Rating: 
Summary: Read Me.
Review: This is in my top three novels of all time.
Rating: 
Summary: The Fountainhead: Valuable Even for Altruists
Review: As a disclaimer for this review, I must hereby state my political postition: I am a devout liberal. So devout, in fact, that I considered making myself a nice book cover out of brown paper in order to disguise the fact that I was reading such an infamously aliberal book as The Fountainhead. (I decided against it-- paper is a valualbe natural resource, you know, and it shouldn't be wasted for something as frivolous as my vanity). But I must confess, after toiling through all 704 pages of it, that I didn't abhor it. Not consistently, in any case. One of my main comlaints is that most of the characters, including Howard Roark, the hero, and his lover, Dominique, are entirely static throughout the book. There is not one point at which Roark's incredible integrity is compromised enought to make him seen even slightly human. While Rand's stated goal is to portray life "as it might and ought to be," it becomes ineffective when the characters are too obviously godlike for humans to even aspire to. Also, for all his supposed integrity, Roark (and all the other characters in the book, for that matter) think and act entirely in contradictions. No one ever sinply eats a piece of bread because he is hungry; he eats it because it is the best way to make someone else conscious of his indifference toward them, even thought what he wants most is their love. Here is a prime example: "It hurts me every time I think of him. It makes everything easier-- the people, the editorials, the contracts-- but easier because it hurts so much. Pain is a stimulant also. I think I hate that name. I will go on repeating it. It is a pain I wish to bear." Huh? Another complaint: after years of the world's absolute contempt (at least outwardly) for Roark, I found his final triumph completely unbeleivable. Finally, I resent Rand's manipulativeness. Face it: this book is not an artistically written novel, but a piece of Objectivist propaganda. I suppose I resent the fact that, no matter how much one may, in principle, agree with the opinions of the antagonist, Ellsworth Toohey, his positions are so radical, and taken to such ridiculous extremes that the reader has no choice but to hate him. Who could possible agree with the sentiment that all reason should be automatically discounted in favor of intuition and "feelings"? Toohey's lengthy diatribes against selfishness and his sermons about his plans for the world come off more like the rantings of a mad scientist than a sane (if "misguided")philosopher.
I did say, however, that I don't hate the book. I like the message of the triumph of artistic individualism against the garbage of the masses, and I even found the scene in which Gail Wynand (a man who understands Roark and tries oh-so-hard to be like him and stand up for his beliefs) is finally crushed by the power of the ignorant masses rather moving. To this end, I say read the book. Yes it IS long, I know. But at least you will have broadened you horizons. If only to understand the mind of the enemy. ;-)
Rating: 
Summary: A bit trite, but still thought provoking
Review: While Ayn Rand has written a rather predicatble storyline, it is remarkable how she shifts the readers feelings towards the characters from one extremity to the other, and how the main characters in her book always seem to "play both sides against the middle" with respect to their views on the hero.It is a fascinating book, and well worth the 9 bucks. I enjoyed it a great deal.
Rating:
Summary: Say it Ayn't So!
Review: Ayn Rand's writings have been enormously influential, and to argue otherwise is an exercise in futility. Her reach in the field of politics counts Alan Greenspan as one her apostles. She's probably better known for "Atlas Shrugged," a massive novel written in the 1950's. Before "Atlas Shrugged" came "The Fountainhead," written in the 1940's. Rand was a screenwriter and a playwright as well. Ayn Rand died in 1982. This edition of the book is divided into three parts: an introduction with some explanatory notes written by Rand in the 1960's, the actual novel, and an afterword by Rand acolyte Leonard Peikoff, who is also Rand's legal executor. On the surface, "The Fountainhead" is a deceptively simple tale about an architect struggling to make buildings on his own terms. There is much more here than this, however. Rand uses the novelistic style as a vehicle for her personal philosophy. This philosophy, known now as Objectivism, places man squarely at the center of the universe. It is man who creates, but only certain men. The man who creates is an egotist, a man who creates solely for his own sake and for the sake of the work, without any influence from others. He does not share his work or collaborate. The rest of humanity is "second-handers," or parasites that feed off the misery of others. They do not create, but merely take from those who do to give to those who don't. These second-handers are usually found promoting a socialistic, or collective, society. In "The Fountainhead," it is Howard Roark who is the creator. Roark is a genius that is guided by an inner force to build. His whole life is dedicated to creating monuments to man's greatness. While others resort to imitation, Roark creates and expresses new ideas. He refuses to change his plans to please others. He only respects others who share his worldview. Arrayed against Roark is Peter Keating, a fawning, inept architect who turns to Roark to bail him out of tough spots when he needs help, only to turn against Roark at the first opportunity. Keating accepts awards and positions he doesn't deserve, is vain beyond belief, and is also a momma's boy (Peter wants to become a painter, but his mother talks him into becoming an architect). He does what he thinks others want him to do. He is not his own man, but a man of the collective mentality. Ellsworth Toohey is the archenemy of the novel. Toohey is a pseudo-intellectual who works behind the scenes to create a "brotherhood of man" society. Toohey creates councils to debase literature, architecture, and theater. He writes a column in a newspaper and magazine promoting socialist values. His goal is the domination of the world with himself as a sort of "first citizen." These are not the only main characters of the book, but they are the most important ones. There is Dominique Francon, a woman who shares Roark's outlook on life. She is so loyal to Roark that she works against him because she knows that if Roark succeeds, he'll be destroyed by society. Gail Wynand, a newspaper publisher with Roark's worldview, also emerges later in the novel. He too shares Roark's ideas, with an important exception revealed at the end of the story. For the most part, I liked the book. Rand systematizes some beliefs I've held for awhile, especially on socialism and communism. She's dead wrong about second-handers not creating anything, however. These people have made much progress in the fields of political murder, torture, and penal institutions. Just look at the Soviet gulag system! Her use of the novel format to express her ideas is good, and you can certainly tell Rand was a screenwriter. She creates believable social settings and atmosphere. My problems here are with the Dominique character; I just didn't like her. All too often, Dominique's presence led to over long dialogue and annoying situations. Be sure to pay attention to the first encounter between Roark and Dominique. It's an unusual take on sexual relations that I don't agree with. I'll probably read "Atlas Shrugged" at some point, although I would rather read one of Rand's purely philosophical books. I'd like to see Objectivism fleshed out a little bit more than is done in this book. I do recommend reading this book because Rand is considered an important figure, and you should have an opinion about her work and her philosophy.
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating insight into American society - a classic
Review: Ayn Rand's fascinating and complex characters and her insight into American society are what make "The Fountainhead" such a powerful classic. Though it contains some out-dated themes, the timeless story of one man's vision and integrity in the face of impossible obstacles is still profound and enjoyable over a half a century after it was written. Ayn Rand's descriptions are mesmerizing but she is never much of a romantic. The love story angle is weaker here than in "Atlas Shrugged". While Dominique may seem unrealistic and difficult to identify, the story's main character, the unbendable, unbreakable Howard Roark, will always remain one of the most memorable in American literature. There is an interesting side note about this novel-- Rand's inspiration for Roark, Frank Lloyd Wright, refused to ever meet the famous author despite several attempts on her part, a typically Howard Roark thing to do.
Rating: 
Summary: Not really
Review: As much as Ayn Rand is praised for her insight, I found this, as well as Atlas Shrugged, to be predictable and pat. Rand's use of language is nothing special (even simplistic) and her philosophy seems dogmatic and out-of-date. In the cold war society in which this work was first published, it may have held some relevance, but, in the 21st century, it seems dated and glib.
Rating:
Summary: Read Rand
Review: It is very difficult to review Any Rand: many people despise her work and ideas, and others are bouncing off the walls and joining the Ayn Rand institute. I have a lot of questions for her but I still bounce off the walls. This is not of book of "real" characters and it isn't supposed to be--this is a dramatization, almost cartoon-like, but still full of deep, totally new and differing people. Reading this was a roadtrip for my mind and I appreciate the unapologetic, straight-foward and well thought-out logic that says that altruism retards society. On this note, I oftentimes don't agree with Rand or can't see how her ideas can implemented well in "real" life, but she makes some excellent ponts and raises interesting questions that serve as scrumptious brain-food. She sides on the extreme and lets the responsible reader look elsewhere for a differing point of view. I love it, just love it.
Rating: 
Summary: Barmy, preposterous, and surprisingly enjoyable
Review: A surprisingly easy read for 700-odd pages, and a surprisingly easy read considering Rand's unique mixture of sexual and philosophical babble. This book is of course the manifesto for ultimate license of the 'artist',love song to the ego of the superman etc etc. so there isn't so much dialogue as rhetoric throughout. Plenty feisty ladies dislike Dominique ("I wish I'd never seen your skyscraper!") Francon's rape scene, but it doesn't bother me because the overall mood is, well, camp.
The themes are uncomfortably neo-Nietzchean and right-wing for me, but I like the work of Lloyd Wright and Rand basically took him as inspiration. This preposterous novel is required reading nonetheless.
* Check out the wonderful dramatic & oversexy 1940s movie version with Gary Cooper in it and phallic imagery the likes of which has never been seen since.
Rating:
Summary: Tough as nails and twice as smart
Review: This is how Mickey Spillane might have written if he'd been a man.
Rating:
Summary: Actually, a Great Work of Naturalism
Review: I first read "The Fountainhead" when I was 17. I have re-read it many times in my late teens and early twenties, but did not return to it again until last year, in Berlin, at the age of 36. Well, a lot has changed in my life since. I guess in that sense, my own story is somewhat different than many reviewers here: Although I considered myself an Objectivist until my mid-20s, I fortunately took Rand at her word, and made up my own mind on issues Randist. So, even when the revelations came out in the 1980s of what a maniacal and cult-like figure she was, I never felt the sense of betrayal so many others did. Actually, I kind of felt sorry for her, and for the people she manipulated and duped. Life is too short to give and demand blind worship and obedience to some celebrity. Sum it up to say, if you're looking for "I read 'The Fountainhead' as a teenager, but now -- ouch, I can't believe what an awful piece of turgid nonsense this is," look elsewhere, not here. On the other hand, those people are welcome to their opinions. Neither am I a dyed-in-the-wool Objectivist Randroid, who will tell you that "The Fountainhead" is the greatest novel ever written. When I was 17, I fervently believe it was; I don't now. People read more, they develop new tastes. So, for me the greatest novel ever is Joseph Conrad's "Heart of Darkness." But, that doesn't mean that I'm going to swing to the other extreme and deride it into the ash can. I agree with many reviewers that "The Fountainhead" is adolescent. But, it is not adolescent in the same sense that "Beavis and Butt-Head" or "American Pie" is. "The Fountainhead" captures that confused yet clear-headed sense of anticipation, loneliness, grandeur and fear of failure that make up the contradictory state of our teenage years, rather much like J.D. Salinger's writing did for some, Daniel Clowes' "Ghost World" does today, and Hunter S. Thompson's "The Rum Diary" did for me later on. It is rather revealing that many reviewers recoil from their adolescent fervor for "The Fountainhead," because adolescence is an awkward, confusing and often embarassing time. It is fraught with heartbreak, social faux-pas and immaturity. But I have never felt the need to disassociate from my adolescent self, and this is why I can reflect upon this book more objectively (no pun intended), yet still appreciate it for its strengths. One of the hallmarks of this book's adolescent spirit is that it is a paean to individualism and never selling out. Of course, reality gives us all a swift kick in the rear, but I stopped confusing "The Fountainhead" with reality around the same time I started having to shave daily. There is no sadder a scene than seeing Rand's acolytes and detractors waging life-or-death battle over this book and her philosophy. It reminds me of all the rather more rabid history buffs reliving and refighting the American Civil War. Come on, "The Fountainhead" is fiction, Rand died 20 years ago, and no-one is scared any longer of Leonard Peikoff's excommunicating temper tantrums, so lighten up out there! The old cliche goes 'No-one has yet written the great American novel.' Well, in the sense that it must encompass all things American, no. To me, if a novel catches the _essence_ of America, that qualifies it. Sinclair Lewis' "Elmer Gantry," Ernest Hemingway's "The Sun Also Rises," Stephen Crane's "The Red Badge of Courage," Mario Puzo's "The Godfather," all these qualify in my mind for that elusive title. And so does Ayn Rand's "The Fountainhead" captures the spirit of America. I loved it thoroughly. Her characters are larger than life, the message of being true to one's self, and not selling out, sorely needed today. Rand expertly contrasts the novel's hero, Howard Roark - an uncompromising architect - with the tragic Gail Wynand, a newspaper baron who, like Othello, is a flawed hero, and whose quest for power and domination leads him to almost destroy that which he loves most. Actually, I DID find Roark a bit wooden (but not as wooden as Gary Cooper's portrayal of him in the 1949 movie). Really, Gail Wynand is the most believable main character in this book, because he's torn by dillemma. His is a character of tragic dimensions, rather like Orson Welles' Charles Foster Kane (who, like Wynand, was also based on William Randolph Hearst). When Wynand sells out Roark, it isn't a betrayal so much of Roark, but of Wynand's own soul, and this is why I cry for Wynand. Because of his basic fatal flaw. Wynand chose damnation over redemption, rather much like Michael Corleone did in "The Godfather Part II" when he ordered and watched his brother Fredo's execution. I can't countenance THAT being labelled "two-dimensional" or "cardboard" at all. It is the great tragedy of the story. Ellsworth Toohey is the story's Iago, a small, cunning manipulator who himself tries to use Wynand's greatness to destroy Roark. Because of Wynand's own fatal flaw, he refuses to acknowledge Toohey's ability to influence and control. I especially love the book's Roaring '20s and Depression-Era feel. Rand may have painted her heroes in romantic, Nietzshean brushstrokes, but her characterisations of her villains and non-heroes is sardonic and small, and owe's much to the naturalistic novels of Sinclair Lewis and the newspaper columns and book reviews of H.L. Mencken. Her desciption of Stanton, Mass. -- tight, manicured, exhibitionist lawns in front of crackerbox houses -- is right out of Lewis' "Main Street" or "Babbitt." And, close your eyes - you'll see a Hell's Kitchen as painted by Edward Hopper and Roark's skyscrapers as photographed by Alfred Stieglitz. "The Fountainhead" may not be the greatest novel ever written, but it IS great.
|
