<p><em>chimes in</em> I'm an Objectivist, as much as one can be not having read OPAR or ITOE (haven't had the necessary time to devote to them yet). </p>
<p>Taggart~ are you on any of the Objectivist forums?</p>
<p>nope -- between CC, gradewhoring, AIM, and whatnot, I have no time. I believe I may have had an account at one point on objectivismonline, but all I did was read...about the development of the Atlas Shrugged movie.</p>
<p>I got about halfway through The Fountainhead and stopped. Her books are so long, but maybe when I have time I'll finish The Fountainhead because she is a good writer and I enjoy reading her work.</p>
<p>i enjoyed reading her books when i was in college and as a young adult. if the intro to the books could have been a little shorter, they'd all have been much more enjoyable. perhaps when i have a little more free time, i'll re-read the fountainhead and atlas shrugged, which, even today, remain my favorite books. one more thing....don't see the fountainhead movie - it really did not do the story justice!!</p>
<p>Yes, when I read about the development of Atlas Shrugged and some of the bizarre casting ideas, it made me SURE that I'd never watch the movie.</p>
<p>i hate ayn rand... sooo much</p>
<p>and im not someone literarily ignorant... im good with books... ayn rand is just impossible to read cuz in the back of her books are advertisements to buy her other books which preach her philosophy... its like scientology, but for smarter people</p>
<p>plus, her philosophy is dumb (imo) too</p>
<p>I read the Fountainhead. One of my friends put me on to her. He read all of her books in chronological order (the way they were written) over the course of a couple months. He was in love. :) </p>
<p>I have yet to get around to Atlas Shrugged (I'm reading A Farewell To Arms right now) but I will eventually. </p>
<p>I hope everyone else has heard about the Ayn Rand Foundation Scholarship? I don't remember how much it's for, but you write an essay based on one of the novels. I may do it over the summer. I don't have a website or anything, if you're interesed you'll just have to google.</p>
<p>yeah. my friend was a semifinalist, I believe.</p>
<p>=] thank goodness I like to write.</p>
<p>"ayn rand is just impossible to read cuz in the back of her books are advertisements to buy her other books which preach her philosophy... its like scientology, but for smarter people"</p>
<p>naa. every author does this.</p>
<p>^Really? Like who?</p>
<p>I mean authors of literature, not of political fiction like Ayn Rand.</p>
<p>most of the time it's the publisher who puts that there. it's just advertising similar books. sometimes they'll be completely different authors, just similar styles and subjects.</p>
<p>Yeah, the publisher wants people who like the books to buy more from them, of course. But I have to agree it did seem like all the Ayn Rand books were trying to convert and sell you in a cult-ish way the entire idea of Objectivism in the back.</p>
<p>haha, but that's the point, isn't it? Rand isn't really trying to sell novels (as in, her original purpose was not to sell stories, but rather, to illustrate her philosophy). she couldn't make that fact more blatant.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Rand isn't really trying to sell novels
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Besides the fact that she doesn't really have to try to sell novels; Atlas Shrugged is one of the best sellers of all time.</p>
<p>Sorry I asked. :)</p>
<p>Seriously, though, those who have read and appreciate the books, it seems there are so many layers to them, such as social, cultural, political, economic, and of course, the plot itself. </p>
<p>Do you believe there are people like Dagny and Roark? What would Ayn Rand think about throwing money in a wishing well and get-rich-quick game shows?</p>
<p>When she dated Nathaniel Branden, would she have been fine with him paying? Did she really think women were men worshipers?</p>
<p>How come we never read her books in high schools, yet we read other so-called classics that were produced around the same time as her masterpieces? </p>
<p>Just for starters.</p>
<p>I love the way Ayn Rand <em>writes</em>. It may not be the greatest stylistically, but I still love it. I love the way she begins "We the Living" and here characters. I hate her over-simplistic view of Soviet Russia, but I love Kira. Howard Roark was my first literary crush, and I wanted to be Dominique. </p>
<p>Needless to say, I think that objectivists have no souls. :) It's okay, I used to be an objectivst too.</p>
<p>I think she has an over-simplistic view of everything. She says she writes about men as they should be, that her characters therefore don't reflect reality, but it's also true of her villains, they're two-dimensional like an old version of pong.
I read "The Fountainhead" after seeing her popularity on this board. I read it in a few days, I'll be honest, I couldn't stop. I liked her writing but her rejection of altruism was ridiculous. Thank God she acknowledges that only a few people can understand her and be objectivists, otherwise society wouldn't last long.</p>
<p>Well, she's kind of got the same view of altruism as Nietzsche does (I'm reading Beyond Good and Evil right now). It's impossible to do a "good deed" and have completely pure motives. Subconsciously you want recognition, to make yourself feel good, etc.</p>
<p>Anyways.</p>
<p>I love Ayn Rand, even if I think she's wrong about a lot of things. I find the fact that she explains the existence of the world as being "metaphysically given." That's unsatisfactory to me.</p>
<p>And LOL and the person who had a secret crush on an objectivist and read Rand's books because of him. That made my evening...because I've done that kind of thing before, too. :P</p>
<p>Oh, and I want a "Who's John Galt?" pin. Where can I buy them. </p>
<p>The thread is a bit old but anyway Ill join</p>
<p>hemingway "Needless to say, I think that objectivists have no souls. It's okay, I used to be an objectivst too."</p>
<p>Can't agree here... I might have misinterpreted the book (as I'm an active reader and tend to get "into the book", i.e. to complete what the authors says with my own views), but it seems to me that there really isn't a character with more of a Soul (=Self) than Howard Roark. That's probably because I understand the soul as a compilation of one's own principles and understandings, and a man with a soul (and a self) is one who stands behind his beliefs. I do not really think that the main characteristic of Roark is his egotism, rather his ability to live to his principles.</p>
<p>Also for me it is too narrow-minded to look at the opposition objectivists-nonobjectivists as egoitists-altruists. In another thread there was a discussion about someone who did not want to volunteer because he read the rand's novels and decided for himself that volunteering was wrong. At first sight it seems that the Rand's Fountainhead says something like this but actually this impression is wrong. There was one moment in the novel, when Rand discussed Toohey's desire to build a world of second-handers. Seeing the potential of his niece, he decided to kill it by making her a social worker but in the same time when a student of him, who wanted to become a social worker, came to Toohey for advice, Toohey said that social work is not for him because he was too passionate about it and people should never follow their real passions. Rand does not deny volunteering, and even does not defend egotism in the meaning we understand it today (never help anyone without a personal gain). She asserts egotism as preserving your integrity, i.e. livng to your own understandings of what is right or wrong. In a sense, Rand does not deny or assert any way of living as long as it is subject to your beliefs and standards.</p>
<p>Unfortunately that's only in the novels. =[ Rand was a bit of a nutcase outside of her fiction, so I prefer to consider her philosophy as separate from her own being. The message is something like: Live as you would like to live, and make goddamn sure it's you who wants it.</p>
<p>I doubt I can call myself an objectivist, but I it's probably the closest label there is, and something I can agree with fundamentally. Haha, it's really nice to see other fans. =]</p>