I haven't been here in a while, and it seems a book club was founded. I look forward to this, as I love reading and talking about books.
I've read The Fountainhead before around 5 years ago when I actually got into this reading habit. None of my family were readers, and this, Paradise Lost, and Mein Kampf were the only books around the house. I don't even know why these books were even in my house, although I suppose they must have come into the family through a kind of residual purchase from a yard sale. It was a very odd beginning as a reader. I think it was Paradise Lost alone that kept me from quitting my decision to pick up reading (And I don't need to tell you about how good that book is).
I had just suffered through some tough times due to some external difficulties (putting it lightly), so the tale of a man going against the grain and succeeding against all odds should have really resonated with me, but I remember it making me feel even worse. To put my problems with the book succintly, it seemed unconvincing.
I read the entire book in two days. I actually don't remember most of the novel, aside from a few scenes that stuck to my mind for whatever reason. I guess spoilers if you haven't read it yet.
I remember Dominique being the most interesting character, only because she showcased, I thought at least, Rand's ideas of love. She was with a guy, Roark "raped" her (Both apparently wanted it, and we are just told that they both knew without, um, letting each other know), and now she was with Roark because he was more a manly individualist than the other guy, and the other guy accepted this and let her go to Roark without a fight. It just seemed so alien to me. She somehow made love to be a very mechanical and cold affair. I felt sorry for everyone involved in the love affair, even though I had no real reason to feel sorry for them.
Meanwhile I remember that large speech at the courtcase and when I saw what happened afterwards, I was thinking to myself: "Man, I wish I could blow up a building and then be acquited on all charges by making a speech with a beautiful babe by my side and a reputation that's good enough to still get jobs".
At that moment I was forcefully pushed out of the world of the book and had to admit none of this would ever happen in real life. That's what I mean by the book being unconvincing. It's a fairytale wolf in the sheep's skin of realism (per se). It has the semblance of being plausible enough for people to believe in, since there's no fantastical elements, but is full of falser things and people than even the most extraordinary of fantasies. I saw the story of a guy going against the tides of the days and living happily ever after while I was thrust into the whirlpools of the world and was treated with a torrent of ridicule, exclusion, failure, and a bit of humility.
I probably need to reread The Fountainhead one of these days, but I figure before I even get to that, I should read her other works. I think it would have been better if Roark actually did go to jail for his principles, being a kind of Martyr, although I suppose that wouldn't have worked out for what Rand.
I like the book, but I don't like it as a novel, but rather as philosophy, if that makes sense. Her character developments and personalities are very limited, and their behaviors are predictable. So as a novel, I think its a quite a big failure. However, I agree with her philosophy. I read/heard that Howard was based on Frank Loyd Wright. The first building Howard designed is in essence The Fallingwater. However Howard's philosophy on architecture to me is more based on Mies. In anycase I think without people like Howard, human civilization wouldn't advance. I also admire people whose passion exceeds above everything else in life.
I've read many comments that Howard is just a jerk and selfish and arrogant, his ideals are too idealistic. I think he is all of that, but then again what great leader/inventer/designer isn't all of that.
I think you're actually pretty correct. I have a problem with Rand and the book because, while selfish, arrogant jerks often do provide valuable advancements to society, Rand openly holds those who dare to give a damn about anyone or anything other than themselves in contempt: they're the scourge of society; they're dangerous; they spread their mediocrity like a disease. Her relentless demonization of benevolence makes me sick.
Also, the novel sucks. It's a thousand pages of Rand transparently ranting through totally unbelievable, unrelatable, contrived characters.
In some ways, I agree. The Unbearable Lightness of Being has come up a few times on hubski in the discussion of books and The Fountainhead reminds me of it for the reasons that you've mentioned, except instead of the concepts of "Lightness" vs. "Weight" we've got Rand's version of the modernist ideal as represented by Roark and her thoughts on what makes people weak, represented by almost all the other characters.
If we take a look at the archetype you've mentioned, Steve Jobs comes to mind, at least for me. In broad strokes, Jobs seems less sympathetic to me, but I realize that that's unfair as Roark is a character (caricature?) and Jobs was an actual human being. Either way, there are certain parallels that can be drawn between the two. It's interesting to me that Roark is so widely derided, both within the text and in the real world, while Jobs is celebrated by millions, even though many people who have worked under him have commented on his ill-treatment of them.
I also think that it's interesting that Mallory is the character that Roark shows the most kindness to, even if for him, picking Mallory back up has less to do with Mallory as a person than what Mallory can create. In the end, I think that what stood out to me was that Rand chose architecture as the medium through which her characters expressed Rand's ideas of the ideal. Buildings are essentially statues, inhabited by ordinary people, the kind which Rand somewhat justifiably (in my mind) shits on throughout the book. It's as if Rand wishes radical change to come from immovable and immutable objects, as if the river of human society should somehow flow around the monoliths of art and modernist ideals.
To me, this is a problem. It seems like Rand is almost saying that art should be separate from humanity, which of course involves messy relationships and certainly the loss of integrity. This seems as wrong as thinking that humanity is separate from nature. Art, like nature is balanced dynamically, not statically and to paint art and humanity into these odd corners seems . . . funny. Then again, the book was written in a time and a place when and where Modernism was new and people hadn't had time to see how those grand ideas play out.
I think architecture is more than just art, and what Roark is after is more than just the form. He also emphasizes on he can make his buildings with more efficient use of space, which is why I think it is appropriate that Rand uses architecture as an medium to express her ideals. In other words, I think what I am trying to emphasize is that Roark's ideals will in fact advance and impact human civilization because his ideals are more than just self-expression. Architecture in Roark's case is the making of space, spaces that can radically change people's way of living. The building he burned down was a model of low-income housing, which would impact the fundamentals of human society and economics. Comfortable office buildings can increase productivity, sustainable buildings can decrease energy consumption. Buildings in fact impact human lives more than people realize.
Steve Jobs came to my mind as well. Maybe Roark is more widely derided because the book/readers focus a lot on his character while people focus more on Steve Jobs' achievements?
Somehow I totally missed this.
However I had just read this review on a sort of biography by one of her followers. Not knowing too much about Rand, it's pretty fascinating.
Anyways, I think I'd like to re-suggest that the book club focus on short stories so that people actually read them.
Father I have a confession: I'm only on page 237...not from lack on interest, on no. It very well be my new favorite book. Life's had it's way of keeping me too occupied lately.
I read it! I'm on the shores of Lake Charlevoix right now, but I'd be glad to participate when I can.
Get the conversation started, I'll join in. I know that SufficientGrace, minimum_wage, KenyanSocialist61, ButterflyEffect, and StJohn were going to read it.
If you are looking for a way to dip your toe in to conversation, I think a great place to start would be:
Ayn Rand: Propogandist garbage or... actually a compelling novel?..... or both?
Is my question a bit biased? Well, you may be shocked by my answer. What did you guys think? mk, I know that you've read this.
False. I did not sign up to read this one. Just went and checked the original post about this book. I'm still working my way through East of Eden, which is an incredible read. But that's for another time.
Ah, Sorry ButterflyEffect, my bad. You really didn't miss out on much. However, like the bible this book has such a tremendous impact on modern american politics that it might as well be read from an anthropologic standpoint.
Enjoy East of Eden.
Hmm. I'll have to read the discussion on this book and add it to my list of books to read, which is always expanding.
Lake Charlevoix looks beautiful. Hope you're having a great vacation!
Just a photo I found online. It's not Autumn here :)
Right right, I understand. Yeah I've moved, that took a while.
humanodon, any chance you would be interested in spearheading the #hubskibookclub? There has to be a better way, don't you think?
First of all, welcome. If you are interested in following the bookclub, in the upper right-hand corner of this page there should be a link to "follow Hubskibookclub." If you're interested in the bookclub, you may want to check out the #shortstory, #writebetterdammit, #books, and #writing tags. That said, following people on Hubski is just as important, perhaps more important than following topics. Following people allows for serendipity to introduce you to articles and information you may otherwise have missed. Therefore, I suggest checking out the badges link at the top of the page for some of the most appreciated content and then following the users that posted them.
There are a number of differences on Hubski, and it can take some getting used to. If you have any additional questions, feel free to ask them, I am happy to help. Again, welcome.
Like humanodon said, Hubski itself isn't very large. We have around 10k users and far less of those are active. It makes for an intimate exchange, one in which you actually get to know the people here and have many conversations with the same individuals. That said, if you know of others that would be a good fit for our community, then you ought to invite them to come by. We'd love to meet all of you.
Good luck with that subreddit, it sounds like a cool service to provide to people. If you have any questions about how to navigate hubski etc, like I said, feel free to reach out.