This excerpt is taken from "Atlas Shrugged" - Ayn Rand's radical novel.
Ragnar: ". . . [Robin Hood] is not remembered as a champion of property, but as a champion of need, not as a defender of the robbed, but as a provider of the poor. He is held to be the first man who assumed a halo of virtue by practicing charity with wealth which he did not own, by giving away goods which he had not produced, by making others pay for the luxury of his pity. He is the man who became a symbol of the idea that need, not achievement, is the source of rights, that we don’t have to produce, only to want, that the earned does not belong to us, but the unearned does. He became a justification for every mediocrity who, unable to make his own living, had demanded the power to dispose of the property of his betters, by proclaiming his willingness to devote his life to his inferiors at the price of robbing his superiors. It is this foulest of creatures – the double-parasite who lives on the sores of the poor and the blood of the rich – whom men have come to regard as the moral idea." ". . . Do you wonder why the world is collapsing around us? That is what I am fighting, Mr. Rearden. Until men learn that of all human symbols, Robin Hood is the most immoral and the most contemptible, there will be no justice on earth and no way for mankind to survive."
Criticism : I am unable to digest how Ragnar is different from Robin Hood in any sense. Ragnar maintains an account for all of "Rand's" heroes so that they he could give them their due - which was taken away by the "looters". Wasn't Robin Hood the same? He took away from rich nobles to give the peasants their due. The peasants had in fact, worked under a nobility which had taken away everything from them. According to Rand's Objectivist philosophy, it is the peasants who actually deserved all the material wealth as they were the ones who did the work. I see a contradiction here, in her criticism of Robin Hood. I may be wrong in my criticism and would like anyone who has read my blog as well as "Atlas Shrugged" to point out any flaw in my argument. I need this because I am trying to evaluate "Objectivism" to see if its a full-fledged philosophy. Any Objectivists reading this blog, please note that the above criticism is a subjective evaluation which may be wrong and any abusive or forceful, irrational language on my blog will not be paid attention to.
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Saturday, September 18, 2010
The Fountainhead (Review)
Review of the Fountainhead
The Fountainhead is a must-read. This book was one of those which I had always postponed reading and now that I have read it, I feel that it is something that definitely deserves a review. I cannot say that the characters that Ayn Rand has invented in the book are not larger than life. It is definitely, according to me, a book not to be influenced by unless you have an extraordinary strength of character. I would like to structure the review of the book just as the book is structured - In 4 main parts.
Peter Keating - Through him, Ayn Rand has dissected the mindset of a man with mediocre talent in his field. Peter Keating gets what he thinks he wants just through his people skills. This is something that Ayn Rand has frowned upon throughout the book. Keating is the typical example of an average man living in this world who is driven by materialistic pleasures. He is depicted as unethical, weak, and cut-throat. He takes up architecture even though his calling lies in the art of painting. He is severely scared of Howard Roark - his perfect anti-thesis. There are a few minor offenses that Keating commits in the course of his career which come very close to something that can be punished under law. He is indirectly responsible for the death of Lucius Heyer - one of the major partners of the architectural firm - "Francon and Heyer". This results in Keating acquiring one half of the ownership of the firm. He then betrays Catherine Helsie - his long time love, to marry Dominique Francon. His motivations for this are two-fold. Firstly, Dominque is the daughter of his partner Francon. Secondly, he had always failed to understand Dominique completely and she had never ever been attracted to him during the period of their pre-marital acquaintance. Keating also betrays Roark during one of the trials. Keating seeks advise from Ellsworth Toohey in all aspects of his career and personal life. This further helps Toohey get a grip over Keating's life and turn him into his puppet. Towards, the end Peter Keating is unable to handle the four other big players in the story - Toohey, Wynand, Roark and Dominique. He breaks down and is reduced to nothing at the end. Of what we know of the end, his marriage to Dominique is broken, Catherine will not take him back and his firm - "Francon and Keating" is
crumbling. Of all the characters in the Fountainhead, Keating seems to be the character closest to reality.
Ellsworth Toohey - Toohey is the "man you should not be". In this, I am in complete agreement with Ayn Rand. Well, this is not explicitly mentioned in the book but somehow there is a feeling you get in the sub-conscious, when you read the book that Toohey is being described in a condescending manner. Toohey is manipulative with an unsurpassed lust for power and his tactics are underhand. Toohey works in the Wynand press, where he acquires many followers. His major goal is to rule the world and he sees the press as a means toward achieving his aim. Towards the end, he unsuccessfully attempts to take over the Wynand press. He is a more intelligent and more dstructive form of Peter Keating, who he calls an amateur. Among his flunkies, he has people with money and power. He believes that once every individual in society is kept in ignorance and made to work for things which are pointless, the society can be controlled. As a young man Toohey was mediocre, both in physical appeareance and in his prowess in any field. He passed out of scholl with no great achievement to his credit. He then became a writer for one of the lesser known magazines in the university. This is where he started gaining popularity through a convoluted philosophy that he preached. And then, we joined the Wynand Press through which he achieved fame. Toohey was once shot at, by Stephen Mallory, a staunch individualist who could see through Toohey's manipulation of society. In court, Toohey asked that Mallory be pardoned. Towards, then end Toohey is fired from Wynand Papers.
Gail Wynand - In many respects, Wynand is very similar to Roark. Roark was a self-made man who came straight out of the bowels of Hell's Kitchen, a dark neighhbourhood in the underbelly of New York City. He is described in the book as a "man who could have been". Wynand Papers, a strong enterprise almost dominating the United States and was created by Wynand from scratch. He owns a penthouse and an art gallery. In the art galley, he eps all the works of art that he admires. He never meets the people whose work he loved. He is also said to have destroyed the careers of many individualistic people that he met during the course of his life. These actions probably have a root in his desire for power. The character of Wynand, yet evokes a respect, mainly because he is highly principled and had built his profession without any help. Gail Wynand was in love with Dominique Francon for whom he hires Roark to build a monument. This is when he comes face to face with Roark, his Nemesis. During the building engagement, both Roark and Wynand develop an affection for each other. Wynand sees Roark as a reflection of his mind. There is some sense of rivalry between the two but Roark emerges as the ultimate winner of a noble rivalry between the two of them. Wynand is also credited with incredeible mental strength, stamina and resistance.
Howard Roark - Ayn Rand might have crossed the line in portraying Howard Roark as "the man to be". Her depiction of Roark, seems to be that of a very strong-willed, uncompromising person blessed with an inhuman strength of character. Roark is an egotist. His motivation is his work. He quits his architecture school as he is not inclined to accept what is taught. He believes that one of man's biggest diseases is his reluctance to think independently. He does not believe in using pre-defined templates of the Renaissance for his buildings. Instead he believes that every small square inch of any building must serve a purpose and have a utility. His drawings have no room for aesthetics. He is a self-made man who many a times finds himself in a state of destitution. Even these hardships do not bring him to compromise on his principles. He is highly individualistic by nature, the extent of which can be deduced by the fact that he does not even hire lawyers to defend his work or his actions pertaining to his profession, even when threatened by a long term in prison. Rand's philosophy is that man is individualistic by nature and hence an ideal man must be not be dependent on anyone else for professional progress. Maybe in Rand's time, this could have been a possibility but in the present world with all its interconnections, the feasibility of this idea is wide open to debate. While interpreting the character of Roark, it is very important to note that his individuality spans only the field of his work. In other aspects of life, he is still dependent on society. He may appear to be a non-emotional person but his emotions are abstact and pure, according to Rand.It is also interesting that Roark is a difficult man to destroy as his motivations are not materialistic. He does not crave money, power or recognition. Gail Wynand and Ellsworth Toohey try to destroy him throughout the course of his life but none is successful. It would be very interesting to see, if possible, what would happen to a planet consisting of only Roarks, each one of them having similar character traits but differing only in their varying abilities in their profession. Would this be a Utopia or would the planet just implode?
On reading the book, many people make the mistake of interpreting Ayn Rand,s philosophy. One of the reasons for this could be that her philosophy is not clearly defined in the book. How feasible her philosophy is in today's world compared to her times is a matter of great debate. There is a lot of literature on the above available on the internet. There is no doubt to the fact that original thinkers are the prime movers of the world but to be stubborn to the extent that Roark is might infact destroy rather than create anything. Roark is also highly intelligent and is stubborn because he has the realization that his work is good. What of the people who do not know that their work is worthless. Interest in a particular subject does not neccessarily imply genius in the field. Infact, one can be average in a subject that one is intersted in. Imagine such a person trying to impose his own thinking. I do not see anything constructive coming out of that. It is a sad fact of life that it is always neccessary to be slightly diplomatic to get where one wants to be. Dont get me wrong here. I am not at all supporting the method of operation of the Keatings of the World. Well, he is the other extreme. Everyone in this world is a mixture of Roarks and Keatings. There are a very few Tooheys and Dominiques.
PS : This review is not stagnant and is subject to change as and when I deem necessary.
The Fountainhead is a must-read. This book was one of those which I had always postponed reading and now that I have read it, I feel that it is something that definitely deserves a review. I cannot say that the characters that Ayn Rand has invented in the book are not larger than life. It is definitely, according to me, a book not to be influenced by unless you have an extraordinary strength of character. I would like to structure the review of the book just as the book is structured - In 4 main parts.
Peter Keating - Through him, Ayn Rand has dissected the mindset of a man with mediocre talent in his field. Peter Keating gets what he thinks he wants just through his people skills. This is something that Ayn Rand has frowned upon throughout the book. Keating is the typical example of an average man living in this world who is driven by materialistic pleasures. He is depicted as unethical, weak, and cut-throat. He takes up architecture even though his calling lies in the art of painting. He is severely scared of Howard Roark - his perfect anti-thesis. There are a few minor offenses that Keating commits in the course of his career which come very close to something that can be punished under law. He is indirectly responsible for the death of Lucius Heyer - one of the major partners of the architectural firm - "Francon and Heyer". This results in Keating acquiring one half of the ownership of the firm. He then betrays Catherine Helsie - his long time love, to marry Dominique Francon. His motivations for this are two-fold. Firstly, Dominque is the daughter of his partner Francon. Secondly, he had always failed to understand Dominique completely and she had never ever been attracted to him during the period of their pre-marital acquaintance. Keating also betrays Roark during one of the trials. Keating seeks advise from Ellsworth Toohey in all aspects of his career and personal life. This further helps Toohey get a grip over Keating's life and turn him into his puppet. Towards, the end Peter Keating is unable to handle the four other big players in the story - Toohey, Wynand, Roark and Dominique. He breaks down and is reduced to nothing at the end. Of what we know of the end, his marriage to Dominique is broken, Catherine will not take him back and his firm - "Francon and Keating" is
crumbling. Of all the characters in the Fountainhead, Keating seems to be the character closest to reality.
Ellsworth Toohey - Toohey is the "man you should not be". In this, I am in complete agreement with Ayn Rand. Well, this is not explicitly mentioned in the book but somehow there is a feeling you get in the sub-conscious, when you read the book that Toohey is being described in a condescending manner. Toohey is manipulative with an unsurpassed lust for power and his tactics are underhand. Toohey works in the Wynand press, where he acquires many followers. His major goal is to rule the world and he sees the press as a means toward achieving his aim. Towards the end, he unsuccessfully attempts to take over the Wynand press. He is a more intelligent and more dstructive form of Peter Keating, who he calls an amateur. Among his flunkies, he has people with money and power. He believes that once every individual in society is kept in ignorance and made to work for things which are pointless, the society can be controlled. As a young man Toohey was mediocre, both in physical appeareance and in his prowess in any field. He passed out of scholl with no great achievement to his credit. He then became a writer for one of the lesser known magazines in the university. This is where he started gaining popularity through a convoluted philosophy that he preached. And then, we joined the Wynand Press through which he achieved fame. Toohey was once shot at, by Stephen Mallory, a staunch individualist who could see through Toohey's manipulation of society. In court, Toohey asked that Mallory be pardoned. Towards, then end Toohey is fired from Wynand Papers.
Gail Wynand - In many respects, Wynand is very similar to Roark. Roark was a self-made man who came straight out of the bowels of Hell's Kitchen, a dark neighhbourhood in the underbelly of New York City. He is described in the book as a "man who could have been". Wynand Papers, a strong enterprise almost dominating the United States and was created by Wynand from scratch. He owns a penthouse and an art gallery. In the art galley, he eps all the works of art that he admires. He never meets the people whose work he loved. He is also said to have destroyed the careers of many individualistic people that he met during the course of his life. These actions probably have a root in his desire for power. The character of Wynand, yet evokes a respect, mainly because he is highly principled and had built his profession without any help. Gail Wynand was in love with Dominique Francon for whom he hires Roark to build a monument. This is when he comes face to face with Roark, his Nemesis. During the building engagement, both Roark and Wynand develop an affection for each other. Wynand sees Roark as a reflection of his mind. There is some sense of rivalry between the two but Roark emerges as the ultimate winner of a noble rivalry between the two of them. Wynand is also credited with incredeible mental strength, stamina and resistance.
Howard Roark - Ayn Rand might have crossed the line in portraying Howard Roark as "the man to be". Her depiction of Roark, seems to be that of a very strong-willed, uncompromising person blessed with an inhuman strength of character. Roark is an egotist. His motivation is his work. He quits his architecture school as he is not inclined to accept what is taught. He believes that one of man's biggest diseases is his reluctance to think independently. He does not believe in using pre-defined templates of the Renaissance for his buildings. Instead he believes that every small square inch of any building must serve a purpose and have a utility. His drawings have no room for aesthetics. He is a self-made man who many a times finds himself in a state of destitution. Even these hardships do not bring him to compromise on his principles. He is highly individualistic by nature, the extent of which can be deduced by the fact that he does not even hire lawyers to defend his work or his actions pertaining to his profession, even when threatened by a long term in prison. Rand's philosophy is that man is individualistic by nature and hence an ideal man must be not be dependent on anyone else for professional progress. Maybe in Rand's time, this could have been a possibility but in the present world with all its interconnections, the feasibility of this idea is wide open to debate. While interpreting the character of Roark, it is very important to note that his individuality spans only the field of his work. In other aspects of life, he is still dependent on society. He may appear to be a non-emotional person but his emotions are abstact and pure, according to Rand.It is also interesting that Roark is a difficult man to destroy as his motivations are not materialistic. He does not crave money, power or recognition. Gail Wynand and Ellsworth Toohey try to destroy him throughout the course of his life but none is successful. It would be very interesting to see, if possible, what would happen to a planet consisting of only Roarks, each one of them having similar character traits but differing only in their varying abilities in their profession. Would this be a Utopia or would the planet just implode?
On reading the book, many people make the mistake of interpreting Ayn Rand,s philosophy. One of the reasons for this could be that her philosophy is not clearly defined in the book. How feasible her philosophy is in today's world compared to her times is a matter of great debate. There is a lot of literature on the above available on the internet. There is no doubt to the fact that original thinkers are the prime movers of the world but to be stubborn to the extent that Roark is might infact destroy rather than create anything. Roark is also highly intelligent and is stubborn because he has the realization that his work is good. What of the people who do not know that their work is worthless. Interest in a particular subject does not neccessarily imply genius in the field. Infact, one can be average in a subject that one is intersted in. Imagine such a person trying to impose his own thinking. I do not see anything constructive coming out of that. It is a sad fact of life that it is always neccessary to be slightly diplomatic to get where one wants to be. Dont get me wrong here. I am not at all supporting the method of operation of the Keatings of the World. Well, he is the other extreme. Everyone in this world is a mixture of Roarks and Keatings. There are a very few Tooheys and Dominiques.
PS : This review is not stagnant and is subject to change as and when I deem necessary.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Demon
O' Bloody Demon,
You are much the same.
Beneath that mask of terror,
There is terror in your own self.
You are much the same,
and will be rocked by the principles
on which your foundation lies,
O' Bloody Demon.
You are much the same.
Beneath that mask of terror,
There is terror in your own self.
You are much the same,
and will be rocked by the principles
on which your foundation lies,
O' Bloody Demon.
Confusion
It starts with a storm cloud in the mind,
and goes beyond it; It funnels down and saps all energy.
It's so restless that it moves directionless,
though for brief moments it does acquire an aim,
but usually - its never in a place, now on the field
and then on the concrete.
It just blows and what is left is destruction.
and goes beyond it; It funnels down and saps all energy.
It's so restless that it moves directionless,
though for brief moments it does acquire an aim,
but usually - its never in a place, now on the field
and then on the concrete.
It just blows and what is left is destruction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)