[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 207 KB, 600x461, atlasshrugged71.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1704005 No.1704005 [Reply] [Original]

alot of people on /lit/ seem to be extremely negative towards this book, depite it's widely being regarded as a 'Classic'.

So litfags, a little enlightenment please?
Do you like it or hate it and WHY?

>> No.1704010

Objective bump.

>> No.1704012

Isn't there a wiki page for this? This thread pops up twice a day.

>> No.1704015

sauce or something, i want answers!

>> No.1704014
File: 38 KB, 1372x84, Screen shot 2011-04-15 at 12.37.05 PM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1704014

/bread

>> No.1704017

never read it. i hate what it stands for, basically koch brothers propaganda written 50 years ago. still, never read it but i'm pretty sure that's what it is. also, a girl i used to know whose pants i tried to get in on LOVED ayn rand. i failed so don't go thinking im unbiased about it either

>> No.1704021

>>1704017
ok then people, convice me of WHY it is bad. Is it the narrative, the dialogue, the premise?

>> No.1704023

>it's widely being regarded as a 'Classic'
it's widely regarded as neurotic shit.

>> No.1704024

The Problem with and of Ayn Rand:

When you pull the rope you fancy it may tighten around someone's throat. It is generally considered unfriendly to hang someone.

>> No.1704025

I haven't read that shit.

I did however read "Anthem", and it seemed as-though a five year old wrote it.

>> No.1704027

People seem to dislike it for the message in it which is pretty much critical of government interference abusing the ideas of intelectual property and surpressing the minds of the creative minority in order to ensure equality for the uncreative majority.

>> No.1704035

I read it at a time when I was pretty receptive to its themes but god damn it... I got to John Galt's speech and decided life was too short.

Since it seems you haven't read it OP I'll explain: said speech is an author-tract monologue that, in the paperback edition I had, went on for almost SIXTY FUCKING PAGES.

>> No.1704037

>>1704021

because the main character is a mary sue and it is written like fan fiction, and also she is a bitch, such a fucking bitch.

so yeah, all three of those things

>> No.1704038

http://www.modernlibrary.com/top-100/100-best-novels/
http://www.the-bookman.com/main/Best.books.html
http://hopeofanotherworld.wordpress.com/2010/03/02/the-50-greatest-novels-ever-written-as-compiled-f
rom-multiple-lists/

>> No.1704041

If Atlas Shrugged was written by a bearded, badass man people would think it as ok but not for them.

It is written by this lady and everybody loses their shit like in the kindergarden.

>> No.1704043

im about 120 pages in, ~1000 to go. Tbh, im kinda enjoying the drama of the whole world collapsing and the heroic few trying desperately to pull it back into sanity.
Should i really stop reading now, just because of 'objectivism'(which i don't agree with)?

>> No.1704045

It's a poorly written and uninteresting story that attracts a lot of attention because foolish people somehow mistake it for an argument in support of a worldview that speaks to their prejudices and satisfies their conceit.

>> No.1704048

>>1704043
Read til ya don't want to, man. Like I said Galt's monologue was the first time I ever set down a book knowing I wasn't going to finish it, but maybe you won't mind.

>> No.1704051

>>1704041
Yeah, this world hates women. Specially if they write.

>> No.1704052

>>1704041
No. Fuck off. There are plenty of brilliant women writers that are almost universally acclaimed by anyone who knows anything about books, people like Virginia Woolf or Margaret Atwood.

Ayn Rand's writing is reviled because it's propaganda for her toxic philosophy, not fucking sexism.

>> No.1704054

'poorly written' 'uninteresting story' 'neurotic shit' 'fan fiction'

okay /lit/, now im curious.
What then, is a well written book, that has an interesting story, is coherent, and dignified...

>> No.1704056

>>1704054
Twilight.

>> No.1704059

>>1704054
I could list hundreds, but what happens then, do you demonstrate how Atlas Shrugged is the equal of any of them? What are you trying to do here?

>> No.1704061
File: 24 KB, 300x273, trollface.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1704061

>>1704056
....i see.

>> No.1704065

I love Bioshock, OP.

>> No.1704069

>>1704054

don quixote, crime and punishment, the trial, war and peace, for whom the bell tolls, as i lay dying, the handmaid's tale, the great gatsby, pride and prejudice, the grapes of wrath, 100 years of solitude, moby dick, .............................................................................. .............................................................................. .............................................................................. .............................................................................. ..............................................................................

>> No.1704067
File: 7 KB, 225x224, 128263477750.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1704067

>>1704054
don quixote

now gtfo

>> No.1704071

>>1704069
>crime and punishment
>war and peace
>pride and prejudice
I always think these are the same book. Funny that way, I am.
I've never read any of them.

>> No.1704073

>>1704061
I use to read philosophy only, but I consider stuff like One thousand years of solitude, Naked lunch or The lord of the flies as good books.

>> No.1704075

>>1704059
im just trying to gauge /lit/'s general taste in books, and seeing their views on material that is often hotly debated.
As i said, im curious.

im not a randfag, my fav book so far was 'A Game of Thrones'. There... now what does /lit/ view as good reading material?

>> No.1704078

>>1704073
>thousand
>hundred
lol

>> No.1704079

>>1704054
Picking a book at random off this shelf beside me...

Experiences of an Irish R.M. (Resident Magistrate, a defunct post dating from English Rule), by E. Œ. Somerville and Martin Ross (pseudonyms, both authors were women)

... that'll do.

>> No.1704082

The funny things is how Randrones think that she is some philosophical genius with crisp arguments and important insights, while the truth is that she is nearly universally reviled among professional philosophers, including the small-government conservatives, precisely because of her lack of argument and rigor. It's as if her supporters think that her insistence on being logical and providing arguments is itself some kind of argument, when the the truth is she never gives any arguments that aren't based on ridiculous and unevidenced psychological generalizations about people's motivations.

If you agree with her worldview, at least be intellectually honest and read some respectable small government conservatives like Nozick and various German economists

>> No.1704085

>>1704082
>conservatives
>Nozick
Not every libertarian is a conservative.

>> No.1704087

>>1704067
I'm reading it now and it's not terribly coherent. Don't really appreciate how it veers off from the interesting main character to go into the boring irrelevant story of various maligned lovers like it's one of the worse Shakespeare comedies.

>> No.1704089

>>1704087
you need a version with sidenotes

>> No.1704090

>>1704085

You're right, though it does, as always, depend on what you mean by "conservative," hence the "small-government" qualification (as opposed to social conservatism). I think it's fair to call him a conservative in that sense, but whatever. You understand what I'm saying.

>> No.1704102

nozick's style of political philosophy isn't so much conservative as it is...willfully obtuse with regard to what kind of justification used. it is a bit religious.

>> No.1704118

>>1704089
Damn these public-domain ebooks! Why can't everything good be free!

>> No.1704119

>>1704102
Yeah... I like him, but those principles look more like some kind of kantian regulative ideal than some law really applicable.

>> No.1704122

>>1704071

That was a good century for the "two things this story features" style of book-naming.

>> No.1704129

>>1704069
Starship Troopers?

allow me to explain why we hat Ayn Rand and her philosophy for reasons other than that she was a terrible writer.

her whole belief system is based on the idea that the only justification for anything is 'what's of use.' for example, Ayn Rand believes that if you saw a drowning child, You should never ever be held accountable to try to save that child even -- even if you were the only one in a position to do so -- because it gets nothing for you and might endanger your life.

in in Heinlein's controversial and misinterpreted Starship Troopers, Heinlein argues that examples of when two people drown in a selfless attempt to save a drowning victims life, this is no-man-left-behind attitude is one of the only things redemptive about the human race.

in short:

Rand: me me ME!

Heinlein: ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country

>> No.1704136

>>1704119
well the rights framework is blind to other forms of human relations, because agency is too thin both as action and as world framing principle in the constitution of agents.

>> No.1704138

>>1704129
>ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country

And when it seemed it couldn't get worse...

>> No.1704140

it sucks

/thread

>> No.1704142

>>1704140
Whoa, best comment so far.

>> No.1704144

>>1704138

no, THAT was the message of the book not HURR DURR FASCISM

>> No.1704148

>>1704144
Ok, I think I get it now lol