<p>I've only read one of her novels: Anthem. I didn't hate it; I didn't love it. I was put off by her philosophical pounding. I found it strange that most of my class (I read the book as an assignment) really liked it. Two years later, they still remember it fondly. I also see her mentioned around the boards a lot. I just feel like I'm missing some aspect of her appeal. Have you read her novels? Do you agree with her ideas? Why do you think she seems so popular (trendy perhaps) among our generation?</p>
<p>I feel like the ‘characters’ in her ‘stories’ are ill-conceived - they are not real people and barely attempt to be real. Rather, she uses half-formed characters to represent her own ideas in what I feel like a flamboyant way. I find her work bordering on nonfiction/prose averse to fiction and really don’t see her appeal. According to my English teacher, though, she picked up in interest when the Ayn Rand Assn started giving out scholarships.</p>
<p>tl;dr - her writing sucks, but money is awesome</p>
<p>Agreed. The money is what makes the book popular/“good.”</p>
<p>A lot of her appeal depends on your political persuasion. She tends to be more of a conservative libertarian than a liberal. I haven’t read her stuff, but she’s apparently big on social darwinism, which is the antithesis of the social programs the Democrats/liberals tend to push.
Although the fact that this is the case kind of supports your point that the novel, as a story, is really bad. I’ve heard of many of her novels, but I don’t have the slightest inkling of any of the stories behind them.</p>
<p>The same reason why I read literature in general- to learn more about different views. I loved fountainhead, even though I couldn’t agree with the main character (sadly, I saw some traits of Peter keating in me… Sighs)</p>
<p>I disagree…I actually really enjoy her writing. I’ve read Anthem, Atlas Shrugged, We the Living, and Fountainhead, and though I agree that Anthem was little more than a philosophy lecture disguised as a novel, the other three really fleshed out the characters and used their experiences as a philosophical statement.</p>
<p>I also am a Libertarian, so I suppose that I’m rather biased.</p>
<p>@FastNeutrino: She doesn’t specifically support Social Darwinism; instead, she supports individual responsibility, and the idea that the only purpose in life is to pursue one’s happiness. At its root, it stems from utilitarianism: men should avoid pain and pursue pleasure. </p>
<p>The point most people disagree with is that she says the only moral pursuit in life is individual, and the only economic system that agrees with this pursuit is laissez-faire capitalism, which, as you said, the antithesis of modern liberalism. </p>
<p>So anyway, to return to my point: she doesn’t support Social Darwinism per se, but she supports meritocracy.</p>
<p>I’ve only read Anthem as well and thought it was all… obvious. Like I didn’t need to waste 100 pages to figure out the message.</p>