Rating: 
Summary: This book can be a life-changer
Review: The premise of this book - that just one person can wield tremendous influence over the world - is something that has stuck with me through many different situations and decisions. I cherish it.
Rating: 
Summary: Hilarious Political Pamphlet
Review: In my early twenties, I came under the spell of Ayn Rant and her Ranting. I cannot say that this book was useless. After a time, however, reality sets in and we must live life in the real world. The "virtue" of selfishness sounds silly after one gets married and has children. Thus, as I got older, I found that this book was simply a collection of caricatures. The closest that we come to a character is Francisco, but all the others are not. Dagny Taggart is a slut business manager - managing a transcontinental railroad -who manages to sleep around with three different men: Francisco d'Anconia, Hank Rearden, and John Galt. Other than sleeping around, Dagny is simply a hard worker. Hank Rearden is a hard working metal business owner who gives his wife a bracelet in the form of his new Rearden metal; Rant can be profound at times... Rearden is married to a contemptible woman whom he sleeps with occasionally when he is not in bed with Dagny. John Galt is the mysterious guy who is supposedly the smartest man in the world, but alas, he is the most boring, ridiculous character of the entire book. This wise guy's plan is to get all the smart people in the world to drop out of society, hoping that the world will collapse. Of course, Dagny, being the slut for all the smart boys, jumps in bed with John Galt after she meets him halfway through this tale; this is another of Rant's profound insights into virtuous human character. Galt invented an electric generator that runs on the static in the atmosphere; I suppose that A is not A after all. This strange machine supplies all the electricity for a fraction of the cost of conventional energy production. Rant is obsessed with some unimportant place on the East Coast called "New York." This place has big buildings that require much electricity for lighting. After Galt and his promiscuous friends evacuate all the smart people from this "New York" in an airplane, they watch the lights go out across this strange city. Dagny swears the oath to get into Galt's religious-like political cult, "I swear, by my life and my love for it, that I will not live for the sake of another man nor ask another man to live for mine." Such high poetry is the climax of this Mosaic tale. Moses leads his people out of the land of Egypt to the Promised Land and Pharaoh and his army are destroyed in the Red Sea. Galt stars as Moses, d'Anconia as Aaron, Dagny as Miriam, and the rest of the world perishes like Pharaoh's army after the grand departure of all these narcissistic smart people. Ayn Rant simply recycled the Exodus tale with twentieth century caricatures of inventors and business people. Toward the end of the book, this strange Galt fellow takes over all the radio waves in the country to broadcast a political speech that takes up several dozen pages in the book. It supposedly summarizes Rand's "philosophy" of Objectivism. The good thing is that this "philosophy" has been sufficiently debunked and destroyed by several professional philosophers, the latest being Scott Ryan. This section of the book reveals that Rand did not sufficiently develop her mind to understand such a complex subject like philosophy. Those who are familiar with philosophy might find this speech most hilarious section of the book as Rand's mind attempts to "grasp" philosophy. Most readers wonder why Rand inserted a political pamphlet inside a novel in the form of a speech. But, cutting through all the fluff, smoke, and mirrors, that is all this book is: a political pamphlet.
Rating:
Summary: A Beautiful Book
Review: I feel excited to review "Atlas Shrugged" where so many people will be able to read it. Although, one year after reading this book, I seriously accept the principles of Rand's philosophy, this book is still quite an achievement if one (for the sake of clearer appreciation) ignores the ethical and political content and focuses on the craftmanship. Atlas Shrugged has so many beautifully realized scenes. Which of its fans can forget The Wedding of Jim Taggart, The Opening of the John Galt Line, or The Demonstration of Project X? There is another scene I read again recently. It depicts the final atrocity in Atlas Shrugged before the epic speech of its hero. A young man is shot and left for dead by thugs while defending the object of his love. His death is unusually tragic because he realizes just before he loses it that his life is a very signicant thing. He is not just a "collection of chemicals" produced by his environment, and no better life awaits him beyond the grave. He dies courageously because he does not deceive himself that his death is noble, or that it had to happen; it is just unneccessary, horrible, and it cannot be undone. Rand carefully draws out the scene, with his impassioned words and even more impassioned silence taking turns to hold the reader's imagination. Another of my favorite aspects of lierature is the use of imagery. In my opinion, Shakespeare still remains unparallled among writers in this area (the medium of dramatic verse gave him a great advantage here). But Atlas Shrugged is filled with images that are not only memorable, but inextricably tied to the plot and theme of the book. The shape of a human being contorted by a hand-plow, an imaginary bird whose wings are broken by its parents, the convulsed figure of a man who cannot pick up the phone to save his best friend from ruin, and the towering, twisting flame of Wyatt's Torch, are among the harsher ones, representing the torture of human conflict. The more benevolent images include the sprawling map of the Taggart Railway System, the continuous motion of a giant steel furnace, a railroad track that stretches purposefully into the distance, a single bar of gold stored in the safe of a millionaire, and, of course, the sign of the dollar, which will certainly go into history along with the eponymous flower of the Scarlet Pimpernel and the sword-engraved initial of Zorro. Criticism of Atlas Shrugged? My experience with Rand's non-fiction is this: I like to read all criticisms of her philosophy, because they help me to realize how brilliant and interconnected it is. Critics sometimes say "Oh, but there's no reason for her to make this or that assertion"; but then you read some other part of her philosophy and you see the nasty consequences of denying that assertion in general. This may not be equally true of her fiction, so here is a try. Firstly, the heroism of the characters tends to be displayed more in terms of the sheer magnitude of the problems they face, and the gigantic risks they take, rather than through the demonstration of their problem-solving skills. This would not have to detract from the focus book, since the problems solved would be ethical. This might make the book less realistic, since steel magnates and railroad tycoons do not sit down and engage in lengthy, detailed analysis of people's characters, but I think it would add greatly to the stature of the heroes. Instead, one character who is laboriously trying to figure out the moral principles of his antagonists, has a mysterious friend that gives him so many leads and insights that the real battle mainly comes down to mustering the courage to act on his convictions. It is possible that Rand did this in order to keep the focus of her book on basic moral principles applicable to everyone, rather than complicated intellectual cases. But I would have appreciated such elements. This book, however, is the best that I have read from the last century. Not since Dante's Divine Comedy (a book I do not like nearly as much) has a systematic world view encompassing so many aspects of human endeavour been expressed in such elegant, blindingly powerful literary form.
Rating: 
Summary: Do not rely on this book as proof of your worth.
Review: I read my previous review, and I am sure it is not particularly helpful to non-informed readers, so my aim now is to divert potential readers from adopting this book's ravings as their philosophy. This book argues for the valuing of things over humanity. The one person I know who lives by these "teachings" has studied no other philosophy and spouts such gems as, "If someone is dying of hunger in front of me, and my $5.00 could save their life, I am under no obligation to help them." "Abortion is okay because the fetus is a parasite, and you'd certainly kill a tapeworm, wouldn't you?" Enough said, I hope. The entire class, including the intellectuals and dim-bulbs, ended up hating this guy. No, not because he was obviously superior and we were all jealous of his mental splendor. Anyone who has any caring for human beings in themselves cannot tolerate such dismissal of human life. Please do not let the underlying cruelties of this philosophy go unnoticed. It is all too clear the people who embrace it already have a disposition towards conceit combined with low self-esteem; this sad conglomeration results in seeking the "proof" of your greatness in the "non-human," lowliness of others. If you want a genuine look at the possibilites for your own worth, read Francis Didion's SHORT work on the subject. Your self-worth does not lay in the immolation of others or messianic tendencies ending in seclusion. A blatant paradox of Rand's work is too painfully obvious: if she was content in her beliefs and their soundness, and didn't give a flip about the well-being of others, why did she write and "preach" so much, anyway? Not for the sake of other's lives, we know that. For the reinforcement of her own self-image and the need for worship from others? I think so. You want to reach your full "human" potential? Follow reason, but allow for compassion and empathy. Reason does not have to be devoid of Rand's hated "feelings." You are fooling yourself if you believe Rand and her flock of sheep act on "rationality" alone. They are following something that resonates originally with what they WANT to believe. Their "proofs" of "rationality" are only secondary, and they are not even good proofs, at that. People capable of true human love and connection will not like this book.
Rating:
Summary: Conservative Manifesto!
Review: I've been reading this book for the last three weeks now - almost 3 quarters done and I can't decide if I'm more repulsed or drawn to it with every passing page. It's long for one - I love epic's as I call them. But the story. It should be the G.O.P. manifesto! It's so incredibly conservative in every way possible - I get frustrated w/ the characters at times because of how absolute they are in everything they do - everything is "The most...," "The greatest...," "The best...," "The biggest..." And being a very liberal person myself - I want to argue w/ Ayn Rand or the characters on the statements that they make - wanting to explain to someone where their theories are WRONG! But there's no one to talk to - I just keep reading and reading... Yet the story fascinates me - I really liked the first 3rd of the book, the building of The John Gault Line - as that section was ending I couldn't imagine what the rest of the book would be about - I thought it was a complete story as it was... Then it just keeps getting better and better - I keep thinking I have it all figured out, like most movies and books, but Ayn Rand was definitely a woman of a different era because where she takes the characters is in directions even today would be considered drastic or radical. I'm not even sure which character it is I like better - Dagny Tagart? Francisco D'Anconia? Or Hank Riordan? I'm still captured in it (spent my entire weekend buried in this book) and I'm going back to finish it now!
Rating:
Summary: WOW
Review: I've read this book over and over and have to say I agree with many of the thing Ayn Rand is trying to say. If you're one of those people who is very religous and firmly believes everyone is equal, I'd have to say this book is definitely not for you. I'm amazed that the author can prove her point so well, for I've read books by many who don't. It's almost impossible to disagree after you've read this. I've decided that the reason I love this book so much is because it gave me something to believe in. Because I know what Dagny feels like when she discovered the nature of the world! I think the people who would enjoy this book most are those who, like me, can't imagine why anyone would WANT to be normal! For all my 13 year life, people have teased me about how I'm "too smart" and always try (imagine that!) to stick out. The scariest thing in the world for me is the thought that I might become normal like everyone else. A lot of people who read this propably think I'm nuts, but I don't really care what they think. If you're one of them, this book is NOT for you. But if you know exactly what I'm talking about, read it! You'll love it like I did!
Rating:
Summary: A Reader
Review: This book should be required reading in EVERY high school in America. A very important book
Rating:
Summary: Dagny is cleverer than we ever imagined.
Review: One of the reviews was wrong. This was taught to me in college. Not only did I have to learn about Objectivism, but I have more than one professor who is a devoted socialist. I hear arguments against this book every day. I am a philosophy major, so reading this was not nearly so dry as say, Hobbes or Aquinas. It was not the most boring thing I've ever read, to put it simply. I am growing immune to stale syntax, so the length and arguments were not a problem for me. The disregard for human life and the world (ecology, animals, etc...) were a problem. Rand is almost silly in her inability to realize not all socialists, communists, or Marxists are lazy, grubbing malcontents who covet the robber-barons' wealth. She describes exclusive human natures and tries to convince us all humanity falls into these two opposing categories. There's no possibility of the hard-working socialist or intelligent altruist. These people are argued to be as fictitious as Santy Claus. If this book were a play, I suppose I would be cast as a tree. The long and short of it--capitalism, in the end, promotes the valuing of material gain over human life. I cringed when Rand tried to romantically justify the killing of "non-humans" because of their Evil ways (the train in the tunnel, for example). A person who can try to rationalize these thoughts should not be taken very seriously, though it's good to know those people are out there, for your own good. Rand goes on about rationality forever, but the problem is, pretty much anything under the sun can be "rationalized." It just depends on how much you want to believe it. I love reason as much as the next fellow philosopher, but I'm not delusional enough to believe we should all be fully rational Vulcans who would produce freaking SYNTAX errors at the first line of inconsistent programming. And give Dagny some credit. She invented the most successful form of birth-control known to man while the country was still typing on typewriters, AND she got the man who slapped the beJesus out of her to pine away for her till the end of his days. She smoked as much as she wanted, yet never developed a hacking cough. She was just too rational to be outsmarted by nasty ol' nicotine addiction, emphysema, and pregnancy. Railroad runnin', nothin'! She is a multi-talented gal!
Rating: 
Summary: Yuck!
Review: Rand must dwell in a special kind of a world -- one that discounts 99.9% of its inhabitants contribution to a functioning society. In rare moments, the book is compelling and exciting; for the most part, it's a 1000+ page rant on objectivism. I've never read a book that I seriously considered quitting after page 900 -- until I encountered Atlas Shrugged, that is. This reviewer strongly recommends that you read something else!
Rating:
Summary: redheads
Review: the best thing about this book is redheads are the good guys!
| 
