Rating: 
Summary: "Ladies and Gentlemen... This is John Gault Speaking."
Review: Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand's classic novel of the rebirth of man's spirit, represents the pinnacle of her philosophical vision. Set in the modern world, but not dated, the novel deals with what happens when the "prime movers" go on strike. The prime movers are tired of being blamed for everything bad in society and given no credit for the good. They are also tired of being enslaved by the second-handers, so the prime movers give these people what they want: a world without the things, values and people the leeches detest. However, by doing so, they have led to the destruction of society as we know it. The great thing about this novel is the fact that it predicts many of todays problems. You can simply look at the California Power crisis and see many of the characters in the novel are with us today: people like Governor Gray Davis remind me of James Taggert. The environmentalists and their pseudo-intellectual ideals remind me of people like Chic Morrisson and his ilk. These people, just as the people in the novel, do not realize that many of the things they advocate are in complete opposition to logic and reason as well as the laws of economics. However, that matters not. They "want" things done their way and will achieve their goals at all costs. They substitute true intellectual discourse with child-like name calling and tantrum throwing until they achieve what they want, and when they do so, they demand the very people they persecuted come to their rescue. Another point of the novel which I truly enjoyed was the fact Rand took her time to fully explore the motivations of the characters and fully develop the plot. She isn't in any hurry to get to the end, and although I certainly was, I found the trip an enjoyable one. I must say at this point many of the characters are meant to be caricatures of various ideas running through the American Culture and political discourse of the times. The best example of this is Gault himself, who is the ultimate caricature and represents something different to each character in the plot. This novel is certainly one of the greatest novels of the 20th century. A complete philosophy on life is presented between its covers. Whether or not you are an Objectivist, you will find Atlas Shrugged to be a compelling and timely novel, even 40 years after it was first published.
Rating:
Summary: The needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many.
Review: What a mind... A truly brilliant work from a truly brilliant mind. Highly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: One of the Great Books
Review: This is one of the books that affected my thinking. It's a powerful dramatic illustration of how we are coerced to march in lockstep with the dominant culture, and thus forfeit our individuality and ultimately our freedom and humanity. It's interesting how Ayn Rand has become for many people a political symbol of all they love or hate. I would caution the reader to avoid this trap. This book is not a blueprint for utopia. It's a work of fiction, and, like all fiction, it mirrors certain aspects of our reality without being completely realistic. I value this book because it illuminated some of the social snares and pitfalls we face, forces that I had been dimly aware of but could not previously bring into focus. Because it meant so much to me, and because it has things to say that no one else had the courage and passion and skill to articulate, I'll call this one of the Great Books. It is not without flaws, but it is important and it is unique.
Rating: 
Summary: Only for Rand admirers; not for the rest of us
Review: Critical judgment of Rand's controversial novel must ultimately depend on the reviewer's standards of criticism. For those who are sympathetic to Rand's general philosophic view, "Atlas" must be given hard marks--that much all fair-minded individuals can agree upon. Admirers of Rand who, for some reason or another, have never read this work, hardly need a critic of Rand like myself to tell them they ought to look the thing over. There are plenty of Randites who can fulfill the office of recommending "Atlas" to other Randites. But what about those who are not admirers of Rand and who do not sympathize with her philosophical views? Should they take the trouble to read Rand's massive tome? If Rand's admirers are correct in their view that "Atlas Shrugged" is a great masterpiece, we might think that anyone seeking to be well-read ought to add "Atlas" to their reading list. But suppose this is not the case; suppose "Atlas" is not one of the greatest novels ever written. If so, it would be a waste of time for any non-Randian to read it. It is this question that I will address in this review. Should non-Randians read "Atlas" because it qualifies as great literature? Or should they avoid it precisely because, as literature, it fails? If we examine "Atlas" solely on the grounds of literary criticism, rather than as a work of philosophy or propaganda, I believe that our verdict on the work must be largely negative. I say this, not because of the glaring weaknesses in the novel's characterizations and its painfully artificial contrivances of plot (although these certainly are serious enough problems), but because of a far more serious defect that towers over purely technical concerns. I have in mind the prevailing attitude which the novel projects, an attitude of blistering, passionate hatred towards anyone who disagrees with the ideas which the novel seeks to propagate. Rand was passionate not only about her ideas, but also about those who had the temerity to differ with her on any significant issue. This passion is present on nearly every page of the book. Anyone who disagrees with Rand can hardly miss it. In the seventy page speech by the novel's hero toward the end of the book, it practically leaps off the page and grabs the offending reader by the throat. If you don't care for Rand's ideas, you would have to be a masochist to read this novel. This is why the praise of the novel by Rand's admirers is misleading. Since they agree with Rand, they don't notice the degree to which she abuses those whose views differ from her own. Lacking in empathy for anyone who has the gall to think differently from Rand, it never occurs to them how offensive "Atlas" is to the nonbeliever. But it is a plain fact to any non-Randian who has trudged his way through its eleven hundred pages of hate. Now it should be obvious to any cultured individual that any novel which projects furious, unbridled hatred towards those who do not agree with its author can hardly be regarded as a work of great literature. You look at any great novel--say, for instance, Tolstoy's "War and Peace" or Drieser's "Sister Carrie--and you will find that disagreement with the author's political and moral views do not in any serious way compromise enjoyment of the novel. Tolstoy was a pacifist and Drieser a communist; but you don't have to be a peacenik or a commie to get something out of reading "War and Peace" or "Sister Carrie." But unless you are sympathetic with Rand's Objectivist philosophy, you will get nothing out of reading "Atlas" except a massive rhetorical whipping. For this reason, it is really quite beside the point whether "Atlas" has a good plot or is well-written or demonstrates a high-level of literary excellence. As a novel, it fails because it breaks one of the cardinal rules of great fiction: it promotes hatred and contempt rather than insight and understanding. It is a great work, not of literature, but of philistinism and darkness. Whitaker Chamber's, in his notorious review of Rand's novel, tried to capture the attitude Rand projects towards dissenters with a metaphor that has ever since enraged the novel's admirers. "From almost any page of Atlas Shrugged," Chambers wrote, "a voice can be heard, from painful necessity, commanding: 'To a gas chamber--go!'" While I can understand the outrage of Rand's partisans at this remark (they make the mistake of taking it literally), if you understand exactly what Chamber's was driving at, you will realize that, far from slandering the book, Chambers has merely used a metaphor to more vividly describe the prevailing spirit of the novel. And although Rand certainly would have opposed literally sending people to gas chambers, it is clear from the tone of the work that she desired some kind of awful punishment to be visited upon those who dared to resist her message. But books written with this kind of scathing hatred and contempt for humanity are not worth the trouble of reading. "Atlas" will long remain a favorite work for those who admire the author's ideology. But as for the rest of us, we must regard the work as a curious abomination, not fit to be read as literature.
Rating:
Summary: The Novel to live your life by
Review: This novel is imprtant. Important if you accept much of Miss. Rand's Objectivism, more important if you don't. If you do support Objectivism this book provides great insight as to how it would work in actual practice. If you don't than with luck it will convince you, if not you will at least have gained a truer understanding of it than you would by the misrepresentations it is given by oponents. Many People seem to understand only half this book. For example I see comments on "selfishness good?" I say yes, but you must understand selfishness. Selfishness isn't the cry of "mine" from a small child when told to hand over a toy that belongs to someone else. Selfishism is being primarily concerned with your own happiness. If all people worked form this perspective altruism would not only be unnecessary(as it allready is) but seem unthinkable. For example, my happiness is predicated on many things. It does not make me happy to see a man hurt due to factors outside his control, so I try to help. This includes such activites as helping organizations that help AIDS sufferers. Why do I do this? Not out of some fuzzy spirit of altruism, but because it gives me pleasure to help people who want to be alive, and be productive. I do NOT help with Habitat for Humanity, an orginization that seeks to give unearned property to people. It does not make me happy to help those attain what I have, without having to produce for it. Many people seem to think this means venerating a man who owns a business while hating those who work for him. Not so. If a man works his hardest and produces, as a sweeper, an industrialist, a business owner, a novelist, or anything he is a good moral man nad to be admired. The man who takes welfare and refuses a job at McDonalds becaus ehe feels it, beneath him, he is to be despised, not pitied, but despised. I am not a wealthy industrialist. I have a small theatrical production company. Does it support me? No, but I don't take pride in being a starving artist, I work. I work for money forty hours a week, and I work to make my company a sucess. A friend asked if I wanted to form a non-profit theatre company. NO some day my company will be sucessfull and I will make money from it. How do I know this, because I want it, and I will work for it. That's all we need to know. Who is John Galt? In a perfect society we all would be.
Rating: 
Summary: AT LASt I'm finished!!!
Review: "Atlas Shrugged" is a book that one either loves, hates, or just plain doesn't understand. It has been my experience that those who wholeheartedly agree with Rand's philosophy LOVE this book, while those who do not believe in free-market capitalism hate both Ayn Rand and her books. So much for objectivity!!! All too often people rate a book such as this based upon the philosophy it espouses, and not its literary merits. Well, I'll try to do both. As a philosopher, Rand is for the most part dead-on. However, there is nothing very original or groundshaking offered here. Two hundred years earlier Adam Smith said very much the same things in "Wealth of Nations." Yes, self-interest is good for everyone. Why? According to Smith, an individual operating in a free-market who seeks to further his or her own interest must inevitably serve the interest of the market (other people); therefore, selfishness is indeed a virtue. Money, then, is only a measure of the value contributed to others (the market). So, if a person is wealthy, and did not acquire that wealth in some fraudulent or criminal way, then that wealthy person must therefore have contributed more value to society. Again, all of this requires a free-market. In "Atlas Shrugged", all characters are in fact caricatures. They only exist on the extreme ends of the producer/parasite spectrum. Rand does this to make her point, but I've already seen "Star Wars", and prefer a little more subtlety. As the book's literary merits... I won't lie to you. Reading "Atlas Shrugged" is about as much fun as a trip to the dentist--particularly if you already agree with its philosophy. I am an avid reader, given to long bouts of reading very boring, technical material. Still, I found it incredibly difficult to finish "Atlas Shrugged." It's best taken in small doses.
Rating: 
Summary: Religion illogical?
Review: This book is a teaching tool in story form. Here is what it teaches: Selfishness is virtue. Any act that is not based on selfishness is a sin. If you practice infidelity for the sake of personal pleasure, it is good. If you murder those who hold that your philosophy is wrong and you are doing it to gain your own selfish end, it is OK. Religion or any belief based on faith is illogical. If you act on a belief based on faith, you are subconsciously wanting death or "non-existence." Acting charitably, however, is good if you have some selfish motive. The characters are well developed and the story line reads smoothly and holds one's interest well (with the exception of a 50 page speech by the character John Galt near the end). As I read, I couldn't escape the feeling that I was reading half-truths - that there was some flaw in the philosophy that the author set forth. On several occasions, I lost sight of the characters and could only hear the author repeating the same theme through character after character. Instead of expressing similar beliefs in different language and form as true individuals would, they all spoke the basic philosophy in the voice of the author. As a writer, Ayn Rand is very talented. However, because I disagree with the basic philosophy set forth in this book, I cannot fully recommend it.
Rating:
Summary: Heros and Heroines
Review: This is truely a masterpiece. It is a book about heros and heroines. The heros have impecible integrity (their integrity is so complete that it seems many people today cannot even comprehend it). It is only when the heros forgo their integrity do they fall victim to the vicious looters and moochers attempting to destroy them. The looters and moochers are constantly scheming against the heros and bit by bit are able to slowly overcome the heros by undermining their decency. However the heros are onto the looting/mooching schemes and have devised a plan to redeem their position. The plot is simple good vs. evil. The storyline has a multitude of twists and turns, but is clear and easy to follow. The book's setting is familiar. It plays upon the social climate of America. Through this familiarity Ms. Rand brought the book and the characters alive and even brings in the political and moral aspects of the reader as part of the storyline (fabulous). As the book progresses the seperation between the good and evil characters widens until the reader is forced to take a side (To confirm this read most of the other reveiws, they are not about the book's storyline but about the reviewers philosophical or moral viewpoint). I don't want to give away the ending but it is a book about heros and heroines. As you can probably tell I really enjoyed this book. I think you will also.
Rating:
Summary: Unbelievable....powerful and life changing
Review: Ayn Rand culminates her whole life philosophy in this powerful work. The story, 1200 pages long, is literally gripping. The protagonist of the story is Dagny Taggart, the woman industrialist who runs the great transcontinental railroad in the US, and is a story about how her love of life, her love of her railroad, her social obligations, and understanding of man's values and morality pit against one another. Ayn Rand's protagonists embody her philosophy, and through them and this captivating novel presents a tremendous argument of individualism. For me, her words and arguments in the story clarified and put into perspective many things i have struggled with in my life, in balancing social expectations and obligations against my own hopes and desires. I recommend the book whole heartedly--it certainly changed my life.
Rating:
Summary: The unstoppable guiltless man.
Review: This is by far the greatest book I have ever read. The book shows the greatness and logic of objectivism. The heroes are the hardest working people on earth. They produce wealth, jobs, innovations, and ways to live longer. From what I have read of history; Socialist/Communist countries have few innovations to boast. The same goes with any force-ruled country. The United States, Japan, Germany, and others have far less restrictions than any civilization in the last 1000 years and are also the most productive as well as the greatest. Individualism is the reason for all of our ideas. I defy any person to show me any of the top 1000 ideas of all time (material items)that were not created by an individual. Ayn Rand's Philosophy showed me that there are others such as I. To happiness, production, thought, and money.
| 
