Atlas Shrugged Movie update

[freakazoid]

There was quite a rash of interest in the book, a year or so ago. May not be that many loose copies about these days. The used-book dealer from whom I purchased my copy told me it was getting hard to find.

There was quite a few copies when I bought mine about 4 months back at borders, or Barnes and Nobles

[AJ Dual]

Q: What do you get when you have a person who follows 80-90% of Objectivisim?

A: A pretty hard-core right/libertarian.

Q: What do you get when you have a person who follows 100% of Objectivisim?

A: An ahole.

[lee n. field]

Just checked to see if it's available on either the Kindle or Nook.  It is, but at twice the price of the paperback.

I don't get it.  Why would any publisher do this?  It's the 3rd book in a row where they wanted just as much for the digital copy as they did either the paperback, or, in the case of "The Gun" the actual hard cover edition.

Amazon, the Ayn Rand Boxed Set (AS and FH together) looks like the best deal. "21 new from $10.88 7 used from $10.50 " 

Otherwise, plain old top-of-the-search Atlas Shrugged, "52 new from $8.19 67 used from $7.03".  A little worse availability that "Late Grate Planet Earth", but not bad.

[lee n. field]

I did not, and I'm not so sure it is. I prefer not to research works of fiction before reading them, so all I knew about was the anti-socialist angle. I knew she was an "Objectivist," but I didn't have much idea what she meant by that.

I know John Piper was enamored of it for a bit, decades back.

I'm not sure if AS qualifies as anti-Christian. Galt/Rand are definitely attacking some kind of religion(s), but it doesn't seem to be Christianity. 

Those on the outside have an odd view of it.

[Perd Hapley]

Those on the outside have an odd view of it.

Sadly, a lot of Christians don't know any better, either.

[MicroBalrog]

Well...

Christianity requires at least the belief Christ is God, and that human beings are inherently sinful, and that salvation is only through Christ, right?

Also, Christianity is an altruist doctrine.

Ayn Rand preached atheism and railed against the doctrine of original sin  as well as against altruism. This seems to be inherently anti-Christian.

[Perd Hapley]

Sure, I guess. I'm just saying that the "mysticism" she goes on about in the Galt speech bears little resemblance to Christian doctrines. She would do a better job of refuting religion if she understood it more clearly. Instead, she spends a lot of time beating a straw man.

[TommyGunn]

Whatever her good points, Ayn Rand was, unfortunatly, that type of athiest who thought people who believed in God were less than intellectually well equiped.
Ron Paul actually managed to point that out on a Fox News Show Britt Hume is doing on the Conservative Movement.

[Perd Hapley]

I just now realized that I read The Speech on the date of The Speech.

"November 22nd! Don't forget to listen to Mr. Thompson on November 22nd!"

[drewtam]

Well...

Christianity requires at least the belief Christ is God, and that human beings are inherently sinful, and that salvation is only through Christ, right?

Also, Christianity is an altruist doctrine.

Ayn Rand preached atheism and railed against the doctrine of original sin  as well as against altruism. This seems to be inherently anti-Christian.

Not all are convinced that the Old or New Testaments teach "original sin", as taught by Catholics and Calvin. My conclusion is that the Biblical evidence does not support this teaching. Instead, I see it clearly taught that (all) individuals choose sin.

Although the end situation is the same, the doctrinal path to sin does make a difference in strange and unexpected ways. For example, look up "immaculate conception"; a doctrine used in Catholic teaching to deal with "original sin" being passed to Jesus.

Bringing this diversion back to the main topic... Rand never seems to deal consistently with the idea of forgiveness. At one moment, Dagny is helping with full strength to perpetuate an immoral system. Yet, she deserves forgiveness and inclusion into the "Galt club" because she earned it? There are internal inconsistencies with this philosophy.

From a Christian perspective, I don't want justice given to me... according to The Law, justice means that I ought to be put to death. Which is where mercy plays an important role. Rand commits the philosophical failure she condemns most harshly, she wants to have her cake and eat it too. She wants mercy to play a role, while nobody is given anything they don't deserve.


Finally, "altruism" is a slippery concept. When I spank my child, is it not being altruistic? I take the loss of hurt feelings and drama, so that she might receive modified behavior.
Is it altruistic to give money to an addict? Clearly not.

So from my perspective, free markets easily fit into altruism. It is the best situation for everyone else. A controlled economy with "me" on top is the most selfish design. A design where I get to vote myself everyone else's money seems pretty selfish too.

[Perd Hapley]

OK. All done.

Spoiler Alert! ------------ Spoiler Alert! ------------ Spoiler Alert! ------------

I really liked the novel for the first few hundred pages (1084-page paperback). The political/economic points were great, as well as the depiction of academic pseudo-intellectualism. Once it became rather obvious that John Galt would turn out to be the Third Student, the Motor-Maker, the Destroyer, Eddie Willers' Father-Confessor; Rand seemed to be stalling and dragging things on. I might have liked it better if I hadn't already known that Galt & Co. were "on strike." That's why I prefer to know as little as possible about a novel before I read it. The whole Tower of Babel Galt's Gulch episode is kind of boring, if you're expecting it. Once we do meet Galt, we predictably recapitulate the thing where all the true heroes of the industrial age are just desperate to get into Dagny's pants.

Downhill from there, Dagny's little radio address was hilurrious, and I liked the way Rearden ended up, and the way his boys dealt with the (attempted) hostile take-over of the steel mill. The Thompson character was one of the better parts of the novel, I think. He was a good contrast to the others in the looter government, and the way he tried to co-opt Galt was the sort of thing I would expect from a govt. like that. The daring rescue at the end was a little underwhelming.   

Overall, I'm left wishing that Rand's political and economic perceptions were not tainted with the dross that makes her (to me) less credible. The chilling disregard for familial obligations, the weird existentialist obsession her characters seem to have with other people's bodies, the ill-informed rants against religion, etc. And it's one thing to say that people deserve the fruits of their labor; quite another to denounce altruism and exalt selfishness.

And just for kicks; this is going to be our Dagny Taggart.

[BridgeRunner]

Overall, I'm left wishing that Rand's political and economic perceptions were not tainted with the dross that makes her (to me) less credible. The chilling disregard for familial obligations, the weird existentialist obsession her characters seem to have with other people's bodies, the ill-informed rants against religion, etc. And it's one thing to say that people deserve the fruits of their labor; quite another to denounce altruism and exalt selfishness.

Yep, yep, and yep.  For someone who has rejected ambivalence, in Atlas Shrugged she embraces the imposition of the Hegelian dialetic onto American history in a way eerily parallel to communist ideas of revolution as they played them out in Russia.

Also, see sig.  I can't figure out how the mark of an evil society is that they it save someone's life just because she really, really wants it to, and yet the mark of another evil society is that it demands that others save the lives of other people from time to time.  This is rational if one accepts that life is complicated, that there aren't many hard-and-fast lines, especially when it comes to imposing concepts of good and evil on very complex and multi-faceted issues.  If one does not accept the shades of gray in the world, then it just confuses me. 

[MicroBalrog]

The mark of an evil society - per Rand - is not that it didn't save the character's life in that one. It's that instead of paying for the things that would have saved his life, the protagonist had to resort to begging for it - not because she failed somehow at life, but because ALL wealth was allocated by favor.

Which was exactly how War Communism really worked.

[BridgeRunner]

The mark of an evil society - per Rand - is not that it didn't save the character's life in that one. It's that instead of paying for the things that would have saved his life, the protagonist had to resort to begging for it - not because she failed somehow at life, but because ALL wealth was allocated by favor.

Which was exactly how War Communism really worked.

Of course.  But my point isn't so much about what she had to do but about what he didn't do at all.  It's also about the degree to which it is possible or necessary to live within the political or social structure in which one finds oneself. 

Moreover, she attempt to earn it.  She couldn't earn enough.  In light the arguments frequently put forth by self-proclaimed Libertarians or Objectivists that some people just need to die if they can't afford health care, it's hard not to recall her attempt to sell the only commodity she owned.  She learned the market was such that she could not earn enough to save his his life.  Sorry.  Tough luck.  He needs to die. 

Oh sure, the state had manipulated her into the position of having only one commodity to sell, but what about he diabetic orphan in Galt's Gulch? 

[MicroBalrog]

Oh sure, the state had manipulated her into the position of having only one commodity to sell, but what about he diabetic orphan in Galt's Gulch? 

That's sort of the point of the whole novel. Which is far better than AShrugged.

[BridgeRunner]

That's sort of the point of the whole novel. Which is far better than AShrugged.

Of course.  But what about the diabetic orphan in Galt's Gulch?

[MicroBalrog]

Of course.  But what about the diabetic orphan in Galt's Gulch?

The problem is, that's not how Rand rolls.

In Rand's universe - and again, I don't approve of her views, I'm just describing them - there's a massive chasm between dying just because nobody likes you and wants to GIVE you things and dying because the government (or private person) intervened and TOOK a thing from you or stopped someone who was willing to give it to you.

[BridgeRunner]

The problem is, that's not how Rand rolls.

Of course not, because she existed in a fantasy land that is impossible, and were it possible it would be utterly, irredeemably evil.  But she sold it not only as a reality but as the only reality.  And a lot of people have been caught up in the rhetoric of the brave and true and forgotten that they might only be a week or a month away from being the diabetic orphan in Galt's Gulch. 

In Rand's universe - and again, I don't approve of her views, I'm just describing them - there's a massive chasm between dying just because nobody likes you and wants to GIVE you things and dying because the government (or private person) intervened and TOOK a thing from you or stopped someone who was willing to give it to you.

Of course, and I'm attacking you at all, I'm attacking her.  But dead is dead, and maggots don't care if they've feasting because the government intervened or because individuals didn't intervene. 

I almost said "failed to intervene" but in Galt's Gulch, not intervening wouldn't be a failure, now would it? 

[MicroBalrog]

I'm neither here nor there.

I don't think altruism is evil.

But I don't think a person fails morally if they're not an altruist.

[BridgeRunner]

I'm neither here nor there.

I don't think altruism is evil.

But I don't think a person fails morally if they're not an altruist.

Ok.

But Ayn Rand did think that altruism is evil, and that a person fails morally if they are an altruist.

[MicroBalrog]

This is the problem with Ayn Rand.

Ayn Rand was not, you understand, a qualified philosopher - by which I mean, she lacked the rigor of those individuals who study philosophy professionally.  She came up with an understaning of how statism worked, and created what SHE thought was an antithesis to that. She believe religion - and especially Christianity - had an enslaving aspect to it, because she opposed the idea of original sin and altruism.

But what she did create was a cultish religion all of her own.

This little play here is a worthy revelation of how crazy it really got.

[Perd Hapley]

What about he diabetic orphan in Galt's Gulch? 

Did I miss something in the book, or is that a hypothetical?

[Ned Hamford]

This is the problem with Ayn Rand.
But what she did create was a cultish religion all of her own.
This little play here is a worthy revelation of how crazy it really got.

Right on the money.  Randians are creepy.  One thing to appreciate the book, another to buy into the notion Ayn Rand can tell you what your favorite color should be... all in the name of rugged individualism. 

http://xkcd.com/610/

[gunsmith]

Can't be.  With  Starship Troopers they took an extremely readable book with interesting ideas and turned it into a piece of crap onscreen.  Atlas Shrugged has some interesting ideas, but it's a horribly written piece of tripe.  Clumsy wording, stilted dialogue, impenetrable paragraph structure.  I've tried unsuccesfully to read it 3 times over the years, and I'm a big reader who doesn't give up easily.

This^ I tried and tried, just couldn't. I sure hope the movie is good. However, I loved "Anthem" read it during the "Yes We Can" campaign freaking eerie!

[Perd Hapley]

But what she did create was a cultish religion all of her own.

This little play here is a worthy revelation of how crazy it really got.

I can't believe I read the whole thing. I don't know enough about Rand et al to judge the accuracy of the depiction, but it would not be surprising. It occurred to me that Galt's morality really was just as exacting and judgmental as that of any religion.