tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post1858851794168193190..comments2024-03-17T04:17:49.429-07:00Comments on Ayn Rand Contra Human Nature: Rand's Novels 3: The FountainheadDaniel Barneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06359277853862225286noreply@blogger.comBlogger33125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-61414994779437651032016-12-10T18:52:31.892-08:002016-12-10T18:52:31.892-08:00If she had borderline personality disorder, that w...If she had borderline personality disorder, that would make her incapable of fathoming normal human behavior, as she took herself to be the norm.<br /><br />That is a fatal flaw in someone who philosophizes about human nature, because she is talking about something she knows nothing about.Adriana I. Penanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-64282845204465542402016-07-10T13:46:57.016-07:002016-07-10T13:46:57.016-07:00-- "How about Ayn Rand's proclamation in ...-- "How about Ayn Rand's proclamation in 'The Virtue of Selfishness' that homosexuality is caused by bad parenting?"<br /><br />She has implausible deniability on this one: it was Nathaniel Branden, not her, who suggested that bad parenting leads at least some male homosexuals to have a neurotically negative view of women. Whether this claim has any truth to it would, of course, be irrelevant to homosexual activists.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-58352993574383215862016-06-05T10:42:34.481-07:002016-06-05T10:42:34.481-07:00You can't discredit a philosophy by discrediti...You can't discredit a philosophy by discrediting the philosopher.<br /><br />So it doesn't matter if she had "Borderline Personality Disorder", whatever that is.<br /><br />In fact to use such arguments is a tacit admission that you don't have any real<br />arguments.<br /><br />But there are real arguments-------<br /><br />check out AYN RAND CONTRA by Greg Nyquist!!! <br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-76531810130740700632016-05-31T22:11:17.271-07:002016-05-31T22:11:17.271-07:00Could she have had Borderline Personality Disorder...<i>Could she have had Borderline Personality Disorder? Quite possibly but we do not have enough information to know for sure.</i><br /><br />On the contrary, there is abundant and overwhelming information supporting the diagnostic conclusion that Ayn Rand had BPD.<br /><br />Borderline Personality Disorder is a complex and difficult subject. This is why the mainstream media has trouble covering it and mostly avoids it, despite the fact that a certain number of famous celebrities obviously have been (or are) afflicted with BPD. This web sight is also deficient in that regard.<br /><br />Despite my criticisms, I maintain that the ARCHN blog has been useful. <br /><br />@Gordon Burkowski - My point regarding Michel Foucault was not to dismiss his work, but to acknowledge the fact that criticisms of his writings (a peer reviewed process) were indeed valid when it became clear that this personal predilections were intruding upon them. <br /><br />Now, will this blog fully analyze "The Virtue of Selfishness"? The book contains many horrible ideas. Is Greg Nyquist unwilling to talk about them? Which ideas from the book deserve criticism and which deserve praise, according to Mr. Nyquist? This book was designed to reach a wider audience, therefore it deserves as much scrutiny as her other writings, perhaps more. <br /><br />A personal observation: The first time I read "The Virtue of Selfishness", it occurred to me, immediately, that Ayn Rand was leading a cult. This was given away by the introduction, which was devoted to condemning and excommunicating a former cultist from her group.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-83080739639343814822016-05-28T09:17:33.022-07:002016-05-28T09:17:33.022-07:00"Borderline Personality Disorder" is a r..."Borderline Personality Disorder" is a rather nebulous term.<br /><br />But I will concede that writers and artists tend to be a little eccentric.<br /><br />Perhaps it is an occupational hazard!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-42849225382561267672016-05-27T14:51:12.853-07:002016-05-27T14:51:12.853-07:00I've read three Rand biographies and there'...<br />I've read three Rand biographies and there's no doubt that she had issues. However, it's silly to suggest that her supposed BPD or Foucault's SM constitute an automatic rebuttal of their ideas. That's like pointing out that Van Gogh was mentally ill - then drawing the conclusion that anyone who likes his paintings must be mentally ill too.<br /><br />I have a feeling that Anonymous is not especially open to counterarguments. However, viewing A Beautiful Mind might be a quick way for him/her to find out that crazy people can come up with important ideas.Gordon Burkowskinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-77396496715842524962016-05-27T07:30:48.636-07:002016-05-27T07:30:48.636-07:00I just did a search and found that you have commen...I just did a search and found that you have commented on Rand and on Cclaims o Borderline Personality disorder here before. People here had doubts and regarded it as uncertain. And thought that a focus on her personality was a bad idea.<br />Lloyd Flackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00832519369660328832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-73546558341803340302016-05-27T03:05:46.957-07:002016-05-27T03:05:46.957-07:00So you are complaining because people here are not...So you are complaining because people here are not denouncing Rand herself or at least not going out of their way to do this. Did it occur to you that some of this is rejection of Rand's judgmentalism?<br />The question is why are you so keen to have us condemn her? Are you on a judgmentalism kick like her? Are you an objectivist agent provocateur trying to get people here to attack her personally so that you can denounce them for ad hominem attacks? Or are you a troll trying to get their jollies by stirring up a fight?Lloyd Flackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00832519369660328832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-89524836944185573942016-05-26T23:29:56.856-07:002016-05-26T23:29:56.856-07:00Could she have had Borderline Personality Disorder...Could she have had Borderline Personality Disorder? Quite possibly but we do not have enough information to know for sure.<br />People here are more interested in analyzing her ideas than her. And are not getting off on indignation and moral superiority by attacking her.<br /> Lloyd Flackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00832519369660328832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-13875894776958492422016-05-26T17:49:13.701-07:002016-05-26T17:49:13.701-07:00Again, we see how this site condones and justifies...Again, we see how this site condones and justifies Ayn Rand's ideas which were so obviously linked to her mental illness. <br /><br />Anyone with even a basic understanding of Borderline Personality Disorder will see the disorder shining through in her writings. Contributors and commentators at the ARCHN blog who don't understand the disease would do well to read "Stop Walking on Eggshells: Taking Your Life Back When Someone You Care About Has Borderline Personality Disorder" by Mason & Kreger.<br /><br />Rand's published eulogy of Marilyn Monroe is one such example where she really gives it away; she's a Borderline identifying with another Borderline, and in a very public way. Its pathetic and sad. <br /><br />Even Blumenthal, the trained psychiatrist from her inner circle admitted that she was BPD.<br /><br />But here at the ARCHN blog, Ayn Rand's ex-fanboys want to skip over her mental problems so they can promote Chicago School economics and "traditionalist" values.<br /><br />I realize that readers here would not be interested in the philosophy of Michel Foucault. However, I want to point out (merely as an example) that his work received criticism because it was apparent that influences from his real life involvement in sado-masochistic sexual practices were seeping into his writings. That's fair criticism. <br /><br />How about Ayn Rand's proclamation in "The Virtue of Selfishness" that homosexuality is caused by bad parenting? That's a vile and disgusting claim. But for Ayn Rand, who quite possibly never bothered to read a book on anthropology in her life, the idea aligns perfectly with a BPD mindset. Such a claim must have caused much consternation among her closeted gay followers. <br /><br />Ayn Rand's ideas are directly linked to Borderline Personality Disorder. The term "magical thinking" is appropriate in this context.<br />And indeed, "magical thinking" is key to understanding BPD and Ayn Rand. Look it up.<br /><br /> <br /><br /> <br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-32683027450674385302016-05-24T10:37:32.108-07:002016-05-24T10:37:32.108-07:00Rand's ad hominems don't justify your ad h...Rand's ad hominems don't justify your ad hominems.<br /><br />Two Rands don't make a right!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-29221494194316403062016-05-23T19:42:11.465-07:002016-05-23T19:42:11.465-07:00"It's more useful to keep the focus on th...<br />"It's more useful to keep the focus on the ideas, not the person."<br /><br />Agreed. However, let's keep in mind that Rand herself - and most Objectivists - have the following standard operating procedure:<br /><br />1) "Prove" that an opponent's philosophy - or politics or even artistic choices - are "irrational";<br /><br />2) Use this alleged proof as a licence to engage in vicious attacks not simply on opposing views but on the character of the people who hold those views.<br /><br />In short, Objectivists who complain about ad hominen attacks might start by taking a long look at their own approach - and at the modus operandi of Rand herself.<br /><br />Gordon Burkowskinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-69144580306015044752016-05-23T00:08:13.678-07:002016-05-23T00:08:13.678-07:00I'll add two points to Lloyd's comment.
1...I'll add two points to Lloyd's comment.<br /><br />1) Little is gained by amateur psychologists attempting to diagnose someone none of them ever met. At best you can only guess. You will never know. <br /><br />2) Mental illness does not preclude coming up with good and useful ideas or insights. (See John Nash, the subject of "A Beautiful Mind.") Thus, even if we could establish that Ayn Rand had some particular mental illness, it would say nothing about the merits of her ideas. It's more useful to keep the focus on the ideas, not the person. Echo Chamber Escapeenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-55670118952539213422016-05-10T04:46:33.051-07:002016-05-10T04:46:33.051-07:00The focus here is on criticism of her ideas. Attac...The focus here is on criticism of her ideas. Attacking her personally gets in the way of this and damages the critic's credibility. So her mental state gets discussed only to the extent that it helps to explain her beliefs.Lloyd Flackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00832519369660328832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-60923562791744891832016-05-09T14:51:42.522-07:002016-05-09T14:51:42.522-07:00A true understanding of Borderline Personalty Diso...A true understanding of Borderline Personalty Disorder would be helpful in understanding the characters as they are written in Rand's novels. Anyone who has the experience of interacting with a borderline partner or family member would recognize the elements immediately.<br /><br />This site has been useful, but it mostly avoids going into a deep analysis of Ayn Rand's (multiple and co-morbid) psychological maladies. <br /><br />Part of the reason for this is because the writers and contributors here are obviously ex-Ayn Rand fanboys who still admire much about her, despite their criticisms, as these posts about her novels demonstrate. <br /><br />Archaeologists and historians recognize from the ancient records that Alexander the Great was psychologically unbalanced. This is from ancient records, and I'm not just talking about his violent behavior. Here in the present day, we have much more information about Ayn Rand's distorted state of mind, even from associates of Ayn Rand who are still alive to describe it. Yet here at the ARCHN blog we can't say a meaningful word about her psychological problems because that would be "unfair" to her.<br /><br />She was a mess. Admit it and move on!<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-35411066614874806442016-04-30T10:34:16.201-07:002016-04-30T10:34:16.201-07:00At least she asked the right questions.........
....At least she asked the right questions.........<br /><br />......even if she didn't always come up with the right answers.<br /><br />There could be no AYN RAND CONTRA without Ayn Rand.<br /><br />Kudos to Mr. Nyquist.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-39625538488889532222016-04-23T09:52:15.588-07:002016-04-23T09:52:15.588-07:00I've said it before----I'll say it again:
...I've said it before----I'll say it again:<br /><br />Atlas Shrugged would be twice as good if it were half as long!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-45842383926251929742016-04-22T09:41:37.898-07:002016-04-22T09:41:37.898-07:00Thanks for clarifying, Greg. I think Rand's no...Thanks for clarifying, Greg. I think Rand's novels owe a great deal not only to Victor Hugo but to other 19th century romantics like Sir Walter Scott and Alexander Dumas. How realistic is "The Count of Monte Cristo"? The plot obviously involves extreme implausibilities - a man escapes from an impregnable prison, finds a treasure trove, and executes a series of complicated revenge strategies that work out to perfection. Moreover, it is not very realistic psychologically; in real life, a prisoner subjected to near starvation and solitary confinement for so many years would not be able to smoothly readjust to society, much less function at an almost superhuman level of manipulation and deceit. <br /><br />Even Hugo's novels are not known for their rich psychological insights. And Rand's favorite character, Enjolras in "Les Miserables", is a one-dimensional figure, essentially a marble statue that declaims inspirational dialogue and strikes heroic poses. <br /><br />Rand herself was, as this blog has amply demonstrated, no master of psychology. She had a rationalistic and entirely unreasonable notion of how human beings behaved, or ought to behave. I agree with you that this is a serious weakness for a novelist, especially one dedicated to depicting "the ideal man." But all writers have weaknesses and blind spots. I guess I'm more inclined to cut Rand a break and to say that, like Dumas, Hugo, and other romantics of an earlier era, she compensated for her psychological implausibilities with other elements. <br /><br />What other elements? Well, you mention "Roark's stainless integrity, his lonely battle against ingrained stupidity and corruption." I think this is so important to the book's appeal that it merits even more acknowledgment. What always meant the most to me was the inspirational quality of scenes celebrating youthful idealism and intellectual integrity. For instance, the famous "boy on the bicycle" scene, or Roark's interview with the dean. I believe that most people who like "The Fountainhead" are responding to this motif above all. <br /><br />Naturally, one can argue that books like "The Count of Monte Cristo" don't qualify as serious literature, and neither does "The Fountainhead." Here I'm inclined to agree with novelist James M. Cain, who said that ultimately the only critic who matters is Old Man Posterity. The works that stand the test of time will overcome any criticism. "Monte Cristo" has been filmed three or four times and is still being read today. "The Fountainhead" is still influential enough to be cited by politicos and pundits, and it's never been out of print. Though Rand's book has its defects, I think it will outlast us all. <br /><br />Cheers!Michael Prescotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12963295565160636175noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-66809723163980025002016-04-21T12:11:54.054-07:002016-04-21T12:11:54.054-07:00Sure, she called herself a Romantic Realist, but b...<i>Sure, she called herself a Romantic Realist, but by "realist" she simply meant that her stories were set in today's world and not in the distant past or a mythical kingdom.</i><br /><br />She meant more by romantic realism than just a contemporary setting:<br /><br />"My school of writing <i>is</i> romantic realism: "romantic" in that I present man as he ought to be; 'realistic' ... in that it's possible to man and applied to this earth." [<i>Ayn Rand Answers</i>] <br /><br />In other words, by realism Rand meant something that was possible, although it could be a very "stylized" possibility, and didn't involve, as Rand would say, statistical averages or the highly plausible. <br /><br />My criticism of the Cortlandt trial is based on Rand's own view of realism, not on any assumption that Rand needs to adopt the same sort of realism as Dreiser or other "naturalists." Serious literature can be as stylized and unrealistic as it pleases; but, when it comes to the characters, to their psychology and motivation, serious literature seeks to be realistic and convincing. Shakespeare's major plays are full of unrealistic incidents and impossible plot devices; moreover, his characters speech are far more eloquent than people in "real life" (they speak in blank verse, for heaven's sake!); yet Shakespeare's major characters are thoroughly convincing as representations of human nature. The problem, therefore, with <i>The Fountainhead</i> is not that it's realism is too stylized (Shakespeare is far more stylized), or that it has a happy ending, but that its big climax and subsequent resolution fails to convince, even on its own terms.<br /><br />Of course, one could argue that, regardless of Rand's stated goals or her definition of "romantic realism," she was not really writing a "serious" novel that contained (however stylized) realistic and insightful representation of human nature; that, on the contrary, Rand's novels (excluding <i>We the Living</i>) are really fantasies with realistic settings, written as wish-fulfillment exercises. Perhaps, in the end, this is what Rand's last two novels really amount to; and that may be how they will be remembered and admired. But I doubt Rand herself would have been comfortable being categorized as a writer of fantasy.gregnyquisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13653516868316854941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-66201255435583697272016-04-21T08:10:24.132-07:002016-04-21T08:10:24.132-07:00Why, what a perfect segue, Michael! :^D
(continue...Why, what a perfect segue, Michael! :^D<br /><br />(continued)<br /><br />4 - Genre and longevity: Atlas Shrugged is an example of highly anachronistic genre-mashing science fiction, the love child of VIctor Hugo and Jules Verne, adopted by Ian Fleming. This is why, as a vehicle for shoddy philosophy but impressive rhetoric, I believe it will stand the test of time. When we project ourselves into the world of Galt and d'Anconia, do they have internet and smart phones? Sure, why the hell not. Base on Mars? Transporter beams? P=NP proof? We would've gotten there if there had been one more act. And they still would've been listening to classical concertos, smoking unfiltered, and loving big things made of strong metal. At least a dozen aspects of the world are bound to seem strange and cool for the indefinite future. By contrast, the world of Roark is 1940s America, in which Frank Lloyd Wright is a major cultural icon, society is cleanly stratified by class, and the world hangs on the pronouncements of single prominent critics. This world is already unrelateable and uncool.<br /><br />jinrokhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00155470600628162027noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-38540133679043421922016-04-19T12:20:59.413-07:002016-04-19T12:20:59.413-07:00I think the criticism of both the rape scene and t...I think the criticism of both the rape scene and the courtroom climax largely misses the point. The book is fiction of a particular type. It's not meant to be "realistic." One way to make fiction more interesting than real life is to have the characters do things that people in real life only fantasize about. For instance, we may have gotten mad enough to fantasize about blowing up something, but we wouldn't actually do it. A fictional representation serves as a catharsis; it allows us to vicariously experience the pleasure of acting outside social limits. Many women do fantasize about being raped, as proven by the immense commercial success of "The Fountainhead," success driven largely by the notoriety of the rape scene. The book, being fiction, allows this fantasy to play out. <br /><br />A book on creative writing that I read some years ago suggested having your protagonist not just think of outrageous acts, but actually perform them. Instead of having your protagonist wish she could shove a cream pie into her annoying boss's face, have her actually do it. This is sound advice and does make for better, more lively characters. <br /><br />People in stories are always coming up with the perfect riposte, even though in real life people are often tongue-tied and only think of the right quip later. Fictional people take outrageous risks and get away with it, though in real life James Bond or Indiana Jones would be dead many times over. Fictional people say and do things the rest of us only daydream about. This is the appeal of fiction, or at least fiction of a certain type. <br /><br />So of course Dominique has to be raped by Roark. She is living out the reader's presumed fantasy. And of course Roark will blow up his building. He is living out another fantasy. And they'll fall in love and he'll be acquitted because a happy ending is part of the fantasy. <br /><br />I can understand not liking this sort of story and preferring something realistic like "An American Tragedy," but as Rand liked to say, the stories she enjoyed were "better than real - they were interesting." Sure, she called herself a Romantic Realist, but by "realist" she simply meant that her stories were set in today's world and not in the distant past or a mythical kingdom. She never imagined that her writing was realistic in the Theodore Dreiser or Upton Sinclair sense. That kind of writing, however much it may be preferred by the cognoscenti, was not what she was about. <br /><br />To criticize Rand for not being "realistic" is like criticizing a banana because it doesn't make a good hammer. Or as Alfred Hitchcock put it, "Some movies are a slice of life. Mine are a slice of cake."Michael Prescotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12963295565160636175noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-6111025108023603392016-04-17T06:22:48.353-07:002016-04-17T06:22:48.353-07:00J. Goard, I agree that the imagery in Atlas Shrugg...J. Goard, I agree that the imagery in Atlas Shrugged is good and better than that in The Fountainhead. But most of the characters are less interesting, less believable and less sympathetic. I think that is the main reason why most here prefer The Fountainhead. That and that the events in Atlas Shrugged are eve<br />n more unbelievable.Lloyd Flackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00832519369660328832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-44901415891665769872016-04-17T01:37:12.403-07:002016-04-17T01:37:12.403-07:00@Lloyd Flack: I wonder whether the rape scene is a...@Lloyd Flack: <i>I wonder whether the rape scene is an example of Rand overestimating her ability to read others motives and believing that her heros would also be extremely good at understanding others. I'm suggesting a romantic overestimation of the clarity of non verbal communication.</i><br /><br />She admitted somewhere that the rape scene was something that would never work in real life. In fiction, the hero can be sure he has read the heroine's motives correctly. So Roark could know that Dominique wanted him to attack her, that she wanted to fight him, and that she wanted to lose. In real life, Rand conceded, it would not be reasonable for a man to jump to the conclusion Roark does. <br /><br />Rape fantasies turn out to be fairly common, something like 30-40 percent of women admit to having had them. But it's a fantasy, not something they want to have happen in real life. So I have no problem with Dominique fantasizing about being overpowered by that sweaty, muscular quarry worker. The problem is that Rand isn't writing this as Dominique's fantasy: she wants us to believe Dominique wants to be actually raped by Roark. It doesn't work.<br /><br />Echo Chamber Escapeenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-27307728796020654192016-04-16T20:40:54.271-07:002016-04-16T20:40:54.271-07:00Allow me, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, to pre...Allow me, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, to present my case for the uniquely crazy Atlas Shrugged as by far the better work.<br /><br />1 - Visualization: The Fountainhead is ostensibly a story about transcendent architecture, yet it contains basically zero evocative descriptions, let alone any that convey to me why the strange good stuff is supposed to be better than strange bad stuff. I'm left with the impression that architecture is merely a skin for what Rand really wants to convey: that she and her literary heroes are the equivalent in literature, Contrast this the imagery of the John Galt line racing up to and over the untested bridge, Dagny coming across Wyatt's burning oil fields, Francisco and Hank having the titular conversation cut short to handle an emergency, the lead up to the tunnel disaster, scenes from the history of the motor company. There is simply no contest here. Even the descriptions of art in Atlas, though unspectacular, are far more convincing. I have no doubt that Rand had strong reference points for Halley's Fourth and Fifth, for example, as I do.<br /><br />2 - Clark Kent: The most bizarre aspect of the rape scene is that Dominique only knows Roark as a confident, hot guy, and yet, the takeaway is clearly not supposed to be that accomplished women are allowed to have purely sexual motivations from time to time, but almost the opposite. It is supposed to be part of Dominique's character arc that her lustful and intellectual values will naturally align if she just opens herself up to them -- and that, right there, is grade-A crazy Objectivism in vitro. As far as I'm aware, this is not how the Lois/Clark/Superman triangle has ever been played out, and it's obviously contra Cyrano. Dagny's sexual encounters with men whom she not merely admires, but has gotten to know over substantial time, are erotically masochistic but romantically sane.<br /><br />3 - A jury of one's peer-inferiors: Individualist Galt packs up and leaves, builds shit himself, and then starts addressing other individualists one-on-one. "Individualist" Roark turns out to have a Johnnie Cochran-level knack for jury selection. (Of course, even O.J. was immediately hit with a huge civil suit.) If it weren't Rand, one might take this for the "Life of Brian" sort of gag on individualism. ("Think for yourselves!"/"Yes, we will all think for ourselves!") Why, when the author controls the story, add this need for formal approval (shared by Night of January 16th)? For Christ's sake, the final lines of The Fountainhead, in the most obvious of metaphors, describe Dominique rising above office buildings, courthouses and churches, until only Roark is left -- and yet, the heroic climax involves courtroom procedure in a courthouse!<br /><br />(More to come...)J. Goardnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-76704470892359289822016-04-16T19:06:48.401-07:002016-04-16T19:06:48.401-07:00@Michael:
People who love The Fountainhead show u...@Michael:<br /><br />People who love The Fountainhead show up in some unlikely places. Actor Michael Caine, for example, who named his first daughter Dominique. She was born in 1956, one year before Atlas Shrugged.<br /><br />I can see how people who don't share Rand's ethics or politics could be inspired by Roark's uncompromising integrity. That's not the case when it comes to Atlas Shrugged: either you buy the whole package or you don't buy in at all.Gordon Burkowskinoreply@blogger.com