those who either a) already know the Truth and are fighting it with all their being because they want to crush the heroes and make mankind their slave, or b) stupidly oppose the Truth while being secretly afraid of it because they know, deep down, that its really True after all. Finally, there is the Common Man who, once The Speech is proclaimed, has found voice for his inarticulate assent to the Truth at last; he expresses a simple gratitude for his enlightenment to the one(s) who delivered it to him. He cannot hope to match the achievements of the heroes, but his spirit is one with theirs -- they have provided him with a firm foundation for life to come. In this last group we find Rand's fans. These are the people who give copies of "Atlas Shrugged" to their teenage children in the feckless hope that it can serve as a substitute religion -- a guide to higher understanding and moral fortitude. Such is the fate of enclosed thought systems with ideals that lead nowhere. The parallel to Marxist-Leninism is most compelling -- Rand's overtly atheistic philosophy has become its own false god.
Rating:
Summary: rand should of wrote the bible!!!!
Review: her wisdom was far a head of it's time, current event's proove it, just look at news paper or wathc the news
|
