Rating: 
Summary: now THIS is "expanding your mind"
Review: As I was skimming over the 215 reviews already posted, I found something interesting; the majority of ratings were either 5 stars or 1 star. This book is black and white, with no room or tolerance for gray. This book has been more influential than any other I have ever read. I have an entirely different outlook on life now. I can't say that I agreed with everything she wrote, as I am a devout Catholic, and believe in things that she says I can have no proof of. But I wouldn't believe without reason, and reason, I have. Ms. Rand did an excellent job with the development of the characters. I will never forget any of them, they had strong personalities, and were all believable. I also respect her belief in capitalism, because in today's government, we seem to be straying away from it, in order to allow everyone to have a "fair shot". It is nice to find someone who will actually stand up for what they believe in. I am sure that I will re-read this book many times, as I believe that it was one of the best ever written.
Rating:
Summary: This is one of the "Greatest" books ever written
Review: Congragulations to the man from . You managed to read such an amazing novel with such a small mind. Only such a small minded person would make a coment such as " I'll point out that Ms. Rand's book wouldn't have even been published without the efforts of many of the non-genius "parasites" she denigrates. Or did she--all by herself--chop down the trees, process the pulp (after building the paper mill), collect the material necessary for the ink and process it, design the printing press and build it (with the machine shop she built herself), create the bindery, proofread and edit her text, carry her books to every store and sell them herself? (And I've left out quite a few steps!)" Did you not understand that it wasn't the simple worker that she despised, it was the government parasite that believes socialism is the best answer. I will agree with you that Ayn rand could not have made this book by herself, but give me a break when I laugh at your examples. Of course Ayn did not build the printing press, but the man who did, "Guttenberg", was not a parasite. You seem like a person who started to read Atlas Shrugged but you really didn't understand the book at all. You are just a child in the world of the mind and I may be 17 and I am probably younger then you but I understood the book and think it was the greatest. That should tell you something about yourself. To anyone who reads this review take my word that this is one of the best books ever written.
Rating:
Summary: Use your brain
Review: Contrary to what some readers below have claimed, Ayn Rand never suggested that she published her book on her own, or that life consists of individuals producing things entirely of their own capacity. Read her books and this is clear. Every one of her heroes uses resources that other have produced. What Rand DID advocate is that individuals should have the right to exchange goods and services as they choose, and that no one should be forced or obligated to sacrifice his products to anyone else. That's what free market capitalism is. There is a great difference between complex interaction of independent producers and collective, sacrificial socialism.
Rating: 
Summary: Rand denegrates the people who produced her book!
Review: Hear, hear to the reader from Austin Texas who got it exactly right. If I might add to what he wrote, I'll point out that Ms. Rand's book wouldn't have even been published without the efforts of many of the non-genius "parasites" she denigrates. Or did she--all by herself--chop down the trees, process the pulp (after building the paper mill), collect the material necessary for the ink and process it, design the printing press and build it (with the machine shop she built herself), create the bindery, proofread and edit her text, carry her books to every store and sell them herself? (And I've left out quite a few steps!) Of course not. In truth, Ms. Rand knew very little about the human condition, now or ever. What she knew about was her own ego which she magnified into thousands of pages of philosophical nonsense. For authors who struggle with the human condition, try Dostoevsky, Conrad, Hardy, De Assis, Toer....well you get the idea.
Rating:
Summary: Wow!
Review: To everyone who thought that this book was pointless, you obviously did not understand it. It is not just about the philosphy, it is also a great story.
Rating:
Summary: Book has a cinematic style to it, and might make good film.
Review: I received Atlas Shrugged as a gift. After reading one page, I put the book aside wondering how I would ever finish the one thousand-plus remaining pages. A couple of years later, I did the same thing. When I finally did get to read it to the end, I wanted to kick myself for not having read it through the first time. I did not realize at the time I read it that Ayn Rand worked as a writer for movies in Hollywood when she first came to America. I think this shows through in the very visual style she gave to the action and settings in Atlas Shrugged. At first, I thought it would make a great movie, but to capture the scope and essence of the complete novel would probably take a thirty-day TV mini-series. If someone told me that a novel known for its underlying political and social theme could also be so much fun, I wouldn't have thought it possible until I read Atlas Shrugged.
Rating:
Summary: rape as romance
Review: Read this book 20 years ago when I was in my early 20s, when I was still a misunderstood heroic genius. Several things stand out. The female lead character being raped early in the novel and the presentation of that act as one of love, the wooden robotic characters, the novel's horrible redundancy (John Galt's speech begging a cream pie in the face), and those silly on-strike over achievers trying out their philosophy in their Rocky Mountain bunker. The ultimate irony is that all people who are alive and have ever lived, are indebted to each other whether they realize it or not. Life just isn't black and white. It makes the world an easy place to understand but it doesn't make it true. In addition, Objectivism's obvious lack of gratitude and/or appreciation for the sacrifices individuals have always made for others is puzzling and ultimately disturbing. How would the heroic geniuses of Rand's novels implement the great ideas of their great minds? Dams, railroads, oil fields all involve collective effort and to imply otherwise is a childish take on endeavors that are complex interactions between individuals and institutions.
Rating:
Summary: THIS BOOK CHANGED MY LIFE!!!!!!!!
Review: Before I read it, I thought there might be something to Rand!!!! Now that I've read it, I see that she was just a pathetic demagogue whose "philosophical" system consisted almost entirely of rationalizations!!!! Read this book and SET YOURSELF FREE -- of the mind-numbing Cult of Objectivism!!!!
Rating:
Summary: Conditional Five Stars
Review: Just for the author's hammer-like ridicule of the dominant socialistic mindset of this epoch, this novel deserves at least four stars. Ayn Rand's biting, sarcastic humor carries the book. Those several reviewers who found Miss Rand humorless are too far gone in Left Wing La-La land to get the fun the author is having at the expense of socialism's intellectual pretensions. Atlas Shrugged has weaknesses, thus the conditional five stars. Almost all of her characters have one dimensional personalities. They're either wonderful and productive or evil and parasitical. The ninety page speech of John Galt is the height of egoism but to be expected of a woman who thought herself the greatest philosopher since Aristotle. Her philosphy has holes, too. Dagney's sluttiness is made a virtue, paralleling Ayn Rand's personal life around the time of Atlas Shrugged's release. I heartily agree with the reviewer who would not like a world without "the likes of Mother Theresa". Most probably, Ayn Rand would consider Mother Theresa a sob sister. What would a Rand objectionist do for the retarded or the crippled or the orphaned- throw them out into the world to raise themselves like wolves? I share the puzzlement of some reviewers of the treatment of Eddie Willers at book's end. Even Francisco says that Willers shares the values of the heroes of Galt's Gulch if not the superman abilities of the Galt Gulchers. Perhaps Willers' demise is Rand's way of explaining the future for America's abused productive people- the looters will grind down the productive in the end. Lastly, I find laughable the labeling of Rand as a fascist by several reviewers. They ought to look up the word fascist in the dictionary and find that they are bigger fools than they realized.
Rating:
Summary: A TRUE INSPIRATION TO THE HEROIC WITHIN MAN!
Review: A truly incredible novel! An inspiration to all those who oppose dictatorship, slavery (service to others as the sole justification to one's existence) and all forms of collectivism. This book is excellent ammunition against contemporary intellectual "mystics" who preach that an individual's life, work and identity are the property of the "group"- whether a race, class, state, or religion etc. and that self sacrifice,( the surrender of that which you value in favour of that which you do not value), is the moral ideal. If you beleive that "the political definition of a free society is the absence of physical coercion" and support the concept of man as an heroic being,(with his own happiness and productive acheivement as the moral purpose of his life, neither sacrificing himself to others nor others to himself), then this book is an essential read! D S A Murray
|
