Rating: 
Summary: Yuck!
Review: Rand...has created one of the most appallingly simplistic and inadequate philosophies ever. And it's (surprise, surprise) very popular....This novel is overlong in the extreme, full of one-dimensionals, and horribly written. Pure bad with a capital B. BAD. Objectivism (I cringe even dignifying Rand's vision with its proper name) is the purest form of skunking, existentialism's great sin, creating yourself as unique and vital to the world. So even though the two philosophies are often linked (mostly by idiots), they are in direct opposition. If you're looking for literary developments of competent philosophies check out Sartre and Camus. These guys don't pull their punches, and they don't ignore the areas of life that pose problems for their ideologies. To ease up on Rand, she did write a novel I really enjoyed: Anthem. At just over a hundred pages in length, I didn't have time to puke, because she didn't have time to rant, and her constant deployment of first person plural was amusing.
Rating: 
Summary: The slide.
Review: This book is the best explanation I have found of why and how the citizens of a country can be lead willingly to the destruction of their own economy through socialism. The author has first hand knowledege from her own experiences in the early Soviet Union. The first 90% of the book is absolutely top notch. Many of the characters in the book fit current real life figures so well that it is hard to believe that it was written almost 50 years ago. The ending was adequate, but not as good as the rest of the book. An excellent choice for someone interested in the subjects of economics and politics presented as a novel.
Rating:
Summary: standing still
Review: motion is proper to human life. this book integrated and defined the philosophy i had held since i was 12. it was my island in a sea of the melting consiousness of the 'people' around me. maybe it'll help you, too.
Rating:
Summary: One of the most awful books I've ever read...
Review: For a number of years I kept hearing what a classic work of American literature Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" was. Despite repeated attempts to read this huge, awkward book I could never get beyond the first 50 or so pages. Finally at 28 years old I forced myself to read the entire thing. Classic work of American literature? Hardly. What a long-winded, confused and throughly terrible piece of tripe filled with characters you couldn't care less about, all of whom are totally devoid of normal human emotion, and ridiculous situations that were obviously contrived simply to prove a point or make some grand 'statement'. Rand could have written this book with one sentence "Capitalism good, communism bad" and saved me a long, mind-numbingly dull read
Rating: 
Summary: Shallow
Review: I picked this book up out of curiosity, after hearing that Ayn Rand provoked strong reactions - but without prior knowledge of Ayn Rand's philosophy. So I read it with an open mind, without expectations or preconceptions. Half the book later, I was forced to put it down in disgust. The characters are shallow, the plot is shallow, and the so-called philosophy is shallow. The heros and heroines of the novel - icons of her philosophy - are given godlike physical and intellectual attributes, while the chosen strawmen are bumbling, incompetent and evil. As a simple piece of fiction, this might have been semi-readable. But the consistent attempts to paint this as a profound philosophical work (complete with advertisements for her Objectivist school of philosophy lodged between the pages) make it completely repulsive. The true condition of life is much more nuanced than can be captured by her one-dimensional characters or one-dimensional philosophy; for understanding, look elsewhere.
Rating:
Summary: An absolutely wonderful read
Review: I have had trouble trying to read Rand's books in the past. I pick them up, read a few pages, put it down, and a few months later the whole process starts again. However, I did not go through this process with Atlas Shrugged. In fact, I finished it in about three days, and was absolutely mesmorized by it. For starters, the main characters are likeable. (I had the problem of hating all of the characters in The Fountainhead.) When you start reading, you feel like they are people you want to be associated with and deal with on a daily-basis: focused, goal-oriented, hard-working people. The only part of the book where my eyes started to glaze over was near the end when Ayn Rand's ideology was stated in a 50-page long speech, but if you don't know her philosophical/political views, then don't skim this over too much... her views are actually pretty interesting, although not to pc. For today's reader, you can really see what happens to a world when political correctness gets out of hand, and it is interesting to think that this woman who grew up in Russia felt this way about Communism and the way people interact.
Rating:
Summary: Poor literary style, full of contrived & self-serving themes
Review: Did I really have to struggle through this massive novel and be subjected to all of the one-dimensional characters, the simplistic ethical quandaries and the total unrealistic human interactions to understand Rand's philosophical intent? No, I didn't, but once I started, pangs of literary guilt prompted me to finish. I have significant issues with this book. First, the characters and dilemmas are so one-dimensional (i.e., very good or very bad, very productive citizens or totally non-productive, handsome and fit or physically unattrative and "fattish," to quote Rand) that they become tiring. We all know real life and real people are not this black-and-white; I do wish it was this easy to see deceit, sloth and underhandedness, because it would be easy to pick out the bad guys. Also, the countless examples of the "us-versus-them" dilemma was too much. Too much, because even in Rand's fictional society where human leeches cling to the valiant few productive citizens, the enormously egregious examples of evil that some characters get away with would just not be tolerated or possible in a lawful society. Its too much for me to swallow (ever hear of the literary concept of "suspension of disbelief?" - Rand ignores this practice in her books). I mean, does every good character in this book have to be so heroic, almost Paul Bunyan-like? Why can't we have a few "Joe Lunchboxes" (to quote Mr. Burns from the Simpsons) who are just average guys trying to make a dollar out of 15 cents? Even if I can get past the stylistic problems with her writing, I just can't wholesale buy into Rand's precepts in "Atlas," which I consider all 'in extremis.' An impressionable, and largely unread, friend of mine finished this book and tells me, "Dude, things really are getting like this in our country." "What are you talking about," I replied, "have you looked around lately? The economy is flourishing, hundreds of millionaries are created every day, and big business is becoming the engine that drives the global community. What saint-like industrialists that you know of are being forced out of existence by inept and corrupted governments and being brought to their knees by parasitic citizens?" Do not assume by my response that I do not recognize the continued failure of the federal welfare state, the attack on our civil liberties by religious zealots and our increasing tax burden. I am a self-described civil libertarian whom strongly supports the notions of self-reliance and self-governance. And while I may be a civil libertarian and support a more restricted government, that does not mean I am a fool about the very real damages and harm that businesses can impact on society. And I realize Rand's extreme examples are a result of her exposure to Communism. But I challenge all of Rand's devotees who believe that big businesses and these giant engines of wealth creation are the strongest beacons of freedom, creativity and national strength to read an alternative viewpoint, one that is real and not contrived, like Rand's. I challenge them to read John Steinbeck's "In Dubious Battle," which was written about 20 years earlier than "Atlas Shrugged." Its very short and highly entertaining; it is not a simplistic rant against the evils of orchard owners like "Grapes of Wrath," but it asks the reader fundamental questions about good and evil, both from self-serving business and individuals.
Rating: 
Summary: One of the 25 most important conservative/libertarian books
Review: This book has been described as a very long essay in the guise of a very long novel. It is one of the most devastating critiques ever written of big government and the liberal media. Rand's moral indignation is contagious; after reading her, most readers are forever immune to the enticements of socialism. It must also be said, however, that the militantly atheistic Rand had an unrealistic view of human nature and little appreciation for cultural values. Most people, however mesmerized by her they may be in their youth, outgrow Rand's philosophy, which Burke might have described as a theoretical construct rather than an application of the accumulated wisdom of mankind.
Rating:
Summary: Too long
Review: It's just too long to drive home its point. The characters are one-dimensional, or not realistic. Granted it is a philosophical novel, it still is a novel, and the characters should have been made more believable. Too much repetition as well. I also don't understand what the big deal about objectivism is- haven't a lot of people before Ayn Rand been living their lives according to their own self-interest?
Rating:
Summary: Epic but disappointing
Review: I have been meaning to read this book for years but I was sorely disappointed once I started it, to the point of almost putting it down. I persevered just for the sake of it (and because I had nothing else to do on a six hour plane flight!). While the concepts of liberty and freedom expressed are worthwhile, Rand's writing is turgid and two-dimensional, and her broader philosophy smacks of an elitism I found repugnant. Her characters are strictly black and white, with no shades of grey. The plot of the noval is really a mechanism to jam her philosophy down your throat, rather than an attempt to engage your mind, and this becomes tiring after many hundreds of pages. I understand a lot of her hatred towards communism may stem from her upbringing, and she has a right to express that. What jumped out at me however was the unlikely selection of square jawed industrialist heroes, their total lack of any human compassion and the strange thread of sexual repression which runs through the book. This book is a product of the early part of last century, and if you read it as such then it makes sense in some ways. Attempting to make much sense of it in the 21st century is an exercise in futility.
| 
