WatchmenComicMovie.com Forum

I'd like to address this, if I may.

Though it's true that most of the book's protagonists are mostly wealthy CEOs, that isn't universally true. Perhaps the best example is John Galt (Rand's vision of the ideal man, remember), who works as a menial laborer and doesn't have any corporate holdings. Another good example is Quentin Daniels, a young engineering prodigy who's taken right out of college and eventually becomes Galt's protege.

It's also worth remembering that for every Dagny Taggart in the book, there's a Jim Taggart. For every Hank Rearden, there's an Orren Boyle. For every John Galt, there's a "Head of State" Mr. Thompson. It's strange how everyone talks about the corporate heads that are portrayed as saints in this book, without ever mentioning those who are depicted as pond scum.

The difference is that the protagonists of the book are responsible for creating things. They innovate. They take risks. They don't deal in political favors and they hire people solely on merit.

Compare that with the villains of the piece, who can only beat the heroes by dragging them down to their level. These are people who've grown so fat and lazy on the status quo that they'll defend it to the death, even if it means killing whatever brilliant new improvement that comes along. Though if they can take the profit and the credit for that improvement instead, so much the better.

Say what you will about the book, but I don't think anyone here would argue that there's way too much of the latter in the world today and not nearly enough of the former.

_________________
This is truly a madhouse. And I'm the lunatic running it. I've spent three years wondering if I should be proud or ashamed.

Good point, Curi. I should elaborate.

Atlas Shrugged paints a good picture of the 1%, The lesser numbers of creative individuals pitched against the greedy ass-hats.

Unfortunately in the real world we don't have a Fortress of Solitude-style retreat full o' geniuses planning a brave new world after the U.S. defaults on its deficit at the end of 2011 and fuses with the tumbling Euro-economy (see what i did there?), taking us all down into a new dark age along with 'em.

Or... do we?

_________________
...evidently chicken-town.

If we don't, then we're thoroughly fucked.

_________________
This is truly a madhouse. And I'm the lunatic running it. I've spent three years wondering if I should be proud or ashamed.

They also bribe people (Dagny), take credit for the work of others (Rearden), despise the very idea of unions (Galt), discriminate the working class (Dagny again), commit unethical medical practices (the doctor at Galt's Gulch) and commit acts of terrorism (Danneskjold).



The problem lies in thinking that both are different nowadays.

When in reality the modern capitalist is nowhere near the description made by objectivists.

_________________

Do tell.

_________________
This is truly a madhouse. And I'm the lunatic running it. I've spent three years wondering if I should be proud or ashamed.

As in "of course" or "please elaborate" ?

_________________

Do you need other synonyms? Because I'm sure I can think of a few more.

EDIT: Pardon, I misread your post at first. Let me be more clear: "I'm hoping to start an intelligent conversation on the matter, so please do continue your argument."

_________________
This is truly a madhouse. And I'm the lunatic running it. I've spent three years wondering if I should be proud or ashamed.

Good thing I saw the EDIT, otherwise I might've been even more confused

What I meant to say is that seeing a Capitalist, the way Rand does, is like seeing a police officer and arguing to everyone that all policemen are paragons of virtue and justice.

Her view is completely obsolete right now, it only applies to a sector of the population who is both creative and financially succesful, what about a great artist who hasn't made it big ? What about a computer programmer who doesn't get paid as much as the CEO or CFO of the company he works for ? What about comic book writers and artists ? None of the latter receives a cut of the pie as big as the publishers or editors, and they are the creative force behind the success of the company.

Whatever we may think of Karl Marx and socialism, he kicked Rand's ass on something, the capitalist, is a person that benefits from the exchange of products and capital, a capitalist does not have to be the maker of a product, nor the creative force behind it, he just has to know how and who to sell it to.

_________________

Is the shadowy guy lurking outside of Dagny's new office john Galt?

_________________
@RealSlimCAvery

I don't remember any "shadowy guy" lurking outside her office !

_________________

It's in part 1 she's in her office and looks outside and just sees a shadow of a guy with a widebrim hat darting away into the night, I know it's going to be significant and I just assume it has to be Galt. It's right after she forms the John Galt line

_________________
@RealSlimCAvery

Give you a hint, Dr. Brooklyn: Of all the things Ayn Rand is known for, subtlety ain't one of them.

_________________
This is truly a madhouse. And I'm the lunatic running it. I've spent three years wondering if I should be proud or ashamed.

Alright, thanks for clearing that up

_________________
@RealSlimCAvery

In retrospect, I can't help but see the book less as an exposition of principles and concepts and more of an inward look into the mind of someone very much a part of the times, locale , and trends of the moment.

I think Atlas Shrugged is the one of the greatest works of outa-control Freudian slippage the literary world has ever seen. You could cap the book with a prologue where Ayn Rand slips and bangs her head whilst having (consensually) rough sex, and an epilogue where she comes to... 'It was a dream!' (and possibly keeps right on bangin'), and the whole instantly-dated, of-it's-period piece would become a post-modern masterwork.

_________________
...evidently chicken-town.

I would say............quite exactly the opposite.

_________________

Yeah, I haven't finished reading it... but... I totally agree with Feliciano here

_________________
@RealSlimCAvery

Well, there's more n' one way to read a book I guess. if you don't see every novel as at least a glimpse through the mind of the author into how they fit with the mores and sexualised society of the time (especially in such an uptight bodice-ripper as Atlas Raped.. I mean, Shrugged), then i think you might be missing a certain part of the subtext.

_________________
...evidently chicken-town.

You have to point me somewhere, give me some specific examples.

Otherwise, I think we'll keep agreeing that Ayn Rand is as vocal as a jackhammer on a public library.

_________________

It's often been pointed out how similar Rand and her hubby are/were to the central characters of Shrugged. While she was writing a 'cartoon' (in the academic sense of the word) of modern times, she was also holding a mirror up to her personal life. Intentionally or not?.. well there's a master's thesis to be written on that 'un.

_________________
...evidently chicken-town.

I just saw the first train on the John Galt Line off, and I was kind of curious what people who are "anti-objectivist" thought about this scene, it stirred a bit of excitement up in me (despite knowing it was going to go off without a hitch.

_________________
@RealSlimCAvery