I’ve been listening to people of all sorts dump all over Atlas Shrugged since I was a kid. Now people are going to dump all over the movie, which is totally expected. In the meantime, the book continues to sell copies and influence people, and will for some time to come.

To my mind, dumping on a work like Atlas Shrugged–whether for political, philosophical, or artistic reasons–is like the way people on amateur writing websites dump all over the Harry Potter series or the Twilight series, or on Stephen King. (It also reminds me, sort of, of how arreligious cranks will pick over every story in the christian bible looking for tiny inconsistencies or falsehoods so they can “debunk” it on a historical basis. BORING!!! But I digress.)

That these works and authors have enjoyed such enormous success tends to provoke hostility among… let’s generously designate them as “critics”. Is there any mystery in that? Every site and blog on the interweb has one or more section in which aspirers-to-literary-success virulently diss some popular author or work in the mistaken impression that that somehow gives them superiority over the successful writer.

I don’t think “Twilight” is very good, but it’s obviously very popular–I feel that I would sort of look like, you know, I was jealous or something, if I went around cracking on it.

Atlas Shrugged has been a perennial bestseller since it was written, and it’s also a seminal work of philosophic rationale for free thinkers everywhere. The moviemakers made the movie for people who like the book and would have preferred to keep the movie as close to the book as possible, which–in view of Atlas Shrugged’s many millions of ardent fans worldwide–probably was a pretty savvy idea.

Hey, it wasn’t ment for you guys. It was ment for guys like me that made the #2 book of all time(behind the Bible).

If you haven’t spent 10 uniterrupted minutes thinking about Ayn Rand’s works – that’s thinking, not emoting – then you shouldn’t expect anyone else to give a rat’s ass about your opinion of Rand or the movies based upon her novels. That applies equally to Smitty and Ehlinger. Try to organize the scattered contents of your brain, if that’s possible so late in life, then get back to us in about 5 years.

So do I. Most women would retort that they endorse Rand’s belief that men should be worthy of said worship.

I believe we never should have taught the split tails to talk, but apparently I’m in the minority.

I don’t regard myself as better than most, but I’d say I’m better than you; a low barrier, to be sure, but better than nothing, I guess. Your proclaimed fear of inferiority is well-deserved, and your contribution approaches that of a a Democratic Underground or Kos-style form letter, e.g., “I read Ayn Rand when I was 14, then I grew up, blah, blah, blah…”

If you have a few neurons still firing, I’d suggest that those who seek to preserve & expand what liberty we have left should not get too flippant and/or stupid regarding the thinkers who make that prospect possible. You didn’t make the Tea Party possible. I didn’t, either. Ayn Rand and a handful of other modern thinkers (e.g., economists of the Chicago School) did. For the right ideas to gain influence, a culture needs both didactic work and the dramatization of abstract ideas, so as to engage the moral imaginations of a broad segment of the population. Ayn Rand did both. She is certainly subject to criticism where she got it wrong, but joining the idiot mob and dissing her out of intellectual sloth is counterproductive – if one of your professed goals is liberty.

I didn’t read any of her novels completely, which considering how many thousands of novels I’ve read tells you something. I’ve literally read from A-Z in SF/F novels listed by authors (A-Isaac Asimov, Pohl Anderson, Kevin Anderson, Piers Anthony, Robert Asprin,…).

Rand’s novels are painful to read and I am a Serious Reader.

Rager’s pt….as I sometimes say ‘Libertarianism is the philosophy of the adolescent mind’ has a lot of value.

But, w/o Rand, we might be saluting a hammer and sickle in the morning. She was probably crazy, but sometimes crazy people have their uses.

On the gripping hand (If I’m using that SFism correctly), Rand was right that one should reverence the Great. Unfortunately, she did not run into or accept the Kalam aka Cosmological Arguement which proves beyond reasonable doubt the existence of God. What we should reverence is the Creator. So her postulates were missing the Key Postulate of All: God exists. Can’t make a proper logic based philosophy when you’re ignoring the most important fact of all time.

Have a good time, RR – the first round’s on me. But make sure you come back and not Go Galt on us.

Smitty, you and I probably would disagree on virtually all political issues, but I would like to applaud you for an exceptionally perceptive and even-handed review.

I realize that perceptions of this event tend to be skewed according to ideology, and finding a balance and something more than a clichéd take is exceptionally difficult in this case.

Bravo, sir. (And, yes, The Fountainhead is a far superior literary work simple AS a literary work.)

Kudos upon you.

The Fountainhead was a very good theme. The novel was not great writing, but it was not bad. Atlas Shrugged, not so much.

I would love to see a recreation of The Fountainhead. While I liked Gary Cooper in the original, it was definitely a missed opportunity. The Fountainhead is actually not just an anti-Soviet socialist tome–it is spot on when it addresses creativity and the forces than try to tear down the invovator. It is not just a one liner, like Atlas Shrugged.

Quoted from and Linked to at:
Atlas Dug Or Atlas Ugh?