Scan barcode
insecam's review against another edition
funny
slow-paced
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
1.5
a decade long passion project starting as a (somewhat) competent piece of fiction in the first third, only for Rand's brain to be turned into mush somewhere along the way. she begins to use the lead female protagonist as a self-insert for herself, and has to justify her anarcho-capitalist worldview with literal magic by the end lol. it's really really really funny, so i have to give it some credit!
katephobic's review against another edition
4.0
Reading this hunk of 1200 page word soup was probably in my top 5 biggest undertakings ever. But I did it and I am here to tell the story. This is the only book I have ever read where I can agree wholeheartedly with both the 5 star and 1 star reviews. Atlas Shrugged was interesting in the way that it unapologetically separates the rich from the poor, and is built on the premise that if you are rich in brainpower, it will manifest itself into the physical world.
Everybody in Ayn Rand’s dream world utilizes their brains for hobbies and menial jobs, but only does this in a way that will benefit themselves. They are all the most unapologetic egoists. It’s honestly a little refreshing in a literary sense. I have always been a big complainer, but I feel like I read this book at the perfect time- it makes complainers look so incredibly stupid. The central theme is that people need to get up off their asses and actually do something with their lives before it’s too late and you die (or the bridge to New York collapses). There are so many scenes where some lowly worker is having a conversation with one of the big executive main characters, spitting everywhere and making no sense, while the executive character shuts them down in a few simple words or commands. It kind of reminded me of conversations with my dad, who loves this book, and I can see why. Rand does not stand for bs. She stands for self love, hard work, and fulfillment, whether you are a fisher, farmer, or top executive. In fact, in her dream world, all of the top execs have other jobs that they love just as much and don’t complain about.
The philosophical aspect of this book is interesting as well because Rand does not believe in doing anything for the greater good of mankind. In Galt’s incredibly long speech, he talks about how there is no point in helping others because everyone should just do what they like to do, and then we don’t have to worry about others. It sounds good in theory but what world is universally content? Rand clearly believes in laissez faire government, which makes sense in my head, but it’s hard when I look around at my country and the poor roaming the streets. What is this from? Is it from capitalism? Prison? What about disabled people? Or people that come from war (like her family did)? There are none in her world. You’re just either smart or dumb, that’s that. It’s a juvenile (possibly sociopathic) way of thinking. But definitely an interesting one.
Much to my surprise I loved the characters. I did think that they had emotion, they just didn’t show it as straightforwardly as most people in the real world do. Dagny became jealous when Hank would show up places with his wife. Hank was jealous when he found out Francisco had slept with Dagny. The only wholly unrealistic dude was John Galt, but to me he was symbolic of something more that Dagny desired. She did not go off with Hank or Francisco because she was looking for something that would let her be a powerful yet submissive woman, something she felt like she couldn’t do in the real world. I saw this as commentary on how women can never win, even if this was unintentional by Rand. There was some talk about gender in the book- people were surprised with Dagny’s ability to be “anti womanly” and run a railroad. Maybe she had to go through exhaustive efforts to demonstrate how committed she was to her job, so committed that other men that read this book could misconstrue her as being cold or unfeeling. I understood her completely. Even down to her weird rape fantasies- it was a way of channeling everything she felt about herself that was womanly into a few minutes of intense (and uncomfortable) sexual escapades.
Yes this book is wordy. Probably (definitely) TOO wordy. But I found it cathartic and feel that it definitely broadened my horizons. It definitely doesn’t mean you have to agree with everything the book contains- if I knew somebody like Rand in person I would stay away for sure. But I can see the literary merit to this novel and some strong takeaways that will definitely stick with me.
Everybody in Ayn Rand’s dream world utilizes their brains for hobbies and menial jobs, but only does this in a way that will benefit themselves. They are all the most unapologetic egoists. It’s honestly a little refreshing in a literary sense. I have always been a big complainer, but I feel like I read this book at the perfect time- it makes complainers look so incredibly stupid. The central theme is that people need to get up off their asses and actually do something with their lives before it’s too late and you die (or the bridge to New York collapses). There are so many scenes where some lowly worker is having a conversation with one of the big executive main characters, spitting everywhere and making no sense, while the executive character shuts them down in a few simple words or commands. It kind of reminded me of conversations with my dad, who loves this book, and I can see why. Rand does not stand for bs. She stands for self love, hard work, and fulfillment, whether you are a fisher, farmer, or top executive. In fact, in her dream world, all of the top execs have other jobs that they love just as much and don’t complain about.
The philosophical aspect of this book is interesting as well because Rand does not believe in doing anything for the greater good of mankind. In Galt’s incredibly long speech, he talks about how there is no point in helping others because everyone should just do what they like to do, and then we don’t have to worry about others. It sounds good in theory but what world is universally content? Rand clearly believes in laissez faire government, which makes sense in my head, but it’s hard when I look around at my country and the poor roaming the streets. What is this from? Is it from capitalism? Prison? What about disabled people? Or people that come from war (like her family did)? There are none in her world. You’re just either smart or dumb, that’s that. It’s a juvenile (possibly sociopathic) way of thinking. But definitely an interesting one.
Much to my surprise I loved the characters. I did think that they had emotion, they just didn’t show it as straightforwardly as most people in the real world do. Dagny became jealous when Hank would show up places with his wife. Hank was jealous when he found out Francisco had slept with Dagny. The only wholly unrealistic dude was John Galt, but to me he was symbolic of something more that Dagny desired. She did not go off with Hank or Francisco because she was looking for something that would let her be a powerful yet submissive woman, something she felt like she couldn’t do in the real world. I saw this as commentary on how women can never win, even if this was unintentional by Rand. There was some talk about gender in the book- people were surprised with Dagny’s ability to be “anti womanly” and run a railroad. Maybe she had to go through exhaustive efforts to demonstrate how committed she was to her job, so committed that other men that read this book could misconstrue her as being cold or unfeeling. I understood her completely. Even down to her weird rape fantasies- it was a way of channeling everything she felt about herself that was womanly into a few minutes of intense (and uncomfortable) sexual escapades.
Yes this book is wordy. Probably (definitely) TOO wordy. But I found it cathartic and feel that it definitely broadened my horizons. It definitely doesn’t mean you have to agree with everything the book contains- if I knew somebody like Rand in person I would stay away for sure. But I can see the literary merit to this novel and some strong takeaways that will definitely stick with me.
alyxandrathegr8's review
1.0
The longer I think about this book the more annoyed I am with it. Revising my original rating.
peacegirlconnectsworld's review
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.25
Somehow people seem to misunderstand the purpose and messaging of this book, despite the fact that it’s massive and every description, conversation, and monologue is steeped in its ideology.
This is not a book that would sell well today. Its philosophy is against most of the common modern values. While I don’t agree with many aspects of what Rand believes, I think her point overall is more applicable now than in her time. It’s refreshing to read a different perspective.
I can see why this is one of the most beloved novels in America. The plot is fascinating and thrilling with twists and turns and significantly more sex than I was anticipating—but it isn’t about the plot. The plot of this novel is a backdrop by which Rand expresses her personal philosophy, usually through long monologues.
This book is not for the faint of heart. It is long. Even when you enjoy it, as I did, you can feel it dragging on. Her points are expressed and expressed again in a way that feels monotonous at times. This novel would be much better if it lost about 300 pages.
That being said, it’s great! It’s exciting and dark and it has twists and a happy ending. There’s a reason it’s so beloved. If you’re up for it, I would highly recommend it.
This is not a book that would sell well today. Its philosophy is against most of the common modern values. While I don’t agree with many aspects of what Rand believes, I think her point overall is more applicable now than in her time. It’s refreshing to read a different perspective.
I can see why this is one of the most beloved novels in America. The plot is fascinating and thrilling with twists and turns and significantly more sex than I was anticipating—but it isn’t about the plot. The plot of this novel is a backdrop by which Rand expresses her personal philosophy, usually through long monologues.
This book is not for the faint of heart. It is long. Even when you enjoy it, as I did, you can feel it dragging on. Her points are expressed and expressed again in a way that feels monotonous at times. This novel would be much better if it lost about 300 pages.
That being said, it’s great! It’s exciting and dark and it has twists and a happy ending. There’s a reason it’s so beloved. If you’re up for it, I would highly recommend it.
dalefu's review
5.0
Ayn Rand writes her novels like propaganda, and this is both their greatest strength and most blatant weakness. When I first read this book as a teenager, it had the desired effect of propaganda, and for a year or two I was a devout "Randian".
In those years I had many discussions with people on Rand's views. One pattern I noticed is the type of people that tend to be drawn to her views are the types of people who get things done. The types of people who don't come up with excuses; even when something isn't fair, and the odds are stacked against them, they don't spend their time complaining about it. They simply see a problem that needs a solution. For them, morality is a personal statement, and not a mutual agreement. These are qualities I still admire today.
Maturity and experience, however, tempered my commitment to her views on morality; I began to see the world wasn't quite so black and white. Emotion, while not always logical, is a fundamental part of human existence, and one that cannot be ignored. Sometimes practicality wins out over idealism. Compromise is not always a sign of weakness, but a sign of strength.
However, one lesson that stuck with me from my time as an Objectivist was that I will not apologize for my success, or how I achieve it. I dictate the terms of my morality, and have no need for validation from someone who uses their criticisms of success as a simultaneous excuse for their lack-there-of.
Still, sometimes it can be fun to temporarily buy in to the propaganda. Sort of like watching a good revenge-movie: the morality is questionable, but we suspend our advocacy in favor of the guilty pleasure. And once it's over, we return to the real world, knowing those rules, alluring in their simplicity, just don't work in the complexities of every-day reality.
Despite Rand's heavy-handed espousal of her Objectivist philosophy, behind her propaganda is an expertly crafted mystery. This book generates a lot of hatred for it over the controversial, and often overly simplistic views on morality. If you have the mental fortitude to withstand the pages upon pages of being hit over the head with her views, their is a very intriguing novel here as well.
I give this book 5 stars for the addictive plot, and controversial views, even if those views weren't, in the end, ones I entirely stuck with.
In those years I had many discussions with people on Rand's views. One pattern I noticed is the type of people that tend to be drawn to her views are the types of people who get things done. The types of people who don't come up with excuses; even when something isn't fair, and the odds are stacked against them, they don't spend their time complaining about it. They simply see a problem that needs a solution. For them, morality is a personal statement, and not a mutual agreement. These are qualities I still admire today.
Maturity and experience, however, tempered my commitment to her views on morality; I began to see the world wasn't quite so black and white. Emotion, while not always logical, is a fundamental part of human existence, and one that cannot be ignored. Sometimes practicality wins out over idealism. Compromise is not always a sign of weakness, but a sign of strength.
However, one lesson that stuck with me from my time as an Objectivist was that I will not apologize for my success, or how I achieve it. I dictate the terms of my morality, and have no need for validation from someone who uses their criticisms of success as a simultaneous excuse for their lack-there-of.
Still, sometimes it can be fun to temporarily buy in to the propaganda. Sort of like watching a good revenge-movie: the morality is questionable, but we suspend our advocacy in favor of the guilty pleasure. And once it's over, we return to the real world, knowing those rules, alluring in their simplicity, just don't work in the complexities of every-day reality.
Despite Rand's heavy-handed espousal of her Objectivist philosophy, behind her propaganda is an expertly crafted mystery. This book generates a lot of hatred for it over the controversial, and often overly simplistic views on morality. If you have the mental fortitude to withstand the pages upon pages of being hit over the head with her views, their is a very intriguing novel here as well.
I give this book 5 stars for the addictive plot, and controversial views, even if those views weren't, in the end, ones I entirely stuck with.
robivy's review against another edition
5.0
One of the most satisfying and insightful books I have ever read, and eerily reminiscent of current day left-wing propaganda.
vtranreads's review
2.0
It took me forever to read this thing becuase I kept putting it down. It was pretty tough to get through the 3 hour radio broadcast, that was only a summary of what Rand is trying to get across through the entire book. I mean isn't 900 pages already enough to get a point across without the need to repeat it all again only in different words?
And I understand that she was using it to teach her philosophy, but it bothered me that the books characters were pretty two dimentional. One last thing that bothered me was the fact that Dagny killed that man in the end. Sure he was confused and didn't have time to assess the situation and make up his mind, but did he really deserve to be murdered? I mean after all that talk about not forcing your way with the point of a gun. I just thought that it wasn't right that he was the only guard that they killed.
But overall I didn't hate this book. It just wasn't as appealing to me. It did have some thought provoking arguments that helped me understand Objectivism much more, and I don't fault her for following her own philosophy. Of course, I think that there are many holes to be found.
And I understand that she was using it to teach her philosophy, but it bothered me that the books characters were pretty two dimentional. One last thing that bothered me was the fact that Dagny killed that man in the end. Sure he was confused and didn't have time to assess the situation and make up his mind, but did he really deserve to be murdered? I mean after all that talk about not forcing your way with the point of a gun. I just thought that it wasn't right that he was the only guard that they killed.
But overall I didn't hate this book. It just wasn't as appealing to me. It did have some thought provoking arguments that helped me understand Objectivism much more, and I don't fault her for following her own philosophy. Of course, I think that there are many holes to be found.
jeremie's review
challenging
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
0.5
novelestic's review
2.0
While I do value the philosophical ideas presented in this book, I find it challenging to overlook it's extended speeches, one-dimensional characters, and didactic tone, which ultimately impacted my appreciation for the work.