Atlas Shrugged

Rating:
Summary: It grows off you
Review: I first read this about a decade ago. Coming from a persistently anti-intellectual rural American public school, I absolutely loved it. At last, something that validated excellence and reason and thought! Even at the time I recognized that the characters were wooden and I thought her economic theory was oversimplified, but those seemed to me minor flaws next to a philosophy that gave me justification in being smart and using reason rather than emotion. I'd venture to guess that something like this is the root of Rand's ideas among adolescents, especially since teenagers haven't really necessarily lived enough to experience the limits of that philosophy when you try to live it.

So, yeah, I loved the book. It really did change my life at a time I needed that justification. And it's clearly affected a lot of people quite strongly, not just me.

But I just tried reading it again and could hardly get through it a second time. The flaws I dismissed as minor before now seem overwhelming. For one thing, her economic and political theory is completely inapplicable to the real world, in which political and business leaders (to make the most profit) would be rationally best served by completely screwing over their workers and 95% of people on earth. I've spent a fair amount of time in some of the poorest countries in the world, and the unadulterated capitalism you see trying to grow there is much more in line with Rand's philosophies than the guided and regulated capitalism that serves us so well in America (or even to some extent in Europe). Her philosophy was obviously formed by her past growing up in Russia, but though there are some obvious flaws with extreme communism, it does not at all follow logically that the other extreme is the best alternative.

From a more literary perspective, her characters are uncompelling and unbelievable -- not just in their ability (you expect that in some novels, and part of the point is that they're geniuses) -- but in their utter certainty about everything and their utter *sameness* to each other. In my experience, one of the marks of independent thought and rational thinking is when you see people disagree, but that certainly doesn't happen among any of her heroes except when they misunderstood each other. It would have been a far, far more interesting book if the characters had had more depth and questioning and sense of being torn between different values, the way real people are.

That said, the book still has a very interesting premise. And while lots of the writing (especially the monologues) is clunky and wooden, some of it (particularly the descriptions of the cities and the mills and the railroads) is quite evocative. The sex and the relationships are cringe-inducing, but I quite enjoyed some of the microscopic interactions, particularly those involving Francisco - one of the more interesting of a set of fairly uninteresting characters.

And, really, it should be read, for a similar reason that I think the Bible and the Quran (and, heck, even the Left Behind series and the Lord of the Rings) should be read. Believe it or not, like it or not, it's formed the basis of a lot of people's thinking on an array of issues that are very relevant to the world we live in.

Rating:
Summary: Mildly interesting, poorly executed, 0 believability
Review: That being said I agree with Rand's philosophy, to a point. There are not 3 kinds of people in this world: sinister looters/moochers, screaming ingorites(yes I made this word up), and creative Jesuses. There are not only 2 motives in life: domination and creativity. There is no purity in anything. That is the only absolute. Everything has flaws, imperfections, and inconsistencies. The only thing perfect is chaos which by definition is imperfect. Then why would Rand write this voluminous tome that contains nothing but absolutes?

There is no solution to the evils of the world. They will continue because of the imperfect nature of our universe. Protection from them is impossible because we are all by nature evil in our own way. We struggle daily with right or wrong be it helping someone who doesn't ask for it, or ignoring someone who does. Which of these things are wrong? There is no answer to that question. All of our decisions are based on what will make us respect ourselves tomorrow. Our responsibility to our actions go only as far as the ability for us to see the consequences of those actions. Furthermore, those consequences are valued by everyone differently. We're all different and inconsistent so obviously we have to restrict everyone's abilities to judge right or wrong by determining a basic standard of values. But those restrictions can, and do at times, go too far. So we need to restrict the restrictions. Balance of power, checks and balances: nothing is perfect or constant.

Welfare is evil if its purpose is to solidify an aristocracy. Accumulation is good if it is earned. I don't think these last 2 sentences should take over 1000 words, much less pages, to explain. What she tried to do was make everyone believe those words by repeating them incessantly. I don't mind point blank bluntness but I do mind being hit in the face repeatedly by a 2x4 and that's what reading this book feels like.

I can't wait for the film to be made. Hopefully it translates well to a screenplay given that they could cut out 90% of the book as repetitiveness. The plot was obviously just a tool that she used to infest the reader's mind with her opinions but for the most part it was a solid story. Ideally they'd make it surprising and suspenseful rather than predictable and repetitive. Did I say this book was repetitive?

Rating:
Summary: Great read - flawed philosophy
Review: I read this book for the first time when I was 20. It was a great read - I loved it and subscribed to everything in it. I thought - finally, I have found somebody who thinks like I do. I went on to major in Economics and Philosophy in part due to the influence of this book.

However, as I have grown older (I am 27) I have come to see some flaws in Rand's philosophy. For instance, where do children fit in? There are no kids in Rand's book, and I dare say she would have been a scary mother. Also, since when is efficiency the number one goal? It's a good goal, but there are higher goals in life. Rand is also not high on religion, which is not surprising, as she thinks she can handle everything herself.

So while I appreciate the story - it is a great ride - I have to limit my review to 3 stars because of the potentially damaging philosophy Rand is espousing. While her philosophy is useful in many situations, if carried out 100% it would lead to a hateful, spiteful world with little compassion and love. So if you haven't read her book, do read it, but do so with a grain of salt.

Rating:
Summary: Good, but with some reservations
Review: I enjoyed most of this book. I am pretty sympathetic to the message of the book, but I can understand why some people would be turned off. The book is set in a futuristic United States that is being slowly taken over by collectivism and by folks more concerned with "fairness" than excellence. The book proceeds with an ever growing amount of protectionism being implemented on various industries, with the best companies and the best men unfairly hurt in the process. The protagonist of the story fights back by convincing all of the high achieving men of the country to quit working in the system and runaway to a restrictive enclave in the mountains. The point was to show the world what would happen if the creative and business energy provided by these men were to be suddenly removed, as if on a strike (Indeed, the working title of this book was "The Strike" Rand changed it on the advice of her husband). It is an interesting premise, indeed think of how our history would have been altered in the last 20 years with out Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Michael Dell and other such mavens).

The entire premise does require some suspension of belief. How many multi billionaires would quit their day job, sell off all of their worldly possessions in order to follow a kid out into the mountains and live in a commune? However, the story is a means to the end, which is ultimately to get Rand's philosophy out.

I found most of the story quite enjoyable, however it got very tedious towards the end. Rand descends into long spiels about the evils of collectivism and how the individual is the ultimate power. I think most readers will get that after the first 5 times she says it. The other 40 are overkill. On this score, I agree with a previous poster who said she was in dire need of an editor. The character construction led a lot to be desired as well. None of the "good guys" had any detrimental attributes. They were all smart, capable, dashing and good looking. None of the "bad guys" had any redeeming characteristics. They were all conniving, lazy, indecisive and frightened. But, based on the premise that the story is a means to a larger philosophical end, this shouldn't be surprising.

Overall, I liked the book. I do feel that "The Fountainhead" was a better piece of work, but this one is still worth reading if you don't mind the time investment (it is over 1000 pages). I am fortunate that my current situation gives me spare time to invest in reading (I am currently deployed in the army). If I were back in my civilian job in the army, I am not sure this is where I would spend my reading time.




Rating:
Summary: This book is about being and trying your best
Review: This book is about living your life to the best of your ability and respecting that effort in others. A college professor once told my class that "everything you do has your name on it; reflects your values, your self respect - if you do a shoddy job that's how you value yourself and how others will value you. Do everything as best you can."

That's what this book is about: values, respect, worth, work, effort, doing your best and therefore making a contribution. And what is against is having no values, no respect for yourself or others, making no effort - i.e., becoming a parasite living off the efforts and work of others.

This is the philosophy behind the story that includes mystery, suspense - everything for a good novel.

It is not written for the MTV/CNN generation that needs everything in 30 second sound-bytes; but certainly should be read by them.

Rating:
Summary: As our need for alternative energy sources...
Review: becomes increasingly desperate, let us not forget the books of Ayn Rand. Especially where home heating fuel is in short supply.