Regardless of whether a person likes the book Atlas Shrugged or whether they do not like it, one has to admit that it must have taken considerable effort to write such a descriptive story infused with story upon story stamping the author Ayn Rand’s ideals page after page. This outstanding effort seems remarkably symbolic of the story as a whole and the message that the author is attempting to convey to readers. In the most simplistic of terms, I interpret Ayn Rand’s fundamental message to readers to be that everyone deserves to reap the benefits for what they have worked for, and that nobody should be permitted to restrain another person’s work regardless of necessity.
I personally agreed with this basic principle behind Atlas Shrugged, a principle that is becoming eerily abdicated by the United States nation in harsh economic and social times like ones plaguing our nation today. I cannot even begin to recall all of the examples of this “moral” in the story. While I was reading the story, I thought it almost strange that the author felt the need to include repetition after repetition of situations that seem to demonstrate the catastrophic failure of virtually any economic policy other than Capitalism. Having survived the story, I can now see more clearly all of the stories as a whole. In my opinion, the point of her excessive repetition was to make sure that any reader, regardless of financial means, would be able to relate to the examples and begin to comprehend the potential disasters that Socialistic economic methods could cause. I enjoyed that as the author went through each problem, she did not herself, or have any character, blatantly say that one economic policy is horrendous and the other should be used. In each story, it is left up to the reader to interpret what exactly has gone wrong after seeing what has gone on. Developing a personal relationship with characters like Dagny and Reardon, people who seem to represent crusaders for the cause of Capitalism, along with a disgust that exponentially develops toward people calling for policies that call for mandatory giving like Jim Taggart and his pack of government hyenas undoubtedly helps readers understand what side the author is advocating. The only rememberable time of the blatant expression of the author’s values would be John Galt’s rant on the problems with society that have lead to the disappearance of the leaders of all of the economic powerhouse causing further financial distress.
Other than the excessive repetition, there was truly only one aspect of the book that I did not necessarily agree with, the entire concept of Atlantis. I understand that not every single person in this world is going to develop into a great titan of industry or a tycoon of the stock market, some people are destined to be people who do the leg work of these businesses. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that, but that does not mean that those who are capable are better than everyone else. Some are leaders, and some are followers, that is just how life works. In this story, the obvious leaders are the people that abandon the wold because they just do not like how it seems to be going, and the followers are the ones that are left behind even if it was there fault for creating the despicable economic environment. Maybe its from childhood stories, the superheroes across the globe coming to the rescue when the world is in peril, but to me, when the going gets tough, the leaders do not just abandon society and start something anew. It really bothered me that Rand included this in the story, because it seem neither remotely realistic nor does it seem remotely effective. In my mind, a leader like this really proves themselves in harsh economic times. The leader is one who defies all odds and brings success and prosperity to the world. In this story, however, the leaders virtually give up and start an exclusive club for their own success. It just seems completely unrealistic unlike most of what happens in this story and a waste of time because it does not really solve anything.
I remember listening to stories of Robin Hood as a child. Stealing from the rich and giving to the poor seemed like such a noble thing to do. What this story fails to include is the fact that, in the real world, Robin Hood comes in the form of a government, and does not actually steel from just the rich. Instead, this “Robin Hood” takes from every socioeconomic class, he dips deeper and deeper into the pockets time after time of every single person to pay for the people that have chosen not to act on ambition. This entire book was really eye opening, especially since it rings so true in this era of increasing government control in a nation that was originally branded as a society run by a weak government. I enjoyed the book not because it was an argument for the privileged or wealthy, but because it was an argument for the ambitious and dedicated, a principle that is rewarded less and less in this faltering nation.
No comments:
Post a Comment