Ever read Atlas shrugged?

[BigRed]

Now that’s an excellent book. A bit dry as most academic books tend to be. But at least he didn’t fancy himself as a novelist. He knows his lane. I’ve incorporated a lot of Conflict of Visions into my own thinking.

Says jamil in less than ten paragraphs.

 

[mmpsteve]

I've read it 3 times: once as a young man, and every 15 or so years since then. I believe it to be a masterpiece, especially since it was written in the 50s, and foretells nearly everything we are seeing today in this country.

.

 

[jamil]

I've read it 3 times: once as a young man, and every 15 or so years since then. I believe it to be a masterpiece, especially since it was written in the 50s, and foretells nearly everything we are seeing today in this country.

.

How did you get through **** like the example I posted. I mean. I got through it. But it was painful. Masterpiece?

 

[Cameramonkey]

Well I can see this won’t be a popular opinion. Atlas Shrugged is probably one of the worst novels ever written. Rand, as a writer, is WAY overrated. Atlas Shrugged was her attempt to explain Objectivism, and a defense of Capitalism through storytelling. She just really sucks at storytelling. And it’s too bad. There are some redeeming points. Just poorly executed.

I’ll look through my notes that point to some of the worst turns of phrases ever penned, and post them later.

Well arent you just the turd in the punch bowl...

 

[Doug]

... it should be mandatory reading in high school

It should be mandatory that high school graduates be able to read.

 

[BigRed]

It should be mandatory that high school graduates be able to read.

State only neds a few dollars more from your property to make this happen.

 

[bwframe]

I did the audio book about 5 years ago. I’m due for another read of it

Me too.

 

[jamil]

It should be mandatory that high school graduates be able to read.

It should be mandatory that they be allowed to shoot it after reading it. My son had to read it. I tried to talk him into borrowing my kindle version. But he wanted the print. That was last Semester. At least we can shoot it now. Books are kinda fun to shoot.

 

[ancjr]

I'm not a fan of Atheism or amphetamines either.

 

[KG1]

Here’s a gem:

A gray cotton, which was neither quite fog nor clouds, hung in sloppy wads between sky and mountains, making the sky look like an old mattress spilling its stuffing down the sides of the peaks. A crusted snow covered the ground, belonging neither to winter nor to spring. A net of moisture hung in the air, and she felt an icy pinprick on her face once in a while, which was neither a raindrop nor a snowflake. The weather seemed afraid to take a stand and clung noncommittally to some sort of—

JUST GET TO THE ***DAMN POINT!

Damn that's hard to read.

 

[Cavman]

Saw the the movies. Does that count?

 

[AlVine]

I've read it several times, but not recently. Time to fix that. What a great novel. The Fountainhead is even better, IMO.

 

[jake blue]

Rand, as a writer novelist, is WAY overrated. Atlas Shrugged was her attempt to explain Objectivism, and a defense of Capitalism through storytelling. She just really sucks at storytelling. And it’s too bad. There are some redeeming points. Just poorly executed.

I have to agree that as a literary novel it's painful but a lot of crap that gets called great literature isn't much better. The concepts and points though are solid in spite of the author's weaknesses and I think that's what causes people to embrace it, even overlooking the faults in the writing to embrace the bigger picture.

 

[jake blue]

No, but I have read Thomas Sowell's "A Conflict Of Visions"

I am going to check that out.

 

[jamil]

I have to agree that as a literary novel it's painful but a lot of crap that gets called great literature isn't much better. The concepts and points though are solid in spite of the author's weaknesses and I think that's what causes people to embrace it, even overlooking the faults in the writing to gain the bigger picture.

I called Rand a writer because she was indeed a prolific writer, despite her inability to express ideas meaningfully. She wrote a lot of nonfiction as well. But she communicates her ideas in the most complicated ways. It’s easy to make complicated ideas complicated. It’s hard to make complicated ideas easy.

As a contrast, just taking the works of one author. Jordan Peterson is an example of both. Maps of meaning is complicated. It’s a complicated concept presented in a complicated way. He figured it out with his 12 rules series. He presented some fairly complicated concepts in a way that makes it easy to understand what he’s saying.

 

[71silverbullet]

A friend of mine got me interested in the book a couple years ago but I never picked it up. I just went to Amazon to check out the audio book since I'm getting ready to board a plane. 63 HOURS LONG! Nah, It would take 31 flights to get through that.

 

[jamil]

Something I find striking about most people who have strong opinions about this book. Praise and criticism are usually ideologically based instead of objectively based.

You read the praise here and it’s not because it’s a well written book. It’s because people agree with her ideology. Objectively, it’s poorly written with numerous awkward passages like the one I quoted earlier. And the ideology behind it is not subtle. The best works with an agenda behind them leaves the reader to discover those concepts for themselves. Rand just declares them to the reader. There’s almost no discovery.

Similarly I’ve read many criticisms of her book, and the most easily found criticisms are usually ideologically left leaning people who object to her message and say almost nothing about the legitimate criticisms.

In either case, I don’t think it’s that neither noticed the driveling passages, or the overt one sided messaging throughout. Their priorities are either to praise or condemn the messaging.

I think it deserves a more objective review of the book, not an automatic, ideologically derived opinion of it. Good message? Okay. Fine. I’m not a big fan or critic of objectivism, though I’ll just say it’s not all that aligned with human nature. But nevertheless that’s purely subjective. Bad message? Yeah that’s subjective too.

Edit: this post is dedicated to BigRed. It’s been awhile since my last long post.

 

[BE Mike]

1984 is also a good read. I read it in high school and again recently.

 

[jamil]

1984 was well written by a good storyteller.

 

[ancjr]

As a contrast, just taking the works of one author. Jordan Peterson is an example of both. Maps of meaning is complicated. It’s a complicated concept presented in a complicated way. He figured it out with his 12 rules series. He presented some fairly complicated concepts in a way that makes it easy to understand what he’s saying.

I've never read any of his work, but I've listened to many hours of his lectures. Certainly one of the more sane academics of the day.