Scott Brick, possibly, Ayn Rand, definitive not.
This was not a "story". It was a preachy rant. Though I don't completely disagree with her "philosophy", this was the worst possible presentation for many reasons.
As a "story", it was terrible. As opposed to trying to (in the course of the naritive) make thoughtful, logical, arguments or otherwise pose well-constructed ideas - it attempted to make a point, solely my trying to draw an unbelievable imaginary world in which anyone or anything in opposition to this point is cartoonishly incompetent, or a bumbling, blundering idiot, whose actions lead to the complete crumbing of everything around them. Thus it was ridiculously unbelievable.
It is akin to me writing a "story" illustrating why "Democratic ideals are good", which merely consisted of a bunch of drunken hillbilly Republicans, who were physically destroying society with the frequent explosions of their poorly-constructed backwood moonshine stills.
It's sole objective was to try to preach her values. It did this by having extraordinarily long-winded narratives by their characters which preached the same messages over and over and over. There was at one point a 3+ hour speech given by one character that would have been overkill even by Muhamar Ghadaffi's standards.
Any rationale human should know that the way to get a point across is not to completely restate the same arguments, over and over and over for 60+ hours. The pace of the book was extremely slow. I had spans of an hour go by in which no movement happened in the plot.
Much of my incentive in listening to it was the "notoriety" it has in popular culture. After being shocked at how poor I thought this book was, I did some research which lead me to believe that much of it's popularity comes from a small but vocal following, in conjunction with free printing and distribution of the book by Ayn Rand's foundation.
In short, it seemed like a long-winded, rambling manifesto of a person who loved the sound of their own voice - giving it no consideration to how anyone else might perceive it.
I don't know if it's a plus of a minus - but his portrail of the "villans" in the book made them look like all blathering, bumbling, whiny idiots. I thought this made the book pretty unbelievable. I don't know if it was *supposed* to be like this or not.
Boredom. Very looong-winded, a not-so-interesting point, and a very boring story.
No - I LOVED this book and in spite of it's considerable length I wished it would go on even longer. I had always thought this was a work I "should"read and the audio version appealed to me because I don't often get time to just sit and read. This might be my favortie book of all time.
Romance, mystery, drama, outstanding character development - I was hooked in the first half hour.
Dagny's decision to follow the plane
The slight differences in tone and voice quality helped me "see" who was speaking.
It made me think more about government programs and pork filled bills. Personal responsibility and good decision making are not hallmarks of our government. I'm not ready for survivalist camps, but if you choose to take risks, then be prepared to live with the consequences and be happy when you reap the rewards.
While I am a fiscal moderate and see a place for government in our lives, this book should be required reading for anyone serving in our government. Written more than 50 years ago, the themes in the story are being played out today as we continue to see nanny government take over personal responsibilities.As our government "leaders" are continuing to redistribute wealth in the name of the "public" it's time to consider the long-term disinsentive that redistribution has on all members of our nation.
I love how this book clearly lays out the problems of the anti-capitalist agenda. It is very straight forward in demonstrating how the anti-capitalists can ruin an economy and a country. I am not a die hard capitalist and certainly did not agree with all the points of view of the protagonists. However, I found myself agreeing way more often than not with the protagonists than anyone else. I even found myself laughing and even cheering when a policy of the anti-capitalists ultimately turned around and burned the anti-capitalists by its effect. While it has some flaws, the book truly is a masterpiece that I will enjoy listening to again.
The John Galt speech is one of the most moving speeches ever written. The clarity of observation concerning mankind's inability to do for themselves and willingly put dictatorial figures in charge of the worlds greatest resource, 'People'.
Yes, this book is on my mind when I am not in a place to listen to it. The topics are are so 2012...2013?! that it is amazing that it is written so long ago! My mother was not even born yet. So, read away!!! (listen away!). Something for everyone.
The two main characters and their dedication to their dreams and passions!
Wow, when (spoiler) Dagney and Taggert got together (finally!)
yes!, but you do need thinking room built in because it has so much depth!
Generations have thought the world of this story. But come on, just how much can you berate the system?
Had a more demanding editor! That conrtolled her ramblings.
Brick is the best. He has never failed to present a story in the best possible way. If he performs, I listen.
How about 75% f the book?
Just try and get a credit!
A plot that actually caught my attention as opposed to endless drivel. I didn't even make it through the first 8 hours before I asked to return this.
I don't know. It never caught my interest, I couldn't make myself feel anything for her rather one-dimensional characters, and after nearly 8 hours of listening it didn't seem like anything was happening.
He spoke well and clearly and I could find nothing objectionable in his accent.
Boredom and the wish that it would get interesting enough to make me want to listen to it as it is supposed to be such a classic.
Probably very good if you are suffering from insomnia.
I would, will and have been recommending this audio book to anyone who cares to listen. This is my favorite work by any human in my 32 years.I'm almost done a second time! 62 hours!
Scott Brick's narration is perfection. He's successfully captured the character and leaves no doubt in your mind as to the depth and breadth of how evil some of these characters are. The men that are resolute and powerful are read with a very deep, confident tone and cadence that reflects as such. The women that are scandalous and vicious, are read as such. Scott reads for the female characters in such a way that it allows you to immerse yourself in the book and you forget, completely that a man is narrating.
I despise Lillian Rearden. My skin crawls when I hear "her" speak and I cannot discern if it is because I know people like this and the character is spot on.. or if the people I know like that were brought to light by the way Brick represents her. I can't say enough about Ayn Rand, or Scott Brick. This book has had an immediate and powerful impact on my life that those around me have seen, and taken notice.
The detail of the writing allows for mental imagery that demolishes anything modern film can accomplish. Rand's ability to set the scene for what could be camera angles, and the environment is astounding. It has components from every type of work. Philosophy, Psychology, Business, Romance, Fiction, Action, Mystery, Science Fiction and it does every genre justice. Scott Brick's narration fills in the only possible hole that could be left by a reader incapable of assigning character traits to those the manifest in the mind.
I have not but absolutely will. He is a fantastic narrator, and shines the best light possible on a work of this magnitude.
When asking questions that cannot be answered, the answer may be those that seek the answer. " Who is John Galt?"
Might want to fix that typo in the preceding field. ") other than that.. Audible is a fantastic product and service that gives me my time back.
I would, but not because it's a good story. The book is worth reading for the warning story of the Bum's Speech alone, and Hank Reardon's testimony is also worthwhile, but one must have the full context to understand why those two speeches are worth listening to.
When Hank Reardon gave his testimony before the tribunal stating that he had no plea to enter because he hadn't violated any law. The entire book was worth it for that moment alone.
No, while one was able to get used to the performance after a while, the monotone, down-beat delivery of the performance left me wishing for a better narrator.
Ayn Rand's use of this book to convey her Objectivist philosophy suffers in two major areas:
First, she writes what is essentially a Self-Insert story where it's clear she's intending the Dagny Taggart character to be her proxy in-story, second is the obvious use of a Mary-sue level character in the form of John Galt. Self-insert stories need to be delicately handled, and Mary-sue characters never make good characters at all.
Second, Ayn Rand suffers from the core problem that most atheists suffer; allowing someone else to define God for them. There is no spiritual aspect to this book beyond the physical needs of the moment, resulting in no real driving goals being obvious to anyone, requiring the reader to intuit that there is supposed to be some great spiritual strength to John Galt's "Workers of the Mind" strike. A single charismatic opposition leader who understood the spiritual needs, as well as the temporal needs, of any human would have destroyed the "strike" without even knowing it was taking place.
This is ignoring entirely that Ayn Rand's so-called "perfect man" in John Galt is fairly two-dimensional and is fairly uninteresting.
Rand's logic used to present her ideals were superb.
Rand's ideas on capitalism, happiness, role of government and etc.
Too dramatic of a tone all the time made it weary after a while and took a long time to get used to it.