The Fountainhead
discussion
Best Character in Fountainhead and why?
message 51:
by
Janki
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
May 10, 2012 10:39AM
Roark... symbolizes the best within us.
reply
|
flag
Roark, of course... why would I like someone else?
Soma wrote: "Roark, of course... why would I like someone else?"Well, "best" is a relative term. It could mean the one you admire most, the one that's most memorable, most unusual, best developed, or the American pollster favorite "the one with whom you want to share a bottle of beer." Roark is the hero to admire, but other characters are actually more complex and lend themselves to more analysis, so some readers may prefer them.
Masha wrote: "Soma wrote: "Roark, of course... why would I like someone else?"Well, "best" is a relative term. It could mean the one you admire most, the one that's most memorable, most unusual, best developed..."
Yes, all the characters have been given a personality that needs a deep analysis and only few people go deep into it to know what the characters might say. What I meant was when the best of all qualities is found in Roark, how could I prefer another character. If this question is put for Atlas Shrugged, it is a question I'll have to think about. I only wish I find a Roark in flesh and I can be his Dominique....
Gail Wynand. After multiple readings, I have found the relationship between Roark and Wynand to be the most sympathetic and true.
mike is best in book
Mr. Roark - Fully aware and alert of his conscious being. Still yet feiry.
All the characters in this book are lacklustre ...not worth remembering...Still Howard Roark seems to be slightly better. Dominique and Toohey are total failures.Above all the author bulldozes so much philosophy to suffocate the reader.
I love Wynand! He was the only real person in the book, he came from nothing and made himself rich! He never forgot where he came from! I love love love Gail Wynand!
What's the best piece in a bicycle? or the best sound in a song? i.e. Ayn Rand made the effort to illustrate how every and sometimes groups of characters add to the idea of the book. We have: - "the creator"
- the society
- the society "commercial" character(s)
- a guy, who manages some society strings
- the power-guy
- complex personality of the emotional women, who sees the big picture at all times
- we have an A-grader
- some like-minded creators, sharing the hard destiny of the free spirit.
It is the mindset and the connections between all of the above characters that make this book so great.
Gail Wynand: He is the only human being in this story of static, cardboard characters. He is the only one who seems capable of learning, changing and discovering things about himself and the world around him. His journey could be our journey.
My favourite character is HR (Of course!! :P) and Gail Waynand!! :)I like Roark because, he makes me believe to believe in myself and become a hero of your own, no matter what the world thinks of you!!
And I like Waynand because he gives a human touch to the Superhuman-like figure of Roark!! :) He is someone you can see around you or inside you!!
Whereas, Roark is what you idealise!! :) I feel that both are great!! :)
I read the book, and would say, this is one of the most intriguing narration, I have read till now. Highly influencing and admirable. Well, when it comes interesting characters, I love HR, PK and ET. These 3 characters, particularly interest me. I see the combination of these 3 characters in me.
In my opinion, every human being, should have extremes. It is the middle path, one should lead to get a balanced life/choices. I see, PK & HR in extremes, of course with HR, the character is highly interesting. With ET,I feel, he is mostly in the middle, however, utilizing the destructive skills of his own. Too much of cleverness is not recommendable. HR is not clever, but talented. ET is talented, but choses to use his cleverness.
I will read the last 100 pages again and again, till I get tired ;-)
I'm an Architect and I read this book whilst I was studying at University. It had a profound affect on me and I never forgot it. The ethics and morals in the story to me defined my thinking as an architect at that time. Roark was true to his values and that inspired me - particularly as at the time I was writing an essay on Ruskin and Pugin.
Scottie wrote: "I like Ellsworth Toohey and of course everyone loves Roark. But Keating is pretty interesting and so is Wynaud. I got like 100 pages to go almost. Can't wait to see what happens. Mrs. Keating-Wynau..."actually u r kinda right. almost all characters of the fountainhead becomes ur favourite at one time or another. its like different aspect of one life only. we all behave diferently under different situatons. n truth is we r like all the characters of this book. when i read this book, it feels like as if am reading myself not a book
Sameer wrote: "Without doubt, everyone would vouch for Howard Roark. However, he is the epitome of "perfection", a place where few dare and reach. I think and believe, everyone of us is endowed with a little bit ..."very true sameer...we all want to be like roark but hardly any of us have the courage to do so
Pranaya wrote: "Gail Wynand. He's the tragic hero of the novel, in my opinion. His aspirations were so similar to Roark's, but his spirit was crushed by the second-handers."I didn't see Wynand that way at all. I thought he contrasted Roark in that he gained wealth and illusory power by feeding the sensational appetites of his tabloid readership, whereas Roark stayed true to his values.
Wynand could have been like Roark (and his rise from Hell's Kitchen had great potential) but at the end he came to realize he had sold himself to the lowest denominator. And by the end of the book it haunted him and caused his exit.
Howard Roark never sold out. Indeed that's why he was willing to go do manual labour in a quarry rather than take on lucrative projects that did not support his unique aesthetic.
well my fav characters are Howard Roark, dominique and Gail wyand....HR was definatly the hero of the book , he is passionate and dominique such a strong personality and moreover and independent person...thoough at some parts she really confused me...i mean she marries Peter...wat was all dat abt?????? newayz Gail i luvd him he was a self made person who had had come a long away n had achieve successs.....n i really liked da concpt of second handers...so apt......
Definitely it is Howard Roark. However, Howard is portrayed as the perfect human being. I’m not saying that this perfection is unachievable by normal human beings. But, that is not something easy to do. Let us say, being like Howard is kind of a starting point (and preferably end point also) in our life. Some kind of imperfections namely complexes, ego, selfishness, apprehensions (to name a few) make us closer to some other characters of this novel. In other words, there is a Howard in all the characters. However, certain limitations –imperfections like I mentioned before - mold them into an entirely different characters. Encounters of all these characters with Howard are exhibited as comparison of similarities/ differences with Howard. For example, Gail Wynand has a lot of traits in common with Howard, but also missing a few so contrastingly. We also, could feel like getting closer to different characters at different point in time of our life. It takes a lot of ingeniousness to create such wonderful characters like Ayn Rand’s.
Howard Roark. For confidence, individuality and clarity of thoughts.
I'm currently reading this book. And yes, I like Roark, but what about Keating? Despite finding his physical description peculiarly close to somebody I know, I'm intrigued by him. I can't make up my mind on what to think about him.
Keating is an interesting character. He represents a particular kind of person. Keep reading!
Barbara wrote: "Gail Wynand. After multiple readings, I have found the relationship between Roark and Wynand to be the most sympathetic and true."Much as I like Rand's romantic couples, I find that she truly excelled at male-to-male relationships, making them actually more realistic than male-female. Roark-Wynand and Roark-Keating relationships were both very well done, esp. towards the end of the book.
Patrick wrote: "I recall a foreman that was in Roark's employ. The description of equal respect between the foreman and Roark when the final building of the book is laying in courses of steel was a real winner for..."The name of the electrician- not foreman was Mike Donnigan. His devotion to perfection in his work was remarkable. Of note is the fact that he expected the same devotion from others. I am so glad someone remembered a character besides Roark, Dominique, Wynand, Keating and Toohey. Mike was a glimpse into the idea that Rand does not expect everyone to be a genius, but she does expect people to attempt to achieve perfection. The idea was further expanded of course in the Atlas Shrugged where there were characters from vastly different backgrounds.
Though like most people, Roark is my favorite, there are so many more characters that define the philosophy of the book. Kent Lansing says it best when he defines integrity as-"Integrity is the ability to stand by an idea. It presupposes the ability to think". And another one of my absolute favorites is Steven Mallory. All the interactions between Roark and Mallory are so rich in ideas.
Midhun wrote: "Definitely it is Howard Roark. However, Howard is portrayed as the perfect human being. I’m not saying that this perfection is unachievable by normal human beings. But, that is not something easy t..."yeah..Roark seems quite out of the world.Rand's apathy towards socialism or communism might have transcended into her characters.But yeah,you could find bits of all these characters within us.I'd say just like communism, Rand's world's surreal.
This sums it up perfectly :):"Roark is a bizarre blend of Dr Sheldon Cooper (The Big Bang Theory) and a Marvell superhero."
Dominique Francon. Very real, very complicated, shades of grey.
Vince wrote: "The most interesting character is the reader."you're actually right..i never thought of it that way
my fav character would have to be Ellesworth Toohey...the most dangerous villain i've ever encountered...
I read the book quite some time ago, so I cannot recall with the same vehemence my feelings about the characters as one can when in the throes of reading...but despite the 1800 words with which the characters replied to an unsuspecting one-line question I rather fondly remember two names on the sidelines of the story, Mike Donnigan the elctrician and Austin Heller were the most accessible and tangible personalities in the orgy of unapologetic romanticism that The Fountainhead is,they were very tenable, memorably understated and restrained (something Miss Rand doesn't do well) very likely and very very realisable...infact I know a few (very few) people like them.I remember it had destroyed a 14 year old me to realise that the human condition and the constructs we put into place to regulate it make Roarks unviable and ensure their continued impossiblity,we have made celebrating betrayal, infidelity, chaos, masochism, and other such distortions of our nature into a science and our selling points; that specious argument for the "fragile ruinous human". We've made sure the high ideal remains lost and mythologised, and society ensures it keeps churning and rewarding more exegesis and odes to the "easily corrupted,venal,vulnerable, contradictory, amoral "man" seething with innate, bestial, primevally inherited, imperiously insistent cravings or instincts" the USP of all those "gloriously and unabashedly human".
Well said Samata. The idea that because we are human, we should accept the corruption of our existence, destroys the heroism that may have existed in humankind.
peter keating...!!!
Gail Wynand...a self-made man...his attitude inspires me..loved him a lot...
Aryn wrote: "Gail Wynand: He is the only human being in this story of static, cardboard characters. He is the only one who seems capable of learning, changing and discovering things about himself and the world ..."That was the point Miss Rand was trying to make throughout the book,her hero does not change posseses no need to learn and nothing is worthy enough to be discovered by him, he was born with the awareness of his innate perfection and calling, she deified her protagonists at every opportunity, making them into the very frozen Gods she refuses to believe in in the process. Do you rememember the conversation between Steven Mallory and Dominique about how each of us dies a little bit every moment we absorbe change and discard bits and shards of our older selves eventually resulting unawares in a completely different organism, with a starkly different even contrary set of ideals, while Roark is the only true immortal in that he feels absolutely no compulsion to pay heed to the world he has no use of and is frighteningly at ease with himself,content and self-sufficient and assured of his perfection..change is an attribute ascribed to mortals and lesser beings not heroes, a lack of it scares us hence our aversion and at the same time awe of Roark..
The Fountainhead, to me, is Rand's preparation to writing her culminating work, Atlas Shrugged. There we get more character development and some characters actually do grow and change. Whatever made Roark who he is by the time we meet him in the book, we are not privvy to it. One Rand analyst pointed out that The Fountainhead actually does have two transitional characters. Guy Francon transitions from an indifferent merchant of mediocrity to supportive father who discovers importance of ideals (also one of few Rand examples of non-toxic family relationships). Peter's fiancee (Catherine?) transitions from a girl full of life and wonder to a joyless spinster. So Rand actually was capable of writing transitions; she just mostly chose not to.
As to realism (or lack thereof), Rand wrote in the Romantic tradition, where realism takes back seat to ideas and stark contrasts. Not everyone's cup of tea, to be sure, but I believe in judging art on whether it accomplishes what it intends to do, rather than what we want it to be.
Masha wrote: "The Fountainhead, to me, is Rand's preparation to writing her culminating work, Atlas Shrugged. There we get more character development and some characters actually do grow and change. Whatever mad..."Of course plenty of characters change and transition states in her books, but most of them are secondary to the story, the operative word in my previous statement was the "protagonist" does not however change, and we are in fact privy albeit very discreetly and subtly to what went into the making of Roark, I read the book years ago so I can't explicitly sepcify but an instance I remember is the conversation between the Dean and Roark where the latter mentions he had known he wanted to be an architect since he was 10, his reasoning of life has pretty much been shown to be congenital further established by Mallory, Heller and Dominique's ritual effusiveness.
As to her fierce adherance to the Romantic tradition, she is after all a modern philosopher who chooses to propound her philosophy through the story,and that can only be done with an art that deals in "concepts" (Romanticism) rather than "incidents/occurences" (Naturalism). Despite her rationale behind defending Romanticism I think it is logically impossible to write any other way if one is projecting an entire school of philosophy through the story, she is bound to take the liberty of ignoring tawdry reality and besides as time progresses I notice philosophy lends itself lesser and lesser to the details of our temporal existence, to the rather non-philosophical lives of its readers..so any amount of abstraction that restores a bit of profundity or rigour to an otherwise morbidly lazy world is welcome..
There were more chapters of Roark's earlier life, but they were cut for lenghth (or possibly because Rand didn't 100% flesh out her philosophy when she started on this book and wanted to make the character more consistent with her vision).
In my view, Architecture is the most interesting character in this book.
I think we should take the book as its supposed to be - a fiction. Comparing it with real life might be a mistake since Rand, all through out the book, was aiming to propagate her philosophical ideas (however bizarre or idealistic they may be).
That is very true, but there's still a lot in the book that can be related to real life. I'm sure every one of us has met a Peter Keating or two (or have seen buildings designed by one of those architects!), and parts of the other characters are very recognizable even if those characters taken as a whole may be a stretch.
F. wrote: "In my view, Architecture is the most interesting character in this book."That's an interesting way to put it. Would you like to expand? I'd love to hear from someone familiar with the subject which I assume you are in some way?
Beth wrote: "I read it years ago, and I'm not telling."Why not? I'm just curious (as to why you won't, not necessarily who is your favorite)
My favourite character was Stephen Mallory. The only complaint I have with the book was that he was not explored further.
I liked him too. He also allowed us to see a different side of Roark that I wanted more of in the book.
Howard Roark, Wynand..
Gail Wynand - a man capable of greatness, who recognises his failures and weaknesses and tries to ocrrect his path. Loved by both Roark and Domininique - doesn't that same something as well?
For me it will always be Dominique. A woman with so much intensity within her. She is sure of herself, fully concious of her actions, words. Amazing woman! Roark may be perfection himself, but he falls short as he fails to understand that which is around him. Whereas Dominique knows what and why of the things that matter to her the least and the most too!!
Howard Roark----- my all time favourite character
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
