Rating: 
Summary: A serious waste of time
Review: I decided to read Atlas Shrugged because I heard of its interesting premise-- the leaders of the industrial world begin disappearing and everything starts falling apart. Little did I know what I was getting into.
Rand seriously messed up an interesting storyline with all of her political rantings and speeches. The mystery and suspense were really exciting for awhile, but as the book kept going and going, it really began to drag. I began skimming over the ten page speeches that the characters would say to each other in face to face conversation as it was the same old drivel over and over and over and over. No one talks like that in real life. Are you really going to sit down with one of your friends and talk at them for an hour without feedback? If you make it towards the end of the book, your in for a real treat... a sixty page speech over the radio. Us poor readers are meant to believe that everyone in the nation stopped what they were doing and listened to the droning mind-numbing drivel being drilled into their heads.
If people choose to believe Rand's political philosophy, thats fine. However, she can't even seem to be consistent within her own book. Galt and company are sick of working to support the masses and leave. Big deal. However, in their new 'utopia' Galt's machine runs the whole enterprise. Without him, there would be no 'utopia'. So basically he's back where he started; just supporting a smaller group of people.
Overall, the interesting premise failed because of Rand's insistance that EVERY action and EVERY idea falls into a black and white issue with no middle ground. A real editor might have helped her get her story straight (and 800 pages shorter), but as it stands, Atlas Shrugged is a waste of time.
Rating: 
Summary: Rand was right, but she couldn't write.
Review: This is not a book to read for pleasure. It is far too long and windy, the characters and pseudoscience are unrealistic, and everything is almost comically black 'n' white.There are some good ideas within, but it's probably not worth your time to wade in and find them. Read Rand's earlier fiction for somewhat better stories, or her nonfiction if you really want to get into her head.
Rating: 
Summary: Mind opening!
Review: I can not find the best words to honor or praise this book! Her writing is so masterful, anything I say would lessen the experience or fall short of the book's strengths!
Rating:
Summary: Classic that everyone should read.
Review: I though it was fantastic. It should make people think twice before they complain about our system of free enterprise. At times she was a bit long winded and seemed to go off on a rant for pages. All in all...Classic Read.
Rating:
Summary: Atlas died of boredom
Review: and you may very well die of boredom too after you wade through this hyperverbous book.
It was such a disappointment. Having read the Fountain Head, I had expectations of a good story and solid characters, instead it was one loopty loop after another and boring from the get-go to the long, long awaited end.
If you are a fan of politics and boring books, this is the one for you.
Rating:
Summary: flatulence at best
Review: If you are fond of deeply flawed arguments and bombast, then you'll love Ayn Rand. Otherwise, save yourself the trouble of wasting valuable hours reading the awful ramblings of a writer (please, let's not sully the word "philosopher") who substitutes analytical rigor with delusional and narcissistic assertions. By the way, to call "objectivism" a philosophy is akin to claiming that "Mr. Deeds" is a good movie.
Rating:
Summary: Decent, but excessively long, story based on bad philosophy
Review: This is a story that is grounded very strongly in a particular philosophical viewpoint, namely Objectivism. I'm not going to criticize Objectivism too harshly, since the story could have been great even if Objectivism is not, but I must say that Rand spends far too much time force-feeding her philosophy through the characters. Grounding a story in philosophy is not a bad idea....but continuously having your characters give 6 page monologues on the greatness of an idea gets ridiculous after 300 pages or so. What Atlas Shrugged really needed was an editor. This story could have been told, without losing anything whatsoever, in 400 pages or less, instead of the absurd length of 1074 pages that my copy contains.
Furthermore, there were serious problems with the plot and characters. Every single character in the book is a blatant stereotype that doesn't actually exist in real life. All of the "good guys" (Hank, John, Ragnar) think, act, speak, dress, and look exactly alike. The only exception is Dagny Taggart, who is different only by the fact that she's a woman. The "bad guys" are all exactly the same as well, expounding a ridiculous philosophy that Rand calls "collectivism" which doesn't actually exist in the real world. With her characters, Rand is making the well-known "either-or fallacy" (which she does quite often in her fiction and non-fiction work). Rand presents two sides and then declares that they are the only choices, without allowing for the possibility of a third option. Now, on to the plot. This book appears to be set in the future, but it was plainly outdated even when it was originally published (1947 I think). Rand's view of the future is ridiculously primitive and unimaginative. Trains are still the primary mode of transportation and steel is the main industry. There is absolutely no mention of the service or information sector, which was beginning to rise at the time of the writing of the book. Wow, what a lack of vision. Furthermore, the very premises and underpinnings of the plot are false. If the major corporate executives were to "go on strike" as the plot suggests, then business would just continue as usual. Rand seems to believe that all the business leaders are the main creative engine of the world, which is outright false. Most innovation and creativity comes from the rank and file....those who the capitalists exploit for profit. Take away business leaders and nothing is lost. A well read socialist or biologist would be able to debunk Rand's philosophical underpinnings easily, because they are based on a bed of misunderstandings about human nature. The story wasn't terrible, but it could have been much better, which is why I'm giving it 2 stars. To summarize: Poor philosophy + long-winded and boring storytelling + bad plot = A waste of my time. Definitely not recommended.
Rating:
Summary: Stands the test of time
Review: This is one of those books people discover in college, in some old musty bookstore. Maybe they read it, maybe not. Then, they notice it appears in new printings periodically in the mainstream bookstores. Whatever anyone says about Ayn Rand, and she attracts a LOT of controversy, her message and philosophy (Objectivism) resonate. The plot of this novel is a thinly-disguised exposition of Objectivism. The central focus of Objectivist philosophy is the primacy of the rational, creative human mind. As in her other fictional works (The Fountainhead, We The Living), the heroes are independent, rational, potent people who are persecuted and taken advantage of by the leech-like masses or evil power-hungry despots-in-waiting. Rand divides the human species into three camps - those who are able and good and act in accordance with their inner drive to succeed and create and generally carry the rest of humanity on their backs; those who are unable to do much of anything and just "go with the flow"; and those evil people who are unable to create, but who are aware of the worlds power structure and manipulate it to their own benefit (read: politicians, bureaucrats and monopolists). The interplay between these camps drives her plot. In Atlas, the inheritor of a nationwide rail line fights her spineless brother and the evil, socialist political structure to keep her rail line alive and in private hands. If that sounds like a sleeper, it would be except that Rand novels are about ideas, not plot or character. This book was my first exposure to Rand and Objectivism, and it was an eye-opener. "Atlas" was written at a time when the conflict of ideas regarding the role of government and individuals in society was much hotter than it is today. Rand was writing at a time when the Soviet Union was still regarded, in some circles, as a workers paradise and when England and much of mainland Europe was experimenting with Socialism, Communism or other communitarian social and political structure. Even the United States was taking its first look at socialist ideals. To suggest Rand despised Socialism would be an understatement, but rather than just grind the axe, she attacks the philosophical underpinings of communitarian social systems at a very fundamental (some say simplistic) way. This novel, especially with the added foreword and some of the notes, is a great jumping off point for ones' own consideration of social justice, without the added pseudo-ideological baggage currently sloshing around U.S. college campuses, politics and media. I would never have read "The Road to Serfdom" or any of Milton Friedman or Noam Chomskys' works had I not started on Rand, and I'd still think that the two political parties that dominate the U.S., my home, were somehow fundamentally different. Rand was my introduction to applying reason to observed human behavior, and her work gave me a place to build a worldview far more rational and ethical than any base built on what passes for public education, or worse, organized religion. That is her great strength - she preaches reason; you can figure out everything else from there. We don't hear enough about reason in public discourse, at least not in the U.S. If more people read this book, America might have a level of public debate that rises slightly above the current schoolyard-screaming, everyones-a-victim level. I cannot recommend this book highly enough. Buy it, read it, think about it, then act accordingly.
Rating: 
Summary: Good Book
Review: Its a very philosophical book, readers will enjoy it more if they really think about what she writes. Many people find her views on life pretty liberating. I'm probably not the best guy to talk about it but she advocates 'enligthened selfishness'. In fact her main characters are a little too self-absorbed in my view. Its pretty entertaining, and she does present her arguments very well. So even if I disagree with her views, I feel I've become a better person just by reading it.
Rating:
Summary: There is no Better...
Review: There is no better of a book to choose to read. Although it may seem intimidating at first, seeing as its 1100 pages of bible-sized print, it is an incredible read. Amazingly enough there are no weak or dull moments in the book, but only some of the most fantastic passages I've ever read. I am only a junior in high school but this book is twenty times better than any "American Classic" I've had to read so far. You won't regret the investment!
|
