Atlas Shrugged Movie

[Rosie the Riveter]

These "I read Atlas Shrugged this many times!" claims remind me of the essay "The Sociology of the Ayn Rand Cult" by Murray Rothbard...

One method, as we have seen, was to keep the members in ignorance. Another was to insure that every spoken and written word of the Randian member was not only correct in content but also in form, for any slight nuance or difference in wording could and would be attacked for deviating from the Randian position. Thus, just as the Marxist movements developed jargon and slogans which were clung to for fear of uttering incorrect deviations, the same was true in the Randian movement. In the name of "precision of language," in short, nuance and even synonyms were in effect prohibited.

Another method was to keep the members, as far as possible, in a state of fevered emotion through continual re-readings of Atlas. Shortly after Atlas was published, one high-ranking cult leader chided me for only having read Atlas once. "It?s about time for you to start reading it again," he admonished. "I have already read Atlas thirty-five times."

The rereading of Atlas was also important to the cult because the wooden, posturing, and one-dimensional heroes and heroines were explicitly supposed to serve as role models for every Randian. Just as every Christian is supposed to aim at the imitation of Christ in his own daily life, so every Randian was supposed to aim at the imitation of John Galt (Rand?s hero of heroes in Atlas.) He was always supposed to ask himself in every situation "What would John Galt have done?" When we remind ourselves that Jesus, after all, was an actual historical figure whereas Galt was not, the bizarrerie of this injunction can be readily grasped. (Although from the awed way Randians spoke of John Galt, one often got the impression that, for them, the line between fiction and reality was very thin indeed.)

Then again, I like what I have so far read of Rand's work. I've read Anthem, The Virtue of Selfishness, and and in the middle of We the Living. Does her fiction take a turn for the worse (or, at least for the ridiculous) as time goes on? Or is she just mischarecterized?

I just like her fiction writing for what it is fiction. I simply enjoy the books so I re-read them. I have read all the Harry Potter books a couple of times, too -- to me there isn't much difference. They are all just great stories. I guess once you're a re-reader you'll re-read anything 

[planetaryjim]

Dear Rosie,

I like the Harry Potter books that I've read (one through four).  I'm particularly impressed with the theme of wizards going about armed with their magic wands.  There are quite a few scenes in which not having one's weapon is shown to be a poor choice.

Mind you, I don't know that JK Rowling is a libertarian or supports the individual's right to keep and bear arms.  But, she has written some impressive libertarian themes into her books, and I suspect her philosophy is of a libertarian sort.

Thus far, I've re-read none of them, owing to a mildly eidetic memory and a lack of perceived profundity.  I don't think I've missed anything the first time around.

Regards,

Jim

[Russell Kanning]

I liked Atlas Shrugged. I felt no need to read the speeches.

[burnthebeautiful]

Being both british and a woman puts Rowling at about 1 to 10 million chance of being a libertarian

[planetaryjim]

They are an odd people.  I gather their national anthem is something like "Britons ever ever ever will be slaves."  Or is that their national sea chanty?

However, I have met some very nice English ladies who are libertarian.  One is Sarah Fitz Claridge who is the founder of the Taking Children Seriously educational philosophy.  There are also quite a few libertarian women in the Libertarian Alliance, and in Libertarian International, as well as the International Society for Individual Liberty.  If you actually want to make friends in other countries who are interested in freedom, I would strongly urge you to attend this years ISIL world conference.  It happens to be in Virginia this year.  See also  http://www.isil.org

Though, of course, there is a lot of fun to be had at the expense of women, foreigners, and other groups by simply mocking the probability that they have liberty in their souls.

[planetaryjim]

Another nice bit of Ayn.  Roark's speech from the film "The Fountainhead."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zc7oZ9yWqO4

[coffeeseven]

Another nice bit of Ayn.  Roark's speech from the film "The Fountainhead."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zc7oZ9yWqO4

Brilliant - Karma

I'm posting it to the Ed Brown thread.

[Dreepa]

It happens to be in Virginia this year.  See also  http://www.isil.org

The FSP is looking for someone (or someones) to man a booth at the event.... great way to spread the word.

[Lloyd Danforth]

They are an odd people.  I gather their national anthem is something like "Britons ever ever ever will be slaves."  Or is that their national sea chanty?

However, I have met some very nice English ladies who are libertarian.  One is Sarah Fitz Claridge who is the founder of the Taking Children Seriously educational philosophy.  There are also quite a few libertarian women in the Libertarian Alliance, and in Libertarian International, as well as the International Society for Individual Liberty.  If you actually want to make friends in other countries who are interested in freedom, I would strongly urge you to attend this years ISIL world conference.  It happens to be in Virginia this year.  See also  http://www.isil.org

Though, of course, there is a lot of fun to be had at the expense of women, foreigners, and other groups by simply mocking the probability that they have liberty in their souls.

Say hi to Jarret Wollstein for me.  He bought me dinner once.  I have never been able to figure out why he took SIL international when the Liberty movement wasn't getting much traction here.

[d_goddard]

She came off as an asshole, in my opinion.

She was an asshole, in my opinion.

News flash -- you do not have to like people to work with them or to share the same goals.
News flash -- some people that oppose you in every goal you have, can be great people to have a beer with.

Anyway, Ayn Rand was also not a very good novelist -- her prose reads like a sculpture made with a chainsaw. Not exactly elegant or nuanced.

That said, she was also fucking brilliant, a genius for perceiving the reality of how humans ought properly to deal with one another, and had an amazing ability to understand how business executives really do behave in real life (I swear, I meet people like Dagny, Hank, and yes, like Jim, on a daily basis in my corporate life) and she was very good at developing a gripping plot. She just needed a good editor -- which she'd never allow.

I treasure her legacy and value the gift she gave the world.

[Sweet Mercury]

Dear Sweet Mercury,

I'm very fond of Murray Rothbard's writings.  Lew Rockwell has done yeoman's work in making these available online at the vonMises.org and LewRockwell.com sites. 

<snip>

Thanks for the detailed answer, I appreciate it. I'll be better able to critique her writing after I've read a bit more. I'm almost done with We the Living and I have so far enjoyed it immensely. I don't think the characters come across as "wooden" as her writing is so often described—they change throughout the book as the circumstances beat down on them.

Then again, maybe I just have shitty taste in fiction? I'm not very good at "deconstructing" fiction; my focus of study is math and philosophy, which is what I would consider myself qualified to analyze on any real academci level. But fiction? I loved HArry Potter and Eragon as much as I love Hugo, Dostoevsky, and Chekov. It really just boils down to my preference, and I enjoyed reading her first two works of fiction.

[Sweet Mercury]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRDgIXn2IWs

Be sure and watch all 5 segments so you can see where she strips an audience member of her right to free speech because it does not match her own beliefs.

I'm calling shenanigans on this post. I watched all five segments (as well as the Mike Wallace interview)—I was impressed with the way she acted, for the most part. Had she been any less sure of herself, I would have had to believe her a hypocrite.

How did she "strip the audience member of her right to free speech?" At all? Did I miss the part where she did a flying scissor kick across the room and initiated force to prevent the woman from speaking? Ms. Rand exercised her rights and refused to engage the woman in conversation. At worst, she came across as a cantankerous old biddy, but to equate that with the "stripping of another's rights" is patently absurd.

That said, I don't think that such a strategy is an effective way to deal with people, specifically in that setting. I'll go with J.S. Mill on this one, that the most effective way to truth and advancement is through the free exchange of ideas.

[Lloyd Danforth]

The 'setting' was part of the problem.  At the time, the Phil Donahue show was the equivalent of today's Oprah show, not a lot of geniuses in the audience, studio, or, at home.  Explaining a complex philosophy in less than an hour under those circumstances with a skeptical host had to be difficult.

[KBCraig]

The 'setting' was part of the problem.  At the time, the Phil Donahue show was the equivalent of today's Oprah show, not a lot of geniuses in the audience, studio, or, at home.  Explaining a complex philosophy in less than an hour under those circumstances with a skeptical host had to be difficult.

And an arrogant, controlling, condescending host, at that.

[Atlas]

And an arrogant, controlling, condescending host, at that.

Essentially a prick