/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.3503806]

I recently had an incredibly annoying conversation with an objectivist where I tried, unsuccessfully, to convince him that plopping a seventy page speech in the middle of a novel completely ruins any sort of narrative and that such a thing should not be done by any writer, regardless of skill. I didn't say a word about Rand's philosophy, or the quality of her writing. All I tried to say is that the speech was a very bad idea and that she should have either published the speech separately, or that she shouldn't have written a novel in the first place.

Am I wrong? I mean...none of the things that I said to him penetrated in any way shape or form, and I couldn't seem to get him to understand what I was trying to say. Am I totally missing something, or is the world lacking all logical cohesion and collapsing into absolute chaos where the rules of good writing no longer exist?

[Anonymous No.3503827]

that's because objectivists don't read atlas shrugged for literary value

you were coming from fundamentally different places and the twain shall never meet

[Anonymous No.3503832]

Anyone of any sense will come to this realization of their own accord.

Also, it was a 90 page speech per the paperback.

I'm a lifelong Objectivist, I have donated to the Ayn Rand Institute every year since 1995, and I think you're 110% right.

-Brad Goldberg

[« 零 » !Ry9.23Wow. No.3503875]

>Am I wrong?

YES.

JUST BECAUSE YOU DISLIKE IT DOES NOT ENTAIL THAT IT IS "WRONG", OR THAT YOUR OPINION OF HOW A NOVEL OUGHT, OR OUGHT TO NOT BE, IS STANDARD.

A NOVEL CAN BE WRITTEN IN MANY FORMS, OR STYLES.

WHY ARE YOU EVEN TRYING TO "CONVINCE" HIM THAT IT IS "WRONG"?

WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THAT?

[Anonymous No.3503922]

>>3503827
i'm goingto 2nd this. I read atlas shrugged to dip my toes into the philosophy behind it. When i got to the speech it didn't bother me at all because it was still giving me that. The narrative was just a neat device to keep me interested and help me to draw parallels to my own experience.

I think atlas shrugged and animal farm have a lot of parallels. They both bring to extremes existing political ideologies, and they both oversimplify the subject. But atlas shrugged held more value to me partly from it's veering from the narrative.

[Anonymous No.3503932]

>>3503875
WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOUR KEYBOARD ANON?

[Anonymous No.3503945]

>>3503932
THE CAPS LOCK IS BROKEN; HAVE YOU TRIED WRITING BY INVERTING YOUR USE OF THE SHIFT KEY. IT'S EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO WRITE ALL THOSE LOWERCASE LETTERS WITHOUT INTERRUPTING YOUR FLOW.

I SINCERELY APOLOGIZE FOR ANY INCONVENIENCE OR CONFUSION THIS HAS CAUSED.

[Anonymous No.3503990]

>>3503945
I laughed reading that last night in a yell-y voice.

[Anonymous No.3503995]

>>3503990
line* not "night".

>sorry about that guize.

[Anonymous No.3504016]

>>3503875
It demonstrates a lack of creativity, breaks the flow of the narrative, and is aesthetically unpleasing. If you argue that there is beauty within the grotesque that is a valid point. However, you must then admit that it is intrinsically ugly because it is out of place.

[Anonymous No.3504073]

>>3504016
I didn´t read the book, but maybe is just rand that isn´t a good enough writer. I don´t like all these rules.

[Anonymous No.3504087]

>>3504073

In order for an artistic endeavor to be considered worthwhile, you have to meet a certain number of criteria. I'm not sure how this is a controversial concept.

[Anonymous No.3504084]

>>3503875
that pic was perfect for the capslock. 10/10

[Anonymous No.3504094]

>>3503806
I'm sick of this atlas shrugged shit.
Do I have to read it guys? I don't want to read a book that big about something I might disagree with. But it looks interesting.

[Anonymous No.3504406]

>>3504094
Do you have anything better to do? I'd probably read her non-fiction if I wanted to be able to argue with the idiots that take her seriously, but I don't, so I won't.