Atlas Shrugged

by Ayn Rand

Paperback, 1985

Status

Available

Call number

813.52

Collection

Publication

Signet (1985), Mass Market Paperback, 1084 pagea

Description

This is the story of a man who said that he would stop the motor of the world, and did. Is he a destroyer or a liberator? Why does he have to fight his battle not against his enemys but against those who need him most? Why does he fight his hardest battle against the woman he loves? You will learn the answers to these questions when you discover the reason behind the baffling events that play havoc with the lives of the amazing men and women in this remarkable book. Tremendous in scope, breathtaking in its suspense, "Atlas shrugged" is Ayn Rand's magnum opus, which launched an ideology and a movement. With the publication of this work in 1957, Rand gained an instant following and became a phenomenon. "Atlas shrugged" emerged as a premier moral apologia for Capitalism, a defense that had an electrifying effect on millions of readers (and now listeners) who have never heard Capitalism defended in other than technical terms.… (more)

Media reviews

Newsweek
"Despite laborious monologues, the reader will stay with this strange world, borne along by its story and eloquent flow of ideas."
8 more
"to warn contemporary America against abandoning its factories, neglecting technological progress and abolishing the profit motive seems a little like admonishing water against running uphill."
"inspired" and "monumental" but "(t)o the Christian, everyone is redeemable. But Ayn Rand’s ethical hardness may repel those who most need her message: that charity should be voluntary…. She should not have tried to rewrite the Sermon on the Mount."
Atlas Shrugged represents a watershed in the history of world literature.
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/213298/big-sister-watching-you-whittaker-chambers "We struggle to be just. For we cannot help feeling at least a sympathetic pain before the sheer labor, discipline, and patient craftsmanship that went to making this mountain of words. But the
Show More
words keep shouting us down. In the end that tone dominates. But it should be its own antidote, warning us that anything it shouts is best taken with the usual reservations with which we might sip a patent medicine. Some may like the flavor. In any case, the brew is probably without lasting ill effects. But it is not a cure for anything. Nor would we, ordinarily, place much confidence in the diagnosis of a doctor who supposes that the Hippocratic Oath is a kind of curse." "remarkably silly" and "can be called a novel only by devaluing the term" ... "From almost any page of Atlas Shrugged, a voice can be heard, from painful necessity, commanding: 'To the gas chambers — go!'"
Show Less
[Rand] deserves credit at least for imagination; unfortunately, it is tied to ludicrous naiveté. There could have been something exhilarating about the capitalists' revolt—except for the fact that what Rand presents is not so much capitalism as its hideous caricature. In fact, if her intention
Show More
were to destroy faith in capitalism, she could not have written a book better suited to the purpose.
Show Less
Perhaps most of us have moments when we feel that it might be a good idea if the whole human race, except for the few nice people we know, were wiped out; but one wonders about a person who sustains such a mood through the writing of 1,168 pages and some fourteen years of work.
Saturday Review
"dazzling virtuosity"

"shot through with hatred"
Challenging and readable, and quick with suspense... It's a book every businessman should hug to his breast, and the first novel I recall to glorify the dollar mark and the virtue in profit.

User reviews

LibraryThing member tomcatMurr
Unquestionably the greatest achievement in human history. Greater than the invention of the wheel, greater than the invention of credit, and the discovery of pi and penicillin, the Reformation, the invention of agriculture and the harnessing of electricity, greater than the greatest invention of
Show More
all time: the washing machine (or the adult diaper, I can’t quite decide on that one). Orginally entitled Atlas Farted, Ayn was persuaded by her publisher to change the name to Atlas Shrugged. I used it to practice my speed reading on, you know, that technique where you only read the first word of every line and then guess the rest? So cool to learn that the technique was invented by Walter Bosenbonkers at MIT in the mid 1950s at around the same time Ayn was working on her magnum. It was a really good book to practice on, coz Ayn has no long words or difficult ideas, so it’s easy to practice speed reading on. Ayn’s great genius is that she can take the thoughts of your average 5 year old who resents the fact that her candy has been stolen by the playground bully but can’t do anything about it coz she’s like you know, too little and weak, and give them the weight and heft of Tolstoy or Nietzsche! (don’t drop the book on your foot, by the way, it bloody hurts.)

A hymn to unfettered human intelligence (coz you know how fettered human intelligence is, at least, I know mine is LOL) Atlas Shrugged includes such gems as:

Learn to value yourself, which means: to fight for your happiness. Wow, eh? WOW

And this:

Pride is the recognition of the fact that you are your own highest value and, like all of man’s values, it has to be earned.

All right, that one is a bit difficult. I had to think about it for a whole day before I understood it, the complexity of the language so perfectly echoes the complexity of the thought. I reckon this puts her in the company of other such great philosophers as Dale Carnegie, Warren Buffett, my mate Bill down the pub, and Lord Ron Hubbard.

Oh, and this,

The Argument from Intimidation is a confession of intellectual impotence.

I know I know, I cheated a bit, that one isn’t from Atlas Shrugged, but from The Virtue of Selfishness. It summarises Ayn’s entire philosophy and method of arguing it – in one sentence!!! The Ancient Greeks had a word for that, I think, something like, acronym, aphorism, arsewipe, epitaph, epigram, telegram, or something, those Greek words are kind of confusing, aren’t they? LOL

Also, there's some really great soft porn in the middle. I dropped the book several times during that section coz it's kind of hard to hold with just one hand.

Anyway, I just want to say that I’m really grateful to Ayn Rand for having made life on this planet better for all of us, and for having enriched us all with her brilliant ideas (especially her publisher LOL).

And I’m also grateful to her publisher for managing to persuade Ayn to change the name, as I don’t think the book would have sold so many copies if it had been called Atlas Farted (I think Ayn was perhaps misinformed about the meaning of ‘fart’ - she was Russian remember, and very stubborn: did you know that she hated homosexuals and wrote about them that they are so loathsome a sense of life that an accurate commentary would require the kind of language I do not like to see in print. Me too, I don’t like to see that kind of language in print either. )

p.s: the book is really big, so it’s really handy for propping open doors and jacking up cars. Galt would have approved: so useful neh!

Read this book. You will never be quite the same again.
Show Less
LibraryThing member absurdeist
When I consider the glory of the Seven Wonders of the World, and ponder how "impossible" the architectural feats of ancient peoples who labored so intensively and scientifically (consider those who built nearly 1,000 years ago, the astronomical buildings of New Mexico's, Chaco Canyon - a veritable
Show More
gargantuan, ancient sundial, in its vast complex of structures - which kept track of the seasons and days of the year as precisely as Big Ben, or a Timex), and did so, obviously, truly amazing, without the benefits of modern technologies ....

When I contemplate the innovative, miraculous advances made in medicine over the past couple centuries, and the tens of millions of lives that have either been saved as a result of those advances, or whose quality-of-life has been dramatically improved because of the discoveries of compassionate women and men ....

When I consider the unparalled invention of the computer, the internet, even LibraryThing ....

When I consider Galileo, Einstein, and the invention of the wheel ....

That is, when I consider all these people and their visionary, singular accomplishments throughout World History, as magnificent and humane and life-affirming as they are, they still don't compare - no, they pale by comparison - to what is so obviously (and incontrovertibly), the Single Greatest Achievement in Human History: Atlas Shrugged, by Ayn Rand.

Atlas Shrugged is about a thinly disguised, pompous, unpretty, and compassion-less Bee-otch (pardon the oh-so-egregious "ad hominems" - shame on me!), named Ayn Rand (who should've known better, considering the pompous, unpretty, and compassion-less totalitarian regime she hailed from), played by a stick-figure named Dagny Taggart, who decides, like she's Almighty Yahweh, that she's going to rule the World someday via The Railroads; and who, unfortunately, and rather awkwardly, stylistically speaking (such wooden prose) also engages in some of the worst written sex ever penned; sex so poorly written it made even Norman Mailer cringe (and Tom Pynchon cringes to this day!)

In a nutshell, John Galt can kiss my tuckus.
Show Less
LibraryThing member HaughtyKnotty
I first read this novel after seeing it discussed on the Colbert Report, and have come to the conclusion that this frequently misunderstood novel is one of the greatest works of literature ever written, likely on par with the Bible and anything ever written by Shakespeare.

The entire book is, in
Show More
reality, a parody, which casts a megalomaniacal and shodowy zealot named John Galt as a hero to a wide range of dysfunctional and privileged misfits who declare themselves to be the truly productive people in society. Rand shows Galt playing on the fears of weak individuals living in a flawed but majoritarian world, and using every flaw as a way to build toward his utlimate dictatorship of the self-righteous and egomaniacal. She crafts the real world with all of the technology and industry of the middle twentieth century, but expands on the small fears of everyday life and magnifies them so they make individuals skittish and paranoid and eager to embrace any alternative. She purposefully overstates each small action of the government to feed the underlying paranoia of her readers.

Rand does some amazing things throughout. First, she writes in a way that leads many readers to actually believe in Galt, and the book has spawned an enormous following among those whose moderate acuity prevents them from understanding the real gist of her work. They become part of the parody. Second, she carefully takes this well-thought out and truly ingenious scheme and crafts it as if she is at best a mediocre writer, so one does not understand the true brilliance behind it until further review. Yes, beneath that simplistic prose and those stock characters and cartoonish plots is really a profound statement about how easily conned people are by a facile utopian. In the end, the careful reader will discern in Galt nothing less than the Lamb who opens the Seventh Seal.

One cannot cease admiring Rand. Indeed, she herself should be lauded as a vritual demigod, and worshipped by her readers. I am proud to have stood on her shoulders.
Show Less
LibraryThing member nohablo
Absolutely rank. Not so much written as screamed, and with all the subtlety of an air-raid siren. Doesn't even make the slightest attempt at believability, empathy, or, really, readability. Because, seriously, I suppose ATLAS SHRUGGED is technically composed of words arranged in a grammatical
Show More
syntax, but by god. It's so clunky and utterly tone-deaf that it can barely be called English. May be one of the worst books I have ever read. Wow.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Anjreana
What a load of twaddle - I've never read such a badly written book, and I'm shocked that so many people consider this a literary classic. Interesting ideas if you like propaganda.
LibraryThing member therainking
Doubtful I'll waste much time 'reviewing' many books on here other than giving my Ebert thumbs up or down. But I feel compelled to make this one of my only comments, if only because this tripe has somehow found popularity again.Simply put, Fountainhead and Atlas present a completely unworkable and
Show More
utterly childish philosophy, and worse yet, do so in the context of annoyingly awful writing. Because it is abundantly clear Rand's 1000 pages were not spent on quality storytelling or inspired prose, I'm thoroughly convinced the absurd length of the books is a result of Rand's inability to convince herself of her own argument. It's like she began writing with the intent on proving a point and, after realizing she'd never get there convincingly, figured sheer length would give the books some sort of credibility regardless of their content. That her so-called philosophy is now the mantra of the neocon douche is extremely fitting and indicative of the books' intellectual value. Actually, the only value of reading them, much like the Bible, is to discredit those who rely on them for their worldview.
Show Less
LibraryThing member bitterfierce
The heart of this story is a classic good-versus-evil epic, but unfortunately it's hindered by the fact that Rand wrote Atlas Shrugged purely as a vehicle for her philosophy of objectivism—and it hits the reader like a freight express.

Rand's prose is as striking as ever, but she uses it to
Show More
describe cartoonishly flat people. The third-person, subjective viewpoint flits back and forth between characters, but while the heroes are portrayed with the uncompromising individuality Rand espoused, every other player in the story is so blandly caricatured within and without that the reader can only wait for their inevitable demise, not with tense anticipation, but with bored impatience—Yes, I get it, now hurry up already. Such simplicity of motive would be fitting for a children's comic strip; in a novel of over 1,100 pages, it is tiresome.

Many elements of the plot are as compelling as any suspense novel, but it is rare to make it through more than a few chapters without crashing into yet another pages-long soliloquy on the evils of the collective—something which could be, and is, much more handily demonstrated through the plot. These speeches—the longest lurches through a jarring 60 pages, and summarizes the theme clear into the grave—cannot help but be interpreted by the reader in the most smugly condescending tone imaginable—not because of the nature of the characters, but because of the assumption on the author's part that the reader wouldn't be able to work out the point on their own.

In spite of its frustrations, Atlas Shrugged is rewarding, and even enjoyable, if interpreted as a fable on individualism. If the reader is unfamiliar with the author's background, and ignores the period in which the book was written, it is too easy to read it as a blueprint for a sort of hyperbolic capitalist dreamland—or to heed the many facile and dishonest critiques of the work.

Perhaps this is its greatest failing: Atlas Shrugged requires too much distillation in order to reveal its truth. Fables are supposed to be truth, distilled. The labor involved in pruning the excess from the story filters too much joy out of the reading.

For a more satisfying read on the very same theme, The Fountainhead, Rand's "overture to Atlas Shrugged," may in fact be as good as it got.
Show Less
LibraryThing member kswolff
Pfffft ... this is just silly. The book about the animals on the farm where some animals are more equal than other animals was far better written and mercifully shorter than this mess. Who is John Galt? And why won't he shut up already?
LibraryThing member Pummzie
I went to NY to visit a friend and she handed me this book. I hadn't heard anything about it previously and had no idea what to expect.

Although the rant thinly disguised as a novel is so binary in nature that it is rendered totally unconvincing, I must say that it deserves two stars because:
a)
Show More
rand's thesis was intriguing enough to keep me reading to the end (although by the end, I was skimming most of the soap box speeches);
b) whether or not you agree with rand's rampant capitalist leanings, it does give you pause for thought and you will emerge with a strong opinion on her theories. Indeed, I did also emerge a little changed by it (but probably not in the way that she would have liked); and
c) it does not get more stars because, at base, the writing is dire.

I don't want my time back but it is a strain to call this good fiction or a decent philosophy (although I now know she has many supporters who would vehemently disagree).
Show Less
LibraryThing member sirfurboy
This novel hardly needs a review to encourage someone to buy it, when you consider one point alone: It is over 50 years old and people still read it and enjoy it. It is a classic and nothing I can say can detract from that.

But it is also a product of its time, espousing a philosophy that is only
Show More
internally consistent if one makes rather more assumptions than the author admits to. The characters all speak with Ayn Rand’s voice, in a manner that might be familiar to readers of Galileo perhaps, but not so much with readers of a good modern novel. The characters feel unreal. The whole setting is preposterously unreal, and here is a novel that would have been better set in an alternate universe of a science fiction writer, in the manner - say - of Philip Dick’s “The Man in the High Castle”. Perhaps that was her intent in fact, but she gives us no anchor into the world she is describing and the action of the novel dances across an empty stage.

For anyone seeking rich characterizations, realistic interactions, or a sense of place in the narrative, you will be disappointed in this novel. The novel is merely the platform for Rand’s polemic, and jumps from unbelievable to the preposterous without apology.

This being said, it was still a jolly good read. The conflict in the novel is engrossing and draws you in quickly. The first time someone defeats a “looter government”, you want to applaud. When Dagny (the protaganist) completes a railway line against all the odds you can feel her exhilieration - even if you wonder how she managed it! The concept of the plot is refreshingly original, and readers will want to finish the novel.

Given its length though, finishing can be tricky - especially where it comes to a 90 page speech espousing Rand’s epistemology. Some aspects of the plot were also tiring, and one wonders whether the book could have achieved its purpose whilst being edited a little. Ok, the 90 page speech was probably why she wrote the book - but perhaps Rand forgets the maxim here: “show don’t tell”

Ultimately though, the book’s philosophy suffers for being the product of an age that does not exist any longer. Marxism is a target of Rand’s polemic, but also social programmes that have clearly worked and brought tremendous benefit to the world (including the US), such as the Marshal plan. At the same time, she defends a world of producer industrialists that largely no longer exist now, and rather misses the point that invention in our modern world is hardly the preserve of big business (even if only businesses have the resources to patent their inventions). I could say more on this, but this is a review - not a critique, so I will stop!

All in all I enjoyed this book, I thought about it, I disagree with a good deal of it and a very fundamental level, but I do not regret it. Neither will you.
Show Less
LibraryThing member tvmorgan
Boring. Didn't like it at all.
LibraryThing member AshRyan
I just re-read Atlas Shrugged, which gets better each time, and can say with certainty that it is the greatest achievement in history, in part because it provides the fullest identification of what makes all the others possible. It is a hymn to unfettered human intelligence.

It is also the most
Show More
spiritually rich work of literature I have ever read. A lot of people are turning to it now because of its prescience, but its description of political control and economic collapse are not what's most important (Rand herself, far from aiming at being a prophetess, regarded as one of the novel's strengths the fact that it wasn't even particularly realistic but rather her most fully Romantic work). In an interview with the author of one of the recent biographies of Ayn Rand, Jon Stewart winkingly referred to her novels being filled with lots of "dirty, dirty sex." Those are, in fact, the best scenes. Francisco and Dagny learning together about the wonderful pleasure their bodies can give them the summer after she begins her first job on the railroad as night operator of the Rockdale station; her affair with Rearden beginning at Ellis Wyatt's house after their first run on the John Galt line; and, of course, the encounter in the underground tunnels of the Taggart terminal...it simply doesn't get any better than that. Sure, Rand was prescient---because she identified clearly what certain principles would mean in practice, principles which are now being implemented. But she was much more concerned with what might be and ought to be.
Show Less
LibraryThing member melydia
It's a shame that an opinion about this book is taken as a political statement, because the story's actually really good. In a nutshell: the government decides that competition is unfair and starts regulating trade and production. In response, the producers disappear one by one, abandoning (or
Show More
destroying) their mines, factories, and mills. Chaos ensues. Our protagonist is Dagny Taggart, head of Taggart Transcontinental Railroad. Objectivist women are evidently hard to find; she had so many admirers I almost wanted to rename the book "Everybody Loves Dagny." But that's neither here nor there (though the sex scenes were a touch disturbing); it is she who struggles to keep her railroad running as increasing government regulation and a decreasing population of competent people bar the way. At times I was reminded of Animal Farm, which is no surprise considering Rand grew up in Bolshevik Russia. What starts with good intentions rapidly devolves into a miasma of bribes, favors, and threats. My favorite character was Francisco d'Anconia, CEO of d'Anconia Copper and childhood friend of Dagny. I just love his snarkiness. Everything he does seems calculated to piss off the looters (so the enemies of individuality are called) while remaining impeccably polite. As an aside, I also found it telling that so many of the looters had ridiculous names, such as Tinky or Chick.I found this story fascinating from an intellectual and philosophical viewpoint. A lot of people seem to treat capitalism as a given (or as the enemy); I've never read such a detailed defense of it. And while I do not purport to completely understand Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism, these are the nuggets I gleaned from this story:* Logic and facts are paramount.* You are entitled to nothing and must earn everything. Needing something - anything - does not entitle you to it. Even food and shelter.* Government involvement in private enterprise screws everything up.* The worst thing is to live a life without purpose.* Every man working in his own self interest ultimately produces the most good for all.I'm not going to go into my own personal philosophy here, but these views definitely made for some interesting reading. Certainly better than The Fountainhead. (Howard Roark struck me as petty.) Once again, this is a book that made me think, and that is always high praise coming from me.I listened to this on audiobook, which I think was the only way I would have gotten through it. Not only is the book incredibly long, the characters spend a lot of time making speeches, most notably John Galt's famous three-hour speech near the end. (Yes, you do learn the answer to "who is John Galt?" in the third section.) These speeches are unquestionably an integral part of the book, both the plot and the philosophical ideals, but they can get a little tiring. On audio they come across much more naturally.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Canadian_Down_Under
I tried to read "Atlas Shrugged" about a year ago. I must admit I knew nothing about the book (where have I been?) but had heard it was a classic and one of those darned books you should read before you die.

So I took it out of the library, all 1200 pages of it and started in. I finished about 100
Show More
pages of it before I was ranting to my husband that the theme of this book seemed to be the virtue of selfishness. I decided life was too short and my blood pressure was definitely at risk if I continued, so back to the library it went.

I think Dorothy Parker might have been thinking of just this kind of book when she famously said, "This is not a novel to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force."
Show Less
LibraryThing member JessMowry
One of the top three worst books I ever read in my life
LibraryThing member pausanias
I first read this book in 1970, at the age of 14. I didn't get the philosophy, but read it for the story, which I thought was awesome. It was the age of reading books that were all about the world falling apart, either through war, or ideologies like Communism. In the 39 years since then, I have
Show More
read this book at every 2-3 years - and a few times twice a year. (Hence it's tattered state) Each time I have taken something else away from it.

I don't agree with all of Rands philosophy - many times my christian friends have asked me how I could think this book was so great because she was obviously not a believer. But I believe that you should take from what you read the things that will help you grow and be a stronger person, and this book certainly did that for me. this book, and reading it every few years, saved my life.

A lot of people look at this book and see the big picture of industrialists vs everyone else. but it is really not that. Because it is a very moral book, and it teaches a morality that is fast disappearing from our society. As I have grown older, I have seen a strong work ethic disappear, to be replaced by a society of people who think the world owes them something. I have never believed that. I have had members of my family steal from me, and then defend what they did by reasoning that I should not mind, if I really was a christian and really lived by all I said I believed, then I should be willing to work for the benefit of my family so they could just live off of me - without thanks, even to the point of draining me so badly that I lost my business. After the 9 - 10th read, I finally got it, just like Hank Reardon did. that there are people who will hold you to your moral values, without having any of their own - and will bleed you to death and expect you to be willing to let them do it. My brother is a lot like Phillip Reardon. It took me a long time to figure out what he was doing, and how he was doing it. the subtle words he would use to turn my parents against me - (She has a business, if she cared about me, if she believed all that stuff they teach at her church, she would hire me. I need a job, I need to be respected...) sound familiar? that pressure from my family led to two years of embezzlement, which destroyed my business. did I press charges? I wanted to, but my parents talked me out of it - how could you want to do that? he is your BROTHER! but I should have. It would have saved all the people he later ripped off a lot of grief. I should have learned the lesson from Rand sooner.

I have had bosses that harvested the products of my mind - my work, my effort, and then put it out as their own, and received the rewards, the pay that my work gave them, without a thank you, without an acknowledgment, without reward. When that happens, year after year, you die a little. No matter how self-sacrificing a person you are, there comes a day when enough is enough. Atlas Shrugged taught me that. In my current job, I have a button I made on the wall behind my computer, with the dollar sign as the only symbol on it. It is not there as a symbol that I worship money. it is there as a reminder that the product of my mind is mine alone. when my new boss saw it, he knew what it meant. He asked me if I would go on strike (a strike of the mind) against him. I told him not as long as he acknowledged my ideas as mine. and he has for the last 7 years.

Reading this book has taught me so much. it is one of those books that can change your life. I have on my bookshelf by my bed just a few books - the Bible, Thoreau's Walden, Several of Elizabeth Goudges novels, and Atlas Shrugged. I dip into these books to remind myself who I choose to be, and to gain strength.

to me this book is not about socialism vs capitalism, rich vs poor, or those who produce vs those who don't. it is a book about morals, and it can change your life. If you read it early enough in life. If you wait too long, you will be tainted by the philosophy and morality of the looters. And you would have to read the book to understand what that means.
Show Less
LibraryThing member sonyau
I read this book--for fun!--in the midst of taking three other English lit courses. I read every soap opera-ish philosophical dreg, including the ridiculous adoration passages of all Dagny's aquiline-nosed, blue-eyed lovers. Oy. I can't tell you how much I hated the writing, the characters, the
Show More
plot, and the underlying thesis, that selfishness is good and that our Wall Street tycoons deserve...oh, wait. Maybe the latest financial debacle is really just our noble leaders shrugging off their as-to-now roles as carriers of the market and right now they are luxuriating in their fur-lined, self-reliant haven in the mountains of Pakistan.
Show Less
LibraryThing member bohemiangirl35
I know this book has been reviewed a million times, but after spending 55 hours of my life plugging away through this massive, repetitive, melodramatic tome, I have to write down my own comments.

I checked out this book because I have heard Ayn Rand's philosophy referenced several times during the
Show More
presidential campaign. I did some research on the net, but found conflicting information. So I decided to read/listen to it myself. I had no idea what I was getting into.

First, the basic message in Ayn Rand's words:
"If some men are entitled by right to the products of the work of others, it means that those others are deprived of rights and condemned to slave labour. Any alleged "right" of one man, which necessitates the violation of the rights of another, is not and cannot be a right. No man can have a right to impose an unchosen obligation, an unrewarded duty or an involuntary servitude on another man. There can be no such thing as ''the right to enslave.""

That sentiment is being used as a justification for reducing taxes on the wealthy and even increasing taxes on the poorest Americans.

I agree with it in an abstract way, but in the real world, it's not feasible because it assumes that:
1. everyone is healthy, able-bodied, mentally stable and smart enough to work
2. everyone has the same general starting point - grows up with enough to eat, shelter, healthy and strong relationships, role models who teach them to respect themselves and others, etc.
3. the "smart" and "wealthy" producers respect the workers, pay a fair and livable wage for all positions, provide good working conditions, decent hours, etc.
4. there are enough jobs for everyone who wants to work
5. taxes only go to lazy, incompetent people who choose not to work or do anything meaningful except scavenge and steal what they can from others so they don't have to produce
6. any gift is charity and an insult (even general hospitality like a friend staying over)
7. racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. don't exist or are insignificant

With those assumptions, Rand's premise is perfect and the whole world can function perfectly. However, in real life, some people are:
1. old, weak, unhealthy, mentally retarded or unstable, physically or mentally disabled
2. take care of themselves and then get struck by disaster
3. prepare for the future and then have a disabled child (or some other statistical anomaly that saps all their preparedness)
4. have an accident that permanently changes their physical or mental abilities
5. get laid off and can't find work that pays a livable wage
6. don't grow up with enough food, shelter, love or role models to know how to live a positive, productive life
7. and a ton of other possibilities that lead to the need for assistance

So what then? Kill them all and start over? (I would be in that group because I got laid off and was out of work for 15 months. I had decent savings, but still needed unemployment assistance which I had paid into for more than 20 years.)

The elite "minds" complained that the non-minds would strike and claim that the rich wouldn't be rich without their work. So the "minds" went on strike to prove that the workers needed them in order to earn their salaries and live. Duh, it's a symbiotic relationship. The only way the "minds" could strike permanently was to give up the lifestyles they were used to. So both sides had valid points, but like any author, Rand wrote the characters' personalities so that the more favorable ones shared her philosophy.

Francisco d'Anconia says that his grandfather's descendants paid for his acceptance that what he built was his by permission and not by right. That's all well and good, but how come none of the elite "minds" acknowledge that all their ideas were useless without the hundreds or thousands of people it took to implement them? What good is Rearden metal if there's no one to pour it? What good is a railroad idea if there's no one to lay the track or operate the train? Everyone has a place in society and just because some people are smarter or are better leaders doesn't negate the value of others.

Some of the claims in the novel were pretty bold and wrong. I think it was John Galt who said, "America is the only country born as a national product of man's mind and the supremacy of reason." Really? I could have sworn there were some guns and fighting involved.

Even though I am giving Rand a hard time, I am impressed that she published such radical ideas in 1957.

That said, Atlas Shrugged was one super long, super sappy, super super repetitive, melodramatic, soap opera-like love/morality story with some seriously unimaginative dialogue. This book was the looooongest 55 hours of my life in recent years. I felt like I was being forced to watch months of soap opera episodes back to back with no commercial breaks.

All the descriptions were the same! I was sick of "smart" people feeling feelings they would not name, acting "as a somnambulist" would and asking stupid questions. If you're smart, infer some facts. For example, Dagny crashes into the "mental utopia." John Galt explains how no one has found it before. What you see from above is a reflection of the mountaintops, so you don't know there is a valley below. They built and installed reflectors. Dagny asks why they built the reflectors. Really, Dagny? You've been searching all over. You know they're hiding. You find them by accident and then you ask why they built the reflectors? And MOST of the conversations in the book are like this! Even the arguments!

This was not on my list of classics that I had ever planned to read, but I can now add it and then cross it off my bucket list. Ha ha. And I really think it should count twice towards my 75 books for the year. I may torture myself even more by reading Fountainhead, which I didn't know I should have read first. However, I will NOT re-read Atlas Shrugged if I decide to read Fountainhead.
Show Less
LibraryThing member therainking
Doubtful I'll waste much time 'reviewing' many books on here other than giving my Ebert thumbs up or down. But I feel compelled to make this one of my only comments, if only because this tripe has somehow found popularity again.Simply put, Fountainhead and Atlas present a completely unworkable and
Show More
utterly childish philosophy, and worse yet, do so in the context of annoyingly awful writing. Because it is abundantly clear Rand's 1000 pages were not spent on quality storytelling or inspired prose, I'm thoroughly convinced the absurd length of the books is a result of Rand's inability to convince herself of her own argument. It's like she began writing with the intent on proving a point and, after realizing she'd never get there convincingly, figured sheer length would give the books some sort of credibility regardless of their content. That her so-called philosophy is now the mantra of the neocon douche is extremely fitting and indicative of the books' intellectual value. Actually, the only value of reading them, much like the Bible, is to discredit those who rely on them for their worldview.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Miro
In novel form Ayn Rand contrasts what she sees as the dynamism and wealth creation of capitalism vs. the dead hand and wealth destruction of socialism. She's contrasting the social-communist understanding of the well being of society with the liberal free market version. Essentially Marx's "Das
Show More
Kapital" stands as a monument on one side of the field and "Atlas Shrugged" stands as a monument at the other. I take her main points as the following:

THE SOCIAL CONTROL OF BUSINESS: The government wants to control the sale of Rearden's innovative metal and puts him on trial with the judge saying, "Mr Rearden, the law which you are denouncing is based on the highest principle - the principle of public good." Profit is presented as evil and private business as anti-social (i.e. profits should be shared with everybody - not retained by a capitalist). She sees this as the sure route to the destruction of a dynamic wealth creating society.

DISPOSABLE DEMOCRACY: She follows a scientific elitist entrepreneurial line with Rearden building new industries that create wealth for everyone. When the socialist government tries to appropriate his business she seems to reject the idea that he can be protected by democracy. Apparently she doesn't believe that the popular vote can prevent extremism of the socialist/communist type although the evidence proves otherwise.

ELITISM: A major theme of the book is support for a scientific and business elite - with the government required to get out of their way rather than identifying them as "enemies of the people". She sees these elites generating national power and prosperity but she has little to say about the general population with no ideas about building a civil society as a whole. Also she doesn't consider that her elite could abuse power and manipulate politics, which they undoubtedly do.

RESSENTIMENT: She nicely captures this theme in for example the statement of a young scientist to Dagny Taggart, " You know Miss Taggart, I don't think that such a motor should ever be made, even if somebody did learn how to make it, it would be so superior to anything that we've got, that it would be unfair to lesser scientists, because it would leave no field for their achievements and abilities. I don't think that the strong should have the right to wound the self-esteem of the weak."

Ayn Rand herself (through Dagny Taggart) comes across as not very sympathetic, arrogant and rather silly (particularly in the sex scenes) but having said this, Karl Marx wasn't a very sympathetic character either, and Rand's ideas clearly have more to say about wealth creation than Marx's fantasy of, "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."
Show Less
LibraryThing member nkknill
This is, by far, the worst book I've ever read. I hated it, and it was a waste of a month of my life.
LibraryThing member lindseyrivers
I am a staunch liberal and didn't think I would agree with anything Rand had to say. But she makes such a compelling argument for capitalism, I even began to question some of my beliefs. A great book, a compelling mystery that keeps you turning pages. This is one I will think of and refer to for
Show More
the rest of my life.
Show Less
LibraryThing member DonSiano
I first read Atlas Shrugged 42 years ago, and have read it 4 or 5 times more over the decades following. I found it to be a powerful influence on my life, probably more than any single other book I have read.
I recognize as well as anyone its shortcomings and imperfections, but see through them to a
Show More
powerful message that has been a rock for me. It is something like this: the world is real, and your ideas about how it functions matter, and influence the sort of life you will live. That heroes, producers and achievers are more worthy of admiration than victims; that moochers and mystics, quacks and charlatans are only to be scorned; that to believe in the salvation of a sky god is nothing but superstition; that a hard-headed, objective point of view is superior to a fuzzy sentimentality and that hard work is a virtue that eventually leads to a better life than one that concentrates on satisfying the whims and indulgences of the moment.

While Ayn Rand's prose style never approaches that of another hero of mine, H. L. Mencken, it is certainly respectable enough to produce a novel of great originality and is, for many people, very difficult to put down once well started. It is well suited to her primary goal to communicate a coherent world view, an epistemology, and a derived ethic that can actually be lived. A mathematician struggling after a theorem hardly uses humor as a tool, and Rand has no room here for it either.

As for Rand's analysis of Capitalism, I find it superior to Marx's. But I know that economics is complicated, and hardly a science yet, so her appreciation of the laissez faire variety is probably a bit of an oversimplification. And a naive libertarianism, much influenced by her objectivism, while hardly sweeping the world for now, has something to contribute too. Her biggest failure to me, though, is the problem of race, which she never discusses. It is no easy task to apply her approach to such a difficult problem, and I am not aware of any. The alternative basis in a hard-headed sociobiology, though, would probably have been quite comfortable for her, had it been available then.

Rand's message is powerful and a positive contribution to the progress of the world. Take a look--I doubt you will be disappointed.
Show Less
LibraryThing member IronMike
I have read Atlas Shrugged three times,with many years lapsing in between reads, and each time I've come away greatly impressed. I think it's time for my fourth reading. I have met guys who have read Atlas seven times and five times. One guy told me he reads it once a year, and believe me, none of
Show More
us are 15-year-old kids with our baseball caps on backwards.
Ayn Rand was born in Russia, and escaped from that communist country as a young woman. She came to America and fell in love with capitalism. In today's world where kids are routinely taught that capitalism is the cause of society's ills, I can understand that Rand's message might be jarring to some.
I understand that they plan to make Atlas Shrugged into a movie, with a schedueled release date of 2011, and that Angelina Jolie will play the role of Dagny Taggart, the book's heroine. I predict it will be a blockbuster. Read the book now, before copies go flying off the shelves in 2011.
Show Less
LibraryThing member FMRox
Who is John Galt?

Language

Original publication date

1957

Physical description

1084 p.; 6.9 inches

ISBN

0451157486 / 9780451157485
Page: 6.2318 seconds