William Buckley on Ayn Rand & Atlas Shrugged...
The ONLY reason I'm posting this occurs around the one minute mark when Buckley sez "I had to flog myself to read it." I've tried to read "Atlas" three times in my life and never got further than a couple of hundred pages in before I quit. There's no other book written in the English language with more turgid prose... none.
I do believe WFB vindicates my position... even if he finished the damned thing and I didn't.
The ONLY reason I'm posting this occurs around the one minute mark when Buckley sez "I had to flog myself to read it." I've tried to read "Atlas" three times in my life and never got further than a couple of hundred pages in before I quit. There's no other book written in the English language with more turgid prose... none.
I do believe WFB vindicates my position... even if he finished the damned thing and I didn't.
I read the Fountainhead first, then read Atlas Shrugged. It was a bit of a slog to get through them, and it had long sermon passages that could have been done in far less words. The message though was one I could relate to.
ReplyDeleteThe story, while it was done in a manner to leave no doubt about where things were going, seemed like it was too far fetched, when viewed with how things are today in politics, it really isn't that far out of the realm of possibility.
I think her prose was in part a reflection of the time and contemporaries that wrote in a similar manner.
I've read both books multiple times. It's something that I think one has to get used to the writing style before you can enjoy the meat of it.
I think her prose was in part a reflection of the time and contemporaries that wrote in a similar manner.
DeleteWell, "Atlas" was published in 1957. JFK ("Profiles in Courage") Nabokov ("Lolita"), and Tolkien (no citation necessary) were three of her contemporaries I've read without trouble. Who are you thinking about?
As for getting used to her style... that's a bridge too far, for me. The last time I tried to read her was perhaps three years ago. I give up.
I had a similar experience to yours, Buck. Rand was considered THE writer among Libertarians, when I was involved with the party, and most other high muckety-mucks I dealt with rhapsodized about her. I was never as impressed as they had been. The general ideas? Yes. The writing itself? Not so much.
ReplyDeleteYup. Given I'm more Libertarian than anything else I know people who idolize her as well. I'm also like you in the fact I believe in a lot of the things she advocates... but not all. I just can't stand her style.
DeleteHer style, yi yi yi. At a minimum, you've got to skip the sermons. She sure did like to drive her points home, and then home, and home again, with cartoonish characters. I can't help it, though; I still enjoy her. I re-read Atlas Shrugged last year. I don't find her harder to take than potboiler authors like John Grisham, and it's not really fair to compare her to real literature. It's lightly fictionalized, completely humorless, stark staring political argument.
Delete@Texan99: I'll repeat what I said over at Morgan's place: I like you. A lot! Thanks for dropping by and mebbee... just mebbee... I'll give "Atlas" a fourth go.
DeleteTolkien started during WWII. A lot of his story can be tied into the Nazi's invasion, if you look.
ReplyDeleteI would say she wrote more like Hazlitt and von Hayek. Even Orwell could be in that mix.
I think it is more a matter of taste and not so much content that has some readers of Rand struggle through her books. I think many who go nuts about her are more for the ideas expressed than her writing style, in any event. Her characters are not well developed, and sometimes they seem too cardboard and silly in response, but I think she was writing more for the political ideas than for the literary.
She isn't a great author, but her followers or fans are more in love with the ideas she expressed through the books than how they were written. That will color some readers view on her overall work.
I disagree agree as well with a number of points she expounds upon. Her views of religion are one such example. The thing that strikes me is she is almost prophetic in her depiction of the politicians of today, they would fit in all too well with the politicians in her books.
Anyway, you don't need to read her books to find out about her belief and ideas. Go to the "cliff notes" if you don't like the literary style. You would probably be happier.
Go to the "cliff notes" if you don't like the literary style. You would probably be happier.
DeleteI did, and was. ;-)
Never even tried to read it. The Cliff Notes told me all I need to know. HA! Glancing up, I see Old Goat beat me to that one...
ReplyDeleteYup!
DeleteI'm of the KISS style of writing, and Cliff Notes are my friend.
ReplyDeleteI'm of the same school, Lou. I could be a staff writer for "Short Attention Span Theatre."
DeleteYou can get Rand in a much shorter form by reading 'Anthem.' I agree with everyone... she was a little wooden, but the ideas do hold some water.
ReplyDeleteAgreed. I couldn't get through Atlas either. Fountainhead and Anthem summed it up for me. Or one could listen to 2112, side one and the final song on side 2.
Delete@Dano: Thanks for the tip, but given the fact I've read so much ABOUT Rand... her life and her philosophy/politics... I doubt bad novels would add anything for me at this point. I ain't as young as I used to be and there's too much left to do (and read!) without adding superfluous BS to my list.
DeleteI have been trying to think of anything to add to the commentary, but it reminds me that I actually took the time necessary to read the entire book.
ReplyDeleteThat depresses me.
And I salute you for your persistence and dedication!
DeleteYeah... okay, we'll call it persistence and dedication [GRINS].
DeleteOne other thing for all to consider; Rand's birth language is/was Russian, which may be how her mind worked while crafting her pages.
ReplyDeleteThat's a pretty good point, Darryl. I've found Russian authors difficult, at best.
DeleteYou're going to love this part. This is on page 785:
ReplyDelete"Will you let me speak first? you see, it's something I should have said to you long ago. Will you let me speak adn not answer me until I finish?"
She nodded.
He took a moment to look at her as she stood before him, as if to hold the full sight of her figure, of this moment and of everything that had led them to it.
...me again. As I said, that is p. 785, about a quarter of the way down.
He winds it up at the bottom of page 788. One guy talking. That is micro-printing, averaging North of 500 words to a page.
And I can just hear her from beyond the grave: "Yup, and this is the best-selling novel in the history of the world. Hey, have you written any best-selling novels in the history of the world lately?"
She'd have a point, I suppose.
And I can just hear her from beyond the grave: "Yup, and this is the best-selling novel in the history of the world. Hey, have you written any best-selling novels in the history of the world lately?"
Delete"Atlas" isn't anywhere to be found on this list. Or this one. One wonders where Buckley got his information.
My research says Dickens' Tale of Two Cities outstrips all others and even Tolkien beat Rand
ReplyDeleteBut what do I know
You know what I know, Ivan.
DeleteOK, but at a minimum you've got to admit that it sold an incredible number of copies, and it's still selling like hotcakes after 50 years. No one's going to be reading my deathless prose in 50 years.
ReplyDeleteAt the same time, although she'd have killed anyone who tried it, the book would have benefited hugely from abridging to about 1/3 the original size. And I say that as someone who's very, very sympathetic to her ideology.
Morgan and I have been having an offline on the subject of sales... a brief excerpt:
DeleteInteresting link. This...
"Even more impressive," added Dr. Brook, "is that since its publication in 1957, more than 6 million copies of 'Atlas Shrugged' have been sold."
...pales before the 200 million of Dickens' "Two Cities" and Tolkien's 150 million for "Lord of the Rings." So I think we can conclude safely that "Atlas" was NOT the best selling novel of all time. Even WFB can get it wrong... who'd a thunk it?
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Morgan Freeberg wrote:
Hmmm. I found some hard figures here: http://www.aynrand.org/site/News2?id=17225&page=NewsArticle. I haven't verified them against anything else, but if they're hard numbers, they should be verifiable...or falsifiable...
I have no idea how they compare to the Bible, or others.
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 16:12:14 -0700
Subject: Re: [Exile in Portales] New comment on Small Stuff, Objectivism Division.
From: buckpennington
To: (Morgan)
But WHERE did you read that? Here's what I googled... note my search term (link omitted). I can't find "Atlas," mebbe you can. Not that it matters all that much.
I'm sympathetic to most of her ideology, as well. I'll also give a resounding "Roger that!" to abridging the original copy. Had Ms. Rand employed a strong editor... and been receptive to the edits... she might well have sold one whole helluva lot more copies than she did.
Most of my associates in academia turned their noses up at her stuff. Not because of the writing, but her politics and philosophy. Which tells me they probably never read her. I at least tried but eventually went to the Cliff Notes version and other distillations of her thought.
ReplyDeleteI'm in agreement with most everyone here about her novel writing skills. But I do think many of her views are on target, especially those regarding individual happiness and the best social system for achieving that (capitalism), and I wholeheartedly agree with her abhorrence of communism. Speaking of happiness, I'd be very happy with 1/200 th of her novel sales. :-)
We're (ahem) on the same page in all regards, Dan.
DeleteAs with you, Buck, I was not able to read the book.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I did find that it a "good listen" on an audio book over the course of a very long drive.
Love the blog!
Regards,
Bagley
Thanks for droppin' by, Bagley.
Delete