| Subcategories |
 |
Science Fiction & Fantasy |
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Atlas Shrugged
written by Ayn Rand
Studio : Signet
by Signet
Publisher : Signet
Released : 1996-09-01
Availability : Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Number of Items : 1
EAN : 9780451191144
Avg. Customer Rating: (based on 1510 reviews)
List Price : $8.99
Our Price : $4.85
|
|
| |
|
Product Description |
Published in 1957, Atlas Shrugged was Ayn Rand's greatest achievement and last work of fiction. In this novel she dramatizes her unique philosophy through an intellectual mystery story that integrates ethics, metaphysics, epistemology, politics, economics, and sex.
Set in a near-future U.S.A. whose economy is collapsing as a result of the mysterious disappearance of leading innovators and industrialists, this novel presents an astounding panorama of human life-from the productive genius who becomes a worthless playboy...to the great steel industrialist who does not know that he is working for his own destruction...to the philosopher who becomes a pirate...to the woman who runs a transcontinental railroad...to the lowest track worker in her train tunnels.
Peopled by larger-than-life heroes and villains, charged with towering questions of good and evil, Atlas Shrugged is a philosophical revolution told in the form of an action thriller. |
| |
|
Download Description |
|
Who is John Galt? This famous rhetorical question rings through Ayn Rand's best-selling novel as the people's anthem of despair in depressed economic times. Set in the future, the novel follows capitalist magnates as they battle looters, strikers, and the impending ruin of the United States' economy. The romantic and intellectual relationship between Dagny Taggart, the heroine, and John Galt, whose identity as the leader of the strike is eventually revealed, carries the novel to its climax. This novel, controversial when it first appeared in 1957, purports Rand's objectivist philosophy that the individual is free to pursue his or her own happiness without bowing to God or society. Objectivism in action upholds full laissez-faire capitalism as the only philosophy that can protect humankind's freedom to think, to be inventive, and to live productively. |
| |
|
| |
|
Atlas Shrugged |
|
I thought the beginning started out a little slow, but then I was able to really get into the story. I was bored at times with all the philosopical speeches, but the rest of the story is good. This book really made me think. For people that think a lot about the what ifs of life they will really like it. |
| |
|
She's got a bone to pick and a chip on her shoulder |
I started out wanting to read this book as a novel, not as a political treatise. I told myself: just because I don't like libertarianism doesn't mean Ayn Rand sucks. I told myself I'd be open-minded.
Well, the verdict is that the story is a nice enough story for about two thirds of the book, what with the collapse of the economy and the failing train system and the melodramatic hair-pulling of Dagny Taggart. There are two things that divide 'Atlas Shrugged' from good literature: the first is that the story is basically a wind-up for Galt's long monologue near the end. It (the story) contains no deeper meaning such as we look for in a text, besides Rand's repetitive Objectivist blithering. The characters, as many other reviewers note, are merely the figureheads of the two mighty ships of ideology whose clash constitutes the plot of the book, and despite the pretty paint that's on 'em they're about as interesting characters as a wooden figurehead is. Plus, it's painfully obvious where she's going with the plot. I had guessed the Big Secret of who John Galt is by page 300.
The second problem is that Rand's writing, though oozing with melodrama, is not great at all. In this age of spell-checkers and text messaging, when most impressionable youngsters will be wowed merely by Rand's ability to string grammatical sentences together with a minimum of outright infelicities, the number of positive reviews here raving about Rand's writing can hardly be surprising (though it is a bit saddening). We old-fashioned people with a healthier respect for excellent prose of depth, however, will have to look elsewhere for literary enjoyment. |
| |
|
FantasyLand |
This is a book of science fiction. The good guys have almost magical powers of accomplishing things because they are the good guys and the plot requires it. The bad guys are totally evil. etc. Typical space opera stuff in a sociological context. Not a problem for me.
My problem is that this is an awfully badly written book (like a lot of other SF cult favorites). Booooring. And mean-spirited. When I first read it as an adolescent I was surprised by the intensity of my dislike of its meanness. I tried to reread about 40 years later. Same reaction. Mean and boring.
My recollection of Rand herself on TV shows is of a certain dominatrix type charm(this is said positively, I remember her on Carson). She seemed likable but hardly to be taken all that seriously.
As for this philosophy stuff (Objectivism). Get real. It is not "a philosophy", or philosophy, or intellectually respectable. It may be a good mechanism by which a bunch of intellectually lazy poseurs can pretend to be "intellectuals". That is their business.
One star. Two or three were it not for the meanness factor. But I can see how space opera fans might love it. |
| |
|
the story |
I love this story. I understand that it is really about objective capitalism but I don't care. I'm a sucker for a long and detailed story about people, about life. The characters are expertly rendered. The fashion is used in a truly inspirational way. It brings a whole new layer the characters, especially Dagny.
Rand makes you think about your life and how you react when faced with a challenge or decision. It makes you question charity and welfare. It makes you wonder why some people are in destitute when there are always jobs to do, even if they are less than desirable
|
| |
|
A real mixed bag |
Like many other people here I'm not going to bother covering the plot because 1.) It's been pretty well covered; and 2.) There's almost no way to sum up this goliath of a book.
Which brings me to the first major problem I have with this epic: IT'S TOO DAMN LONG! As other reviewers have stated you can cut 50 pages out when John Galt recaps the last 900 some odd pages you just read. This book could have been written in a much more manageable way that didn't attempt to run so many story arcs at once while beating you over the head with the book's central theme. Even if I had a greater affection for this book, its sheer girth would prevent me from ever trying to read it again.
My next problem was the unrealistic characters. It was impossible to empathize with any of them because they were such heavy handed, single dimensional; archetypes that you want to slap the day lights out of all of them. The protagonists and antagonists are all so over or under flawed that it makes it hard for the reader to attribute real human feelings to them.
One of the positive things I took away from this book is a better understanding of self-determination and how useless "life's not fair" thinking is. As an example, if you're not good at a particular sport you can't just change the rules of the sport to fit you better, or get rid of the score board so there's no loser. Life is a bloody, rough and tumble, full contact affair that doesn't care about your feelings; get over it.
Another interesting facet of the story if the author's imagery of a stagnate, paralyzed future that may not be that far off if what I see on the news, in the papers, and on the internet is any indicator. Socialism or not, general laziness and ignorance in the average Joe is the greatest danger to the future of all humanity. Another good version of this sad future can be seen in the movie Idiocracy by Mike Judge.
Pros:
Well thought out and requires the reader to pay attention.
It is a wonderful example of post World War 2 anti-socialism, anti-fascism literature that was very common, especially from European writers, during this time.
The weak, whinny, "bad guys" are really pathetic and make you cringe when you hear them say things you've heard yourself say. They make you think twice about dwelling on fairness.
Cons:
TOO BLOODY LONG! The central theme of this story could have been discovered and explained in a narrative half the length.
The "good guys" make you want to punch them in the face for just being "too much." Despite capitalist rhetoric, business men and women are just as flawed as everyone else; they aren't supermen/women and most certainly aren't people you should look to for ethical guidance.
I'm versed in economics enough to know that using gold as the only currency is a stupid idea. Gold is a limited resource that can be manipulated like any thing else to change in value. Also, gold doesn't really have an intrinsic value; we just think it does because it's pretty to look at.
|
| |
|
|
|
