Siteadmin, Check users, Administrators
12,071
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 4:
Line 4: + Line 10:
Line 11: + + + + + + + Line 167:
Line 175: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Line 205:
Line 262: + + + + + + + +
no edit summary
== History and development ==
== History and development ==
=== Thematic Development ===
Ayn Rand would later say that she had in mind to write a novel on the theme of the tension between the mind and the heart, and the inherent superiority of reason to emotion.<ref name=history>"History of Atlas Shrugged," The Ayn Rand Institute, n.d. Accessed May 5, 2009. <http://atlasshrugged.com/book/history.html></ref> In 1943, while she was considering how she could develop this theme, she had a conversation with her friend Isobel Paterson.<ref name=BBranden>Branden B, ''The Passion of Ayn Rand'', ca. 1985</ref> Paterson suggested that Ayn Rand ought to write a non-fiction expository book on her philosophy, a thing that Rand did not wish to write. Paterson then said that her readers "needed" such a work. Rand became incensed at this mode of expression, and replied:{{cquote|Oh, they do? What if I went on strike? What if all the creative minds of the world went on strike? That would make a good novel.}}
Ayn Rand would later say that she had in mind to write a novel on the theme of the tension between the mind and the heart, and the inherent superiority of reason to emotion.<ref name=history>"History of Atlas Shrugged," The Ayn Rand Institute, n.d. Accessed May 5, 2009. <http://atlasshrugged.com/book/history.html></ref> In 1943, while she was considering how she could develop this theme, she had a conversation with her friend Isobel Paterson.<ref name=BBranden>Branden B, ''The Passion of Ayn Rand'', ca. 1985</ref> Paterson suggested that Ayn Rand ought to write a non-fiction expository book on her philosophy, a thing that Rand did not wish to write. Paterson then said that her readers "needed" such a work. Rand became incensed at this mode of expression, and replied:{{cquote|Oh, they do? What if I went on strike? What if all the creative minds of the world went on strike? That would make a good novel.}}
This was only the beginning, of course, for now Rand turned her full attention to the thing that she would later describe as the novel's primary theme: ''the role of the mind in man's existence.'' She asked herself what would happen to any society if "the creative minds of the world went on [[strike]]," which is to say, withdrew their talents from the world.<ref name=history/> She then asked herself what would ''drive'' them to call such a strike. This process carried through to the development of all the various [[Literary type#Hero|heroes]], [[Literary type#Villain|villains]], and [[Literary type#Anti-villain|anti-villains]] in the story.
This was only the beginning, of course, for now Rand turned her full attention to the thing that she would later describe as the novel's primary theme: ''the role of the mind in man's existence.'' She asked herself what would happen to any society if "the creative minds of the world went on [[strike]]," which is to say, withdrew their talents from the world.<ref name=history/> She then asked herself what would ''drive'' them to call such a strike. This process carried through to the development of all the various [[Literary type#Hero|heroes]], [[Literary type#Villain|villains]], and [[Literary type#Anti-villain|anti-villains]] in the story.
In addition to these themes, Rand expounded on a theme that one might describe as "the fallacy of the mind-body dichotomy." Rand attacked this apparent split between mind and body in two contexts: the notion that [[sex]]ual feelings were inherently dishonorable and distasteful and therefore could not proceed from a man's thoughts and beliefs, and the notion that the best exercise of the mind was in "pure" or abstract [[science|scientific]] research and not in the practical application of science to real human needs and desires.
=== Character Development ===
The Ayn Rand Institute suggests that the two heroes of the novel were [[Dagny Taggart]] and [[John Galt]].<ref name=history/> This is not actually in accord with literary convention. Dagny Taggart certainly is the novel's heroine, but the other hero is [[Henry Rearden]]. They are heroes precisely because each must make a life-altering re-evaluation and decision in order to serve the causes that motivate them, a thing that John Galt does not do.
The Ayn Rand Institute suggests that the two heroes of the novel were [[Dagny Taggart]] and [[John Galt]].<ref name=history/> This is not actually in accord with literary convention. Dagny Taggart certainly is the novel's heroine, but the other hero is [[Henry Rearden]]. They are heroes precisely because each must make a life-altering re-evaluation and decision in order to serve the causes that motivate them, a thing that John Galt does not do.
John Galt is actually an anti-villain: one who pursues the cause of justice with the same single-mindedness of purpose with which a classical villain might pursue his own greed or an insane desire for vengeance. His major decision to call the great strike is a decision he makes ''before'', not during, the time frame of the novel's action.
John Galt is actually an anti-villain: one who pursues the cause of justice with the same single-mindedness of purpose with which a classical villain might pursue his own greed or an insane desire for vengeance. His major decision to call the great strike is a decision he makes ''before'', not during, the time frame of the novel's action.
Rand's character development decisions sometimes reflected the philosophical points she wished to make, and at other times reflected her almost free association between those characters and certain real-life counterparts. Some of her choices might seem bizarre; for example, her archetype for [[Mr. Thompson]] was [[President of the United States|President]] [[Harry S. Truman]], and that for [[Robert Stadler]] was [[J. Robert Oppenheimer]], the head of the [[Manhattan Project]].
Rand herself was the archetype of the novel's heroine, [[Dagny Taggart]]. Rand later said that Dagny Taggart was herself at the top of her form at all times.
{{spoiler}}
{{spoiler}}
Eventually, the people of Mulligan's Valley realize that the American economy, the last of the world's economies, has collapsed totally and that the federal government essentially has nothing to govern anymore. John Galt declares that "the road is clear" and that his people will emerge from their valley and rebuild the economy on their own terms.
Eventually, the people of Mulligan's Valley realize that the American economy, the last of the world's economies, has collapsed totally and that the federal government essentially has nothing to govern anymore. John Galt declares that "the road is clear" and that his people will emerge from their valley and rebuild the economy on their own terms.
{{endspoiler}}
{{endspoiler}}
== Themes ==
=== The role of the mind ===
"The role of the mind in man's existence" was, by her own account, Rand's primary theme in this novel. Man cannot exist ''qua'' man if he does not think. Furthermore, human thought, applied to practical concerns, makes possible every improvement in human lifestyle since the beginning of civilization. Wealth is the product of thought, and is ''produced'', not gathered like fruit or grass. Therefore, if all the most creative and talented people were to "go on strike," the economy that those talents made possible would collapse.
History provides ample precedent for the collapse of human civilization whenever the mind cannot function or communicate for one reason or another. The fall of the [[Roman Empire]] caused a collapse of law and order, with the result that the remarkable technology that the Romans had either developed or successfully copied from the [[Greece|Greeks]] was lost. Serious students of ancient and medieval [[history]] are often surprised to learn that the Romans had running water, indoor plumbing, central heating, and metalled roads; all these things fell into disrepair, and the technology for these things was forgotten and required near-complete reinvention.
Until recently, no one has threatened to call such a "strike of the men of the mind" as John Galt calls. But [[socialism|socialist]] societies, or democratic republics who flirt with socialist ideas, have all suffered from varying rates of defection, or "brain drainage," in which talented people move elsewhere, seeking a society that will appreciate their talents without burdening them with disproportionate [[tax]]es and regulations. The growth of the [[Tax Day Tea Party]] movement has included calls for just such a strike, in which the men of the mind do not defect, but neither do they work as hard as they otherwise would.
==== Workability of the strike ====
The price for John Galt's strike is high. John Galt provides no "strike fund," and the only such fund is the savings that any given striker might have. Furthermore, the collapse of the economy, and even of civilization, affects striker and "[[scab]]" alike—at least until [[Ellis Wyatt]] leads a large cadre of entrepreneurs and developers to [[Midas Mulligan]]'s secluded [[Galt's Gulch|valley]] and applies his particular talents to transform a rural refuge into a highly developed industrial-commercial community. (Arguably, [[Ragnar Danneskjold]]'s [[privateer]]ing activities provide the equivalent of a "strike fund," but the strikers do not use those funds for the usual purpose of "tiding over" until settlement is possible.) And even the enhanced development of this community sees creative people taking jobs that are far below what their talents or work ethic would normally allow them to apply for.
This, however, illustrates another point that Rand made, whether she intended to make it or not: that even if mind and labor "need" one another, labor needs mind far more than does mind need labor. A talented man can function as a laborer if he must, but a laborer can never function in a job above his talents.
=== Labor and capital ===
Note that the tension in the novel is never between labor and ''capital'', but between labor and ''mind'', or rather labor and ''talent''. Capital alone, if not properly directed, will simply be wasted. The best illustration of this is the failure of the Community National Bank of Rome, [[Wisconsin]], after Lee Hunsacker buys the bankrupt [[Twentieth Century Motor Company]] and then finds himself unable to make it run. Therefore, capital, in Rand's system, ''must'' remain in the hands of the talented. The best way to assure that outcome is simply ''not to tax'' capital. In that manner, even if capital is mis-spent, talented individuals will inevitably accumulate more of it and use it wisely.
=== The Mind-Body Dichotomy ===
Rand, as mentioned above, sought to criticize the ''mind-body dichotomy''. This is any attempt to divorce the mind from everyday human needs (genuine needs, not "need" in the [[Karl Marx|Marxian]] sense). Rand found two forms of this dichotomy worthy of reproach:
==== Mind and Romance ====
Rand believed that the mind is far more important than most people appreciate in dictating one's romantic choices. As [[Francisco d'Anconia]] says on one occasion:{{cquote|Tell me what a man finds sexually attractive and I will tell you his entire philosophy of life. Show me the woman he [is involved] with and I will tell you his opinion of himself.}}
[[Henry Rearden]] makes two key mistakes in this regard, and both of them cost him dearly before his final transformation is complete. First, he marries [[Lillian Rearden]], who, though described as physically beautiful, has nothing but scorn for his talents as a businessman and as an inventor, and also moves in a circle of friends who are dedicated to the destruction of talented men like Rearden. Second, though he has an affair with [[Dagny Taggart]], he does not fully realize that his feelings for her are natural (flowing from his own nature) and even honorable. If he had not regarded the sexual impulse as inherently dishonorable, he probably would never have married anyone like Lillian.
==== Pure and Applied Science ====
If Henry Rearden makes one kind of mistake by splitting mind from body, [[Robert Stadler]] makes another. He believes that the best minds should stand above the "mundane" concerns that are the province of engineers. Thus when Dagny Taggart describes to him the prototype of an [[John Galt#|The electrostatic motor|electrostatic motor]], Stadler wonders aloud why the mind that could create such a motor is not involved in "pure" research.
The very terminology of "pure" and "applied" science illustrates this form of the mind-body dichotomy in real life. The full name of almost any school or department of engineering is "school (or department) of engineering ''and applied science.''" And in fact, practical inventions rarely receive the highest honor that organized science can bestow, the [[Nobel Prize]], unless then have a [[medicine|medical]] application. Thus perhaps organized science discards the mind-body dichotomy when an invention might help save a life. For example, the award of the Nobel Prize in Biology to Solomon Bernson and Rosalind Yalow for their development of [[radioimmunoassay]] techniques was a rare event. Furthermore, such a practical invention in a field other than medicine will wait for years before it finds practical application. The [[laser]], for example, was first built in 1960 but did not find an out-of-the-laboratory application until 1965, when the [[Western Electric]] company first used lasers to pierce industrial [[diamond]]s.
In sharp contrast, [[John Galt]] does breakthrough-quality work in the understanding of static electricity and then constructs a working device that will find immediate application. Furthermore, his laboratory is not in a university, nor in a government institution, but in a privately owned [[automobile]] engine factory.
Robert Stadler's experience is even worse than a missed opportunity. Like John Galt, Robert Stadler does breakthrough-quality work, this time in the field of [[sound|sonic]] physics. But Stadler's work finds application, not in a practical device that will enhance human comfort, but in a [[weapon of mass destruction]], to wit, [[Project X]].
=== Brotherly Love ===
"Brotherly love," as socialists understand and apply the term, is a fallacious concept in the Randian system. The concept arises from a misunderstanding of [[Cain]]'s misguided protest against [[God]] after the murder of [[Abel]]:{{Bible quote|Am I my brother's keeper?|book=Genesis|chap=4|verses=9|version=NASB}}
God asks Cain that question because He is investigating a murder. But the socialists misapply that verse, and the teachings of [[Jesus Christ]] concerning voluntary charity, to suggest that any man ''is'' his brother's keeper, and that a "brother's" needs come before his own. This begs the question of ''which'' brother's needs come first, and requires an overarching authority to decide the issue. This last was a thing that Rand did not recognize that any government had a right to decide for any of its citizens or subjects.
Most of the novel's scenes demonstrate the practical effects of this policy, all of which are negative. But Rand also lodges her philosophical and moral objection. She does this in several places, most notably the defiant speech by [[Henry Rearden]] before a special administrative court, the many statements by [[Francisco d'Anconia]] in his conversations with Rearden and his commentaries to others, and the three-hour speech made by [[John Galt]] in which he finally tells everyone who can hear his voice to go on strike. As Henry Rearden says, "It is not your particular policy that I challenge, but your moral premise."
=== Original Sin ===
Rand rejected totally the concept of original [[sin]]. Correctly or incorrectly, she blamed that concept for the power and primacy of socialist ideals. Man, she claimed, was basically good, and ought to be permitted to be all that he could be. Yet she probably would ''not'' have approved of certain despotic historical figures who wanted to be all that ''they'' could be. [[Julius Caesar]] is probably the prize example.
=== Hypocrisy ===
One concept that Rand demonstrates more in direct narration than in exposition is the high prevalence of hypocrisy in the behavior of the villains. For example, Gerald Starnes, Jr., the Director of Production of the [[Twentieth Century Motor Company]], appropriates vast amounts of money for himself through schemes that one might describe as "creative financing." While so doing, he insists that his ostentatious show of wealth is necessary for making a good showing for the company that he heads. His workers recognize this hypocrisy and hate him for it. As shop foreman [[Jeff Allen]] says,{{cquote|A man who flashes a lot of cash around is bad enough, but at least he makes no bones about the cash being his, and you're free to gape at him or not, as you wish, and mostly you don't. But when a guy starts telling you that all his cash is necessary for making a show and is for your benefit, that's when you begin to hate that creature as you've never hated anything human.}}
[[James Taggart]] is another prize example of hypocrisy, as is [[Lillian Rearden]].
But Rand never says whether hypocrisy or a brazen willingness actually to live up to socialist ideas is the worse sin. Gerald's sister Ivy, for example, deliberately avoids any ostentatious show of wealth, and in fact takes very little compensation for herself. But in fact she savors the exercise of raw power over other people's lives. She also displays her poverty as a testimony against anyone who, for whatever reason, has more wealth than she has. This, then, becomes another form of hypocrisy, because Ivy, though she never robs anyone physically, still robs them spiritually. Again to quote the witness character Jeff Allen, {{cquote|[P]rofit...depends on what you're after, and what [some socialist politicians and leaders are] after, not all the money in the universe [can] buy. Money is too clean and innocent for that.}}
== Historical parallels ==
== Historical parallels ==
As might be expected, the [[Roman Catholic Church]] and its various organs found fault with the explicit [[atheism]] of the novel, and especially John Galt's specific rejection of the notion of original sin, and Francisco d'Anconia's statement that a rational man does not "render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's," because "he permits no Caesars."<ref name=history/>
As might be expected, the [[Roman Catholic Church]] and its various organs found fault with the explicit [[atheism]] of the novel, and especially John Galt's specific rejection of the notion of original sin, and Francisco d'Anconia's statement that a rational man does not "render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's," because "he permits no Caesars."<ref name=history/>
== Science Fiction elements ==
At least four inventions in this novel have never yet been duplicated and would therefore qualify as elements of [[science fiction]]. They are:
# [[John Galt]]'s [[John Galt#The electrostatic motor|electrostatic motor]],
# [[Henry Rearden#Rearden Metal|Rearden Metal]],
# [[Project X]], and
# the refractor-ray screen that protects [[Galt's Gulch]] from detection from the air above it.
==Film Adaptation==
==Film Adaptation==