Ayn Rand

simu

Has anyone here read any of her stuff? If so, how did you find it?

I'm curious as I know little about her but have come accross some very enthusiastic reviews of some of her books on the net.

shotamoose

Haven't actually read her, but she seems to have a big online following among emotionally retarded Thatcherites alright.

simu

shotamoose wrote:

Haven't actually read her, but she seems to have a big online following among emotionally retarded Thatcherites alright.

Rand's political views were extremely anti-communist, anti-statist, and pro-capitalist. Her writings praised above all the human individual and the genius of which he is capable. She exalted what she saw as the heroic American values of egoism and individualism. One of her novels included stories of educated, wealthy persons who found their lives unfairly burdened with the hassles of taxation, bureaucracy and other forms of heavy-handed government interference. Rand also had a strong dislike for organized religion and compulsory charity, both of which she believed helped foster a culture of guilt in successful people.

(from the wikipedia)

Ah, I can see why you'd say that now, Shotamoose. But does anyone who has read her think that her novels have any literary value?

davros

simu wrote:

Ah, I can see why you'd say that now, Shotamoose. But does anyone who has read her think that her novels have any literary value?

I'd have to say no. I read 'Atlas Shrugged' which started off with an interesting premise and was even a bit of a page-turner. But it quickly became clear that there were really only two character types. The first set of characters are strong and self-reliant and are mouthpieces for Rand's philosophy of selfishness. The other set are weak and whining and aim to drag the strong down to their level through laws and regulation.

The book abandons all pretense of a story about half way through when the strong characters are allowed to waffle on for many dozens of pages espousing their arguments in favour of greed. Very repetitious stuff.

For Ayn Rand, it's sufficient to understand her point. You won't gain anything by ploughing through the books. In fact, it's probably enough just to watch the film "The Fountainhead" next time it's on TV.

Incidentally, Alan Greenspan is a big fan.

Redleslie2

There was an episode of Futurama where mutants in the sewers say that they've built up a library from books flushed down toilets. Bender notes that there's nothing there but "crumpled porno and Ayn Rand".

I've only read excerpts of her stuff, it just seems hopelessly childish to me. The only people I know who come close to the "don't live for others" philosophy are alcoholics. And they're a pain in the arse.

oscarBravo

simu wrote:

But does anyone who has read her think that her novels have any literary value?

I've read Atlas Shrugged twice. It's something of a page-turner alright. Granted, there's a blatantly obvious good guy/bad guy divide that's somewhat overcooked, but I think it's important to read this for what it is: the uber-capitalist version of Mein Kampf or Das Kapital - primarily an espousal of a politico-economic philosophy.

On the political front, I think her "objectivism" philosophy is grossly simplistic, not unlike other extreme philosophies. Her "bad guys" are, in effect, morally weak characters who are easy to despise - but she completely avoids the issue of the physically vulnerable.

I'd certainly recommend that you read it, if only to find out where ultra-capitalists are coming from. Also, of course, for a pretty compelling story (most of the time - the 50-odd page monologue is tough going, but I forced myself not to skim it the second time).

Hairy Homer

Has anyone ever met a nice objectivist?

This guy is president and executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute. If you have trouble downloading the sound file have a read of this.

Says more or less the same thing.


Goddam, you gotta like a guy who doesn't pussyfoot around. :rolleyes:

Talliesin

Objectivism is pretty much Nietzche for slow learners.

Also, yes we all get that "A is A" we just don't all think we're fúcking geniuses for getting that much. Also it doesn't disprove "A is B".