Chicks On Lit discussion
Archive 08-19 GR Discussions
>
Atlas Shrugged *chunky read*
I'm only about 50 pages into the novel, but I really like all of the main characters so far. I felt bad for Rearden because his family was so unsympathetic. They criticized him for being a workaholic, but obviously enjoyed the benefits.
Viki - you are right on. If we want the government to develop and maintain a rail system, we all will have to pay for it through taxes. Then we can go to the controversial topic of what should be privatized (in which case we would pay for it at the time of service)...transportation? The main system? Education? Health care?
or are we heading towards socialism and is that a good idea?
Meg, I definitely think we are if we are not already there yet!I found a very interesting paragraph in AS about the media which I think today is quite relevant. "The reporters who came to the press conference in the office of the John Galt Line were young men who had been trained to think that their job consisted of concealing from the world the nature of its events. It was their duty to serve as audience for some public figure who made utterances about the public good,in phrases carefully chosen to convey no meaning. It was their daily job to sling words together in any combination they pleased so long as the words did not fall into a sequence saying something specific."
To me this sounds so much like today's media experience. We can't seem to get to the whole truth. To put it bluntly, there are even questions not given answers to about out own President's background. The media which slammed Bush over the economy and Wall Street decline is now surprisingly silent as the economy slugs along and Wall Street continues to rise and fall (more so fall!) So what;s the story with this and is Ayn Rand's writing a prediction of our future?
I am just so totally amazed that this book was written so long ago. That is a very good quote and I do agree with you about the media. It will break or make the politician, that is for sure.
I finished Chapter 1 on audio last night. I really do like that there's a strong woman who is a business executive as a main character here!I think it's interesting that at the beginning Eddie talks about that when he was young he just wanted to do "whatever is right". Isn't that what we all want? Just to do what's right?
So what is the answer? That's what I struggle with. If government doesn't take care of the poor people, who will? That's the unfortunate truth. No one wants "our" money to be flushed down the tubes, but we can't just step around the poor people lying in the street. We're supposed to take care of people, because in lifting them up, we lift ourselves up.
I mean, he gave the bum the dime he wanted, but I didn't like his attitude toward him. If he didn't want to give it to him, he shouldn't have done it.
I'm sure this all sounds disjointed and strange lol, I didn't sleep very well last night, but those are my initial impressions.
I am wondering who the bum really was. I think he was more than just the ordinary bum, especially when we get the questions of who is John Galt right away. I don't know what the answer is Laura, but I think we could do it differently and do it better.
Meg wrote: "I am wondering who the bum really was. I think he was more than just the ordinary bum, especially when we get the questions of who is John Galt right away. I don't know what the answer is Laur..."
Good point. I think the text made a point of saying that he had intelligent eyes. Not to say that bums aren't intelligent, but the bums I've come across don't typically have intelligent eyes that leap out at me to the point I'll remark on it. Plus as you say, the question did come up right away.
I was thinking about this book a little earlier, and I think the point of that question as I see it so far is that we're not supposed to ask questions that don't have answers. I think my initial impression was to do just that - ask a question that if we had the answer, things would already be a lot different than they are.
Interesting too that he handed the dime "to the shadow that had no face". I think it's easier not to care about the less fortunate when they are just a faceless mass. Once they become human, particularly humans you know who have names, then it's harder to just pass them by.
Mod
I was just looking up the book online though and found this website for it. Not sure if anyone had posted it yet.
http://atlasshrugged.com/
There is an interesting trailer to a documentary about this book on the website. Gives a bit of a synopsis what the book is about and some info on the author.
Interesting website Sheila. I'm wondering too about being beaten to death by the message (one I don't happen to agree with for the most part, by the way), but I'm intrigued enough to continue reading. For now anyway. :)
There are times that I wonder how much of this book, given the time frame it was written in and the author's Russian background, was among other things, a reflection on communism. Maybe so, maybe not? And a forewarning to those governments headed down a more socialist path, that once the direction is taken its hard to hold back a momentum, and retain any semblence of individuality? It all sounds so Marxist. Just a thought.I don't think there is a good answer to taking care of our poor. We attempted to privatize and keep it more local. But looking historically, for example, there's already a discrepancy with welfare systems from state to state. That's why so many of the Hmong immigrants came to the Twin Cities in the 1970's. Where the clan leader goes, the rest of the family follows. There are never clear cut answers. I think most of middle class moderate Americans want the same results, but can't agree on how to go about getting that.
BTW I sure found the conversations at the anniversary party just annoying, especially the philosophy discussion. To me that is a function of her writing to a stylized extreme, both characters and the sparse locales, but it sure makes the people irritating! For some reason my vision of these cities is a combination of some Siberian landscape with a ghetto Detroit industrial mix. I think when we get toward the end we should suggest some character casting...
I can't get over this quote:There are other issues of science besides questions of fact.
What do you think of this?
I think perhaps it means the ethical part of science. There are (were) many discoveries in science (the atomic bomb for one) that had (have) long range moral issues involved. Look at the issue now of stem cell research and how much controversy it stirs up.Scientific fact doesn't always jive with human thinking even from our earliest times. Galileo was excommunicated because of his scientific knowledge for one. Religion and Science sometime have a hard time coexisting with one another.
Meg wrote: "I can't get over this quote:There are other issues of science besides questions of fact.
What do you think of this?"
What chapter did you find that Meg?
Mod
If you have the big, thick, small print paperback copy of the book, it's on page 178, and Dagney is at the State Science Institute asking about the statement they released about Rearden Metal.
Thanks Sheila. That's the copy I have.
I'm in Chapter 4, just started this a couple of days ago. I was having a love-hate relationship w/it at first, but I think I'm hooked now and understanding it better now that I'm not "hearing" it on audio - which I believe can slant your opinion based on the reader's interpretation. In my head, it's much better lol.
Ha that is the same book I have! so must of us have the same copy that will make it easier for me to add quotes.I am glad it is better for you Laura.
Oh my goodness, a quote from chapter 4 (Wyatt to Dagny) just made my Facebook status: "I came to see you because I understand you're the only one who's got any brains in this rotten outfit." Woot! Gotta love Dagny, she totally rocks!I had no idea this was such a feminist novel!
You are hilarious Laura! I am so glad you joined us.
There's certainly some chemistry between Dagny and Rearden going on here!! Tension!Science = other issues? How about - when it comes to technology - "just because we CAN doesn't mean we SHOULD."
I guess what is bothering me about all of this is this: if you invent something, do you not go use it because you are worried about what bad things people can do with it?
Sometimes we don't want to think about the long term implications to people or the environment, or as you say, in the wrong hands.
Meg wrote: "You are hilarious Laura! I am so glad you joined us."hehe thanks Meg! So am I!
Nancy wrote: "There's certainly some chemistry between Dagny and Rearden going on here!! Tension!Science = other issues? How about - when it comes to technology - "just because we CAN doesn't mean we SHOULD.""
Oh my goodness those two have some serious chemistry. I'm dying to see what happens. But I still need to catch up to the rest of you! Only into chapter 5 over here.
Meg wrote: "Why do Dagny Taggart and Lillian Rearden—both highly affluent women—fight over a cheap metallic bracelet at the anniversary party? Who gets to keep the bracelet, and at what cost? Is this foreshad..."Well Lillian really put up a fight, she was ready to give it up on the spot for the diamonds. I don't know why Dagny would pay so much to get it, I don't think that at that moment she had feelings for Rearden (not that she is going to have them in the future, I don't know, yet) to be that sentimental about it. The dialogues between these two are my favorite parts.
I didn't think I was going to get into this book, but it is surprisingly interesting.
Laura, we won't rush you, glad you're here :^)Meg, your quote about science. The context in that chapter seems to me to indicate the "issues" are political, power struggles over what is going to benefit whom.
Elena, that bracelet fight - I sort of had the idea Dagny maybe had feelings. She just didn't acknowledge them yet. Part of the sexual angst. But more important for me was that she realized the beauty of Rearden Metal from a standpoint of the genius and drive that created it. And in that respect it was valuable to her. Old Lillian has sold herself to society, is too self centered and dumb to know what she's got. I'm hearin' it - "You don't know what you've got til it's gone..." I'm just guessing though.
Nancy I am agreeing with you about the bracelet scene. I think the bracelet became symbolic of who will stand behind Rearden. Obviously, his wife won't. I think, in a sense, Dagny is stating that she will stand behind Reardon, that she believes in his metal and it is a thing of beauty to her, much more so than diamonds. I am always thinking that that was a turning point in the novel, Dagny declaring to everyone her strong belief.I still think that they are going to get together if Rearden wakes up and realizes he needs affection/love in his life as well as his work.
Pardon my ignorance, but is Rearden Metal something other than steel that is real in today's world?
My understanding is that the metal is lighter and stronger than steel.
Mod
I think when this book was written, it was written as taking place "in the future" so it was her look at how life could become.
(But I guess I'll have to see if more is told about it in the book.) :o)
There really are a gazillion ways this could go aren't there!?!? so many twists possible. Just when I think the ideology is so obvious and I get impatient, then something funky happens in the plot and I just gotta read more.
It definitely keeps you turning the pages, something I didn't expect with this one!
Meg wrote: "Nancy I am agreeing with you about the bracelet scene. I think the bracelet became symbolic of who will stand behind Rearden. Obviously, his wife won't. I think, in a sense, Dagny is stating tha..."I completely agree with yours and Nancy's assessment, Meg. I just finished that chapter.
I think it's horrible that Lillian has so little respect for her husband that she publicly calls his gift "hideous". To embarrass him and his life's work so publicly like that at their anniversary party...what a joke. I really really hope no real person would ever do such a thing.
My question is this: Why is Rearden angry with Dagny after the bracelet scene? Is it because he is angry at his desire for her? Clearly at the party he realizes his desire, staring at her bare shoulder and arm (if he hadn't known it before). I felt bad for Dagny that she felt she had to apologize to him. Then his response to her that what she said was unnecessary. It all seems so wrong. Is Rearden that repressed?
I wondered that too. My guess was that he didn't want to admit any desire, certainly not publicly on their anniversary. And yeah, good point. He's been repressed of true feelings, only limited sexual response for years. Plus he doesn't yet know her all that well, only a business perspective. After so long, I would think he would be afraid to risk responding to a woman, much less openly. I think he was angry with her in the respect that she made it all the more obvious that Lillian didn't really see the sentiment or meaning of the bracelet. Dagny didn't need to apologize because Lillian's problems weren't really her fault, she just reminded Rearden of what a dim buib he married - and he knew it. In fact, his whole family is one fry short of a Happy Meal.
***spoiler***I didn't feel that Rearden was angry but he wanted to put distance between him and Dagny, his feelings and the meaning of her act. The same thing he did when he left her in Colorado and didn't give her a ride. He is my favorite character so far, he is so smart!
I loved the way he later describes his feelings for her. I don't recall now what prompted it, but he goes for a couple of pages describing them and I was engulfed on the narrative.
I can't stand Francisco d'Ancondia. I still can't figure him out.
I think Reardon is somewhat afraid of Dagny especially since they are mirror images of each other. I think neither of them ever expected to be seduced by briliance of the opposite sex and this is the reason they became 100% business 0% feelings. I also think that we got a glimpse of Dagny's response to brilliance when she had her little bit with Francisco as a teen.Francisco is the ultimate bad boy, that is his seduction. Of course being rich and brilliant emphasizes the badness!
**spoiler**I expected Francisco to be a serious, successful, and ambitious business man like Reardon and Dagny. It seems something happened to him that as an adult, he is portrayed out of character from the child the author described growing up (although I understand the "message" Francisco wants to send). Hopefully this change will be explained, I am not there yet
There is definitely something that Francisco is hiding. There is some reason he changed from the super charged child of business to the low life playboy he has become.
I think Francisco still loves Dagny, but knows something about why society is changing and people are disappearing - it is just a gut instinct. He is using his money to manipulate things as best he can. That's perhaps why his behavior in private isn't quite indicative of his public actions and scandals. And I think he doesnt want to tell her what he knows because she might not believe him and has to find out for herself. I could be way off base too...and I won't bet money on that one!!
Elena wrote: "**spoiler**I expected Francisco to be a serious, successful, and ambitious business man like Reardon and Dagny. It seems something happened to him that as an adult, he is portrayed out of charac..."
I have a friend who has read this three times and she told me it will all be explained by the end.
Meg wrote: "I think Reardon is somewhat afraid of Dagny especially since they are mirror images of each other. I think neither of them ever expected to be seduced by briliance of the opposite sex and this is ..."I think he's afraid of his desire because his word is his bond and he's pledged loyalty to his wife. Plus, I think his desire sickens him.
Emily wrote: "It's going to be really interesting to relate it to our time with government control over the financial industry..."But what I wonder is - what would have happened if we would have let the market continue to free fall? I respect Rand's viewpoint, and begin to appreciate it more and more as I read, but...what would have happened? What state would we be in right now? Perhaps long term, it would have righted itself, but in the short term? It could have been calamity.
Meg wrote: "OK I am assuming we are all busy reading. I am going to start with the first two chapters. Don't feel compelled to answer these yet, I am just trying to do some guided reading as we start. Happy..."The Theme is the groundwork for the rest of the book and The Chain I think represents many things, but the first things that leap out at me are Rearden being chained to Lillian and also being chained to an economic system that is not laissez-faire capitalism.
Meg wrote: "The theme to me though means that Dagny is in charge and her brother isn't too smart. I think she is going to run the show throughout the book. I love books with strong women that won't take crap..."I have a feeling this is going to remain throughout the book - Dagny's strength. At least, I hope it does. I love her too, she is totally kicka$$!
Emily wrote: "Wow! A movie! That will be so awesome. I love Dagny - she is everything you guys have said about her - strong, domineering, confident, zealous...she is one of my favorite literary characters. (A..."I love Hank. At first, I thought he was selfish and self-centered, and I think in a way he still is, but he has lots of responsibility in this screwed-up economic situation in which his business operates. So at some level I've forgiven him. Plus, I really like the heat between he and Dagny and I can understand it on both sides.
Meg wrote: "I can't get over this quote:There are other issues of science besides questions of fact.
What do you think of this?"
I think here that Dr. Stadler, though brilliant, is a victim of his own self-interest. Working for a government agency that isn't producing enough of what the people want (new technology) with the millions that have been spent, he's afraid of the Rearden Metal competition too! Who's NOT afraid of Rearden here? Even the government is afraid - because their fear is that Rearden will drive the smaller steel companies out of business.
Chicks On Lit
Books mentioned in this topic
A Dog's Purpose (other topics)The Art of Racing in the Rain (other topics)
A Dog's Purpose (other topics)
The Art of Racing in the Rain (other topics)
A Dog's Purpose (other topics)
More...
I think if we are to start using trains like the Europeans do the government has to make it more appealing to do so. Amtrak is govt owned; however, in this area it is wicked expensive, breaks down a lot, etc.
You are correct in stating that we do transport food by rail.