Rating: 
Summary: some questions
Review: I laughed, I cried, I contemplated, but most of all I wished that Ayan Rand were standing in my living room so that I could ask her some questions. First, If building on the discoveries and long held architectural (or philisophical) standards of thousands of previous geniuses is the greatest sacrilege and betrayal of one's own ability to create, then why are many of Frank Lloyd Wright's buildings prematurely decrepid and very high maintenence? Secondly, If somehow one were to reach the pinnacle of objectivist perfection, would all normal bodily functions like eating, and using the bathroom somehow become so unimportant that they would cease? Man cannot live on thought alone. The intensity of the book left no room for the characters to be identifiable. Howard Roark seemed to have been able to build buildings in his sleep! Also, I would ask Ms. Rand how a brutal and violent action like rape could innitiate a timeless, passionate, and fufilling love affair such as the one Howard and Dominique shared? (If someone would explain this to me I would be grateful.) It is because of these questions that i give the book 5 stars.
Rating:
Summary: A must for anyone who is interested in improving!
Review: I am sad to see some comments that this book is too long, and/or that the key points can be said more concisely. Often, good books require the reader to take the time to understand and absorb the meanings. The beauty of it is that you learn more as you mature in life. I have personally changed my views in reading the works of Ayn Rand over time. If human nature was easy to change, then books like "10 things to improve your self-esteem" need only be 10 lines long. But humans as humans tend to stay fixed within their comfort-zones, and believe me, there is so much more that you can get from reading this book!
Rating:
Summary: mail me and we will make an atlantis
Review: i mean i
Rating: 
Summary: groupthinkers need not apply
Review: It's a long work, over 600 pages. You won't be able to put it down once you start, so be forewarned. This isn't great literature and Rand can be a little heavy-handed at times, but it's an excellent parable on the value of the individual - and those who are terrified of the individual. Witness any national Democratic candidate over the past 50 years, and you'll see that Ellsworth Toohey is alive and well.
Rating:
Summary: Highly recommended !
Review: I LIVE to read great novels, but of the ten or so novels I've read in recent weeks, only "The Triumph and the Glory" has the potential to become a classic. So, disappointed in most of what is being published today, I've decided to read again some of the true classics of our time beginning with The Fountainhead. Rourke is one of the truly memorable protagonists of our time, and I am rediscovering the magnificent talent of Ayn Rand. READ THIS BOOK !
Rating: 
Summary: Odd... probably worth a read but nothing earth shattering
Review: I just finished reading this book for the first time. As a novel, the characters are totally unbelievable. In fact, I found it hard to understand them as characters, since they were one dimensional to the point of it not bearing much relation to real people at all. The book is much too long. I could've gotten the same value out of reading a 50 page summary of the book. That said, I don't believe this book is the work of the devil, or of a vast right-wing conspiracy. I don't think it works as a manifesto of right-wing politics, like some people think it is. Anyone who believes that is operating at the same level as someone who believes that all cooperation and sacrifice is evil. In both cases, It shows a total lack of understanding of the other viewpoint. It's unfortunate that Ayn Rand is associated with Libertarianism. I'm a Libertarian, but I certainly don't believe in most of the Objectivist views. In an ideal Objectivist world, neither capitalism nor liberty could exist. IMO, cooperation and respect for the value of others is requisite for either.
Rating:
Summary: Most challenging and infuriating novel of our time
Review: This book elicited so much passion from me, that I have to say it might be the greatest novel I have ever read. The philosophy Ms Rand presents is wholly horrifying - and absolutely captivating. I found myself hating her in one thought and filled with pure admiration for her talent the next. She drags the reader through a whirlwind emotions not the least of which is disgust. In the midst of a philosophy that holds selfishness as the highest good, one is forced to admit that when presented as Ayn Rand presents it, it makes a scary kind of sense. It is the only book I have ever read that made me agree and disagree with equal measure. It is truly a literary masterpiece, and even if you cannot agree with her (which you most likely won't) you are forced to admit the novel fully accomplishes that which it was intended - to challenge every standard that Americans hold dear.
Rating: 
Summary: Hysterical anti-philosophy
Review: Of all the "it changed my life" and "the best book ever" rantings here, I was particularly struck by one comment: something to the effect of "if you're looking for easy philosophy, look elsewhere". Life-changing for some I suppose it may be, but that is really ridiculous. "A is A", therefore I know everything and am the most important person on Earth. Man, that's tough. So involved, in fact, that Rand needed to write over 700 pages of turgid prose Yet in all of this thick volume, Rand never once refers to those evil "other people", implying that her "ideas" were both: A. totally original; and B. the conclusive, final word in the philosophical tradition. It's true that most realists like Russell never claimed to prove the existance of the external world (though I'm sure the Objectivist cult doesn't feel it has to bother with the inferior ideas of other supposed philosophers), but Rand does, and takes it to its illogical extreme. Not only can one know Truth, but he can be so irrefutably sure in this knowledge that listening to other people (the "drooling masses" in Objectivist jargon) is an utter waste of time--indeed, an evil to be avoided at all costs. How does an Objectivist know he is right? Well, Reason (naturally with a capital 'R') of course! Simple as that! Wave the magic wand of Reason, and *poof!* in a blaze of blinding enlightenment enters Truth Infallible. I can't believe 2000 years of philosophy couldn't figure it out!
Rating:
Summary: Trite and Self-Serving
Review: There are two approaches one can take to reading this book. The first is to read it as a 700-page propaganda piece for Rand's philosophy of Objectivism. Objectivism is not entirely without merit. American society could benefit from a booster shot of personal responsibility. We would also do well to place more value in the individual. Unfortunately, it is fatally flawed. Apparently, for one to be perfect, one must have no concern for any other human. Some tidbits of Objectivist wisdom: * Any altruistic act is degrading to both the giver and the receiver, and will lead to the destruction of both their souls. * Anyone who values his or her family is a self-deluded failure at best, and at worst a thoughtless automaton, lacking the capacity for original thought. These beliefs have their roots in very good values. Altruism can foster learned dependence. Valuing other people's opinions over one's own is very harmful to one's self-worth. Objectivism does not, however, account for genuine compassion or for the human need for companionship and affection. I highly recommend the philosophy to independently wealthy, anti-social geniuses. For anyone who needs other people for any reason, Objectivism is a call to examine one's motives and relationships, and nothing more. The second approach is to read it as a novel. Rand's use of language is very good. The prose is clean and elegant. For the rest of it, however, I borrow from Woody Allen "the three S words": self-indulgent, sophomoric, and solipsistic. The characters are two-dimensional and the plot is trite. Character development is thoroughly absent. Any concepts that challenge Rand's philosophy are completely ignored. She did not know how to reconcile filial love with her ideal of utter selfishness, so the hero, Howard Roark, has no family at all. It seems he sprang, like Athena, fully formed. Which begs the question: From whose smitten head did he spring? The antagonist presents a greater problem: How to create a nemesis who can threaten Roark, but who has no positive qualities? The solution: Ignore the problem. Elmore Toohey is a very intelligent man with a great deal of insight into the human psyche. He is an excellent orator. He manipulates people like a master puppeteer. His goal is to rule the world, and he seems to have the capacity to meet it. But Rand refers to him as someone who has no inherent talent, who could never have been anything but a social parasite. She did not feel the need to explain how he came to be an evil would-be dictator. She gives brief overview of his childhood, and apparently he leapt from the womb plotting and scheming. The only character that rings remotely true is Gail Wynand, and he is clearly a sketch of William Randolph Hearst. The last 30 pages consist almost entirely of long soliloquies in which the characters go on ad nauseam with very important ideas Rand couldn't fit in earlier. A large portion of the book took place during the Great Depression. The Depression is mentioned exactly once, and had absolutely no effect on any of the characters. I recommend this book only to those who want to know more about of Objectivism. It gives a good overview of its few merits and its many flaws.
Rating:
Summary: This was about ME....
Review: I learned a hard lesson many years ago. I could never "make" some one like me. There was no way I was ever going to fit into whatever mold others saw me in. I chose long ago I was going to do whatever made ME happy, gave me pleasure... Piss on everyone else. After readng this book, I now have a "reason" so to speak. No, it didnt change my life or how I live it. It did, however, give "meaning" as to WHY I am the way I am. My only regret is not reading this book a few years sooner. This book was not about architecture, it was about one man's struggle with conformity. He didnt care what others thought about him. He never conformed to anyones standard. He had his own, and as long as he lived up to that, he was happy. It was one man vs what everyone thought he should do. (something I can relate to) I dont think that this was the best written book ever.... But I do know, this book ment more to me than anything else I have ever read. Take it however you wish. (wanna bet someone is going say what i was thinking is wrong?)
| 
