I jumped into this with the desire to understand the most popularized version of lassaiz-faire economics. It became apparent to me that there was no such treatment to be found in the book. I've read about a quarter of the way into it, and I have decided to abandon the project for other exploits. Yes, I've heard about the famous Galt monologue. No, I won't read it all - here's why.
When Rand decides to abandon real human interaction in favor of artificial preaching, she invariably just says "I [Rand] believe that might makes right [or any other suitable proposition]. Why? Because it's clearly true." Without presenting so much as a shred of evidence that she understands how people function, let alone why her pop-philosophy is to be taken seriously, she's successfully used an old trick: telling you what to think without the compliment of telling you why.
The many reviews and discourses I've read suggest that fans of Ms. Rand are looking for something smart and sophisticated to justify their beliefs post-hoc. And no, you are not allowed to redefine "moral" to mean what we would commonly think of as "amoral self-interest". Believe it or not, structuring a society around helping each other is moral. Letting the vaguely-defined "great" men do their thing simply because they have vision will often lead bad things.
Any book that is longer than the complete Hebrew-English Tanach had better develop a plotline. This does not develop fast enough. The characters don't act like real people. If you want suggestions of what to do with your great burning spirit, I suggest F. Nietzsche.
If you're still reading my review, then let me state that Rand can be very descriptive in her usual paragraphs. If you want a more concise, perhaps even believable version of her objectivism, skip this and move to The Fountainhead. It's much more manageable, and the focus on an artist instead of a capitalist is far more appropriate to matters of spirit.
I love history,I am into genealogy, my iPod is my constant companion. Favorite authors...D. Gabaldon, N. DeMille, K. Follett, E. Rutherfurd
I bought this book because I had heard so much about it, there are several 5 star ratings and Scott Brick is one of my favorite narrators. I love long books, should be a no brainer...you're going to love this book...WRONG...I am now over half finished listening to it and it is the saddest most depressing book I have ever listened to, and it just goes on and on. If I listen to it while trying to go to sleep, I have nightmares.
Listening to it now, I recall skipping dozens of pages at a time when I read it in high school. Too long; too many adjectives; too much of everything. Poor word selection. Maybe her command of the English language just wasn't good enough. The characters are poorly developed, uninteresting, unlikable. Each one so reprehesible, the listener hopes they all fail. Rand fails to construct an interesting basis for the political/economic message, which is thin and unexamined: Capitalists good; socialists bad. OK, but she fails to give the good capitalists a worthy foil. The performance is one note: dramatic. As if the listener should hang on every word. But there is never a payoff for hanging in there.
This has got to be the dullest, most boring thing I have ever heard. And it's not the narator's fault at all. It's all on Rand. She uses as many words as possible to describe what her antisocial characters are thinking and there's almost no action. It's taken me 6 months to listen to the first section. I'll probably finish it seeing how I paid for it but it may take a few decades.
I had heard about this book in various articles I had come across and wanted to see what all the buzz (re-newed buzz) was about. Unfortunately, I found this narrator impossible to listen to. He emphasized nearly every word. The story itself was interesting at first but the book could and should have been half the size. I would have liked to know how it ended and will perhaps finish it in hard copy although the story seems to provide a very simplistic view of a complex problem.
I decided to listen to this book because I've heard so much about it, and wanted to better understand more conservative idealologies. I found I agree with much of what she says, but she takes it way to far.
It is much too long. I'm okay with long books generally, but no new content or thoughts are introduced. It's the same sermon over and over. Also, I HATE Hank Rearden. What a dull, uninteresting character. Dangy isn't much better. I haven't finished yet, but I hope they die horrible deaths.
And trains don't bring lasting fulfillment. They just don't, okay?
I really was excited about this. I just can't get into this extremely long and dry novel. To each his own, I fall asleep after the first 30 minutes.
Great character development.
There isn't, except maybe her other work. We the Living was an excellent first novel; The Fountainhead geared up for Atlas Shrugged.
I want to but can't.
I actually have two audio Atlas Shrugged purchases now. This one is far superior in audio quality to the other. The narrarator is better, too.
Civil War, 1861
Clear, interesting, dramatic
This book is characterized as a
This was very well written and narrated and the story is good. It is very long and there are many long philosophical speeches, one that is three hours long. I can't say for sure that it was the best use of my 63 hours but I am glad I listened to it.