+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 16 to 22 of 22

Thread: William Buckley on Ayn Rand

  1. #16 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    30,926
    Thanks
    4,442
    Thanked 5,236 Times in 3,753 Posts
    Groans
    84
    Groaned 492 Times in 469 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by midcan5 View Post
    I have tried to read her but cannot.

    "... Out of a lifetime of reading, I can recall no other book in which a tone of overriding arrogance was so implacably sustained. Its shrillness is without reprieve. Its dogmatism is without appeal. In addition, the mind, which finds this one natural to it, shares other characteristics of its type. 1) It consistently mistakes raw force for strength, and the rawer the force, the more reverent the posture of the mind before it. 2) It supposes itself to be the bringer of a final revelation. Therefore, resistance to the Message cannot be tolerated because disagreement can never be merely honest, prudent or just humanly fallible. Dissent from revelation so final (because, the author would say, so reasonable) can only be willfully wicked. There are ways of dealing with such wickedness, and, in fact, right reason itself enjoins them. From almost any page of Atlas Shrugged, a voice can be heard, from painful necessity, commanding: " To the gas chambers — go!" The same inflexibly self-righteous stance results, too (in the total absence of any saving humor), in odd extravagances of inflection and gesture — that Dollar Sign, for example. At first, we try to tell ourselves that these are just lapses, that this mind has, somehow, mislaid the discriminating knack that most of us pray will warn us in time of the differences between what is effective and firm, and what is wildly grotesque and excessive. Soon we suspect something worse. We suspect that this mind finds, precisely in extravagance, some exalting merit; feels a surging release of power and passion precisely in smashing up the house. A tornado might feel this way, or Carrie Nation.

    We struggle to be just. For we cannot help feel at least a sympathetic pain before the sheer labor, discipline and patient craftsmanship that went to making this mountain of words. But the words keep shouting us down. In the end that tone dominates. But it should be its own antidote, warning us that anything it shouts is best taken with the usual reservations with which we might sip a patent medicine. Some may like the flavor. In any case, the brew is probably without lasting ill effects. But it is not a cure for anything. Nor would we, ordinarily, place much confidence in the diagnosis of a doctor who supposes that the Hippocratic Oath is a kind of curse."

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-.../2705853/posts
    Well this review could explain why she never invited Mr. Buckley over for dinner.
    You're Never Alone With A Schizophrenic!

    http://www.justplainpolitics.com/pic...&pictureid=305

  2. #17 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    69,975
    Thanks
    1,091
    Thanked 3,763 Times in 2,781 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 225 Times in 212 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mott the Hoople View Post
    Well than no wonder you like the book. You haven't read it all.

    Don't you think those really preachy parts might bring to the fore some of the major flaws of her philosophy?

    Anyone can read bullet points and executive summaries Damo but it takes true self flogging discipline to read all of Atlas Shrugged!
    Wow.

    Okay, I guess I have to go step by step for some people.

    One day I got up, brushed my teeth, took a shower, and got dressed. I went to the library and checked out another book by an author I liked. I had read Fountainhead before, I had just checked out Atlas Shrugged. Over the next three days I read every word of the second book from this author named Ayn Rand. It was interesting, but clearly written in some parts more to teach something that most people who would enjoy the book already knew.

    Because of this in subsequent years when I re-read the book, I skipped some of the longer "teaching" moments and simply read the story. Although I do read the speech on "money" by Francisco every time. That one rocks.

    I would have advised her that a bit of editing on the Galt speech would be nice, it is a bit repetitive (not just a bit, but you know)... and I would have noted to her that a dude in 7th grade could see the foreshadowing from at the very most the third chapter... With a bit of judicious editing the same point that was made repetitively could have been brought to bear leaving the story intact and far more enjoyable.

    Basically it was like reading the "Left Behind" series. On occasion the authors would break into a long sermon in the middle of the book. Skipping those bits that are meant to teach people who may be reading about their religious beliefs for the first time, if you already know about their beliefs, changes nothing in the story and you get more out of it because you aren't annoyed by reading something "teaching" you something you learned long ago.
    Excellence is an art won by training and habituation. We do not act rightly because we have virtue or excellence, but rather we have those because we have acted rightly. We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit.
    - -- Aristotle

    Believe nothing on the faith of traditions, even though they have been held in honor for many generations and in diverse places. Do not believe a thing because many people speak of it. Do not believe on the faith of the sages of the past. Do not believe what you yourself have imagined, persuading yourself that a God inspires you. Believe nothing on the sole authority of your masters and priests. After examination, believe what you yourself have tested and found to be reasonable, and conform your conduct thereto.
    - -- The Buddha

  3. #18 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Federal Way, WA
    Posts
    29,727
    Thanks
    5,595
    Thanked 3,604 Times in 2,789 Posts
    Groans
    353
    Groaned 326 Times in 311 Posts

  4. #19 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    England
    Posts
    19,348
    Thanks
    2,719
    Thanked 3,260 Times in 2,505 Posts
    Groans
    690
    Groaned 668 Times in 622 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mott the Hoople View Post
    What about the Fountainhead? That's vastly superior to Atlas Shrugged and it makes the same points about Objectivism with out beating you to death with volumes of redundant rhetoric.
    Have you seen the Gary Cooper film? I saw some years back but would like to see it again.
    I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're going, and hook up with them later.


  5. #20 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    30,926
    Thanks
    4,442
    Thanked 5,236 Times in 3,753 Posts
    Groans
    84
    Groaned 492 Times in 469 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aoxomoxoa View Post
    Have you seen the Gary Cooper film? I saw some years back but would like to see it again.
    Yes I have.....one of the worst movies ever. Dreadfully monotonous and boring. Some books just don't translate well into film.
    You're Never Alone With A Schizophrenic!

    http://www.justplainpolitics.com/pic...&pictureid=305

  6. #21 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    England
    Posts
    19,348
    Thanks
    2,719
    Thanked 3,260 Times in 2,505 Posts
    Groans
    690
    Groaned 668 Times in 622 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mott the Hoople View Post
    Yes I have.....one of the worst movies ever. Dreadfully monotonous and boring. Some books just don't translate well into film.
    I can't remember too much about it excepting that it did seems a very odd film for Gary Cooper to be starring in, IMDB give it a seven though.

    Director King Vidor originally hoped to cast 'Humphrey Bogart' (QV) and Lauren Bacall in the lead roles, but Ayn Rand insisted on Gary Cooper in the lead. Bacall was cast opposite Cooper, but dropped out before filming began. Hoping the film would make her a star, Warner Bros cast a relative unknown, 22-year-old Patricia Neal, after considering and then rejecting Bette Davis, Ida Lupino and Barbara Stanwyck as replacements for Bacall. Gary Cooper objected to Neal being cast, but during filming, Cooper and Neal began an affair.
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0041386/
    I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're going, and hook up with them later.


  7. #22 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    12,713
    Thanks
    6,750
    Thanked 4,035 Times in 2,967 Posts
    Groans
    791
    Groaned 584 Times in 529 Posts

    Default

    In a nutshell. Didactic and humorless.

    "The same inflexibly self-righteous stance results, too (in the total absence of any saving humor)..."

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. William Greider
    By uscitizen in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 04-01-2009, 10:19 AM
  2. Buckley leaves National Review after Obama endorsement
    By LadyT in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 10-15-2008, 04:56 PM
  3. A Buckley endorses Obama
    By Socrtease in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-14-2008, 03:33 PM
  4. Rest in peace, William F. Buckley
    By Onceler in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 02-29-2008, 04:36 PM
  5. Buckley Dead at 82
    By Professor Baxter in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 02-27-2008, 12:20 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts