What do you think?
Rate this book
Reason Reigns
A novel of ideas with nonstop suspenseful action. Its theme is: "Heaven on Earth can be achieved when reason reigns." Young beau ideals shine as battles are joined between tyrants who crave to rule and thinkers who cannot be ruled.
- GenresFiction
380 pages, Paperback
First published May 14, 2008
About the author
Ilyn Ross
2 books137 followersI learned fiction writing from Ayn Rand's The Romantic Manifesto (A Philosophy of Literature), and from books that pleasure me. I revere Ayn Rand and her hero in The Fountainhead, Howard Roark.
I adore men of mettle like Dr. Jose Rizal, President George Washington, President Thomas Jefferson, the other Founding Fathers, and President Abraham Lincoln. I admire great innovators like Galileo, Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, James Jerome Hill, and Mike Milken.
The values, virtues, and achievements of my heroes, as well as their battles, are an inspiration in my life and writing.
I work in the IT department of a company located in Midtown Manhattan.
My political articles are here: http://ilynross.blogspot.com/
I adore men of mettle like Dr. Jose Rizal, President George Washington, President Thomas Jefferson, the other Founding Fathers, and President Abraham Lincoln. I admire great innovators like Galileo, Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, James Jerome Hill, and Mike Milken.
The values, virtues, and achievements of my heroes, as well as their battles, are an inspiration in my life and writing.
I work in the IT department of a company located in Midtown Manhattan.
My political articles are here: http://ilynross.blogspot.com/
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews
April 4, 2011
I have a question, for you, dear reader of this review: how many times in your life have you encountered a novel printed entirely in sans-serif font? I'm willing to bet the number you come up with is, if not "zero," then very low indeed—on the higher end, perhaps, if you read more self-published/POD fiction than I do. Reason Reigns is the first book I can ever recall reading in sans-serif font, and until now, I've given scant thought to the fact that the publishing industry adheres to a serif standard for its novels. I'm not sure how well the science supports the position that "serif fonts are easier to read," but it's certainly true that thanks to this nearly universal usage of them, I am used to serif fonts in my novels and conditioned to expect them. I don't expect novels to deviate from this, and when they do, it becomes that much harder to pay attention to the story, because all the while I'm worrying about the typeface. Thus, when I opened Reason Reigns and found a sans-serif bonanza, I was stymied.
That feeling didn't go away.
This is probably my fault. I somehow got it into my head that this was a book about the conflict between reason and irrationality, that it was set in a world at a time roughly analogous to our Enlightenment. Now that I think about it, the odd cadence and syntax of the back cover copy should have alerted me that this book is something else entirely. That being said, it took me until page 3 to realize exactly what was going on.
It should not come as a surprise, especially if you've read my reviews of The Sword of Truth series, that I'm not a fan of Objectivism, mostly because I find it rather silly. So when I realized that I had stumbled onto a thinly-veiled treatise on the subject, a hitherto-silent voice in my brain suddenly begun yelling, "Run away, Ben! Run away now!" Unfortunately, I am stubborn and hate to give up on a book, so I persevered.
This is the tale of my miraculous survival and inexorable defeat.
One good thing came out of my attempt at reading Reason Reigns: I have a lot more respect for Terry Goodkind as a writer. He might lay on the philosophy in large gobs of speeches, narration, straw men, and Mary Sues, but he can actually tell a story. Say what you might about the series, and especially its protagonist, some of the Sword of Truth books aren't that bad. They are at least readable.
The book opens—as far as I can tell, because the abstract diction made it difficult to follow what was happening—with a doctor refusing to provide medicine, which he invented, that is the only known cure for a deadly disease. His reason?
As the movie trailer voiceover might say, "In a world where doctors do not take the Hippocratic Oath … one man stands against all those who would dare live without paying him for the privilege!" And, let me be clear, this doctor, Ari Hugo, is supposed to be a good guy. We're supposed to be cheering for someone who sits around cackling about how awesome it is that those darn poor people haven't violated his right to make a profit off his medicine. Somewhere, the shade of Charles Dickens is having a conniption.
The next paragraph goes on:
And this is really where the problems with the book, in terms of its incoherent style, become apparent. In a lighter book that aims for the absurd, like Liberation: Being the Adventures of the Slick Six After the Collapse of the United States of America , this type of melodrama might work. However, it is regrettably, gobsmackingly clear that Ilyn Ross and Reason Reigns are utterly serious. More's the pity.
It's also vague. It speaks of antagonists to Ari's cause as if they are a nebulous, unseen force that threaten him at every corner. And it tells me nothing about either Ari's supporters or his opponents, except that apparently in the world of Reason Reigns, if you disagree with someone, you are morally obligated to "destroy" them.…
Moving on to page 4, we arrive at my next "WTF" sticky note: a conversation between Lola, Ari's ten-year-old daughter, and a classmate:
This is the point where I realized the Objectivist subtext. We have a ten-year-old girl telling her classmate about how the best thing to do is "love oneself" and condemn modesty.
Reason Reigns employs flashbacks that are mercifully labelled in large letters at each chapter heading. It starts in the present in what is essentially a prologue, then it jumps back forty years and works its way back to the present day over about fifty pages. This type of narrative structure is fine, ordinarily, but the same problems I had comprehending the plot made it difficult to distinguish between any changes in the time period. Every chapter, every set of characters, every single conversation, sounds very similar. It's bland.
So a few chapters down the road, we get to learn how Ari married the woman who becomes Lola's mother. Let's watch:
So Ari has the physique of a Greek god. Good to know. Oh, and following this conversation, Ari and Glenda get married after 4 days, and that's when they learn each other's last names.
No one talks like that. It's the exact opposite of natural conversation, at least among people who are older than five. Stilted dialogue is a big problem in Reason Reigns. Here's some more:
This is As You Know exposition in its rawest form. Ari is stating facts like he's some kind of computer program. He's not human. While I like to entertain the notion of "love at first sight" and wholly support authors who choose to include it in their fiction, Ari and Glenda's relationship tests even my credulity. They fall in love and get married after 4 days? With nary a fight or disagreement between them? It's not believable. You might even call it … unreasonable.
So yeah, I'm not a fan of Objectivism, but that is far from my only (or even my major) objection to this book. I should be able to read a book whose themes I disagree with and, if not enjoy it, at least finish it. I did it for The Sword of Truth. Unfortunately, beyond its questionable philosophical underpinnings, Reason Reigns just isn't a good novel. The prose is lacklustre in a phenomenal way; the dialogue is stilted; the characters are flat and unbelievable.
Reason Reigns fails at telling a story. A story is more than narrative, more than plot, and certainly more than theme. It is the expert combination of all of these ingredients, and more, into something that sways us both by reason and by emotion. One cannot successfully tell a story using logos alone. That makes for a dry, brittle thing. Adding ethos—which Reason Reigns sorely lacks—would help too, for strong characters aid one's rhetoric even as they bolster and support the story itself. Above all else, however, one cannot forget pathos. We have to feel for the characters, to sympathize if not empathize with their plight, to understand their sorrow and their suffering. Otherwise, without that emotional connection, the story is an empty husk.
I couldn't finish Reason Reigns. I made it through fifty-six pages, and then I decided I'd had enough. When I give up on a book, it's not because I dislike its plot (although that's usually part of the problem). No, I like to finish my books, and since I joined Goodreads I have only given up on three. When I give up on a book, it's usually due to an incompatibility between the way the book was written and the way I like to read. Often this isn't a reflection on the book's quality—I could not, for the life of me, finish Blindness , even though I know many people find it a poignant tale.
In this case, my rejection is a reflection on the book's quality.
Reason Reigns is a painfully earnest endeavour. Putting aside my reservations about Objectivism for a moment and treating this book only as evincing motifs of rationalism, there is potential here. I find the idea of reifying the forces of rationalism and anti-rationalism in the form of political entities really fascinating. But the "Big Idea" of a novel is never going to be sufficient for the novel to succeed. Success requires also a proportional level of skill. And sandwiched as she was in my reading between the consummate skill of Robertson Davies, China Miéville, and Ursula K. Le Guin—all of them masters of their craft—Ross' shortcomings in this area are all the more apparent.
That feeling didn't go away.
This is probably my fault. I somehow got it into my head that this was a book about the conflict between reason and irrationality, that it was set in a world at a time roughly analogous to our Enlightenment. Now that I think about it, the odd cadence and syntax of the back cover copy should have alerted me that this book is something else entirely. That being said, it took me until page 3 to realize exactly what was going on.
It should not come as a surprise, especially if you've read my reviews of The Sword of Truth series, that I'm not a fan of Objectivism, mostly because I find it rather silly. So when I realized that I had stumbled onto a thinly-veiled treatise on the subject, a hitherto-silent voice in my brain suddenly begun yelling, "Run away, Ben! Run away now!" Unfortunately, I am stubborn and hate to give up on a book, so I persevered.
This is the tale of my miraculous survival and inexorable defeat.
One good thing came out of my attempt at reading Reason Reigns: I have a lot more respect for Terry Goodkind as a writer. He might lay on the philosophy in large gobs of speeches, narration, straw men, and Mary Sues, but he can actually tell a story. Say what you might about the series, and especially its protagonist, some of the Sword of Truth books aren't that bad. They are at least readable.
The book opens—as far as I can tell, because the abstract diction made it difficult to follow what was happening—with a doctor refusing to provide medicine, which he invented, that is the only known cure for a deadly disease. His reason?
"As I will not be ruled by a single human being, neither will I forfeit my rights to the public. An emperor has no claim on me; neither does a poor man. Need is not a claim."
As the movie trailer voiceover might say, "In a world where doctors do not take the Hippocratic Oath … one man stands against all those who would dare live without paying him for the privilege!" And, let me be clear, this doctor, Ari Hugo, is supposed to be a good guy. We're supposed to be cheering for someone who sits around cackling about how awesome it is that those darn poor people haven't violated his right to make a profit off his medicine. Somewhere, the shade of Charles Dickens is having a conniption.
The next paragraph goes on:
Many appreciated Ari's principled stance which was in keeping with the individual rights enshrined in the island's Constitution. But some vowed to destroy him. Each thought, "Ari is a danger to our cause and to society. He must be stopped!"
And this is really where the problems with the book, in terms of its incoherent style, become apparent. In a lighter book that aims for the absurd, like Liberation: Being the Adventures of the Slick Six After the Collapse of the United States of America , this type of melodrama might work. However, it is regrettably, gobsmackingly clear that Ilyn Ross and Reason Reigns are utterly serious. More's the pity.
It's also vague. It speaks of antagonists to Ari's cause as if they are a nebulous, unseen force that threaten him at every corner. And it tells me nothing about either Ari's supporters or his opponents, except that apparently in the world of Reason Reigns, if you disagree with someone, you are morally obligated to "destroy" them.…
Moving on to page 4, we arrive at my next "WTF" sticky note: a conversation between Lola, Ari's ten-year-old daughter, and a classmate:
"It's good to be humble."
"Why?"
"Everybody says so."
"I am not humble," Lola declared. "I respect and love myself. I always do my best because I don't ever want to feel low and small."
Lola's classmate realized that self-love was the hallmark of a good person.
This is the point where I realized the Objectivist subtext. We have a ten-year-old girl telling her classmate about how the best thing to do is "love oneself" and condemn modesty.
Reason Reigns employs flashbacks that are mercifully labelled in large letters at each chapter heading. It starts in the present in what is essentially a prologue, then it jumps back forty years and works its way back to the present day over about fifty pages. This type of narrative structure is fine, ordinarily, but the same problems I had comprehending the plot made it difficult to distinguish between any changes in the time period. Every chapter, every set of characters, every single conversation, sounds very similar. It's bland.
So a few chapters down the road, we get to learn how Ari married the woman who becomes Lola's mother. Let's watch:
The lady saw Ari enter the bookstore. His confident bearing caught her eye. She looked at him closely and felt attraction for the first time. He had an athletic, six-foot-five-inch frame, ruddy complexion, short, dark, wavy hair, and a strong face with a perfectly chiseled nose. The lady approached and engaged him in a conversation. She looked into his eyes. They conveyed a powerful intelligence. She fell in love.
"I am Ari. You must love reading. You know a lot about books."
"I work here. I am Glenda."
"Glenda, may I invite you for dinner?"
So Ari has the physique of a Greek god. Good to know. Oh, and following this conversation, Ari and Glenda get married after 4 days, and that's when they learn each other's last names.
No one talks like that. It's the exact opposite of natural conversation, at least among people who are older than five. Stilted dialogue is a big problem in Reason Reigns. Here's some more:
"Jaya is now forty-four years old." Ari remembered details. "Jon Ray is the policeman's son. He is twenty-one years old. Who is the bride?"
This is As You Know exposition in its rawest form. Ari is stating facts like he's some kind of computer program. He's not human. While I like to entertain the notion of "love at first sight" and wholly support authors who choose to include it in their fiction, Ari and Glenda's relationship tests even my credulity. They fall in love and get married after 4 days? With nary a fight or disagreement between them? It's not believable. You might even call it … unreasonable.
So yeah, I'm not a fan of Objectivism, but that is far from my only (or even my major) objection to this book. I should be able to read a book whose themes I disagree with and, if not enjoy it, at least finish it. I did it for The Sword of Truth. Unfortunately, beyond its questionable philosophical underpinnings, Reason Reigns just isn't a good novel. The prose is lacklustre in a phenomenal way; the dialogue is stilted; the characters are flat and unbelievable.
Reason Reigns fails at telling a story. A story is more than narrative, more than plot, and certainly more than theme. It is the expert combination of all of these ingredients, and more, into something that sways us both by reason and by emotion. One cannot successfully tell a story using logos alone. That makes for a dry, brittle thing. Adding ethos—which Reason Reigns sorely lacks—would help too, for strong characters aid one's rhetoric even as they bolster and support the story itself. Above all else, however, one cannot forget pathos. We have to feel for the characters, to sympathize if not empathize with their plight, to understand their sorrow and their suffering. Otherwise, without that emotional connection, the story is an empty husk.
I couldn't finish Reason Reigns. I made it through fifty-six pages, and then I decided I'd had enough. When I give up on a book, it's not because I dislike its plot (although that's usually part of the problem). No, I like to finish my books, and since I joined Goodreads I have only given up on three. When I give up on a book, it's usually due to an incompatibility between the way the book was written and the way I like to read. Often this isn't a reflection on the book's quality—I could not, for the life of me, finish Blindness , even though I know many people find it a poignant tale.
In this case, my rejection is a reflection on the book's quality.
Reason Reigns is a painfully earnest endeavour. Putting aside my reservations about Objectivism for a moment and treating this book only as evincing motifs of rationalism, there is potential here. I find the idea of reifying the forces of rationalism and anti-rationalism in the form of political entities really fascinating. But the "Big Idea" of a novel is never going to be sufficient for the novel to succeed. Success requires also a proportional level of skill. And sandwiched as she was in my reading between the consummate skill of Robertson Davies, China Miéville, and Ursula K. Le Guin—all of them masters of their craft—Ross' shortcomings in this area are all the more apparent.
February 5, 2009
Let me just say I hate reading books online I am an ol fashion curl up and read kinda girl but this was well worth it!! I will be saving pennies to purchase this as it is one that I must have on my shelves.
*********below is my previous review****
I am having to read it online since I have no $$ and my library does not have this at all.. I have read part 1 and am loving it. It is very intriguing and character development is done fast with no long drawn out history that has no bearing once the story gets rolling. For those of you like me (flat broke) our gracious author has it available to read here on Goodreads join the group or at least check it out...Its well worth the read... Its one of my groups :)
*********below is my previous review****
I am having to read it online since I have no $$ and my library does not have this at all.. I have read part 1 and am loving it. It is very intriguing and character development is done fast with no long drawn out history that has no bearing once the story gets rolling. For those of you like me (flat broke) our gracious author has it available to read here on Goodreads join the group or at least check it out...Its well worth the read... Its one of my groups :)
November 2, 2008
I found this book to be a page turner with great characters, mesmerizing, enthralling. The way it was written made it very easy on the eyes. The plot was different for me because you just never knew which character wouldn't make it. Toward the end the suspense was riveting. A good read for anyone.
I now know why Reason Reigns.
Donna
Read
November 2, 2008I am very proud of Reason Reigns. It is a novel I wish I had read when I was a youngster; it depicts philosophy in a way that kids could grasp and enjoy.
July 13, 2008
Great read! Makes your heart race and your mind run like never before.
July 17, 2008
great read.:)
suggested for children and adults alike.
you will enjoy each page.
suggested for children and adults alike.
you will enjoy each page.
Want to Read
December 12, 2008I have to thank goodreads for giving me this book, once I have trawled through the rest of the world and the void I will give it a read and let everyone know what I think.
September 15, 2009
To get this out of the way, I did not find this to be a readable novel for enjoyment. It is the first effort of a new writer, and it was clearly written in earnest with obvious passion and commitment. The writing has an edge, and the outlines of imaginative talent are evident. If sincerity was the key ingredient in readable literature, this would be an outstanding title.
On first glance the typography is distracting: double spacing between paragraphs with text that is san-serif and not indented. Moving beyond the aesthetic elements, the reader encounters a fast-moving stream of one-dimensional characters, names/aliases, relationships, and motives. The author moves these faint, multitudinous characters through the narrative to illustrate various ideological points, which is perhaps appropriate as they are as human and emotionally resonant as plastic chess pieces. All Good Characters are heroic "Mary Sues" and all Bad Characters are uniformly weak and diabolical.
As a novel it does not succeed, but the truth is that "Reason Reigns" is not a novel but a polemic. This is understandable as Ross is a self-considered protégé of Ayn Rand, and "Reason Reigns" follows in the tradition of Rand's own works such as "The Fountainhead" and "Atlas Shrugs." Unfortunately Rand is a dubious role model, because even her most influential follower, Alan Greenspan, Chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1987 to 2006, recently reported an error in Rand's philosophy, ie, that humans do *not* always act rationally in their own self-interest. (Note: Greenspan said this after being called to Congressional hearings to explain his role in the current economic debacle. "Oops" was his basic response.)
Overt proselytizing of an ideology presented as fictitious entertainment is treacherous because it offers idealized fiction as a metaphor for real life. For one example, the character of a doctor, Ari Hugo, is asked to give up the "fruits of his labors" in the form of a desperately-needed cure ... which he and he alone discovered. Dr. Hugo has apparently received no assistance in his creation, meaning he had no teachers, attended no school, apparently deduced the scientific method on his own, learned nothing from others and generally developed his unique cure for humanity entirely outside of all human influence. He is a Benevolent Superman, beholden to none, the Idealized Man. And since the good Doctor invented this cure by himself, he valiantly refuses to make it available to "the poor" in need. This refusal is termed a principled stance. In fact it is mere nihilism.
The author was influenced by "The Fountainhead," a work of Rand's that presents the appealing story of a man living by his own high ideals, away from the suffocation of conformity. And like that work, "Reason Reigns" does mix truth in with the batter, but ends up mistaking self-gratification for independence. Rand's Roark is taken as admirable because he fights the Establishment: what Rand never realizes (or tells her readers) is that in the real, actual world of human beings, oppressive Establishments represent the leveraged forces she claims are victims of the majority. Rand switched the labels. As Greenspan said ... oops.
Foregoing actual reality may be acceptable in a fantasy novel, but it renders meaningless a work of ideology. "Reason Reigns" is a haunting tribute to mistaken rhetoric, but one that leaves the reader with a good impression of this new author. The book feels like a rhetorical assault, and that itself is a testimony to the talent of this young author. This was an ambitious attempt, too ambitious perhaps, but that can also be said to be a saving grace of an author's debut work.
On first glance the typography is distracting: double spacing between paragraphs with text that is san-serif and not indented. Moving beyond the aesthetic elements, the reader encounters a fast-moving stream of one-dimensional characters, names/aliases, relationships, and motives. The author moves these faint, multitudinous characters through the narrative to illustrate various ideological points, which is perhaps appropriate as they are as human and emotionally resonant as plastic chess pieces. All Good Characters are heroic "Mary Sues" and all Bad Characters are uniformly weak and diabolical.
As a novel it does not succeed, but the truth is that "Reason Reigns" is not a novel but a polemic. This is understandable as Ross is a self-considered protégé of Ayn Rand, and "Reason Reigns" follows in the tradition of Rand's own works such as "The Fountainhead" and "Atlas Shrugs." Unfortunately Rand is a dubious role model, because even her most influential follower, Alan Greenspan, Chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1987 to 2006, recently reported an error in Rand's philosophy, ie, that humans do *not* always act rationally in their own self-interest. (Note: Greenspan said this after being called to Congressional hearings to explain his role in the current economic debacle. "Oops" was his basic response.)
Overt proselytizing of an ideology presented as fictitious entertainment is treacherous because it offers idealized fiction as a metaphor for real life. For one example, the character of a doctor, Ari Hugo, is asked to give up the "fruits of his labors" in the form of a desperately-needed cure ... which he and he alone discovered. Dr. Hugo has apparently received no assistance in his creation, meaning he had no teachers, attended no school, apparently deduced the scientific method on his own, learned nothing from others and generally developed his unique cure for humanity entirely outside of all human influence. He is a Benevolent Superman, beholden to none, the Idealized Man. And since the good Doctor invented this cure by himself, he valiantly refuses to make it available to "the poor" in need. This refusal is termed a principled stance. In fact it is mere nihilism.
The author was influenced by "The Fountainhead," a work of Rand's that presents the appealing story of a man living by his own high ideals, away from the suffocation of conformity. And like that work, "Reason Reigns" does mix truth in with the batter, but ends up mistaking self-gratification for independence. Rand's Roark is taken as admirable because he fights the Establishment: what Rand never realizes (or tells her readers) is that in the real, actual world of human beings, oppressive Establishments represent the leveraged forces she claims are victims of the majority. Rand switched the labels. As Greenspan said ... oops.
Foregoing actual reality may be acceptable in a fantasy novel, but it renders meaningless a work of ideology. "Reason Reigns" is a haunting tribute to mistaken rhetoric, but one that leaves the reader with a good impression of this new author. The book feels like a rhetorical assault, and that itself is a testimony to the talent of this young author. This was an ambitious attempt, too ambitious perhaps, but that can also be said to be a saving grace of an author's debut work.
July 17, 2008
inspiring. great.
Read
November 4, 2008Won copy through Author's Giveaway program. Very interesting approach and unique style. Humanistic self-expression in its purest form. Applause to Ilyn for her accomplishment.
July 17, 2008
excellent
October 8, 2008
Very good read. It will stay in my bookcase to be read again.
July 31, 2009
By the chapters avaiable at GoodReads I think it's very good book, even if you don't know about philosophy of objectivism developed by Ayn Rand. Engaging and not boring.
Want to Read
April 25, 2009Well I can't give it a review, cause I don't have it yet, but I am really facinated by the premise of this book. I just have this feeling that I need to read it. Hope I can find a copy soon =)
November 15, 2009
wonderful book- so well written and absorbing- a must-buy
Read
August 17, 2008ali
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews