Rating: 
Summary: Timeless Philosophy
Review: With out question one of the top five more important books of the 20th C. and the number one concerning the present political spectrum. Communism did not need arguments against it because its extremism took care of its own implosion. It is the mild and creeping socialism that has been eating slowly at the efficiency of the European nations that one needs awareness to. This book sparks that awareness. Essential reading for our times.
Rating: 
Summary: Don't waste your time!
Review: This book has been regarded as one of the "Greatest Books" of all time by people who's job it is to review books. I will save you a lot of time and tell you that if you read the first 300 pages, which are the meat of the book, that you will understand the philosophy of everything Ayn Rand. Basically, it is that the capitalist moves the world and social programs are bad. I believe in this theory myself but to have to keep reading over and over again the same speech by the main characters over the course of 1000 pages can get very stale and boring. Bottom line. More of an anthem for capitalists than a good novel.
Rating:
Summary: It's been said...
Review: I won't reiterate what has already been said about this book by those who love it as much as I do. I will say that the amount of antipathy towards this book is truly disturbing, but also quite hilarious in that it reminds one quite vividly of the unsavory characters within the book itself. That people can read this book and find it to be evil amazes me--but that was Ayn Rand's point all along wasn't it? For every reviewer who cringes "ewww" about this book, I think of Ivy Starnes, the vapid, mindless, new age mystic wannabe, not such a flattering image is it? Incidentally, this image pretty much sums up the state of academia today, and I've had the not so unique privilege of sampling some of its wares, harrowing stuff I tell you. Also, as a side note, please get over Dagny's "rape" because if you actually came to understand that she was raped in the true sense of the word, then you've completely misunderstood her character and the meaning of the word rape itself. One wonders what else was misunderstood/overlooked, and it suddenly becomes easier to see why there's so much vehemence, perhaps it's just a lack of understanding--not surprising. What I also find puzzling is how anyone can read this and come to the conclusion that Rand was a poor writer. All philosophy aside, just as a piece of fiction, I found it to be unputdownable. (Yes, I know that's not a real word, but it should be.) The characters, d'Anconia in particular, were incredibly well conceived of and simply unforgettable.
Perhaps people are too accustomed to having to wade through the muddy depths of fragmented postmodernist "literature" to be able to appreciate clear, purposeful writing at its best. READ THIS BOOK: It might reinforce and clarify what you've always known, or it might shed light on a whole new world of ideas. If you end up thinking it's the work of the devil, well, at least you will have come to that conclusion, however erroneous, on your own. And, for those of you quasi-socialists who are afraid to read it lest it turn you into some radical raving capitalist--worry not, in order for THAT to happen, you must have some sagacity to begin with!
Rating:
Summary: Triumph of the individual
Review: Fabulous story of what makes the world turn. How hard working, intelligent, creative people produce nearly everything that makes civilization advance, and how collectivist minded "liberals" try to dilute their efforts by "redistributing" the wealth, taxing their ingenuity and genius, and thus impeding real progress.
It is noteworthy that more than 1000 reviews have been posted on this forum. This is a book that changes peoples lives forever. A challenging work, absolutely worth it!
Rating:
Summary: Book is worth the struggle (1100 pages... ack!)
Review: It was recommended by a friend of mine, who said, "a lot of people in politics live by this woman's philosophy, which is called Objectivism, and some would rank it next to the Bible in terms of books that affect people's philosophies." So I read it, and it is definitely one of the most powerful novels I read. The odd thing is, it is a fictional novel that contains the explanation of a belief system. However, the book is by far the longest I have ever read. It is 1100 pages of the smallest text you have ever seen. Ayn Rand is obviously a very intelligent person, but she is not the best writer ever. It's not bad writing, but it's not good enought to warrant 1100 pages. I am used to reading 50-60 pages an hour in most books, but in this I might only reach 20-30 an hour. You will find yourself plodding through slow sections and wishing for an abridged version of this book (I still wish there was an abridged version!). I read the paperback version... with that many pages, it is made with very thin, almost tissue, paper, like you see in cheap bibles. Also the text is minuscule. If I had to do it again I would save myself some trouble and get the hardback. All in all, this is a very powerful book. It has a remarkable plot that takes way too many pages to unfold. However, I am glad I read it because of the way it made me consider this philosophy. If you're like me, you want to read a provocative book, one that people either love or hate, one that could change the way you look at the world. If that sounds like you, take a look at the reviews on this page and consider reading Atlas Shrugged.
Rating: 
Summary: Philosophy that takes us half way to the goal
Review: This is a great book, but by no means perfect. Most of the reviews draw it in black and white (which would probably have appealed to Ms Rand) but both are wrong. Both are wrong as most of the reviews are so ideological that those that favor her ignore her faults and those that hate her ignore her virtues.
Her virtues include much much better writeing then most of her detractors give her credit for (simple crap like each white hat good, admirable, etc has his polar opposite who is shifty evil ect, Check out Stadler v. Akston) or the idea that her heros are all handsome viral etc v evil, ugly villians (tall handsome aristocratic James Taggart), that no one develops ( the "wet nurse, Dagny, Hank ( more than anyone), and to many others to mention), better stucture than average ( rising tension ) the aforrmentinoed character changes as plot points ), and some subtle and humorous lines ( Gualt telling Dagny not to look back at New York ( lest she be turned to a pillar of salt.)
However, the problems with Ms Rands philosophy are identical to the problems in Marx. Both presuppose a change in human character ( Marx at least admits this). That illusive "true" communism requires a fundamental change in human nature so that man will help his fellow man and take his pleasure in that. This would do away with the best argument against communism, the coersive nature of it. Unfortuantly Rand also has an overly idealistic view of capitalists, that they only want what they fairly earn. For Rands hero's there would be no deception, no excuses, and no taking of (unfair) advantae. If Dagny ran your cable company the cable guy would show up when he was scheduled to or she would make it right and he would be out of his job. Alas, real capitaliara take advantage not only of stock holders but they also sell penis enlarging herbs to morons. Both ideal capitalism and ideal communism require a change in basic human nature.
Of course a furthur problem with Ms Rand's philosophy that was not obvious during her writing years ( as a novelist not a polemisist) was the idea that some things, under any system, are held in common. Air for example, as we can not devide it up, we all have an equal interest in it. That is to say, we all own it. Hence Dagny's cost of doing bussiness, if she is as fair, just ect, as Rand makes out, would include compensating me, and averyone else on earth for the loss ( suppose we set the rate low, say one ten-thousandth of a cent to each person per train run, today that would be about six thousand dollars a train.) If I have to choose between capitalsim and communism in the current state, I choose capitalism. Without the change in human nature required for "true" communism, capitalism is the champion of rights, justice ect. Unfortunatly, without the change in human nature required for Rand's idealized capitalism, (ethics, universal reason, etc), it seams that the best bet is still a mixed economy. ( don't think I am being simplistic, I could expound on this ( both sides ) for ten times the amount of space available here ).
I admit however, on reading Marx I laughed and thought what a pipe dream, people like that, where as with Rand I was wistful and whished the world was what she thought. There are some other thigs to keep in mind while reading this for the sake of a deeper understanding. Her slavish devotion to Nietzsche early on (We The Living), her attempt to break with him(The Fountainhead), and her failure in that regard (Atlas Shrugged), I think she deomonstarted fairly well that her stolen philsopophy is the ideal for the individual but at least more questionable for a society. Keep in mind to that great products ( the products of great men? ) are of great benifit to society as a whole, (maybe). For example a graet word processing program that costs you two hours worth of salery may save you an hundered hours of work ( over time) what do you do with those hundered hours? Spend it with your family? or do more work.
Read this as a well written example of loyalty to an ideal, just question that ideal as you go.
Rating:
Summary: Eric lefty loosey, please...
Review: Your review is very one sided. This book is by far one of the most influential books of all times. For people to not see that she is trying to make a point,is ignorance. Eric supposed that the reader was stupid and that we are to feel sorry for Rockefeller. That is so not what Rand was saying. She was looking for the triumphal spirit that lives in us!
Rating:
Summary: Love it or despise it
Review: It's interesting how Rand's Objectivist philosophy combines the most controversial liberal and conservative ideas and ties the whole thing together. No wonder why so many people hate her. Liberals for being pro-business, conservatives for being atheist, and moderates for being absolutist. And yet, her masterpiece is the second-most influential book, just after the Bible. I personally very much enjoyed Atlas Shrugged. I think that it was well worth losing sleep at night, trying to finish the 1000+ pages before I had to return the book. However, it is not targeted at "just anybody." This is not remotely tolerant, "people-friendly," or objective. It is very subjective, contains large quantites of philosophy, and it certainly doesn't give a damn about what the masses think. For anyone willing to take this book on, whether you love it or hate it, Atlas Shrugged is a ride worth taking.
Rating:
Summary: READ THIS BOOK!!!
Review: I recommend this book to anyone who has an ounce of ambition. If you are one who belives that you are entitled to sit on your lazy ... and do nothing but whine about your lack of opportunity while living off of the hard work of others, then you probably won't enjoy this book. Otherwise read it as soon as possible.
Rating: 
Summary: Unique, but a little dry
Review: one star for Rand's writing ability, which is at times very good.
one star for the plot, and that the book is so very one sided, but a little blindness and fanaticism a good thing for art IMO. (This is art, not science- remember that.) There is also truth here, beneath Rand's rhetoric, and another star goes to her revelations of unpopular glories- Rand's voice in history will be felt for some time. I can forgive her unorthodox pushy outlook and the many one dimentional characters because they are kind of interesting, but not the 50+ page(!) manifesto/diatribe/yawn fest three quarters of the way through, or the slow pace! WE GOT THE POINT! Holy capitalism that woman could fill space! Plus, she dishes out the cheese at times... stilton anyone?
|
