Rating: 
Summary: Like Roark's Architecture, not for everyone.
Review: As I read some of the most recent reviews of this book, I was surprised at the degree of intellectual midgetry and literary obstinacy displayed. Do not confuse Rand's stern optimism for some mystical and cynical "overman" dream. It is futile to argue this book's philosophy: you either accept it, or you don't (which dooms it to these negative criticisms in a big way). To those naive enough to question the realism of the characters or Rand's view of people in the book, look up the definition of romance literature. To those trying to reduce this work to a pile of dust with a few short and condescending words, I say (not without a hint of drama) you are all a bunch of Ellsworth Tooheys.
Rating:
Summary: A challenging book that will make you think.
Review: As time passes I see myself disagree with the philosophy of Ayn Rand more and more, yet her work has challenged me to think and question my own philosphy of life. I am not a hard core objectivist and I am actually a little amazed at how far hard-core objectivist go especial in their challenge of modern physics and quantum mechanics. But this book is a great book is worth examination and questioning. The Fountainheads characters are really amazing and interesting. Howard Roark the protagonist is a talented college drop out who struggles to become an architect. He refuses to design anything other than to his own design and will not be influenced by the whims of cleints or fads in design. His buildings are prefect in the book and Roark will pay out of his own pocket to fix his mistake in design. And he would rather see a building of his design destroyed than corrupted. Roark is driven by solving problems of design not by fame or fortune. He is contrasted by Peter Keating who unlike Roark always caves in to be popular opinon by catering to the whims of clients and critics. While Roark is almost uneffected by people, Keating is totally dependent on others for his ideas, dreams and sense of self. Dominique Frankon is Roarks lover who wants to see him destroyed and tries to destroy him herself. For she is tortured by the fact that everone gives in and compromises themselves. She tries to destroy Roark because see believes that he can not hold out forever against the world and she would rather see him destroyed than live a subservient life. Gail Wylan is Roarks best friend. Wylan is a newspaper owner who is a tyrant over his empire. He tries at first to control Roark and fails which is what starts there friendship. Wyland is forced to choose between public opinion and Roark in a court case. Wylan must choose bewteen power or intergity. Toohey is the devil in the form of a critic. He praises those who will give into society and attacks those who will show independence and integrety in their work. He wants to destroy indiviualism and replace it with a dull mediocracy. He wants to control mens minds by making them dependent on his evaluation of the world. He is facinated by Roark while Roark has little fasinatition with him. Toohey knows that he must at all cost destroy Roark. As I have said Rand will make you think. But challenge her ideas in your own mind. THE PASSION OF AYN RAND by Barbera Branden is an excellent biography for those who love or hate Ayn Rands views.
Rating:
Summary: excellent dialog, interesing ideas, less-than-perfect plot
Review: First, the book's strengths, and they are considerable. It contains some of the most interesting dialog I have ever encountered. At the same time the reader is analyzing what is being said to determine the character's motivations, you can see them doing the same to each other, and reacting accordingly. Although their mannerisms and actions can be idealistic to the point of seeming lifeless at times, in conversation they truly come to life. The dialog would be pointless if the characters didn't have something important to talk about, and indeed they do. Whatever you think of Ayn Rand's philosophy, it is nothing if not relevant to every part of life. The philosophy integrates the separate actions in the novel so that each contributes to the total message. Ayn Rand said that every novelist is a philosopher, only that some don't realize it. Perhaps if more did, they'd be capable of producing this level of dialog. The weakest part of the novel is its plot. Its center is Howard Roark, an architect and the protagonist, and his struggle to achieve success in a world of mediocrity -- mediocrity so profound that it despises genius. However, most of the story is told through characters less ideal than Roark and through their comparison to him: how they fail to live up to the standard. The first two times, this is interesting, but a bit into the third time, which is quite lengthy, it starts to drag. When the novel finally gets to center on Howard, it becomes more of an allegory than a novel; the brilliant dialog is replaced with lengthy speeches. Don't get me wrong; I give it 5 stars and it deserves every one. As a novel of ideas, it is the best of its class. But simply as a novel, it slows down and becomes less engaging in the last third. Finally, if you are reading this review, you will notice that Ayn Rand receives a large amount of both praise and criticism. None of this is a reason to or not to read this book. Her philosophy is best described in _Atlas Shrugged_ or her non-fiction works. If you don't like her philosophy, don't read those. _The Fountainhead_ is best characterized by its superb dialog, its creational of truly idealistic (not realistic and not intended to be) characters, and the characters' interactions through rational dialog. If every conversation in life was this well-crafted, it might drive me a bit nutty, but the world would be a lot more interesting.
Rating: 
Summary: How close was Rand close to truth?
Review: as a 21 year old,i really found the book inspiring..it's a book which makes u question urself..ur value system..it's a book which inspires u to be "perfect" but the caution is Rand's definition of "perfect" need not be perfect yes intelligence & competence is of prime importance but these values need not make u arrogant & unemotional...how can emotions be a sign of "weakness"..it's a sign of being human & being real..In contemporary times, Rand's book probably loses a little relevance..today we have come to respect the Knowledge industry & we have acknowledged it as the third wave of revolution..so we can be assured that the Howard Roarks of this world will get their due respect, u no more have to feel guity about being competent.. Rand's book gives u a lot of food for thought but she leaves u in maze..she breaks ur world (the way u see it) but leaves u on ur own to pick up pieces & make sense out of it.. It's a very good cerebral read.
Rating: 
Summary: drawn out pablum
Review: Rand takes nearly 700 pages to reach her climax. To avoid spoiling such an excruciating experience, I'll say only that it involves Howard Roark pontificating for a good ten pages in a courtroom showdown. What's even worse is that Rand, who toots the horn of individual genius louder than anyone, can't write her way out of a paper bag. Her plot is a rickety construction to prop up her cartoonish characters (the rugged individualist hero, the women who love him, the men who envy him). Rand also shows a fondness for borrowed expressions (the French "par excellence" seems to be a particular favorite of hers; Roark is continually described as the the this or that par excellence), a considerable irony given her dogmatic attacks on the nebulous hordes of "second-handers" who have plagued studly heros like Howard since the invention of the wheel. Like any perversion, this book might be entertaining, but...[it]just isn't my idea of a good time.
Rating:
Summary: Pulling a Dominque?
Review: If you're sifting through all of these reviews, wondering if this book will inspire you or depress you, the answer is simple. Neither. It will simply bore you. Your interest will not be held enough to be inspired or depressed. Others have said it best--the characters are unrealistic. Who could imagine such perfection and beauty? And oh, how boring to be intelligent, rational, self sufficient. You'd rather read books about characters that are less than you. You'd rather read about Todd's quivering loins, shake your head and tsk about Bridget's escapades. And who can blame you? If you got this review--congratulations. It was wonderful.
Rating:
Summary: Caveat Emptor
Review: I must confess, I loved this book and Atlas Shrugged when I first read them as a freshman in prep-school. I must also relate that reading these two novels did more to confuse and isolate me as an adolescent than any two works I'd encountered. I so identified with the protagonists that I thought of nothing further than "forging my own destiny" and carving out my place in the world at the expense of letting no one come closer to me than arm's length. As far as exposing Rand to impressionable, young psyches, I would have to beg any responsible adult to keep her "at arm's length." She took Carlyle's heroic individualism to an absurd conclusion. She goes beyond Nietzche in her appeal to the isolated self. Each of us is his/her own island, seperate and unequal. Any notion of social amelioration is an act of cowardice. I am no proponent of political correctness, but Rand's philosophy borders on Fascism - the strong leader pulling the herd along by tethers. As much as I abhor her philosophy, I must give her due as a novelist. She carves out compelling characters and keeps a narrative moving. She can write. If you can keep a fourteen or fifteen-year-old interested for 1000 pages, you must be doing something right. Then again, I also loved Harold Robbins' novels at that age.
Rating: 
Summary: After a great start I felt I was being talked down at
Review: I was incredibly engaged in this book when I first started it. 70 pages in I was excited about where this story was going. Around 100 pages I got this horrible feeling that the world Rand was creating was so unbelievably black and white that the book seemed to be written by a 15 year old who could use adult's words. There is no gray in this book. Every aspect of it is hardcore extreme in its stance. I never finished the book. Around page 200 I felt I was reading, 'This good, that bad'.
Rating:
Summary: It is her best novel...
Review: which isn't saying much. But at least it's better than the less-than-zero-stars semi-insane rant known as "Atlas Shrugged." My experience with fans of "Ayn Rand" (better known as Alice Rosenbaum) is that they are emotionally disturbed 20-year-olds who overestimate their own not-considerable intelligence and underestimate the intelligence and knowledge of others. In a nutshell that explains the appeal of Rand. As for this novel, it requires intelligence, knowledge, an open mind and some experience in life to see through the skin to the the dark heart. Rand writes that Roark is the "perfect man", makes several comments that he looks at people as "if they're not there," has him say he is "not kind," and praises him as a rapist. The diagnostic category this fits more than any other is an anti-social personality, a sociopath/psychopath. Rand herself was a narcissist; a sociopath is just the extreme form of a narcissist. Rand was projecting her own self as Roark into this book. It's not odd that her villains are more realistic than her heroes; the woman, who was half-nuts, obviously knew much more about hate, anger and envy than she did of love and gratitude. As, I suspect, do most of her fans.
Rating: 
Summary: Inspiring
Review: I first read this book as a junior in high school, almost five years have passed and I have read it 4 times already(practically once a year). This is an excellent story if you take it from a fictional point of view and it is also filled with great political and ideological viewpoints. I find this book very inspirational.
| 
