Reason Posted November 2, 2013 Posted November 2, 2013 http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/i-crashed-an-ayn-rand-love-in-for-the-super-rich One of the worst articles I've read. VICE is horribly biased.
PatrickC Posted November 3, 2013 Posted November 3, 2013 I always did associate the Left with vice, they certainly don't possess any virtue in their myopic view of the world.. Another rag (like Salon) to avoid.
Panoptic Posted November 3, 2013 Posted November 3, 2013 I like Vice's YouTube channel. But it doesn't seem to have nearly as much bias as this article does (it is still biased though).
Wuzzums Posted November 3, 2013 Posted November 3, 2013 Not as bad as Rand's novels though. Will not bite.
LuckyNumber23 Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 I think that Rand's novels are pulp. The characters are one-dimensional and the storylines are driven by unrealistic motives. That being said, I think that Rand's philosophy deserves some attention.http://www.partiallyexaminedlife.com/2013/07/01/ep78-ayn-rand/A friend told me that he felt bad about my snide remark. I have to agree. It was not very well thought through.
PatrickC Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 Yes, I wouldn't go quite as far as suggesting her characters were one dimensional. But I think the critcism of her story telling skills is often fair play. It was the philosophy that blew my mind reading her novels. She was by far a great philosopher and much less of a great novelist. Having said that, she was of the mind to write a novel that became the second most read book after the bible. So I applaud her for that. Of course this is just my opinion of course, so just ignore me if you disagree.
Wesley Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 she was of the mind to write a novel that became the second most read book after the bible. So I applaud her for that. ...in a language that was not her original language which is an amazing feat in itself.
PatrickC Posted November 4, 2013 Posted November 4, 2013 Indeed Wesley.. I stand a little in the wild west, here with my opinions of course.
LanceD Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 Yes, I wouldn't go quite as far as suggesting her characters were one dimensional. But I think the critcism of her story telling skills is often fair play. It was the philosophy that blew my mind reading her novels. She was by far a great philosopher and much less of a great novelist. Having said that, she was of the mind to write a novel that became the second most read book after the bible. So I applaud her for that. Of course this is just my opinion of course, so just ignore me if you disagree. I would disagree, the actual story and characters of Atlas Shrugged are quite good in my opinion. The problems the book has as far as entertainment value are directly caused by what happened when "The Fountainhead" was released. The book very popular with readers but most of the audience missed the philosophy in the book and instead concentrated on the characters and story. This irritated Rand because the philosophy was what mattered to her, so she made sure to cram it into Atlas Shrugged and lay it out in a manner that could not be missed by any reader. Back on Topic, I love VICE because they cover a lot of really nutty shit that no one else will touch. The authors lean left but I don't care, I don't go there to get my politics so what's it matter? There are way too many incredible videos showing Shane Smith and others out in crazy places seeing things I'd never see any other way. Ignoring what they are doing just based on political bias is limiting what you can be exposed too.
PatrickC Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 Ok, I'm not going to say you're wrong here.. It was just my opinion of course.
Anjin-san Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 I think that Rand's novels are pulp. The characters are one-dimensional and the storylines are driven by unrealistic motives. The characters were highly stylized, and deliberately so (Rand herself wrote about this), carrying each character's beliefs and principles to their logical extreme. It was an artistic device.
LuckyNumber23 Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 In all fairness one can say that her novels have no "deeper" meaning. Everything is the way it is. The protagonists are just who they appear they are. They are like puppets serving a role, either as villains or as heros. There is no complexity whatsoever. Compare that to Hugo who was also a romantic writer and whom Rand admired and you will see the difference.
Hugh Akston Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 I read a lot of bad writing and nobody is talking about it. Something is not bad because you disagree with it. 1984 was a brilliant dystopian novel written by a socialist. Does not make it bad at all. You might not like the "romantic realist" style, but that is a matter of taste. If it was bad you would not be talking about it at all. Bad being defined as something of no value? What boggles the mind is why these people with such insights regarding the ills of the world could not identify the root of the problem.
Recommended Posts