thequidditymuse's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
inspiring
mysterious
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.75
This is easily one of the best books I’ve ever read. It is powerfully written, deeply meaningful, and is a political commentary which has been woven seamlessly into an incredibly tense, edge of the seat, mystery narrative. I have never seen philosophy so deeply melded with plot. I will say, Rynd is a much better philosopher than penny romance writer, and her attempts at sex scenes rather degrade the work. However, the characters are relatable, the distress palpable, and despair of the hardworking few in a world of greedy ineptitude is unforgettable.
rtstewart5's review against another edition
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
4.75
allegra_j's review against another edition
1.0
Thank God I went at this via audiobook. Still, the audiobook was 7 parts of 9 hours each, and I really want those 63 hours back.
I read this book out of curiosity and because it's something of a cult hit and a classic that I wasn't ever assigned in High School or College. Here's a brief synopsis:
I want to start with Dagny Taggart. As I began this book, I enjoyed the scene where Dagny showed up, all inpatient elegance, willing to take a calculated risk, the smarts of Taggart Transcontinental. "Yes! A female protagonist!" I thought.
It wasn't much later that she was entering into the most messed up romantic scenes I've ever read, where sex was a violent act of hate and she liked it fine that way. And then not long after that, I realized that Dagny, who could've been our feminist protagonist, was just an amplification device and literary tool to slowly graduate us from one "amazing" man (Francisco D'Aconio), to an even more "amazing" man, Rearden, to finally the most agonizingly amazing of them all, Galt. I have to admit that turned me off. A lot.
By the way, Jim Taggart "bad guy" hits his wife. This is not ok because he's a socialist. But Rearden twists Dagny's arms to try to get her to tell him who she slept with before him and that's fine because he's an Industrialist. Smart people can do anything.
The whole premise of the book is that the brains of the world have abandoned it. That alone is interesting, because apparently all of the smart people in the world can fit into this tiny hidden valley in the mountains. There's like, sixteen of them maybe. Everyone else in the world is a blundering fool. There is no in between. There are the brains and then there are the fools. Also the brains are all rich CEOs and stars. Poor people are blundering fools. Line workers are blundering fools. Sometimes the brains have to go back to the world in disguise and they have to work as the lowest of low line workers and it's presented like the worst fate imaginable because really, there is nothing worse in this world than to not be a CEO. I sort of feel like the book is particularly appealing to those who think they are smarter than everyone else and hold everyone in contempt for not worshipping them as they should.
Toward the end in what should be a turning point, Galt takes over the radio waves, breaking into a government speech. This should be very exciting. But Rand has him proceed to speak for three hours in the form of redundant questions and circular answers, picking out a term here and there to redefine in his own vision. It's a yawnfest. I was hoping he'd come on the radio and just say "Here's the true purpose of the government's actions, here's what's going to happen to you, here's who is benefiting." That would have been more exciting.
I enjoyed the last few pages of the book because finally there was some action! Strange, torture action, but still action! Strange, "good guys" murdering people without a second thought or regret action, but still action! Right? Right??
I'm just thoroughly disappointed. The monologues were a huge turn off. The violent sex and even degradation that seemed to be the marks of romance were a huge turn off. That Dagny was just a mirror for the three alpha males was a huge turn off. I'm not even going to start in with the evil scientists.
There were a few redeeming moments here and there. A golden literary phrase here and there. The bromance between Rearden and D'Aconia and later including Galt (three way bromance!) was endearing. But Dagny was just a follower and in the end, all the smartest people don't owe anyone a damn thing, are crazy rich, and are predominantly male.
I read this book out of curiosity and because it's something of a cult hit and a classic that I wasn't ever assigned in High School or College. Here's a brief synopsis:
I want to start with Dagny Taggart. As I began this book, I enjoyed the scene where Dagny showed up, all inpatient elegance, willing to take a calculated risk, the smarts of Taggart Transcontinental. "Yes! A female protagonist!" I thought.
It wasn't much later that she was entering into the most messed up romantic scenes I've ever read, where sex was a violent act of hate and she liked it fine that way. And then not long after that, I realized that Dagny, who could've been our feminist protagonist, was just an amplification device and literary tool to slowly graduate us from one "amazing" man (Francisco D'Aconio), to an even more "amazing" man, Rearden, to finally the most agonizingly amazing of them all, Galt. I have to admit that turned me off. A lot.
By the way, Jim Taggart "bad guy" hits his wife. This is not ok because he's a socialist. But Rearden twists Dagny's arms to try to get her to tell him who she slept with before him and that's fine because he's an Industrialist. Smart people can do anything.
The whole premise of the book is that the brains of the world have abandoned it. That alone is interesting, because apparently all of the smart people in the world can fit into this tiny hidden valley in the mountains. There's like, sixteen of them maybe. Everyone else in the world is a blundering fool. There is no in between. There are the brains and then there are the fools. Also the brains are all rich CEOs and stars. Poor people are blundering fools. Line workers are blundering fools. Sometimes the brains have to go back to the world in disguise and they have to work as the lowest of low line workers and it's presented like the worst fate imaginable because really, there is nothing worse in this world than to not be a CEO. I sort of feel like the book is particularly appealing to those who think they are smarter than everyone else and hold everyone in contempt for not worshipping them as they should.
Toward the end in what should be a turning point, Galt takes over the radio waves, breaking into a government speech. This should be very exciting. But Rand has him proceed to speak for three hours in the form of redundant questions and circular answers, picking out a term here and there to redefine in his own vision. It's a yawnfest. I was hoping he'd come on the radio and just say "Here's the true purpose of the government's actions, here's what's going to happen to you, here's who is benefiting." That would have been more exciting.
I enjoyed the last few pages of the book because finally there was some action! Strange, torture action, but still action! Strange, "good guys" murdering people without a second thought or regret action, but still action! Right? Right??
I'm just thoroughly disappointed. The monologues were a huge turn off. The violent sex and even degradation that seemed to be the marks of romance were a huge turn off. That Dagny was just a mirror for the three alpha males was a huge turn off. I'm not even going to start in with the evil scientists.
There were a few redeeming moments here and there. A golden literary phrase here and there. The bromance between Rearden and D'Aconia and later including Galt (three way bromance!) was endearing. But Dagny was just a follower and in the end, all the smartest people don't owe anyone a damn thing, are crazy rich, and are predominantly male.
nicolaspratt's review against another edition
3.0
A very long, but interesting read. The ideas and motives of the players in the book are surprisingly modern at times, but the overarching theories have yet to stand up for any period of time in any society around the world.
booklady100's review against another edition
3.0
I don't care to receive lectures from a character in a book.
rj_novotny's review against another edition
challenging
mysterious
reflective
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
dorinlazar's review against another edition
4.0
Atlas Shrugged is far from being a wonderful book. It's difficult, slow and it makes it hard to empathise with the characters. At the same time, it's an amazing book, that you, your son or mother, your sister, your brother, and pretty much everyone you care for and ever cared for MUST read.
The book is important. It will be hell to read, it's slow, it's long, it's tedious. But it will open your mind, it will shape the way you think, and you'll find it impossible not to love the egocentric view of the world that Rand brings.
You don't have to agree with all ideas. I think her view of the problems with socialist societies is more important than her solution, which barely works for the book's plot. Her solution is less credible, while her view on socialism is mild and toned down. I know many people consider her a huge critic of socialism; in this book she brings to the table nothing of the sadism, the methodical destruction of the spirit that socialism brings with it in the world.
In real life, Ayn Rand's Atlantis could not exist. The socialists would find it and destroy it with no remorse. In Rand's book they show remorse; they value intellect and their drive is basically 'honorable in intention and destructive in effect'.
But it's impossible not to collect, like I have, around a hundred or more quotes to revisit when the Atlas Shrugged universe will be a bit farther away from me, in time. Those quotes stand on their own, without support of plot or characters; they show a clarity of thought that one rarely finds in popular culture.
Definitely a book worth reading, and it would've gotten five stars if it wasn't for the disappointing solution of the whole plot. I found the solution of the plot shaky at best, and the magic 'realm' of the geniuses lacking credibility.
The book is important. It will be hell to read, it's slow, it's long, it's tedious. But it will open your mind, it will shape the way you think, and you'll find it impossible not to love the egocentric view of the world that Rand brings.
You don't have to agree with all ideas. I think her view of the problems with socialist societies is more important than her solution, which barely works for the book's plot. Her solution is less credible, while her view on socialism is mild and toned down. I know many people consider her a huge critic of socialism; in this book she brings to the table nothing of the sadism, the methodical destruction of the spirit that socialism brings with it in the world.
In real life, Ayn Rand's Atlantis could not exist. The socialists would find it and destroy it with no remorse. In Rand's book they show remorse; they value intellect and their drive is basically 'honorable in intention and destructive in effect'.
But it's impossible not to collect, like I have, around a hundred or more quotes to revisit when the Atlas Shrugged universe will be a bit farther away from me, in time. Those quotes stand on their own, without support of plot or characters; they show a clarity of thought that one rarely finds in popular culture.
Definitely a book worth reading, and it would've gotten five stars if it wasn't for the disappointing solution of the whole plot. I found the solution of the plot shaky at best, and the magic 'realm' of the geniuses lacking credibility.