/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.2813777]

I just started reading Atlas Shrugged. Some have told me to expect 1000 pages of whiny ranting, others a masterpiece. What do you guys think of the novel?

[Anonymous No.2813788]

I thought it was too long and preachy for what it was, but I can see why some people like it. Other people act like its a religious duty to hate on it, though.

[Anonymous No.2813786]

the first one

[Anonymous No.2813789]

[Anonymous No.2813793]

>trying to pre-formulate opinions before finishing the book

[Anonymous No.2813795]

>>2813777


It changed my life, before I was a selfish argumentative wanker and now I'm an argumentative wanker that trolls people about Ayn Rand.

[Anonymous No.2813799]

Tossed it after the first 100 pages or so. Turned out to be as whiny and preachy as most people say it was.

[Anonymous No.2813801]

Average idiots who delude in intellectual status think it's the greatest book ever. Actual intelligence will appreciate maybe 3 paragraphs out of the whole thing. Ayn was very impressed with herself, and somehow believed she was above everyone else, most likely from avoiding anyone who could ever challenge her.

[Anonymous No.2813802]

>>2813793
My schedule is packed and because of the length of it if the general consensus is that it sucks I won't bother with it.

[Anonymous No.2813807]

the first one.

[Anonymous No.2813810]

>>2813802

Watch the movie for The Fountainhead instead, it covers most of her 'philosophy' and isn't itself a bad movie. 2hours instead of 1000 pages.

[Anonymous No.2813819]

>>2813777
enjoy your ban
>This window is closing in......

[Anonymous No.2813843]

>>2813777
play the video game instead

[Anonymous No.2813859]

I've only read the Fountainhead. I learned nothing. I was probably too young so all I got was an enjoyable novel and the philosophy went straight over my head.

[Anonymous No.2813866]

Please read the rules before posting

[Anonymous No.2813869]

Regardless of whether you not you adhere to Rand's philosophy, one thing that can be said of both Fountainhead and Atlas is that rarely is there a wasted word. Yes, it's a long, philosophically driven piece whose characters are only voice-pieces to separate sides of an inner argument, but the way Rand drives her narrative is impressively agile for not one, but two works that are so huge.

In short, if you're just looking for something entertaining, neither of her classics will disappoint. But if you're reading them to understand her ideas behind the "Ideal Man," then your enjoyment may ultimately be colored by whether or not you agree with her position.

[Anonymous No.2813877]

Just read Anthem. It's vastly shorter and more fun, even though I essentially disagree with it.
Her actual writing style is pretty meh; whether you think Atlas Shrugged is a masterpiece or a waste of time depends on whether or not you agree with it.
Honestly, everyone who would consider diving into Atlas Shrugged already knows what she's trying to say with it, so there's really no point IMO. There's really no subtlety; it's pretty much propaganda.
Don't waste your time.

[Anonymous No.2813886]

>>2813866
I'm not OP but where are the rules? I see none in the sticky.

[Anonymous No.2813887]

>>2813886
http://www.4chan.org/rules#lit

[Anonymous No.2813892]

>>2813887
What the hell? Why?

[Anonymous No.2813894]

>>2813892

it sucks dawg

[Anonymous No.2813922]

>>2813894
This rule is awesome. Thanks for pointing out the rules. I wasn't awared they were organized by board

[Anonymous No.2813938]

>>2813892

People have strong views on her; a thread with Rand has guaranteed replies.
As such, a few posts a week can easily clog up the board, and Rand has become the most effective troll of /lit/.

[Anonymous No.2813941]

>There is to be no discussion of Ayn Rand.
wut

[Omar B No.2813993]

I like her work. I always get a feeling more people have not read her work but adopted the opinions of others on them.

[Anonymous No.2814029]

nuff said.

[Anonymous No.2814201]

>>2813993

I agree with this, I feel like it is perfectly alright to disagree with her philosophy, but far to many people seem to be following the trend of hating on her. In short, I really like her work from what I've read, I think the ideology behind objectivism is an interesting concept. In addition, I just simply like her writing style.

so, whatevs.

[Anonymous No.2814208]

And by the way, the rules are stupid. Fuck the rules. Rule 1 should supersede rule 4.

[Anonymous No.2814217]

>>2814201
No, I'm pretty sure it's that her views are odious and horrifying to the educated person who understands exactly what it is she's proselytizing.

[Anonymous No.2814237]

>>2814217

I think it depends on what arena they are being considered in. As consideration or application. I truly enjoy considering the possibilities of the objectivist standpoint and seeing what that says. In philosophic readings I rarely look to adopt new views but only borrow one standpoint as a temporary retrospective point to look at the world through a different lens. But hey, that's just me.

But yes, if you were to consider the idea of a mass acceptance of her philosophic views, that may be quite unapplealing, doesn't mean her writing as a whole should be flamed.

And to the overall discussion: yes her writing heavily focuses on her philosophy, yet what about the opportunities for other discussions like her style and general syntax? This is a literature board so why be so overly focused on the philosophy instead of the content?

But hey, again, whatevs.

[Anonymous No.2814261]

What's the difference between Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead?

The Fountainhead burns hotter but Atlas Shrugged burns longer.

[Anonymous No.2814267]

I still have my free copy of Atlas Shrugged I received from the Ayn Rand Institute a few years ago. I still haven't touched it.

[Omar B No.2814286]

I hear ya man. A lot of what is said about her seem almost as if a bunch of people shared one reader's opinion. Why start a thread asking people's opinions on a book you currently have in your possession? Just read it, decide for yourself. Don't feel singled out OP, I'm just pointing out something I'm noticing on a whole here. More threads asking about books rather than posting their own thoughts on something they have read.

Sometimes people make it seem like it's this huge impenetrable, unending book. It's really not, I used to read both The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged every summer as a teen. I am an objectivist, my father's a scientist and I'm from a Hindu family and I don't have any conflict.

[Anonymous No.2814363]

I enjoyed The Fountainhead immensely as I found the story to be quite entertaining and the philosophy to be filled with passion. Atlas Shrugged was nowhere near as good in my opinion and the story was riduculously bad as well as that 90 page radio rant that I had to skip over. I agree that her philosophy comes across as quite harsh and could easily be misunderstood but I think the books themselves can be enjoyed without trying to understand her philosophy. Didn't change my life or anything but I would reccomend people to actually read her and formulate their own opinion on her like some previous posters have done.

[Anonymous No.2814463]

Atlas Shrugged will always be the book that liberals love to hate because they have no defense against it. Read the book and you can't help but see what's going on today a little clearer.
Rage on you beautiful yet gutless turds.

[Anonymous No.2814937]

>>2814463
Ridiculous. The fundamental defense against her books is that Howard Roark and John Galt and Dagny Taggert dont exist. They literally do not sin in Rand's religion of self aggrandizement.

She was certainly prophetic about predicting the looting of america, but suggesting that conservatives and liberals arent looting the shit out of the country equally is ridiculous. She was traumatized by Marxism in her youth: she writes as though she believes history is linear, and that her dream is a perfect capitalist society exactly like marx's perfect communist one. Consider instead that history is cyclical, and that no one changes anything for long.

“From bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage.”