So That's Who John Galt Is: My Review of Atlas Shrugged

This Christmas Eve, in between bouts of celebratory eating and last minute gift wrapping, I completed a project I started over six months ago: the reading of Ayn Rand's magnum opus, Atlas Shrugged.

I was given the book, along with her other major fictional works, by the Ayn Rand Institute while attending an English conference in New York. I had always wanted to read Rand's works, mainly because I was tired of people who had never read any of her novels calling her work juvenile and childish. Before I was about to draw any conclusions, I was going to see for myself. I started with her brief starter book Anthem, which acts as a sort of primer for the Objectivist philosophy she refined later in her career. It's a quick read. From there, I moved directly on to Atlas (with plans to read The Fountainhead only if I really liked Atlas).

Now that I spent the last six months reading this 1069 page paperback brick, I can say that I have mixed, but overall positive feelings about this Russo-American author. On many levels, the book is excellent, even when her philosophy is flawed. Its ideas about the free-market, government welfare, and individualism are relevant and extremely important to modern conservative thought; although, her extreme views on selfishness, atheism, and the worship of the dollar are missteps.

One of the main themes of the book is the punishment of success in today's society. In the book, those industrialists ("the movers") are constantly looked down upon for being rich, successful, and intelligent. They're treated as if their success belongs to the collective masses, rather than their own personal doing; because of this, they are expected to bend over backwards to help society. Rand challenges this common practice of tearing down the rich by showing us what would happen if the movers disappeared. If all of the industrialists (a term that isn't necessarily used much anymore), inventors, scientists, and artists that we take for granted stopped producing, what would happen to the world? In Atlas, the movers begin to disappear one-by-one after they become fed up with the regulations, restrictions, and oppression of government intervention in the economy.

Rand's scope in the book was simply incredible--then again, I would expect a 1,000+ page book to have a little bit of breadth. While the story follows a number of key players, we mainly see the heroine, Dagny Taggart, as her family train company rises and falls. One of the side effects of reading this book is that you inadvertently learn a lot about the country's railroad system; although I have read articles that discuss Rand's exaggeration and simplification of the system for dramatic purposes. We don't necessarily realize how our industries are all connected until they all begin to fall like dominoes. In Atlas, the disappearance of a coal mine or a parts manufacturer sends the entire railroad economy into a tizzy. The same goes for the nationalization of Hank Rearden's steel: after public opinion shunned Rearden's new steel recipe, they quickly turned face and began clamoring for it... eventually, the government stepped in and made Rearden sign over his secrets to society, so that everyone could produce it.

All of these instances (and there are plenty in the book) are presented as cautionary Romantic examples that ultimately endorse complete laissez-faire capitalism. In Rand's world, this message and its many instances work fine--obviously, because she is creating them. All of the characters are idealistic, stoic, and emotionless. They deliver grand speeches that are, at times, very challenging to get through. It's much easier to understand Rand's complex philosophy through fiction, obviously, but if I knew people that talked like this in real life, I'd probably think they were crazy.

Her writing style, while at times stiff, is also very descriptive and specific. Rand leaves next to no room for confusion of emotions or actions. She'll tell you that these two characters make eye contact because they secretly hate each other. There's a lot of telling going on, and I assume it's because she wants to make certain that her vision is completely understood--at times it's a little excessive and silly. One aspect of the book that I really enjoyed, however, was the motif of shrugs. While the title "Atlas Shrugged" isn't discussed until the end of part two, the movers (AKA all of the people that are essentially titans like Atlas) occasionally shrug as a form of saying that they don't care. At different times in life, people become, and cease to be, titans, and she demonstrates this in the book through the use of shrugging. It's not the easiest thing for me to explain, but in practice within the world of the book it works well, and consistently, throughout the three parts.

As the story, and Rand's philosophy progresses, the arguments that she is making become a tad too broad for my tastes. I understand that her Objectivist philosophy is something that must be applied to one's entire lifestyle, but I never once felt like I wanted to be like anyone in the book. All of the heroic characters are cold, emotionally barren individuals who never seem like they are enjoying life (despite how much they talk about living). This could be because of Rand's complete rejection of religion, which she refers to as mysticism. While she never actually brings up a specific religion or church, she makes it clear that Man's only point of worship should be himself. While individualism is good, her idea of never helping or aiding anyone is too extreme for my tastes. Like much of pure philosophy, her ideas are extreme and hardly applicable to real life. I think that it's important to take the ideas that she is presenting, critically address them, and find out for yourself what's right and what's wrong. Her strict atheist viewpoints ring truer of Marxism--the very collectivist ideas that she hates with a passion. Yet while she may be against any sort of god, her characters become hypocritical later in the book, as the movers worship the almighty dollar. John Galt and his posse of merry industrialists treat the $ symbol like Christians treat a crucifix. They draw it with their hands, they erect large monuments to it, and they even smoke cigarettes adorned with it (that last instance isn't really practiced by Christians). It's these brief flashes of inconsistency that make me want to step back and challenge Rand's ideas further.

The practice of Objectivism isn't really something I find to be wholly perfect or useful in society today, however some of her ideas are sound. The government shouldn't be involved in stifling or nationalizing industrial advancements, nor should it be redistributing wealth in the promotion of welfare laziness. But Rand's views go beyond mere economic Libertarianism and into a world that's cold, singular, and selfish. Basically, I would rather make her Secretary of Commerce than President. Aside from all that, Atlas Shrugged is a book that was well worth reading, even if you don't care about her philosophy. The story is epic and the ending is spectacular. Looking back on it now, I find is curious that the Ayn Rand Institute was giving away these books for free--an idea that Rand would probably be pretty upset over.

Posted by MikeRubino at December 28, 2007 10:27 PM | TrackBack