Atlas Shrugged.  Ayn Rand.  New York, USA:  Dutton, 1992.  1168 pp.  Original copyright 1957

Book Review by Joel
I had wanted to read Atlas Shrugged for a while, as a friend recommended it and I had heard about it years ago.  After finally reading it, I must say I was disappointed.  I don't know if the disappointment came from high expectations or my own prejudices.  I know the book is a classic and well received.  What disappointed me was the style of the interpretation of characters in the book. In trying to bring out three dimensional characters, she only accomplishes cartoonish actors in a dark, unbelievable play. Time after time, reactions to epiphanies, external stimuli, or merely interpreting their world, would result in overly dramatic and unreal actions. It didn't matter what character. They all suffered from hysteria. To me the reader, I lost all respect for any of the characters.  For example, in one scene where d'Anconia is talking to Hank at a party, d'Anconia's diatribe is reaching its peak and Hank finds himself uncontrollably laughing--as if he would lose all control of himself.  Similarly, when Dagny was talking to the young man who was whistling the 5th Concerto on the train and she noticed the dollar sign on his cigarette in the ashtray, she leapt to the ashtray to get it.

It seems that her characters are not allowed to express their feelings because whenever the "looters" talk their philosophy to them, they use every conceivable fiber of their being to not allow a facial muscle to twitch or show any signs of life. Dagny also wanted the men she was attracted to to read her mind and know what she wanted.  I know some of these things were signs of the times, or dramatic cues used by writers of the times. They are still used today- but in bad books. So that's my beef with Atlas Shrugged.  

On the good side, it is an interesting concept--taking extreme socialism and capitalism to the limits in a good versus evil context. Having the government take the roll of ogre, it could have been big trouble in her time. It is interesting that some of the characters were born into money and that they were continuing on the tradition of their industry. Hank Rearden was self-made, while John Galt was a mysterious jesus-like figure.  I gave up on the pirate character.  For a drama, I found myself laughing out loud too many times.  I hope the book is not some long-winded Rorschach test. Cuz if'n it is...

Joel.

Atlas Shrugged.  Ayn Rand.  New York, USA:  Dutton, 1992.  1168 pp.  Original copyright 1957

Book Review by Jane
Ayn Rand wrote this fiction in order to demonstrate the philosophy she coined called objectivism. Objectivism heavily relies on pure, unbridled capitalism. Incidences and characters in the book seem to be exaggerated so that at every turn in the book, an association with objectivism can be made. Also, while the characters hold different occupations and sometimes come from different social classes, they are either of one or two camps; either objectivism or it seems communism. Most of the characters are "movers" in the world. Common people are rarely mentioned except as in reacting to what one or the other camp has put into place. In fact, common people were not viewed as a valuable part of the picture, according to one of the main characters, who shows up a little later in the story. For instance, a janitor in a company would be a lesser man with nothing to offer, except taking from his betters--the ones with the ideas. So, apparently, these "movers" are solely responsible for mankind's successes. However, the "looters" are the reason for its failures, throughout the ages. On its own, the story could have been developed around the struggles the main characters had in being great industrialists of the time. One of the main characters, Dagny Taggart, is a woman running a railroad. She was basically assimilated into the man's world of her day, and there were particular challenges that she overcame. These challenges in themselves would be enough to keep a reader interested, but the main gist of the book has little to do with Dagny's particular situation. Ayn Rand wrote this book using language not usually found today, in as there was a disregard for women; as if women did not exist or make any contribution in the world at all. Even Dagny Taggart, the railroad tycoon, would talk as if she were only in a world of men. This is obviously the world Ayn Rand was writing in and was widely accepted, judging by the tone of the book. Another main character, Hank Rearden, was a great inventor and industrialist, but had a terrible family life. This was hard to swallow, because while there may be a bad apple in the family, it is hard to imagine a great leader who does not carry the support of the family. That being said, since Hank Rearden had been living in these circumstances, it seems things would have played out differently for him. The main premise of the book is that there are basically the industrialists that are working hard and everyone else is taking from their fruits. The other people, particularly in government, high society, and educational institutions are benefiting from their accomplishments, but not contributing in any way and are actually actively hurting their efforts. These entities do make the appearance of communism, as they seem to be coming from a collective mind. Ayn Rand came from communist St. Petersburg, Russia and felt the restrictions of that life. Her background must have been a big influence in the philosophy.

Ayn Rand says in her brief statement after the book that no person would say that people like these in the book exist. While characters like these certainly exist in the world, the world is made up of so many other types of people that are left out of the book. In an introduction, Leonard Peikoff mentions that Ayn Rand had a priest for a character who took confessions from James Taggart, Dagny's brother. This character was cut out, because, as Ayn Rand said, she couldn't make him convincing. In truth, objectivism stands against any type of altruism; rather it finds virtue with self-interest.

The book also tends to forget some of the social dilemmas created in the Industrial Age--the long working hours, poor wages, and conditions suffered by the workers. It is also forgotten that the industrialists could not succeed without the hard work of the workers, which should have value. The failed social programs that came out of it, where some companies would house the workers and take care of the workers--did have a brief mention in the book in the mines of d'Anconia. Ayn Rand, herself, is an interesting person to read about. Her philosophical views challenge the reader to confront his or her own stance. To get the philosophy of objectivism exposure, the book does a good job. However, a believer may come away from the book with an "us and them" attitude. There are no shades of gray in the characters portrayed. Although there were intelligent people on both sides, there really were no individual thinkers. The characters had to belong to a certain mind set to gain entrance to the Utopia Ayn Rand writes about. A non-believer may long for the story that could have been, had the characters and not the philosophy, taken center stage.

Jane.