Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

We the Living

by Ayn Rand, Leonard Peikoff (Goodreads Author) (Introduction)

3.84 of 5 stars 3.84 · rating details · 13,603 ratings · 741 reviews

Ayn Rand said of her fist novel, We the Living: "It is as near to an autobiography as I will ever write. The plot is invented, the background is not....The specific events of Kira's life were not mine; her ideas, her convictions, her values, were and are."

First published in 1936, the theme of this classic novel is the struggle of the individual against the state. It portra...more

Paperback, 60th Anniversary Edition, 464 pages

Published January 1st 1996 by Signet (first published 1936)

more details... edit details

Get a copy:

More…

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

Best Dystopian and Post-Apocalyptic Fiction

123rd out of 1,495 books — 12,010 voters

The Worst Books of All Time

496th out of 5,104 books — 14,157 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 3,000)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

May 07, 2007 oliver rated it 5 of 5 stars

Here's the thing: this book is fucking awesome. I'm a big fan of this theme - the whole "individual vs. the state" story. I think most of the books I've read in this vein were descended from "1984", but this is without doubt my favorite execution of the familiar thematic focus. This book was just so evocative for me; it did an incredible job of capturing the crushing force of living under a sociopolitical regime that cares not for the wants or needs of the individual. I found something incredibl...more

like 25 likes · see review

Mar 10, 2009 Richard Houchin rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: history, philosophy, romance

If you ever want to acquire a keen appreciation for food, read any story about the USSR. History or fiction, doesn't matter. Mildewed millet and one loaf of bread a month is enough to break anyone!

We The Living is an illustration of the loneliness that seems the unavoidable consequence of any who possess an Objectivist viewpoint.

One passage in the book made me laugh in appreciation for how true it rang in my life. Kira says,

"Well, if I asked people whether they believed in life, they'd never un

...more

like 14 likes · see review

Jan 26, 2008 Rebecca F. rated it 4 of 5 stars

Instantly as visceral as her more popular later work, Rand's first novel set in early 20th-century communist Russia can really stir you up -- that is, if you support her views on individualism and passion for life, which I do. Like her other novels, the characters are boldly drawn archetypes, strong and obvious, minus extraneous detail that could be distracting from the philosophical ideal overlaying the plot. While Rand experienced first-hand much of the life in Russia she portrays in We the Li...more

like 3 likes · see review

Oct 07, 2008 Rob rated it 3 of 5 stars

This book helped clear up some of Rand's religious philosophy. At one point, the Heroin asks a friend if he believes in God. When the friend answers no, she says that was the right answer, because if you believe in God then you don't believe in life. She goes on to explain that when people believe in God they believe in something higher than themselves that they can never achieve, and she doesn't want to believe that there is something she can never achieve. I found her reason for being an athei...more

like 4 likes · see review

Apr 02, 2013 Mike (the Paladin) rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: skimmed

Ayn Rand is/was an interesting, intelligent woman. This is her first novel. If you're reading it simply for the novel then skip the introduction. If on the other hand you are interested in Ms. Rand's thought processes then by all means read the introduction. This is (of course) a newer edition (as the book was written in 1925. Ms. Rand wants us to understand that this is not a novel about the Soviet Union but a novel (in her words) of "man against the state".

While I am not a "student" or followe...more Ayn Rand is/was an interesting, intelligent woman. This is her first novel. If you're reading it simply for the novel then skip the introduction. If on the other hand you are interested in Ms. Rand's thought processes then by all means read the introduction. This is (of course) a newer edition (as the book was written in 1925. Ms. Rand wants us to understand that this is not a novel about the Soviet Union but a novel (in her words) of "man against the state".

While I am not a "student" or follower of Ms. Rand and her philosophy (Objectivism) I do find her quite insightful..."in some ways".

There are places where I definitely disagree with Ms. Rand but on the other hand there are places she is right on and has been borne out by history. (Simply read her short discourse on "5 year plans" in the introduction).

This book tells the story of (basically) a woman. Most on Ms. Rand's writings do. She can be found in each of her books and this (even though her first) is no exception. Lets not forget that Ms. Rand's family lost everything to the Soviet revolution and while this isn't strictly about "the Soviet Union" that is a dictatorship that is "included".

As you read I think you'll see that Ms. Rand has hit the proverbial nail on the head in many ways. She points out that free people are quite often "taken in" by the idea that while the "effects" of totalitarianism..."colectiveism"...state controlled governing systems are negative the "ideals" are "noble". That, she points out has been the attitude of every free state that has ever fallen to totalitarianism.

Stalin referred to those who held this view as "useful idiots".

Ms. Rand also points out that to see this one has to be intellectually honest and open minded, willing to see it. Looking at America now it should be obvious to us but for some reason most don't see it despite the loss of prosperity, unemployment, loss of freedoms (including the erosion of rights GUARANTEED in the Bill of Rights) most not only don't see it...but seem to be voting for it.

Where do I disagree with Ms. rand? Well, she was very much a "my way or the highway" thinker. She herself had little patience with those who disagreed with her as her attitude seems to be that they just couldn't, or wouldn't see it. Also I'm a Christian and she seems to have seen little difference between putting others before yourself willingly and having the "State" force a the view that everyone must exist "for the State". There is some argument by Objectivists that she saw the difference but simply rejected religious belief. That could be the case as I noted, I'm not a "student" of Rand, I've simply read her work and some little about her.

Wherever you stand or whatever you think about the woman herself this is a book I'd recommend. It has some value and can have the effect of making us look at what we have before we lose it. I rate it a 3 as it's not quite as readable as some of her later work (it is her first after all) and can get dry. Still it's worth a read. (less)

like 4 likes · see review

Jan 07, 2013 Marts (Thinker) rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: philosophy, ayn-rand, 2012-reads

First published in 1936, the novel ‘We the Living’ by Ayn Rand is, as stated in the preface, ‘the closest she would ever come to writing an autobiography’. The novel follows three years in the life of a young girl, her family, and acquaintances, all of which must face the varied hardships of a post-revolutionary Russia.
Now Ayn Rand (born Alisa Zinov’yevna Rosenbaum) was born, raised and educated in Russia. She came from a bourgeois family and in Saint Petersburg (later referred to on separate oc...more First published in 1936, the novel ‘We the Living’ by Ayn Rand is, as stated in the preface, ‘the closest she would ever come to writing an autobiography’. The novel follows three years in the life of a young girl, her family, and acquaintances, all of which must face the varied hardships of a post-revolutionary Russia.
Now Ayn Rand (born Alisa Zinov’yevna Rosenbaum) was born, raised and educated in Russia. She came from a bourgeois family and in Saint Petersburg (later referred to on separate occasions as Petrograd and then Leningrad); her father was a successful businessman and even owned his own property. All the family’s comfort changed however under Vladimir Lenin’s rule and the Russian Revolution; first the business was lost, then the property was lost, and the family had to flea to the Crimea. On returning to Saint Petersburg, now called Petrograd, despite many distresses, Rand was able to enroll at the Petrograd State University. During her course of study she was introduced to many philosophical, historical and classical writings and upon graduating advanced to studying screen arts. Rand first arrived in America in 1925 and was given opportunity to visit a movie theatre and from hence decided to stay in America, she became a citizen in 1931.
‘We The Living’ is one of Rand’s early works. The protagonist Kira, like Rand, grows up in Russia, is from a bourgeois family, loses all life’s luxuries and is forced to live under much hardship. Kira however, possesses quite an independent spirit. She refuses to allow herself to become overly entangled in the ideals of her family or Soviet society, life is harsh, cruel, and uncertain.
Kira is finally able to enter the Technological Institute to pursue her dreams of becoming an engineer, but this privilege is also taken away due to her family’s former bourgeois status, work prospects are also difficult. Two men eventually enter Kira’s life, the first; Andrei is a Communist and part of the secret police. The second, Leo was met by chance encounter on her way home late one night, and she immediately falls in love with him.
The relationship of these three individuals forms the basis of this novel’s plot.

In my opinion, whether Kira achieves or fails in life is up to the reader’s interpretation of this plot which to me goes beyond the likes of a headstrong young woman, to that of an individual who, despite the thoughts and opinions of society, and regardless of existing physical conditions and consequences of actions, chose instead, individuality.
Kira’s experiences remind us that sometimes we may have to succumb to society’s whims but we must not allow them to engulf us.

I appreciated this line towards the novel’s end, “Life had been if only because she had known it could be…”

Despite other’s perspectives of us, our dreams, our morals, values, actions, decisions, passions; we must not allow our ambitions to be engulfed in their flames. We are rational beings, and this, our lives, must encompass our own individuality…
(less)

like 3 likes · see review

Aug 06, 2008 Amanda rated it 1 of 5 stars

I know its popular among American youth to essentially worship Ayn Rand. My main problems are two fold. Putting aside philosophical differences for a moment, i just think it was bland writing; i didnt feel for the characters, and i found the dialogue unbelievable.

Now, philosophically, i disagree with Rand greatly and I find her argument for 'objectivism' if you will, quite weak. she fails to make a fair connection between what happened in the USSR and why that should lead to such a undying love...more

like 5 likes · see review

Dec 09, 2007 Charlie Schlangen rated it 4 of 5 stars

My first foray into Ayn Rand (I have chosen to read her four major works in chronological order). The pages drip with her horror at the changes wrought by the Russian Revolution, and you cannot blame her for feeling the way she does. To watch as talented, successful, intelligent people were marginalized from society and education and the government and commerce in a sick and destructive pattern of retribution, only to find themselves replaced with people as callow and impecunious as they were ac...more

like 2 likes · see review

Kesha I think you may be missing the point regarding the protaganist. Kira is detached from her family because they are sniveling sheep, ready to sell their...more
Apr 09, 2010 10:08am

Diana Keep in mind that the author, Ayn Rand, was born in Russia. The Russian character tend to take a very dark viewpoint of the world, which is reflected...more
Oct 21, 2012 01:51pm

May 05, 2007 Sporkurai rated it 5 of 5 stars Recommends it for: Playas

Erotica at its best. We the Living is about a young lady with a brilliant mind and a ferocious appetite for sex. The book begins with Kira, a hot little harlot who might have been working at a strip joint (if they weren't so damn bourgeois!), as she seeks to find a nightlife for herself in her newly Soviet city of Petrograd. Posing as a prostitute in a red light district, she quickly forms her first life-long sexual bond with the first guy who comes along. He happens to be a philosopher, and tha...more

like 5 likes · see review

Jun 05, 2011 Carole rated it 5 of 5 stars

This is the most interesting and heartbreaking novel I've read in a very long time. I have thoroughly enjoyed anything I've ever read by Ayn Rand. Not because of her life philosophy, but because of her strong characters. This book is no different. However, it is set in 1920's communist Russia rather than 1940's United States like the others I've read. I have about 100 pages left to read, and I can barely bring myself to finish. I know it is all going to end badly. For everyone. And, unbeknownst...more

like 1 like · see review

Mar 19, 2008 Kendra Kettelhut rated it 5 of 5 stars

I just finished this book. My soul has never been so pained by a novel. Very few books affect me like this one did. I cannot explain other than it was so beautifully horrific. I knew very little about Communism or what the USSR was like. It caused so much anger and frustration in me, but the pain comes from the truths that it enlightens about humanity. We are creatures of pain and suffering and joy and and triumph. And no matter what pain we are dealt...we still have the capacity within ourselve...more

like 6 likes · see review

Dec 13, 2008 Jen rated it 3 of 5 stars

If you need to check her off your list, this is the book to start with. It was difficult going in because the dated writing style was awkward for me, but it was worthwhile getting over that hurdle.

Some people come away from Rand thinking, yeah, communism is evil and capitalism is where it's at. I came away thinking that there is no evil inherent in either model, and that greed and corruption are what's truly devastating to any system.

like 4 likes · see review

May 02, 2007 heather rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: to-read-at-least-once

While I enjoyed the Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged for their unbending optimism in man's potential, Rand's didactic promotion of her philosophical ideals would overshadow the story in numerous places. Anthem was interesting in a 1984, Fahrenheit 451 type of way. Enjoyable.

However, We the Living offers a sucker-punch of a tale about cold war Soviet Union, with none of the laboriousness of the first two, and much better characterizations than Anthem. Not my all-time favorite book, but I felt I le...more

like 2 likes · see review

May 07, 2013 RaskolnikovRR rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: favourites

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here.
Review contains expletives. Yes, a lot of them.

It's sad. It's very sad. It's very realistic too. It's got all these fancy, Russian names and then it shows that only names are fancy. Wow. This book - it's fucked up, man. I hope that it's exaggerated cos if it's not I'm hanging myself. Or maybe I'll shoot myself. Or some insecticide would do too. Jumping off a building is an option, yes. I mean, I have always heard about communism and how people don't like it and all that. Hell, there is even a le...more
Review contains expletives. Yes, a lot of them.

It's sad. It's very sad. It's very realistic too. It's got all these fancy, Russian names and then it shows that only names are fancy. Wow. This book - it's fucked up, man. I hope that it's exaggerated cos if it's not I'm hanging myself. Or maybe I'll shoot myself. Or some insecticide would do too. Jumping off a building is an option, yes. I mean, I have always heard about communism and how people don't like it and all that. Hell, there is even a legitimate party here in my country that has communistic ideals. Nobody votes for them, of course. I thought it was all bull crap and over-reactions when it came to communism. I used to think, how bad can it be? Well, let me tell you. Very, fucking bad.

I never liked Ayn Rand much. Serious. She wrote like she had a...something up her ass. Kind of pompous. And spoke like that too. Now, before you start typing hate comments on this review telling me Ayn was a sweet person and that she deserved the Nobel Prize, let me say that my opinion has changed. I read her other book - Dickhead. Oh, I mean 'Fountainhead'. Dickhead was the lead character in it. Welcome to Jackass, this is Mr. Howard Roark. He likes buildings. He likes sex. He likes blowing up buildings. Meet Dominique. She gets raped - kind of - by this dickhead and decides she loves him. And then there is the newspaper guy. Wayne. No. Waynard. Something like that. He admires Roark. He fucks Dominique. Roark is okay with it, so is Dominique.

Yeah, I never understood that book.

Something else I have observed about Ayn is that there is always infidelity in the lead character and the lead character is usually based on herself. I didn't say it. I did not say it. Don't jump to conclusions. Or do, if you want to. Don't tell me I made you. I'm not saying anything about Ayn's character or her sexual preferences. All I'm saying is this: Dominique - does both Roark and newspaper-guy, and they are both kind of okay with it. Kira Argounova - does both Leo and Andrei. Leo is angry about it, though and she doesn't even flinch or apologise. In fact, she acts surprised that Leo is even bothered about it. Kind of supercilious, this Kira.

Halfway through, I forgot my reality. I was in a place where nothing is mine and nothing matters other the common good. The food was meagre and you got it only if you worked. I couldn't buy things or sell for a profit. After all, profit is only for me not for the 'collective'. All this might sound pretty lame. I mean, how many times have you heard about 'greater good'? That term will have a whole new meaning and an entire back story after you read this. Property, food, drinks, clothes, land - every fucking thing could be taken any time and redistributed to someone who came from a less fortunate family, someone who had it rough before the revolution, someone who did not have all the luxuries you had.
(less)

like · see review

Jan 27, 2013 Nebiyu rated it 5 of 5 stars

I personally think that we the living is an entertaining book that will leave you hanging off the edge of your seat, curious to find out more and read more. The book is full of suspense as it is an encounter of how people’s lives changed after the red revolution in Russia. Through out the book Ayn Rand uses situations and characters that can easily be empathized with by any average person to show the affect the Red revolution was having on the lives of these ordinary people. The book’s protagoni...more

like · see review

Nov 08, 2012 Kyle Thompson rated it 4 of 5 stars

I've finally finished all of Ayn Rand's fiction now, and I can say that this is her most accessible, readable, realistic book. Unlike Atlas Shrugged, The Fountainhead and Anthem, this book has realistic, three dimensional characters. There isn't the black and white-ness as in her other works.

The story revolves around Kira Argounova, the protagonist, searching for someway and somehow to live the life that she knows is possible, even though she lives in the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics. She...more

like · see review

Oct 14, 2012 Alejandro rated it 5 of 5 stars

1. Based on the five parts of plot, all of the parts relate to the climax. The exposition sets the action in place for the climax. The rising action increases the tension on the action in which it’s ready to be released. The climax releases the energy and builds up and the story reaches its height. The falling action starts to end the story. The resolution ends the story and leaves with a conclusion of the action.
2. The most memorable plot moment was when Andrei committed suicide, and Kira decid...more 1. Based on the five parts of plot, all of the parts relate to the climax. The exposition sets the action in place for the climax. The rising action increases the tension on the action in which it’s ready to be released. The climax releases the energy and builds up and the story reaches its height. The falling action starts to end the story. The resolution ends the story and leaves with a conclusion of the action.
2. The most memorable plot moment was when Andrei committed suicide, and Kira decided to make decisions to change her life.
3. “A moment or an eternity-did it matter? Life, undefeated, existed and could exist.” “One hundred thousand workers died in the civil war. Why-in the face of the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics-can’t one aristocrat die?” “They are still few, those whose devotion to the State rises above all personal ties of blood and family.”
B. The first quote is significance since it shows that spirit of life is the one element that could not be taken away. The second quote is significance since it shows how many of the Soviets feel about the aristocrats. The significance of the last quote is that the Soviets demanded the loyalty to the motherland, and only to the motherland.
4. The three most important characters were Andrei, Kira, and Leo.
B. The character Andrei is a Russian communist that would risk everything for the motherland. He is a high ranking officer and shows no emotion, or pity towards anyone except for Kira. He’s friends with Kira due to their encounter in the institute; they would become close friends despite opposite political views. He helps the protagonist, Kira, over come some of the obstacles in the story. He is your typical Soviet when it comes to looks.
The character Kira is the main character in the story, which the story explains her struggles in Soviet Russia. She has a very strong spirit that the soviets can’t even contain. Kira belonged to a rich family before the war, but though to the war she suffers the life of a peasant. When it came to looks Kira wasn’t your averaged girl, she was your idol. Even though Kira still believed in the freedom in this led to her death.
The character Leo was the most suspicious of them all. He was a soldier in the white army before its collapse. He was a very handsome fellow that many girls can’t resist. He fell in love with Kira in which he would be by her until her the break for freedom. Leo was also a strong spirited person like Kira, but he could only match her for a while before he started to deteriorate.
5. The setting of the story takes place in the Russian city of Petrograd. For the first few chapters the setting takes place in Kira’s apartment. Through out the rest of the book the setting takes place in Leo’s apartment. The seasons throughout the book varies due to the month of the year. At times the story takes place in other parts of Russia, but it never leaves the country.
6. The opening scene of the story shows that they were returning to their lives, or what’s left of it. The closing scene of the story shows the freedom of a brilliant person, in which many can’t capture.
7. The protagonist’s main external conflict was adjusting to Soviet Russia. She did everything that she could do to adapt, but in the end she decided that she doesn’t need to.
8. The protagonist’s main internal conflict was staying true to herself. She faced many obstacles but in the she came out of top, by founding out what the true meaning of freedom.
(less)

like · see review

Aug 12, 2012 Kim rated it 4 of 5 stars

The year is 1922; Lenin is in power, the red party the new regime, and the ruling class is even more brutal than the Czars that came before. It is the rise of the proletariat, the working class. There is no private property- only state, only government. Every aspect of life is kept track of: ration cards are dispensed to everyone. Students get slightly more than the “non-working” citizen, union workers and party members being given the most. Should you not have a party member in your family the...more The year is 1922; Lenin is in power, the red party the new regime, and the ruling class is even more brutal than the Czars that came before. It is the rise of the proletariat, the working class. There is no private property- only state, only government. Every aspect of life is kept track of: ration cards are dispensed to everyone. Students get slightly more than the “non-working” citizen, union workers and party members being given the most. Should you not have a party member in your family the only way to make up any shortage of food was to pay private traders or, most often, smugglers that are bringing food in and selling it on the black market.

It is in this world we first meet our protagonists: Kira, an eighteen year old, fresh from Crimea- her family having fled St. Petersburg (Petrograd) years before when her father, a textile factory owner, was stripped of his business and home; Leo, a student of philosophy that is being sought out by the GPU (military) because his father was a counter-revolutionary; Andrei, a party member, a revered member of the GPU and a student at the Institute where Kira is studying engineering.

Kira and Leo are both individuals within the state; they want only to study what they would like, to learn what they deem necessary and to do so for no other reason than because it is what they want. Both with bourgeoisie roots their food supply is limited by their student status and what is left of any earnings after paying taxes to the party and its various programs. Their life together, as fraught with struggle as it is, is something they both hold dear and unto themselves. When Leo refuses to donate several hours after work to free instructional sessions for “the good of the State” he loses his job and they find themselves in a desperate situation where each lies to the other in hopes their partner, their love, will eat the only food they have. One such instance of this is when Leo is standing in line at a co-op at the University:

"Leo said to the clerk behind the counter, trying to make his voice pleading and making it only wooden, expressionless: 'Comrade clerk, would you mind if I tear next week’s coupon off, too? I’ll keep it and present it to you for my bread next week. You see, I have…there’s someone at home and I want to tell her that I got a two weeks’ ration and ate my half on the way home, so that she’ll eat all of this piece…Thank you, comrade.'"

In one short paragraph Rand shows us the desperation, the horror and the drive to support those we hold most dear through any means we have at our disposal. Leo and Kira, living together, do everything they can to insure survival of the other person but when they are both thrown from their institutions of learning because of their family history the situation becomes even more desperate. “Non-workers” and non-students get the smallest rations because they don’t contribute to the party and, at this point, it is all but impossible to gain employment without party or union status (union status only obtained if you’re working).

As Kira meets her friend Andrei for tea, him being a party member that can afford such things, he discovers how deprived she is and takes it upon himself to use his status to get her a job. His devotion to her, in this moment, seems to over ride that of his party as he gives her all his money so she might buy food. He stays devoted to her in his friendship, in his affection until one day he disappears from her life. It is only through Kira’s persistence and desperation over Leo’s newly affirmed dire medical situation that the two are reconciled and Andrei confesses his love.

The story progresses, taking the reader further into the love each of our protagonists experience as well as others but, perhaps more overwhelmingly, this book depicts the struggle for life. It is a struggle that does not just occur for those now being penalized for having “non-worker” roots, but for those that fought for the right to live for all people. Those that wanted to see an end to czarist oppression and bring about a new form of liberty in their country; the people that believed in the doctrine of Marx, of Lenin’s view for their country. The people that realized they formed a society, not for everyone, but for those in power and those willing to do anything to secure it, were then faced with the weighted guilt of killing so many outright, and even more by continuing to aid the monstrosity that was Lenin’s, then Stalin’s, regime.

This was Ayn Rand’s first novel and the beginning of her journey into the founding of “Objectivism”. Originally published in 1937 under the assumption it would not make any money but simply a work that needed to be published it is, most assuredly, a book that many should read. Through a gut wrenching portrayal of life in the USSR that Rand refers to as somewhat autobiographical, she shows the danger of those that seek to control others, to dictate how best to live, and how far and tragic having faith in a person to uphold your view can be.

The writing is a bit rough in some areas, some of the point of view shifts take you away from the story and emotion, but is still excellent. Unlike some of her later works this book is chock full of humanity and human characters- those you can relate to and believe in their existence only making it all the eerier. Her descriptions of the hunger, the sights and smell of the city as well as the outright fear of tuberculosis and of thinking are so poignant I often found myself weeping for the characters and thinking gratefully of my stores of food in the kitchen. I couldn’t recommend this novel enough- if for no other reason than the copious amounts of information bestowed upon us by a woman that lived through this time period in Russia. It is not the best novel I’ve ever read for all the reasons I mentioned above but I have yet to come across its equal in regard to historical accuracy, information as well as emotional poignancy.(less)

like · see review

Jul 30, 2012 John H.D. Lucy rated it 3 of 5 stars

I have a somewhat like-totally hate relationship with Rand. This book fits into the somewhat like category, thankfully.

In general my biggest problem with Rand is not that I disagree with her ideals and politics but that, as a novelist, ideas are clearly the fuel for the story. When an idea is the sole driving force for any work of art it is almost certainly not as good as it could be. With this book I'd be hard-pressed to say that Rand's ideas are the sole driving force of the work; although her...more I have a somewhat like-totally hate relationship with Rand. This book fits into the somewhat like category, thankfully.

In general my biggest problem with Rand is not that I disagree with her ideals and politics but that, as a novelist, ideas are clearly the fuel for the story. When an idea is the sole driving force for any work of art it is almost certainly not as good as it could be. With this book I'd be hard-pressed to say that Rand's ideas are the sole driving force of the work; although her ideas are often the major driving force, even then there is a legitimate story unfolding. Still, I can't stand her endless description of the setting, when the setting she describes is only a far off part of the characters' world; or when the characters engage in a long dialogue that is supposed to be steeped in emotion because so-and-so is in love and that-and-that is not in love, but all the while they're screaming about ideas and politics and things.

Since I do agree more with Rand's ideas here than in her other works, though, I'm willing to give it a three. At the end of the day, I think it's probably safe to say that Rand is clearly a product of her age: born in Soviet Russia, then lived in the so-called West during the Red Scare. But, I'd also venture to argue that, despite fearing for what would happen if we agreed with Rand in whole or even mostly, one is more likely to be a politically whole and well-rounded individual having read one or multiple of Rand's works. And by "politically whole and well-rounded" I mean in the original definition of "politics," meaning dealing with people: our social habits, how we relate to one another and how we work together in addition to our government structure and how we live with our governments.

For that reason, though We the Living might not be as famous as Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged, I'd first suggest someone read We the Living. The other two books, as far as I'm concerned, have much more of Rand's ideological notions strewn about that will take us beyond radical individualism, which I'm all for, and that can be scary... and it ruins the writing entirely. Here there is a lot more to Rand than mere attempts at indoctrination.(less)

like · see review

Jul 24, 2012 Lorrie Savoy rated it 3 of 5 stars

This book disturbs me and I don't quite know how to respond to it. On the one hand, the reality of Soviet Russia in the 1920's is haunting; the descriptions of food (or the lack of it) stayed with me, making me reflect on and enjoy my own meals while I was reading it and for a few days after. I also feel that it would work as a companion piece for 1984 because the tensions between the sordid details of daily life and the hypocrisy of the political system are clearly seen in both books. Rand's p...more This book disturbs me and I don't quite know how to respond to it. On the one hand, the reality of Soviet Russia in the 1920's is haunting; the descriptions of food (or the lack of it) stayed with me, making me reflect on and enjoy my own meals while I was reading it and for a few days after. I also feel that it would work as a companion piece for 1984 because the tensions between the sordid details of daily life and the hypocrisy of the political system are clearly seen in both books. Rand's philosophy is clear but not too overstated so it is easy to read it simply as a novel, not a political tract. I'm okay with all of that.
What I don't care for are the characters themselves. Kira is the worst sort of passive woman; I know I'm supposed to see her as a strong individual, but she is neither. Her goal of being an engineer is not enough to sustain her, and it is barely shown - just stated. It feels like a detail added on after a first draft of the novel to distinguish Rand from Kira (she makes a point of the difference in her introduction). Her passion for Leo is all about being subjugated by him - at one point he is even described as her "slave-owner." Details that were originally used to show how supremely unconnected Kira was from the mundane tribulations of life ("Kira never noticed what she ate" "Kira never noticed what she wore") are reversed the moment that Leo enters the picture - all of a sudden Kira is a fashion plate and wants Leo to notice how she is dressed. All of the details about how Leo can't be subjected to the sight of her cooking or cleaning truly upset me. I know I am approaching this book from a feminist perspective, but what kind of love is only able to be sustained in a perfect atmosphere with no glimpses of the everyday? Leo is loathesome; the words arrogant, contemptuous, and mocking are used in almost every passage about him - and we are supposed to admire him? Like a "young god"? Why? Just because he's hot? Really, that's what it seems to come down to. Most of the minor and background characters are awful - I can't think of a single description of a child that doesn't involve nose-picking. The older women are shrill, the older men are empty shells.
Overall, I think the world that is portrayed in We the Living is worth seeing; the characters Rand admires are not my choice for admirable human beings but there are moments in the novel where they go beyond their cardboard versions of Rand's philosophy to show true humanity. (less)

like 1 like · see review

Jul 21, 2012 Michelle rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: historical-fiction, classic-literature

I am not one to pick up historical fictions. It is always hard to know what will be good or not. This was well worth the read, though. The reason why I started reading it was because of my favorite fantasy author, Terry Goodkind. He is an objectivist in the Ayn Rand camp. Knowing this, I knew that these books that she had written would have had a huge impact on the stories that I love so dearly and the philosophies and beliefs that seemed to read so true from the depths of that fantasy world.

I d...more I am not one to pick up historical fictions. It is always hard to know what will be good or not. This was well worth the read, though. The reason why I started reading it was because of my favorite fantasy author, Terry Goodkind. He is an objectivist in the Ayn Rand camp. Knowing this, I knew that these books that she had written would have had a huge impact on the stories that I love so dearly and the philosophies and beliefs that seemed to read so true from the depths of that fantasy world.

I did not jump into reading this book right away, however. I did some studying on Objectivism and the basic philosophies from it. Though I find that I agree with many things, I find that there are some things I probably won’t agree with. It is still a good philosophy to look into.

Anyway, this book was not the edge-of-your-seat, cry-for-their-plight kind of book. But it had some element in it that made me want to see the end—to confirm what the end would be, what I knew it would be but I had to be sure. I wasn’t really sure if it would be a happy ending or not until I reached around the part where Leo returned, but I had to read it to know. I knew of only two things—-if everything worked out, I would be disappointed. That was what the book drew me to. This book, written so long ago, was literally about life. There was no major bad-guy or major hero, no fight for the world…it was about life and trying to live it in spite of the obstacles thrown at you.

The focus is mostly upon Kira, a young woman from a bourgeoisie family that had fallen during the take over of the Red Army. It details her life, the decisions she makes, and how living under communist rule in Soviet Russia of 1925 dictated the decisions she made.

The end is most appropriate. It ended how it should have ended. Any other way would have been a disservice to the story and what it meant. There were only two points in the book where I actually felt anything for any of the characters, though. One was when Irina was talking to Kira.

The second time was at the end. I don’t want to say too much about it, but Kira finally realized what the answer was to her question. She finally found meaning. Interestingly enough, when I read the end of this book, I immediately thought of “The Giver.” Whether that was because of how it was described, or because me and a student were talking about it early is uncertain, but it was there. You can draw some parallels between the books, too, when you think about it. Maybe Lowry was influenced by Rand in some way.

This book is still relevant today. These things are happening, have been happening. I am looking forward to reading the next book. I highly suggest that others read this book as well.(less)

like · see review

Mar 20, 2012 Natalie Budesa rated it 5 of 5 stars

(Slight spoilers)
This is probably one of my favorite books by Ayn Rand. It is also the most depressing one in my opinion.

The story can be simply summarized to a few characters wanting to escape communist Russia. For those wholly unfamiliar with Rand and her writing style, expect sometimes dry description, seemingly inhuman personalities and exaggerated circumstances. Usually, this writing style is pretty effective in communicating Rand's philosophy moreso than a work of fiction. That being said...more (Slight spoilers)
This is probably one of my favorite books by Ayn Rand. It is also the most depressing one in my opinion.

The story can be simply summarized to a few characters wanting to escape communist Russia. For those wholly unfamiliar with Rand and her writing style, expect sometimes dry description, seemingly inhuman personalities and exaggerated circumstances. Usually, this writing style is pretty effective in communicating Rand's philosophy moreso than a work of fiction. That being said, We the Living tones all this down and Rand's views don't seem as present and important to the plot as in her other works. The story seems more about the story - people who could have existed in the historical context of communist Russia. Her usual superhuman characters are toned down and more real-life. They aren't powerful societal or corporate figures and they don't achieve great things; no one even builds anything though the protagonist, Kira Argounova, is studying engineering. Because of all this, this book is a good introduction to Ayn Rand for those who are faintly aware or want to learn a little of her philosophy.

The heroes of the story, who typically succeed in superhuman ways in her other books, surprisingly disappointed me. Not in that they were poorly written or imagined, but in that they were all only human in the end. Because of this, Rand's views probably are communicated in the best way possible - they are not preached for pages on end, but told more simply, in a story where not much happens plot-wise. But Rand's writing style communicates so much happening within the characters - lost hopes, loves, and freedoms. Instead of the reader learning what Rand supports and cherishes in life through dramatic victories or long speeches, it is told through loss. The sadness of the story did not make me feel like Rand was a boasting, hot-headed egoist, but someone who could have developed her views from honest, desperate circumstances (though the story isn't intended as autobiographical). One of the saddest scenes to me was the description of a character examining a drawer of clothes, and I think that says something about the powerfulness of the writing and story (as to why that's sad, you'll just have to read).

What is good in life is not stuffed down the reader's throat, glorified in an utopia as in Atlas Shrugged; it is torn away, like a gaping wound, bleeding red (pun intended). I'm not a Rand enthusiast or full-fledged supporter, but the simpler circumstances of the setting and simpler goals of the characters communicate Rand's views in the most touching way out of all her works. (less)

like 1 like · see review

Jan 03, 2012 Adam rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: fiction

Another December of Ayn Rand. . .yes.

I don't know if it helps coming from the dry an impersonal texts of law school, or whether the anticipation built up waiting for this self-prescribed end-of-the-year treat creates such a yearning for a good read, but either way, Ms. Rand delivers on another one here!

We the Living tugs at the emotions throughout. I feared my deep distaste for historical novels would turn me off to a story set in (seemingly ancient) Soviet Russia. Kira however drew me in to her...more

like · see review

Oct 11, 2011 Marn Mg rated it 5 of 5 stars

Being Ayn's first book, she was writing mostly about her own experiences and the USSR communist philosophy's that were killing so many people. She wanted to tell the world (although at the time, sadly, the world would not listen). You don't need to agree with her beliefs to see what horrific crimes were occurring. You can see from future writings that her beliefs are further and more strongly developed after this book. Hence, while future books are more of a story wound around a set of beliefs,...more Being Ayn's first book, she was writing mostly about her own experiences and the USSR communist philosophy's that were killing so many people. She wanted to tell the world (although at the time, sadly, the world would not listen). You don't need to agree with her beliefs to see what horrific crimes were occurring. You can see from future writings that her beliefs are further and more strongly developed after this book. Hence, while future books are more of a story wound around a set of beliefs, We The Living is mostly story (of course, based on real life). We The Living is written in a different style than future books as well, although extremely well written. Gripping and sad, the story reveals a specific point and place in a real history from an insider's perspective - something we are not often privy to.

The absolute tyrannical and brainwashing power of the communist government is illustrated in ways such as: you could not get food without a food card, you could not get a food card without being a student in the communist schools teaching their propaganda or without having a job. You couldn't get a job without selling your soul to the communist belief system, by joining a "union" or "club" preaching communist beliefs. You couldn't stay in those unions or clubs without making it known visibly to all around you, constantly, that you felt strongly and lived by those beliefs. Any deviation from such could cost you your membership. This entailed doing things such as "volunteering" after a long day's work to teach children the communist beliefs through propagandistic methods. Everything was documented on papers that you had to carry around. If you didn't have the right approvals or stamps, you weren't accepted by the system and couldn't survive. Although there were no video camera's back then, there were eyes everywhere. Nothing could be easily hidden. In the desperate race for survival, family member was turned against family member. You eventually became a one-thought robot, solely for the purpose of being able to stay alive, to receive a slice of bread or a half pound of mildewy millet for the week. No time or energy was left to be able to keep and maintain your core beliefs. At a certain point the only choice left was to concede your thoughts or concede your life. When one is starving or threatened with imminent instant death, the governmental idea is that one will do anything for any small amount of somewhat edible food or grasp on live. It is eventually easier to just give in to what the government wants. They create an easily controllable population. This was all controlled by endless detailed paperwork, citizen files and people turning against other people; and how easy it was for the USSR government. Imagine how many millions of times easier this would be in this present-day future, with the internet, computers, programming, coding, video cameras, and endless ways to keep track of everyone's beliefs, on goings and day-to-day lives. Endless ways to distribute propaganda. Endless ways to control food, water, shelter and life through already existing government control on farms, water, means of transportation and fuel, heat, energy, banks, corporations, etc. It would not take much in the world of today, and every day it gets easier and easier.(less)

like 1 like · see review

Sep 20, 2011 Lo rated it 4 of 5 stars

I'm going to kind of branch out here and do a different review and talk just what I felt strongly about in this book. If you would like a brief summary, wikipedia does an excellent job.
Anyways, this book was one of the most devastatingly beautiful books I've ever read. The scene between Irina and Sascha broke my heart - it's one of the moments where, in typical Rand fashion, she weaves her characters into such real but horrendously tragic situations you just weep. I would recommend this book to...more I'm going to kind of branch out here and do a different review and talk just what I felt strongly about in this book. If you would like a brief summary, wikipedia does an excellent job.
Anyways, this book was one of the most devastatingly beautiful books I've ever read. The scene between Irina and Sascha broke my heart - it's one of the moments where, in typical Rand fashion, she weaves her characters into such real but horrendously tragic situations you just weep. I would recommend this book to some who is either (a) lacking motivation in their life (b) wants to know more from a fictional perspective what communism is like to live in (c) has had their heart broken by an ideal (d) Rand lovers.
I want to focus on the love triangle of Andrei-Kira-Leo here. What this book gets at is three types of love and the chaos that descends from them. For Andrei, it's infatuation. Oh Andrei, he's wonderful. The more the book progresses, the more you just want to remove him from the story line and rescue him from the horrors contained in this book. He's the dashing communist who falls in love with the revolutionary Kira, a woman of pure passion and ideals. He fights it, but his infatuation for this woman who encompasses everything he has ever wanted in a woman takes over and turns him into her pawn. Eventually, he breaks free, giving the ultimate sacrifice to Kira to show his "unending" (re: completely obsessive) love for her. Ultimately he (well, spoiler) loses, he takes his own life unable to bear to live without Kira. Weak.
So, Kira; Yes, our strong female lead, modelled after Rand herself. She's beautiful, talented, intelligent, and most importantly she wants to live and experience more than anything. The fight and drive of this girl is incredible and truly inspirational. What's her flaw? While posing as a hooker one night, she "meets her one" Leo. She does everything for Leo on his command. At first, things are beautiful between them - they are each other's halves. They don't do things based on other's opinions, they act according to their passion (which is primarily for each other). Kira loves Leo, even after his transformation (going to Crimea), where Leo changes drastically. Although carrying on a passionate affair with Andrei, she is loyal (I know, it's a paradox) to Leo always and that is the one ember that keeps her going, this all encompassing love. Even when Leo breaks her heart, she takes it (and takes it out on other people) and continues to passionately love him. Really weak. Kira, starting out promising, ends up being the most disappointing female Rand character yet. Her strength < her idealistic obsession with Leo. Ugh.
And Leo. He starts out wonderful, as I said, Kira's other half. However, he gives up on everything at one point. He may have loved Kira at one point, but he never loves her above himself. I think the ending here with Leo was a little farfetched, but essentially, Leo is an entirely selfish being. I give Kira this, the point Rand is trying to make is that without communism, Leo would have been the man for Kira, the one she first met. However, after he loses all hope, he becomes an alcoholic and mentally abusive towards Kira (especially in his frustration over her being the breadwinner). Leo becomes a character towards the end that you shake your head at and wonder how someone could be so ungrateful and so miserable.
If only Kira had gone abroad with Andrei to live happily forever. But that isn't the way Rand wanted it; she wanted to show two things. One, obviously, communism is evil (duh, it's a Rand book) and (2) blinding love will destroy who you are. I think she tries to redeem Kira in the end there, but Kira's failure to pursue the life of her dreams is a total failure in my mind, and she sacrificed all her opportunities for a glimmer of the Leo she first new. That is not solid advice to offer the younger generations Miss Rand, but at least in my mind, she conveys this solidarity in true love (Irina and Sascha) vs the destructive love (Andrei, Kira).
Read if you get a chance; The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged have better defined characters, yet as Rand's first novel, We the Living leaves its mark on the reader.(less)

like 1 like · see review

Aug 28, 2011 Jason Beineke rated it 4 of 5 stars

While this the first book published by Ayn Rand it definitely sets the pattern for her later books, up to Atlas Shrugged. We start with the main protagonist, Kira, a strong woman who has fallen in love with a dynamic, but somewhat damaged and dangerous, man while also cultivating yearnings for a far stabler man whom she should devote herself towards but does not. In many ways this is akin to Rand herself, who seemed to have recreated the same female template, taking herself as the basis, for Fou...more

like · see review

Aug 18, 2011 Tania Brzovic rated it 5 of 5 stars

I thought this was an excellent novel, regardless of where you sit politically. I certainly don't share Rand's philosophies.Don't prejudge the novel and decide not to read it because you dislike Rand/Objectivism.

The story is genuinely moving and the characters, particularly the main character, are well drawn. I understood why she felt the way she did, and why she made the choices she did. Rand created some very evocative images in the novel -- I felt like I was there. I got totally pulled into...more

like · see review

Aug 06, 2011 Bonnie rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition Recommends it for: All Rand fans who have already read other novels (don't start here)

Shelves: philosophy, dystopian

"Kira, the highest thing in a man is not his god. It's that in him which knows the reverence due a god. And you, Kira, are my highest reverence."

You won't finish this story and feel uplifted. The book is a warning, and depressing to the core. And it's a real, deep sadness-- not a cheap shot at the reader's heartstrings. It was supposedly going to be called "Air-tight," and that's exactly the sense of the world that I got while reading.

It's also an odd book relative to Rand's other novels. I've r...more

like · see review

Feb 19, 2011 Velvetink marked it as to-read · review of another edition

Shelves: historical-fiction, politics, russia-russian

".......My heart is a tractor raking the soil,
My soul is smoke from the factory oil..." = page 163

I just 're-found" this old paperback in my old backpack stashed under my parents house. I never finished it. I originally found it in the back seat pocket hold-it-all on a Garuda flight from Indonesia...wondering if we'd ever make it through the electrical storm- the plane kept suddenly dropping and the lights flickering & I was frantically searching for the map/plan of the planes exit doors (th...more

like 2 likes · see review

Dec 01, 2009 Kay Fair rated it 5 of 5 stars

Ayn Rand claimed that We The Living was as close as an autobiography as she'd ever write. The heroine of the tale, Kira, manages to rise above the hopelessness of Communist Russia and find solace in her own will and desires. Her hard-headed determination to succeed as an engineer, merely because she WANTS to succeed as an engineer can easily be interchanged with Ms. Rand's struggles to become a writer in that same environment. Reading the text with the concept of near-biographical context, it is...more

like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 99 100 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

topics	posts	views	last activity
book review	2	24	Oct 26, 2012 11:38am

combine
Other Editions (50)

More editions...

Genres

Classics

159 users

Philosophy

129 users

Literature

56 users

Historical Fiction

37 users

Politics

27 users

Novels

21 users

Cultural > Russia

20 users

Science Fiction > Dystopia

16 users

Classics > Classic Literature

9 users

Adult Fiction

8 users

See top shelves...

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About Ayn Rand

Alisa Rosenbaum was born in pre-revolutionary St. Petersburg to a prosperous Jewish family. When the Bolsheviks requisitioned the pharmacy owned by her father, Fronz, the Rosenbaums fled to the Crimea. Alisa returned to the city (renamed Leningrad) to attend the university, but in 1926 relatives who had already settled in America offered her the chance of joining them there. With money from the sa...more

More about Ayn Rand...

Books by Ayn Rand

More…

Share This Book

Facebook Twitter Your website

Trivia About We the Living

2 trivia questions
1 quiz

More quizzes & trivia...

Quotes from We the Living

“Because, you see, God—whatever anyone chooses to call God—is one's highest conception of the highest possible. And whoever places his highest conception above his own possibility thinks very little of himself and his life. It's a rare gift, you know, to feel reverence for your own life and to want the best, the greatest, the highest possible, here, now, for your very own. To imagine a heaven and then not to dream of it, but to demand it.” — 46 people liked it

“She smiled. She knew she was dying. But it did not matter any longer. She had known something which no human words could ever tell and she knew it now. She had been awaiting it and she felt it, as if it had been, as if she had lived it. Life had been, if only because she had known it could be, and she felt it now as a hymn without sound, deep under the little whole that dripped red drops into the snow, deeper than that from which the red drops came. A moment or an eternity- did it matter? Life, undefeated, existed and could exist. She smiled, her last smile, to so much that had been possible.” — 45 people liked it

More quotes…

title link	preview: We the Living
avg rating	preview: We the Living Goodreads rating: 3.84 (13603 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/668.We_the_Living?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1306188481l/668.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/668.We_the_Living?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]We the Living by Ayn Rand[/url]

We the Living

Friend Reviews

Community Reviews

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website