"Ayn Rand's Revenge" - NYTimes Book Review of new Rand biography
1–10 of 42 posts
Re: "Ayn Rand's Revenge" - NYTimes Book Review of new Rand biography
#2I purchased and attempted to read Atlas Shrugged a couple of years ago. I failed, because rarely have I ever come across a more tedious, sermonizing, simplistic and unconvincing philosophical treatise poorly disguised as a novel.
She could have distilled her viewpoint into a couple of paragraphs (it doesn't seem particularly subtle or complex), but that would probably have made it too easy to argue with her supporters, who can pointedly ask, "well, have you read it?"
No, I have not. I tried and it was terrible.
For great fiction with a healthy dose of philosophy, I'd recommend reading The Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco instead.
Re: "Ayn Rand's Revenge" - NYTimes Book Review of new Rand biography
#3I purchased and attempted to read Atlas Shrugged a couple of years ago. I failed, because rarely have I ever come across a more tedious, sermonizing, simplistic and unconvincing philosophical treatise poorly disguised as a novel. She could have distilled her viewpoint into a couple of paragraphs (it doesn't seem particularly subtle or complex), but that would probably have made it too easy to argue with her supporter…
Your opinions regarding Rand are not a justification to be insulting.
I enjoyed it as a novel, and find significant parts of the philosophy convincing, but I'm not going to fill my comment with insults that apply to you.
What would be better than insults is arguments. You haven't given any argument that someone who likes the book could find convincing. If you don't want to debate that's fine, then don't. But if you choose not to converse in a way that either side could change their mind, then you should at least be nice about it.
Re: "Ayn Rand's Revenge" - NYTimes Book Review of new Rand biography
#4"But Cerf offered Rand an alternative: if she gave up 7 cents per copy in royalties, she could have the extra paper needed to print Galt’s oration. That she agreed is a sign of the great contradiction that haunts her writing and especially her life."
On the contrary, actually. The idea of artistic integrity is a _very_ central point of her preceding novel, The Fountainhead. The book's main protagonist, Howard Roark, is constantly refusing to compromise with his artistic vision.
Re: "Ayn Rand's Revenge" - NYTimes Book Review of new Rand biography
#5"Giving up her royalties to preserve her vision is something that no genuine capitalist, and few popular novelists, would have done. It is the act of an intellectual, of someone who believes that ideas matter more than lucre."
I don't agree that recognizing that money is a means to an end and is not to be put before that end disqualifies you from being a genuine capitalist, or that being a capitalist and an intellectual are mutually exclusive. I also don't agree with the subtle denigration of capitalism slipped in with the synonym "lucre."
Re: "Ayn Rand's Revenge" - NYTimes Book Review of new Rand biography
#6I purchased and attempted to read Atlas Shrugged a couple of years ago. I failed, because rarely have I ever come across a more tedious, sermonizing, simplistic and unconvincing philosophical treatise poorly disguised as a novel. She could have distilled her viewpoint into a couple of paragraphs (it doesn't seem particularly subtle or complex), but that would probably have made it too easy to argue with her supporter…
Your opinions regarding Rand are not a justification to be insulting. I enjoyed it as a novel, and find significant parts of the philosophy convincing, but I'm not going to fill my comment with insults that apply to you. What would be better than insults is arguments. You haven't given any argument that someone who likes the book could find convincing. If you don't want to debate that's fine, then don't. But if you c…
Hardly an insult, really, when the reviews of Atlas Shrugged of its publication period got far deeper into the thesaurus to describe how terrible the writing really is.
Besides, that's his honest reaction to the text. Why throw a fit over somebody else's aversion to the novel?
Re: "Ayn Rand's Revenge" - NYTimes Book Review of new Rand biography
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your opinions regarding Rand are not a justification to be insulting. I enjoyed it as a novel, and find significant parts of the philosophy convincing, but I'm not going to fill my comment with insults that apply to you. What would be better than insults is arguments. You haven't given any argument that someone who likes the book could find convincing. If you don't want to debate that's fine, then don't. But if you c…
Hardly an insult, really, when the reviews of Atlas Shrugged of its publication period got far deeper into the thesaurus to describe how terrible the writing really is. Besides, that's his honest reaction to the text. Why throw a fit over somebody else's aversion to the novel?
Because we're going to become socialists if he doesn't like it!!11!
Re: "Ayn Rand's Revenge" - NYTimes Book Review of new Rand biography
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your opinions regarding Rand are not a justification to be insulting. I enjoyed it as a novel, and find significant parts of the philosophy convincing, but I'm not going to fill my comment with insults that apply to you. What would be better than insults is arguments. You haven't given any argument that someone who likes the book could find convincing. If you don't want to debate that's fine, then don't. But if you c…
Hardly an insult, really, when the reviews of Atlas Shrugged of its publication period got far deeper into the thesaurus to describe how terrible the writing really is. Besides, that's his honest reaction to the text. Why throw a fit over somebody else's aversion to the novel?
Why throw a fit over somebody else's aversion to the novel?
Because it's often assumed that anyone who complains about the writing actually dislikes the politics and is bashing the writing as a disingenuous cover for that; and that anyone who claims to have enjoyed her novels for their own sake is actually promoting the politics and only talking the novels up to serve that end.
In short, debating the quality of Ayn Rand's writing as fiction is a proxy battle for the associated politics, and we all know how enlightening political debates on the internet can be.
Re: "Ayn Rand's Revenge" - NYTimes Book Review of new Rand biography
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your opinions regarding Rand are not a justification to be insulting. I enjoyed it as a novel, and find significant parts of the philosophy convincing, but I'm not going to fill my comment with insults that apply to you. What would be better than insults is arguments. You haven't given any argument that someone who likes the book could find convincing. If you don't want to debate that's fine, then don't. But if you c…
Hardly an insult, really, when the reviews of Atlas Shrugged of its publication period got far deeper into the thesaurus to describe how terrible the writing really is. Besides, that's his honest reaction to the text. Why throw a fit over somebody else's aversion to the novel?
"a more tedious, sermonizing, simplistic and unconvincing ... poorly disguised"
You don't see any insults?
Well I guess you wouldn't: you're the one who considered it appropriate to demean my comment as "a fit".
In any case, your argument about "honest reactions" being good defends my comment just as much as his. Yet you don't seem to be considering our comments equally valid. And I don't either, since it's just not true that all honest reactions make good comments.
Re: "Ayn Rand's Revenge" - NYTimes Book Review of new Rand biography
#10"But Cerf offered Rand an alternative: if she gave up 7 cents per copy in royalties, she could have the extra paper needed to print Galt’s oration. That she agreed is a sign of the great contradiction that haunts her writing and especially her life." On the contrary, actually. The idea of artistic integrity is a _very_ central point of her preceding novel, The Fountainhead. The book's main protagonist, Howard Roark,…
I think it's even simpler than that. She wanted something (more pages) and she paid for it. There's nothing even slightly uncapitalist about resolving a disagreement by paying to get your way. It's the epitome of capitalism.