Ayn Rand - The Fountainhead
I started this book in December 2010. I finally finished it in August 2011. It was an absolute MISSION, and by the end of it I was just reading it so I could say I did - I finished this book. It certainly felt like an accomplishment by the end. I feel strangely satisfied.
It was a horrible book. I think anyone who doesn't quite agree with the philosophy Rand espouses will find this a hard read. Honestly, that all washed over me, and in a way I wish I had done some research on her views before I began the read. According to Wikipedia,
"Objectivism holds that reality exists independent of consciousness, that human beings have direct contact with reality through sense perception, that one can attain objective knowledge from perception through the process of concept formation and inductive logic, that the proper moral purpose of one's life is the pursuit of one's own happiness or rational self-interest, that the only social system consistent with this morality is full respect for individual rights, embodied in laissez faire capitalism, and that the role of art in human life is to transform man's widest metaphysical ideas, by selective reproduction of reality, into a physical form—a work of art—that one can comprehend and to which he can respond emotionally".
See the full article here.
Now, having read that, I not only agree with some parts, but I can also see exactly where it comes out in the book. But I'm not sure that means I would have enjoyed it any more. There were moments of sheer brilliance; passages about things like worrying or living in New York City or something, which I absolutely loved. The trouble was that these were flanked by endless amounts of texts which was complex for complexity's sake. Honestly, I didn't understand a lot of it, and I think this inhibited my enjoyment. The book is split into sections, one for each main character I suppose, and I liked the first section, Peter Keating. I found this character accessible - in fact, I totally empathised with his quest to gain employment with a corporate giant because that's exactly what I've done in my life (although, I'd like to think I maintain a bit of Roark's individualism as well!).
Unfortunately, the main downfall of the book for me was Ellsworth Toohey. I have never disliked, maybe even HATED, a character in a novel as much as I did this man. Vast amounts of the book are given over to very very long philosophical musings from Toohey. I'm not sure whether we're meant to like Toohey, or if the reader is supposed to find him self-indulgent, arrogant, and so intellectually advanced that one would have to have a phd to even attempt to understand every passage of his in the book. It's kind of funny that the only character I really liked within the whole book was Keating, who is supposed to be an absolute whelp! Dominique Francon was perhaps the most frustrating character. She seemed to be a strong female at the beginning, I was quite intimidated by her and so were the men in the book. But she was quickly defined by the men in her life - Keating, Roark and Wynand - and in the end she did everything for Roark... she has no individual feminine motive, it's all based around a man. I don't even want to try to describe or understand Roark... he didn't confine himself to the status quo, he was individualistic, he wanted to change the mould. Commendable, yes. But I still didn't like it.
I have achieved something in finishing this. But I won't be recommending it to anyone. I might even warn people off it if asked.
