Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Pedro Picasso]

I wasn't going to hold off on this until I actually finished Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand, but it came up in the Iron Man thread (of all places), and I'll go ahead and ask it.  What the HELL, people?

I'm listening to this in audio book form.  It's > 50 hours.  It must be pretty entertaining because I'm 25 hours in and not bored yet.  I do roll my eyes a lot, and certain sections are PAINFUL to listen to, but it's not boring.  It's not unredeeming in every way.  There are some cool ideas in there.  Still: It is bad fiction and bad philosophy. 

Bad fiction: Flat characters who are either good guys or bad guys.  The good guys have every good grace of mankind, and some superhuman characteristics.  The bad guys have everything that is wrong with the world in them and nothing good.  They are subhuman.  They do not act like real human beings.  Human beings cannot act that way unless they are BROKEN by something that isn't described in the book.

Self-interest is man's highest ideal.

Lady, I think I found your problem.  This is the most believable lie in history.  It is the lie that you desperately want to believe.  I'll attack it this way: the characters in the book do not hold this principle, though they spout it.  Their actions betray a belief that justice is the highest ideal.  But they seem to think justice flows naturally from mutual self-interest, so they take it for granted.  That is stinking thinking.  The bad guy philosophy in the book is demonstrably worse, but fortunately they aren't the only games in town.

I would LOVE to have a discussion about the merits and flaws in the fiction and philosophy in Atlas Shrugged.  I'm half-way through it, so I can't do so entirely competently just yet.  ...Unless she just repeats herself a thousand more times in the second half.

Did you notice she totally wrote herself in as the giraffewife in the gulch?

[Pedro Picasso]

To be fair: the other dystopian fiction of the time also lacked characters of much depth, and the fact that capitalism is better than communism did need some pointing out by someone who is not a politician.

[Arachno-capitalist]

I can't ever say youre wrong about the characters. I am one of Rand's biggest fans (I have t-shirts and guinea pigs to demonstrate this) and even I can't stand to watch The Fountainhead movie they made. The only way to digest this stuff as literature is to think of her characters as just mouthpieces and simplified demonstrations of what she writes her essays. If you're looking for some masterpiece of fictional literature, this isn't it.
The philosophy on the other hand takes some consideration. She uses words like selgiraffeness in ways most people do not. Her idea that good in the world comes from people acting in their own self interest is maybe better explained by an Adam Smith quote Ive committed to memory the same way people memorize bible verses: It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages."

[Arachno-capitalist]

If anyone wants to read Ayn Rand, without actually plowing through thousands of pages, I recommend The Ayn Rand Reader, its a greenish color paperback with like a readers digest version of her works.

[Doc]

That book could have redeemed itself so much for me if James Taggart's fiance was treated better (Cheryl wiki tells me her name is), she and Hank Rearden (and to a lesser extent Eddie) are the most compelling characters in there for me because they are conflicted and trying to straddle two worlds rather than being a boring caricature. When the characters I can identify with get totally shafted it leaves a bit of a bad taste.

[Gimpson]

...Unless she just repeats herself a thousand more times in the second half.

Tee hee...   I won't tell him if nobody else does either...

[jay-ell]

Pedro posted in the Iron Man thread:

For someone who worships individual excellence, Ayn Rand sure is lousy at her chosen vocation.  Agree or disagree with her philosophy, there's no denying that she is one crappy novelist.

I just finished a section where a composer explains that feelings have little place in the creation of art and that ideas and intellectual willpower are what create great works of art.  He says that artists who create based what they feel instead of what they think are basically the equivalent of human slugs.  Dropping this essay in the middle of your novel = high art.

There you go.  Discuss it here. 

[Pedro Picasso]

"It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages."

This is only part of the story.  The other part involves what you do when no one is looking.  You don't steal from the butcher while he's looking because he'll cut you.  Your self-love prevents it.  You don't steal from the butcher even when you are sure you won't get caught because you respect the butcher and you respect justice.  Many people do steal, but if everybody stole when they couldn't get caught, our society wouldn't work.  Self-love, reverence for justice, and respect for fellows are all necessary to keep society moving.

Instead of just attacking your philosophy, I should put myself out there.  I am a Christian.  I was raised Catholic and have joined the Lutheran Church.  The book I read before starting Shruggy was Orthodoxy by G.K. Chesterton.  I thought it was great.  He attacks the same kind of "there is no such thing as moral rectitude" and "suicide is the highest expression of the mind" stuff that Rand is against, but where she thinks the physical world is self-explanatory, he points out it's not.

"Love your neighbor as yourself" implies that you already love yourself.  It doesn't say watch out for your neighbor like you watch out for yourself.  You have to trust your neighbor to do most of that.  But if she's in a bad way, you don't leave her in a ditch.  And you don't pull her out because of pity (which is a form of loathing).  You should help her out of compassion.  An understanding love that says "I will help you because I love you, but I will not let you take unfair advantage because I love me too."

Most of all, a philosophy based on self-love is doomed to failure because you are not all that great.  If you devote your life only to yourself, you will not have much of a life.  It leaves nothing to strive for beyond yourself, no room for growth.  Even the characters in Atlas Shrugged don't do this, though they say they do.

[jay-ell]

I've noticed that in the Sims 2, when my characters achieve their lifetime aspiration -- usually as elders -- after a certain point they're just pretty much waiting to die.  It gets pretty boring. 

If they live with their kids and/or grandkids, though, they can help them with their daily lives so that the kids can focus on their aspirations.  They can spend quality time with their grandchildren, and teach them important skills that will help them later in life.  They can fix things around the house, cook meals, help with the cleaning, and babysit to save the younger adults time and money.  They can provide important social support that helps sustain the family.  By transcending their ambitions, these sims can create a better and more satisfying (to the player-god) life through helping others than they can through self-centeredness. 

Sure, that's a video game, and that's the way I play -- which is different from the way some people play.  Some player-gods torture their sims in all kinds of unimaginable ways to laugh at the hilarious results.  Some just create a variety of highly attractive sims and watch them make out with each other.  But that doesn't mean my particular analogy isn't apt. 

[theinevitable]

Sure, that's a video game, and that's the way I play -- which is different from the way some people play.  Some player-gods torture their sims in all kinds of unimaginable ways to laugh at the hilarious results.  Some just create a variety of highly attractive sims and watch them make out with each other.  But that doesn't mean my particular analogy isn't apt.

Oh god, I just realized that the way I play the Sims is PATHOLOGICAL as shit.

like, not quite on the level of my high school girlfriend who had a scrap book of the furniture she wanted for our house when we got married, but...

yeah, no, nothing is that crazy. but I still think it's probably pretty creepy, the way I play the sims.

[jay-ell]

You honestly didn't expect to be able to say that and not have us ask, right? 

I mean, that was part one of your post on How Daniel Plays The Sims.  I'm certain of it. 

[theinevitable]

I mean, I think you can probably guess? I just make endless perfect little young families with a cool house and they both have cool jobs and then they have a baby.
Shortly after the baby I lose interest and start another one. Maybe this time the girl will be a blonde instead of a brunette, or be a doctor instead of a... I forget what other professions there are, it has been a while. The guy is always cool but slightly nerdy.

[jay-ell]

Yeah, but...if you can get through the baby stage, the next generation will have all kinds of Advantages that a newly-minted sim doesn't have...like, for instance, the ability to learn skills early in life, and thus progress through the career tracks faster...and have more time with which to woo a lover...which results in more babies...

I usually just create one sim -- often a female named Eve -- and populate an entire town with her offspring.  I marry her off to a compatible townie, and roll a die for the children's aspirations.  After a while, the great-grandkids of the original couple are sufficiently genetically removed that I can start inter-marrying them, but I only do that when the population becomes to dense for me to play all the households in the neighborhood.  (I have a hard time juggling more than six or seven, even with an elaborate system of note cards to track career progress, skills, abilities, and aspirations.) 

Oh, man.  Now you know my dirtiest little secret: I am an absolutely hard to the core Sims player.  I used to be more so, before Girlface was born, but I'm preoccupied with raising my actual babies most of the time now.  It makes me cringe a little that I am so into this game, because it's so (unfairly, IMHO) maligned by self-styled hardcore gamers, but that's a different rant. 

The Sims.  I like it.  That is all. 

Damn, I really wish I had time to play right now. 

[theinevitable]

yeah, but, see, I don't care about all that other stuff.

I just really enjoy decorating really small houses with cheap furniture, and then saving up to splurge on like a nice stereo or something.

[jay-ell]

Yeah, that's probablywaaaaay healthier than my obsessive style of play.