I'm on chapter 14 of this book. It seems heavy-handed but

>>8335674
Pro tip: Don't mention Ayn Rand on /lit/

>>8335674
I think Rand is generally a terrible author and I will never understand how she got published.

File: 1465171911136.jpg (105KB, 500x540px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 500x540px

It's trash.

When you get to the meandering monologues that last three pages, you'll be wondering why in the hell you thought the characters represented anything accurately.

Turn back now, OP. Don't waste your time on this piece of shit book.

>>8335700

Why?

>>8335700
If something is good enough to make money, it's good enough to publish.

Do you think publishers are commies or something and don't care about money?

>>8335704

That's fair. There seems to be a few pretty redundant passages already

Those characters don't represent shit OP. The only thing those ubermensch and strawman represent is Rand's banal little philosophy. There is no person or type of person on this Earth who resemble those mouthpieces.

>>8335760

Don't you see the people who are just sort of shells, not concerned with their own internal lives but only with the external in order to make some image for themselves?
I think those people are definitely out there and I think their reactions to Roark who is concerned only with his self and its desires are really pretty accurate

People who are concerned only with image instead of substance

Her main characters aren't meant to represent real people, just her ideals or their anti-thesis, all in relation to her philosophy. iirc there is an afterward in The Fountainhead that explains how Roark and Toohey are in opposite sides of the spectrum, and Wynand and Keating are somewhere inbetween.

>>8335674
you almost could've read the bible for the word count

>>8335674
I read it when I was much younger, before I knew anything about Rand. I was interested in architecture.

After getting 3/4 of the way through it, I got tired of her hitting me over the head with ROARK WILL NEVER COMPROMISE. yeah, I get it. I got it the first ten examples. If the writing had been better, I might have stuck it out. But it sucked, so I dropped it.

File: p01k2znj.jpg (46KB, 1200x675px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 1200x675px

>>8335674
>>8335674
I have to say this is the one Rand book that I actually really like. I like that the villains are aesthetic villains, not capital ones, and that Elsworth Thooey or whatever his name was has this great anti-Horatio Alger-aesthetic system he lives for. It's almost kind of funny in a way. "Mwahaha, I will see the destruction of individual aesthetic identity, and the great neo-classical aesthetic principals will be safe for all time."


The characters are all shades or degrees in a gradient or radius where her philosophical ideal of the heroic individual enlightenment era genius who triumphs by virtue of his reason when interacting with the material world rests at one end, the John Galt, and the man who activly understands the nature of the John Galt and seeks to suppress this in the name of the necessity of "true equality"! They are obviously paper thin parodies of actual people and only exist to serve as embodiments of her philosophy.

>>8335704
wtf I hate income now