[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 21 KB, 211x320, TheFountainhead.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6562965 No.6562965 [Reply] [Original]

I read this in February with no prior knowledge of Ayn Rand (a friend recommended it to me). Long contrived speeches aside, I enjoyed it. Are any of her other books worth the read?

>> No.6562982

>>6562965
Depends on whether you're autistic or not

>> No.6562985

>He felt his shoulder blades drawn tight together, the curve of his neck, and the weight of the blood in his hands. He felt the wind behind him, in the hollow of his spine. The wind waved his hair against the sky. His hair was neither blond nor red, but the exact color of ripe orange rind.

>He laughed at the thing which had happened to him that morning and at the things which now lay ahead.

>He knew that the days ahead would be difficult. There were questions to be faced and a plan of action to be prepared. He knew that he should think about it. He knew also that he would not think, because everything was clear to him already, because the plan had been set long ago, and because he wanted to laugh.

>> No.6562996

>>6562985
jesus christ

>> No.6563017

>>6562985
10/10
Greenspan was 100% correct

>> No.6563027

>>6562965
I rage quit after the lack of immersion became unignorable, the characters and happenstance are unrealistic as fuck.

>> No.6563040

>>6562985
I know it's a ridiculous book. I think there was SOME good writing in it though and I liked the general theme of individualism (to an extent)

>> No.6563048

>>6563040
If you want a book all about individualism, read We.

>> No.6563082

>>6562965
Her books are alright as long as you don't believe the philosophy is credible.

Hating rand is a meme, remember, /lit/ is nothing but memes anymore.

>> No.6563109

>>6563082
I know, I was hoping I'd get at least one semi-serious response. I don't take her philosophy seriously but I like aspects of it (being selfish to an extent, striving for originality).

Can you recommend any of her other books? I was considering Atlas Shrugged but I've heard there's a 50-page Galt speech in there and I don't know if I can bear it.

>> No.6563528

>>6563109
i read all of atlas shrugged except for the 50 page monologue. The point of the speech was just to explain rand's philosophy very bluntly, and at the point in the book you are already hyper-aware of what she's trying to convey, so i found it was unnecessary. The plot continues just fine after the speech

>> No.6563591

>>6563109
The 50 page Galt speech isn't bad as long as you keep the philosophy constrained to the motives of Galt.
Some of the non extreme stuff in Atlas Shrugged is pretty legit though.

Basically, no one has the right to tell you what to do with what you created.

You will get mad at the poachers or leaches or whatever they are called regardless of how you feel about the philosophy.

They are basically /r9k/ers and /pol/tard NEET's except who actually expect Bill Gates' money just because he has so much, and are willing to attack him and his family for it.

>> No.6563597

Would you like to discuss what you've read?

I can astute say the creation with which Roarke is, is clever but yes contrived, illusioned even. This is bias to the man who has seen him.

>> No.6563627

I especially like the ridicule, and that is a soft overtone of what the word means, of the renaissance architecture. I like the relationships, the ideas, the warehouse, the colour of the atmosphere on each corner of Roarkes office, it says to me a homeless man in genius and a genius in homelessness. The gravity of work, the institutionalization of his behaviour and his mode, that he has both devotion to himself and his work, though you might not discern this. I speak out of my mouth and I can't even describe myself to be this man in this instant because I haven't read the book in it's entirety and I have a cigarette in my hand. If he is infact devoted, it is not selfless and again it is. This objectivism is not unnoticed, it is an egoists utlitarianism that roarke approaches people with so that they know that he connects to them on this level in particular and none other. He lives for this reason.

>> No.6564260

>>6562965
I liked We the Living. It's different than her other works, perhaps more cynical. Anthem is similar to atlas shrugged but it's 1/10 of the length, aLthough antgem is sort of underwhelming.

>> No.6564267

>>6562965
I liked that rape scene

>> No.6564280

>>6564267
Same

>> No.6564664

Elmsworth is incredibly memorable. Fucking guy.

Atlas Shrugged is obviously the next step. It isn't so bad, especially if you enjoyed T.F.

>> No.6564861

>>6562965
This is her best and only bearable book. Her philosophy is shit. Wynand was infinitely better than Roark. >>6563027 is right, the happenstance is extremely unrealistic. But the villain is probably top 5 best villains in any medium.

I've also read Atlas, We the Living, and Anthem. We the Living and Anthem were both unbearable and not worth your time. Atlas Shrugged is worse than Fountainhead, but if you enjoyed Fountainhead you will probably enjoy Atlas Shrugged.

>> No.6565541

>>6564861
It's not meant to be realistic though. It's meant to present ideals in their pure form.

That said, I did care about a few of the characters. Peter Keating's decline in particular affected me.


>that scene where he brings his paintings to Roark's office

>> No.6565543

>>6564861
Who do you consider to be the villain? Ellsworth?

>> No.6565751

>>6565541
Roark's silent judgement on Keating fucking killed me. The idea that someone could be "too late" to his own destiny hurt.

>> No.6565778

>>6563109
i loved atlas shrugged and not because the philosophy, although its heavy on it.
I just like the way things get more and more depressive and the way she descrives the world changing.
Overall the book would have been better without the third act

>> No.6565818

>>6565751
I know. The thing with Catherine was upsetting too. And when Ellsworth told him that he was essentially worthless.

>> No.6566045

>>6565543
Of course. The only people that seem capable of independent action are Wynand and Ellsworth, and maybe Dominique.

>> No.6566086

>>6566045
Am I misunderstanding you? Wynand had a complete breakdown at the end of the book and Dominique basically lived for Howard, by the end she didn't seem to have any independent thought. Roark and Ellsworth were the most independent characters.

>> No.6566311

>>6564861
anthem is better

>> No.6566315

>>6566311
Why? The common consensus seems to be that it's terrible.

>> No.6566379

>>6566315
Hi, I'm common consensus and yes it is terrible.