Huh, I had a bit of a problem with Toohey - of course, I've only finished Part Three and, obviously, don't know the whole story*
I'm curious what you'll think after you hear his Villain Monologue in Part Four.
And yeah, Rand was playing him straight as a villain, down to the name she saddled him with (Ellsworth = worthless). I like him as a villain because he's competent enough to go up against the likes of Wynand, and the depictions of the artistic types he supported were pretty entertaining (Rand wasn't subtle, but she did a good job of showing rather than telling here).
That said. yeah, it's difficult to find a close enough fit for him among the Transformers as we know them. I picked Prime because he's a leader, and if Scrapper is on the side of the angels here, the villainous mastermind would have to be a 'bot. Though the comparison of Scrapper and Roark is, as you said, hilarious. Scrapper's modesty means that he never thinks buildings are perfect the way he designed them and any change is a detriment - if he did have this my-way-or-the-highway approach, he and Hook would be constantly arguing. He's confident enough in himself to take other mechs' suggestions into account when those are good.
By the way, speaking of Roark, what did you think about the rape scene? That's the one part of the book I always skip when I re-read.
I also wonder who could possibly be Mrs. Keating. I couldn't stand her as a character - she was so overbearing that I always wished Keating would grow a spine and tell her to stay out of his personal life. But Soundwave as Alvah Scarrett is great! All the cassettes could be the staff of the Banner. Ravage would be a perfect Jules Fougler.
Finally, I read a short parody on Goodreads where the characters were Rock, Domino, Cheating and Hellsworth Phooey. But yours is funnier. :)
Rand was playing him straight as a villain, down to the name she saddled him with (Ellsworth = worthless). I like him as a villain because he's competent enough to go up against the likes of Wynand, and the depictions of the artistic types he supported were pretty entertaining (Rand wasn't subtle, but she did a good job of showing rather than telling here).
I like him very much as a character, and now as a villain! Things he says are sometimes very right, and sometimes very wrong (for an Objectivist they must be utterly wrong through and through), but he's smart enough to play everybody! And his artist proteges discussing No Skin Off Your Ass/Nose... At first I took it for satire, Rand's dislike for experimental literature and maybe her opinion of how great plays are made, being a person who wrote several plays and managed to sell only one ;) I could very easily imagine that similar occurrences happen in the real world all the time... But no, it was her straightforward depiction of Toohey actively making the world a worse place, because he's an evil collectivist!
Whatever is Toohey's motivation - love for fascism? Resentment towards naturally great people whose physique matches their minds since he was born a disadvantaged weakling? Simply making the world midiocre to rule it with his extraordinary iltellect? - I think that for Shockwave it would be, of course, logic: it's illogical to have extreme character traits making it harder for you to fit in. It's illogical to work for personal gain instead of making things better for everyone. It's illogical to simply want to be good and believing that it magically cures everything. I guess that this is Prime's problem - simply telling people to be good and equal isn't a cure for bad economy and social problems, but Shockwave provided him with semantic tools to sell his vision. At the same time Megatron preaches that they need a new war as a way to boost economy and create jobs (it's sad how true it is) and Shockwave runs some things for him. Megatron doesn't see him as a threat and when Starscream tells him to get rid of ol' Shocks because he wants to take over the world, he laughs at him.
That said. yeah, it's difficult to find a close enough fit for him among the Transformers as we know them. I picked Prime because he's a leader, and if Scrapper is on the side of the angels here, the villainous mastermind would have to be a 'bot. Though the comparison of Scrapper and Roark is, as you said, hilarious.
I personally prefer Marvel!Shockwave who was simply logical, even to his own detriment, and Cartoon!Shockwave who definitely needs a hug and some help with running the whole planet, but other iterations often depict Shockwave as having his own agenda and I think that it fits here - he plays Decepticons and Autobots against each other to finally achieve... An alternative to an outbreak of the civil war? To create logical society where people complement each other, work towards the greater good and don't fight? (very villainous, I know!)
Ah, Scrapper is definitely an angel with a filthy soul! Also, he doesn't struggle - he's very successful as a controvertial artist but is unhappy because he wants to erect buildings so badly, why do people love his style in art, but not in architecture? He only gets to help his friend Grapple sometimes - compromising and changing actual corpses into sculptures - and finds employment as an engineer with a Decepticon construction project to build something! There, he gets noticed by Hook, who immediately finds him irresistibly attractive and after losing an inner fight - especially with clear signs that Scrapper likes him as well - he summons him for a very "personal" medical check-up ;) And since he's your typical un-gestalted Hook, he has very poor understanding of his feelings and desires. Upon learning that Scrapper isn't just nobody but a famous artist (which makes the infatuation real!) Hook lashes against him - also, Scrapper's art disturbs him. He publishes scathing criticism in the Decepticon Bulletin - people assume that Hook must be right because he knows his corpses, while Scrapper is simply grateful for free publicity. At the same time, Hook cannot resist him in person and their affair blossoms... But he's taken aback by the fact that Scrapper is the first person to treat him nicely, with love and compassion, in spite of his horrible personality. He doesn't understand it and attempts to prove to Scrapper that he's, actually, unworthy of love - he might seduce Grapple, showing how scarily good he is in deceiving people (while his greatest deception is, of course, self-deception). This leads us to poor dumped Hoist and Shockwave advicing him to give his all to the Autobot Cause or something. And, in a way of possible explanation, Hook has been a military medic since young age and probably has seen and experienced some slag... Wow, a character with actually understandable psychology is sucha a joy to write! (Get lost, Dominique!)
I also wonder who could possibly be Mrs. Keating. I couldn't stand her as a character - she was so overbearing that I always wished Keating would grow a spine and tell her to stay out of his personal life. But Soundwave as Alvah Scarrett is great! All the cassettes could be the staff of the Banner. Ravage would be a perfect Jules Fougler.
If you can't stand someone, then the answer is simple - Huffer, somehow. I discovered that I love using him to make other characters' lives miserable ;) While the idea of Decepticons running a tabloid is hilarious, I think that they're just a militaristic faction running their bulletin in an attempt to win Cybertronian minds and sparks, and the 'Bots having their own as well discussing how everyone should be nice and equal. But the Decepticon one is more popular because their language is often mean, crass and brutally honest. And Hook, as the CMO, publishes there too about health-related issues and his articles are often heavily edited as too mean ;) Megatron isn't that very invested in it, to Soundwave's chagrin and Shockwave's secret joy.
Finally, I read a short parody on Goodreads where the characters were Rock, Domino, Cheating and Hellsworth Phooey.
I'm sure that Rand is very parody-worthy! Actually, I treat Fountainhead as an overall satire - Roark and Dominique being so perfect that they're caricatures as well ;) Toohey aiming at equality of mediocrity reminded me of Vonnegut's Harrison Bergeron - we discussed its short movie adaptation in class as a straightforward dystopia! Only aftr I read it it was so obviously a parody/satire for Rand: the protagonist's steps depicted as thunderous, he's voice deep, his body perfectly muscular, and he's, what, 13 years old? How could my professor not know it, how?! I gues that hadn't Rand been so shunned in academia and actually read, making a connection would be much easier, but this... Mind-boggling.
By the way, speaking of Roark, what did you think about the rape scene? That's the one part of the book I always skip when I re-read.
Holy hell! It bothers me very much whenever I remember about it (I don't wanna remember about it... This is why I envisioned Hook jumping Scrapper's cables after Scrapper's very clearly and reapetedly expressed attraction). First, it seems to go against Roark's so-called greatness: why couldn't he treat Dominique like everyone else and simply ignore her? It was clearly a fantasy: he knew what she wanted and gave her exactly that instead of being above that. The idea that they both understand each other so perfectly and so completely is absolutely unrealistic. Dominique might as well be socially awkward and not really want anything from Roark, or even not like him at all. Instances of men convinced that they understand women's intentions and getting them completely wrong are very common, after all... It scares me to think that after reading the book someone could see himself as a great man like Roark, knowing exactly what women think and want, and acting on it...
Also, I'm so tired with Dominique's supposed greatness. It's clear to me that she has some mental problems (similar to Roark's lack of self-preservation and obviously poor socialisation). Gail Wynand would always get bored with his women very quickly, but wanted to marry her just after one meeting! And since I strongly suspect that Rand rather identified herself with Roark than with her, she looks like those irritating examples of men writing women (badly). I'd really like to see a fanfic where, during their important dinner, Gail meets Peter and is so smitten that he decides: screw Dominique, I'm taking you on a ride!
At first I took it for satire, Rand's dislike for experimental literature
Rand had some very dogmatic ideas about good literature, claiming that it shouldn't include four-letter words or references to current events/brands/products, because that would date it (great literature should be timeless). She would have considered Stephen King the Antichrist.
Whatever is Toohey's motivation - love for fascism?
By now you must have finished the book, so hopefully it won't be a spoiler to say that towards the end, Toohey spells this out in his Villain Monologue to Peter Keating. Basically, yes, Toohey wants power, and the only way he can achieve that power over society is to make sure there aren't any "thinking men". The masses must be made to believe and want whatever Toohey and his ilk require them to believe and want.
It's actually a bit difficult for me to reconcile this with Shockwave because Rand goes out of her way to make sure we know what a scrawny unprepossessing specimen Toohey is, and I think of Shockwave as being a pretty tough opponent physically as well as mentally. But I think both Toohey and Shockwave enjoy being the man behind the man, so to speak.
First, it seems to go against Roark's so-called greatness: why couldn't he treat Dominique like everyone else and simply ignore her? It was clearly a fantasy: he knew what she wanted and gave her exactly that instead of being above that. The idea that they both understand each other so perfectly and so completely is absolutely unrealistic. Dominique might as well be socially awkward and not really want anything from Roark, or even not like him at all. Instances of men convinced that they understand women's intentions and getting them completely wrong are very common, after all... It scares me to think that after reading the book someone could see himself as a great man like Roark, knowing exactly what women think and want, and acting on it...
I've read a lot of rape scenes that were clearly written to be sexy, and this one seemed to be heading in that direction, what with the UST and Dominique trying to deal with her attraction to Roark while simultaneously insulting him at every step to put him in his place. So far, so familiar. But the scene itself was clearly written to be as brutal as possible, without any payback in the form of titillation. Roark wasn't trying to please her, and I don't think Rand was trying to please readers either. The scene just left me stumped as to what I was supposed to make of it. Roark never felt or expressed any attraction to women before he met her, so I couldn't even tell if this was in-character, and as you said, why didn't he just ignore her? But no, he reads her mind to the point where he knows what she wants, when previously he didn't understand how people thought or what they wanted. I actually preferred Dominique's interactions with Steven Mallory, because they seem like two normal people who get along well together, rather than a supposedly perfect man and a near-perfect woman doing their best to hurt each other.
Rand's views of sexual relationships were messed up, and not just in real life.
I'd really like to see a fanfic where, during their important dinner, Gail meets Peter and is so smitten that he decides: screw Dominique, I'm taking you on a ride!
Heck, I think the strongest attraction in the book was between Wynand and Roark! After Roark gets out of jail, Wynand takes his hand to lead him away and puts his entire fortune at Roark's disposal for the trial. And then there were the times Wynand told Dominique he'd be having dinner with Roark, or took Roark on a yachting trip sans wife. Just dispense with the beard already, no one is fooled. No wonder Wynand was so devastated at the end when he found out Roark was cheating on him with Dominique. I can't even come up with a Transformers parallel for this one, because the more I think about it, the closer I am to laughing.
Rand had some very dogmatic ideas about good literature, claiming that it shouldn't include four-letter words or references to current events/brands/products, because that would date it (great literature should be timeless).
I know that she formulated her ideas during the first half of 20th century (I have no problem with that... But her unwillingness to change her views while the world was changing bothers me very much) but the more I think about timeless literature, the more I can't wrap my mind around it. The Fountainhead is dated, after all - it has dates and however she would like to deny it, it surely reflects its times and place (Roark lovingly using plastic in buildings... Jesus, aged so badly!). Maybe a slightly alternative timeline where modern ideas of Frank Lloyd Wright (on whom she seemed to base both Cameron and Roark but who, unlike them, was hugely successful) weren't accepted. Also - the lack of real-world references defeats one of the crucial purposes of all literature: education. If we can't read about certain times, places, events, then what are books supposed to teach us? About moral ideals? And maybe we should go to work instead of school, like Wynand, and owe our entire education to listening to people's conversations.
(I still continue to be baffled that Rand would do nothing else than present her own ideas as the only right ones and call it Objectivism)
By now you must have finished the book, so hopefully it won't be a spoiler
It's nothing I wouldn't expect but, unfortunately, my hard disc decided to die and now I'm left picking up the pieces, trying to do things from memory and waiting to hear from people doing necromancy on it to retrieve the important data, what a time to be alive... We always hear to do backups and never do, until something like this happens, then we finally start... :(
Therefore, I'm only halfway through Part Four (and surely waiting to see Toohey's villainy). While Toohey has a very pleasant exterior and a very evil corrupted interior, I think that making Shockwave his opposite would do the job: he looks creepy to people (he probably doesn't influence them in person and under his own name) and they tend to avoid him, but his intentions are actually good - he's only evil because Decepticons want war, Autobots want everyone to be nice, and he wants a logical society working like a well-oiled machine. Similarly, I want to present Scrapper as absolutely unlike Roark - he seems inconspicuous but is so social and such a people person that it's impossible not to like him, and he effectively convinces his fellow builders to unionize! He simply doesn't want to design under his own name buildings without corpses, because he's an artist, they're weird like that! (He becomes less weird and more open-minded after the combination)
I actually preferred Dominique's interactions with Steven Mallory, because they seem like two normal people who get along well together, rather than a supposedly perfect man and a near-perfect woman doing their best to hurt each other.
Rand's views of sexual relationships were messed up, and not just in real life.
It almost seems to me that Mallory simply treated her like a fellow human being working on their project and expecting nothing of her but to do her job and let him do his. There's very little about their interactions, of course, but it seems like she finally didn't have to play any role in front of him (save for posing) and she could just be. And, um, I find Rand's portrayal of perfect or nearly perfect people in this book highly questionable. She calls it greatness and strength and being above the mediocre rest of humanity, I call it being emotionally and socially stunted in some crucial areas, with moments of inexplicable clairvoyance when they perfectly know what others are thinking and intending to do.
Heck, I think the strongest attraction in the book was between Wynand and Roark!
Definitely! Eh, what's with all those homophobic creators leaving gay undertones all over their work?
An (obviously blind and having nothing to do with reason) attraction might be a perfect explanation for their relationship! Because, otherwise, Wynand is incredibly scummy: discarding all morals when running his Banner and ruining people with talents and passions as a hobby? But it's what, okay because those people gave in under his unparalleled pressure and so, as not great enough they clearly deserved it? I was really disappointed that he immediately backed from trying to ruin Roark as soon as he pulled an uno reverse card against him. Greatness, one might think, or simply Roark's total lack of self-preservation instincts. Of course, Roark doesn't care about what Wynand has done and continues doing (because he doesn't care about other people), which clearly absolves him from everything. It surely doesn't convince me about either man's greatness and their exceptional morals - also, unless it was, indeed, attraction, it proves Roark's comically sudden plot armour. And Wynand loving his wife oh, so much and remodelling his entire life knowing it's unreciprocated shows that his emotional intelligence or even grasp on reality are seriously lacking. I'm half-hoping that some years later Dominique would finally grow bored and decide to dispose of him... And I can believe that he was devastated that Roark was cheating on him with his own wife!
I can't even come up with a Transformers parallel for this one, because the more I think about it, the closer I am to laughing.
Obviously, I can't envision Megatron and Scrapper sharing a partner, especially Hook (maybe it's a different AU, but for me, the Constructicons will be forever the ones who built him!). The only thing I can think about is Starscream recruiting the newly-formed team to stop Shockwave, but Megatron gets accidentally hit instead and nearly deactivated. And Shockwave saves him, winning them over ;)
Thank you for your thoughts, and have a great weekend as well!
(I still continue to be baffled that Rand would do nothing else than present her own ideas as the only right ones and call it Objectivism)
Because to her, her own ideas were objectively right. :) There's even an article on the Atlas Society's website about whether or not smoking is compatible with Objectivist ethics, given that Rand praised smoking in Atlas Shrugged.
It's nothing I wouldn't expect but, unfortunately, my hard disc decided to die and now I'm left picking up the pieces, trying to do things from memory and waiting to hear from people doing necromancy on it to retrieve the important data, what a time to be alive... We always hear to do backups and never do, until something like this happens, then we finally start... :(
Damn, you too? My computer just wouldn't turn on about three weeks ago. I knew it was on its last legs, and I was planning to replace it next year, but now I'm in the same picking-up-the-pieces place. Worst of all, I had four fics on that computer which I didn't save to my flash drive. I'm really hoping that once I take it to a repair place, they can transfer all my files to my new computer.
And, um, I find Rand's portrayal of perfect or nearly perfect people in this book highly questionable. She calls it greatness and strength and being above the mediocre rest of humanity, I call it being emotionally and socially stunted in some crucial areas, with moments of inexplicable clairvoyance when they perfectly know what others are thinking and intending to do.
"Being above the mediocre rest of humanity", exactly. I think this came to a head in Atlas Shrugged, where most of the good characters are brilliant inventors and giants of industry. Then there's Eddie, the heroine's assistant. It's made clear in the story that Eddie is not a genius, but he's competent, hard-working, loyal, and humble.
When society collapses at the end, all the good characters escape to a secret enclave, basically a sort of Ark from which they'll eventually emerge to reclaim and rejuvenate the world. Except... Eddie isn't among them. He continued working for the heroine's railway until the end, when he was on a train that broke down in some no-man's-land, with the story strongly suggesting that he died alone out there, forgotten and abandoned. Even the makers of the movies seem to realize this was bad, so they include a single line at the end of the trilogy where the heroes say they're going to pick up Eddie. A reviewer called that a "Fix Fic" and he was quite right.
I don't object to genius characters who are emotionally or socially stunted in some way (Hook!). But I do object to this being portrayed as objectively normal or desirable, and I really don't enjoy it when every "good" character is like this. That's one thing The Fountainhead does better than Atlas Shrugged, positively portraying characters like Jimmy Gowan who are clearly not titans of industry, or Kent Lansing, who has the insight into people and the soft skills that Roark completely lacks. Of course, that's kind of a low bar to clear, so...
Wynand is incredibly scummy: discarding all morals when running his Banner and ruining people with talents and passions as a hobby? But it's what, okay because those people gave in under his unparalleled pressure and so, as not great enough they clearly deserved it? I was really disappointed that he immediately backed from trying to ruin Roark as soon as he pulled an uno reverse card against him. Greatness, one might think, or simply Roark's total lack of self-preservation instincts. Of course, Roark doesn't care about what Wynand has done and continues doing (because he doesn't care about other people), which clearly absolves him from everything.
This trope makes me see red when authors portray it as romantic. The hero tries his favorite form of abuse on a person who pushes back against it rather than giving in as their predecessors have done, and the hero falls in love with that person as a result. But even if he stops raping the person or decides to free them from the enslavement he imposed on them, he never thinks rape is wrong, or slavery is wrong. If he thinks through his actions at all, the conclusion he comes to is that raping or enslaving his love interest was wrong.
So yeah, I hated that Wynand's habit of ruining people was never addressed beyond Roark pushing back. Did Wynand even stop doing this, or did he just stop trying it with Roark? Wynand immediately backing down (LOL at "reverse uno card") is actually normal in Randworld, though - if you read Atlas Shrugged, the heroine is involved with three men, but the third one is John Galt, the hero who personifies Objectivist ideals. So the moment the other two men realize their rival is Galt, they graciously accept that he deserves the woman they love. It's a neat way of ensuring that there's no real conflict between fictional Objectivists (as opposed to the conflicts between real-life Objectivists, which are not so easily resolved).
Obviously, I can't envision Megatron and Scrapper sharing a partner, especially Hook
I've read a few fics where Megatron had a long-term partner, but I can't see him maintaining such a relationship for long, partly because of his own personality and partly because elevating any other Decepticon to such a position wouldn't be good for army morale and would probably get them shanked by Starscream. Megatron and Hook is a real crack pairing, though! Nothing in common, and neither of them willing to put up with the other's faults. I imagine Hook thinking that he comes away from such encounters with a new appreciation of the Autobots. :)
Damn, you too? My computer just wouldn't turn on about three weeks ago. I knew it was on its last legs, and I was planning to replace it next year, but now I'm in the same picking-up-the-pieces place. Worst of all, I had four fics on that computer which I didn't save to my flash drive.
Oh no! What's with this curse? I hope that everything will be alright with your data, I asked today and after nearly two weeks they've been still retrieving the contents of my hard disc... And, of course, when it crashed my first thought wasn't about the 20+ years worth of my personal, academic, creative and professional life possibly vanishing, but "Dammit, the chapter 6 of 'Welcome Aboard was half written, I can't lose it, I can't!" Gosh, I hope they'll be done before October, my Halloween fics depend on it!
Even the makers of the movies seem to realize this was bad, so they include a single line at the end of the trilogy where the heroes say they're going to pick up Eddie. A reviewer called that a "Fix Fic" and he was quite right.
I don't object to genius characters who are emotionally or socially stunted in some way (Hook!). But I do object to this being portrayed as objectively normal or desirable, and I really don't enjoy it when every "good" character is like this.
Without reading the book, I feel pretty sure that Eddie was condemned for stupidly remaining with the doomed humanity instead of bravely letting them perish, the author was generous like that and so were her protagonists... Only stupid people care about others, and they are left to pay the price for their stupidity, let it be the lesson for you, young Objectivists!
This trope makes me see red when authors portray it as romantic. The hero tries his favorite form of abuse on a person who pushes back against it rather than giving in as their predecessors have done, and the hero falls in love with that person as a result.
It's so funny and accurate that you describe it using a romance trope!
Roark: "I can fix him."
Wynand: "I'm fixed!"
And they lived happily ever aft- -
Dominique: enters the chat.
When Wynand was first introduced in the book, he surely wasn't portrayed in a positive light: destroying people with passions for fun, making sure no morals and conscience would stop him from running his business, randomly terrorizing his employees just with his presence... But no, he had to be a good guy because his face had noble features contradicting his lowly origins. His realization that the readers of his Banner, those lowly creatures he'd been immorally pandering to for decades, were his de facto employers was almost comical. Yes, Wynand, that's the point of selling papers. Welcome to the capitalist hell, little saint! The same for Roark who was supposed to work for his clients and give them what they wanted - looks like being a genius with a massive ego isn't that great for business. That's yet another inconsistency in Rand's system: capitalism is all about giving people what they want, which is quite difficult when you don't care what they want... Like, for Roark the housing project clearly was an opportunity to play around with cheap materials and arrangements, with no thought about the people who were supposed to live there. His uproar after adding balconies and a gymnasium... Because screw the poor, they don't need such luxuries! I hope that he at least generously allowed some windows.
And while the strike and boycott of the Banner are portrayed as exaggerated and targeted actions of his enemies, it's actually a pretty probable scenario of what happens when a paper owner starts fanatically backing someone who's committed an act of domestic terrorism. Really - they didn't know why Roark did it and what he wanted to achieve, and whether he wouldn't escalate to killing people if not stopped. I know that they used to have less terrorism back in the 1940s but today, if Rupert Murdoch suddenly started using all his media to defend his controversial pal who up and blew up some buildings, the popular reaction - besides probable legal and political action - would be similar to what poor little abuser Wynand had to suffer. There was no way the public would let him get away with it, and not because the world was a horrible place for great men, quite the opposite. So far, so good.
All probability and logic fall apart around Roark's speech that has him acquitted. Does it even realistically portray how the legal proceedings work? How the hell was he allowed to choose his jurors, and how come nobody told him "Alright, Mr. Roark, thank you for a... Lecture nobody requested, and now back to the point: could you explain why you blew up those buildings?" And the most memorable speech should be the prosecutor's closing statement about the audacity of one egomaniac who had done something he had absolutely no right to. This trial was a farce. And I remember tangentially some true crime cases where the perp would decide to defend themselves - it was always pathetic due to their ego massively surpassing their competence. I can see the same here but, oh well, Roark's plot armour struck again!
The heroine is involved with three men, but the third one is John Galt, the hero who personifies Objectivist ideals. So the moment the other two men realize their rival is Galt, they graciously accept that he deserves the woman they love
Ah, I guess the same can be seen in Wynand's and Guy Francon's acceptance of Roark and Dominique's affair. But I have a meaner interpretation: Francon was accepting because for the first time he'd seen Dominique engaging in something approaching normal human behaviour, and also, he was probably old and not giving a damn anymore. And with Wynand, I like to think that Roark did to him what he'd previously done to others: took one thing he was passionate about and destroyed him with it. While the ending appeared pretty rushed and somehow open, I don't believe it was a happy ending. As soon as the Wynand's skyscraper was completed, I'm pretty sure that he'd finally off himself because what else was left for him to do. And while Roark is content and busy with his newest project, I'm pretty sure that no one would hire him afterward - granted that people there are not total idiots. Good thing that Dominique is supposed to inherit the quarry; hopefully it'll make them some money.
Also, after reading, well, listening to Toohey's Evil Monologue I have an impression that, save for the fact that his evil plan wouldn't bring him riches and a lavish lifestyle evil leaders are usually after, he sounds like the reasoning behind any major religion or totalitarian system. Only... People don't work like that. They don't require regular squashing to prevent them from achieving greatness, they need to be nourished and encouraged to achieve it! And we're all egoistic creatures who naturally tend to be average and conformist and not that reasonable so neither Roark's nor Toohey's vision of the world is entirely correct. I can rather imagine the collectivism and selflessness Toohey claimed were going to define the future were just a passing fad, just like the 1960s were described as the "Me" era. Surely, what he said sounded very clever and seemed to have internal logic to it but, I dare say, many have tried, no one succeeded, and neither would he.
Megatron and Hook is a real crack pairing, though!
I can't see it in the Cartoonverse (Megatron built by the 'Structies) or the Marvelverse (where Hook was literally "born sexy yesterday"... Or at least born yesterday) but, well... In the IDWverse pre-war Megatron was a gladiator in Kaon and the Constructicons were the arena repairmechs (the canon wasn't courteous enough to mention that Hook was the most skilled of them), and they appeared to be Megatron's followers from the beginning. It isn't a big stretch of the imagination to see something... Unprofessional happening between them in this highly stressful and deadly environment ;)
But currently, taking inspiration from The Fountainhead, I'd rather develop a friendship between Megatron and Scrapper - not because Megs is such a perfect hero who "gets him" but simply because Scrapper likes everyone (yes, I went there!) and it's impossible not to like him. And Megs doesn't ruin people's lives as a hobby, he simply thinks that everyone, soldier or not, should be disciplined and he has a problem with Scrapper's wild personality...
Edit to add: I, obviously, don't agree with Roark's speech. First, so-called great people aren't created in a vacuum, they owe who they become to society. I'd like to see him becoming this so-called great architect without the education he was able to receive and his predecessors he could use to prop himself on. Second, so-called great people shouldn't be above the law... Really, I can't see that he 100% won't do something like this again, and this time get people hurt... He wasn't the one paying for it, he wasn't the one building it, but of course his only legal recourse with his design getting corrupted would be suing and getting stuck in bureaucratic hell and an act of domestic terrorism was easier. And... Not guilty? I'm sorry, not guilty of what? Was the final verdict going to claim that no explosion actually happened, or that the place had blown itself up? (Of course, I guess that the actual accusation seemed to be "an evil egoist" and he's gotten acquitted of it). And, really, taking over this particular housing project and turning it into a "free for all", because screw the poor, again.
Anyway, interesting book, but it's better not to draw inspiration from it, save for inspiration of how not to do things.
Have a nice weekend!
I hope that everything will be alright with your data, I asked today and after nearly two weeks they've been still retrieving the contents of my hard disc
I haven't had a chance to take my old computer to the store yet, and I'm dreading that everything on it will be gone. To my relief, I found my Halloween fic on my flash drive (so I had a moment of common sense somewhere in the past), so I'll start posting chapters of that in October. But the Christmas and New Year's fics were on the old computer. :(
I hope you'll be able to retrieve all your data as well!
His realization that the readers of his Banner, those lowly creatures he'd been immorally pandering to for decades, were his de facto employers was almost comical. Yes, Wynand, that's the point of selling papers. Welcome to the capitalist hell, little saint!
LOL, good point! And Wynand discovered the hard way that there were a lot more of the Great Brainwashed Them than there were of the Enlightened Him.
His uproar after adding balconies and a gymnasium... Because screw the poor, they don't need such luxuries! I hope that he at least generously allowed some windows.
I'm pretty sure there were windows, because a lot of the descriptions of the "good" buildings talk about light and air and windows like sheets of ice running down the sides of the buildings (I originally typed "sheets of lice", ew), and so on.
All probability and logic fall apart around Roark's speech that has him acquitted. Does it even realistically portray how the legal proceedings work?
I'd say the second weakest aspect of Rand's writing are the courtroom scenes (the weakest are the sex scenes). I don't reread those expecting any sort of realism at all. The whole point of the first courtroom scene in The Fountainhead was to have Roark lose, so he literally says nothing and just hands over a packet of photos, which no one in their right minds would do. And the whole point of the second courtroom scene was to have him win, so he makes a speech, which no one in their right minds would leave unchallenged, as you point out.
The verdict has been, quite correctly, criticized by reviewers because it makes no sense in real-world. Roark admitted to blowing up the building, so how can he be found not guilty? But that's Rand for you. That said, she'd kind of written herself into a corner there. Roark had to blow up the building so everything could build up to the climax of the implosion of the Banner, and he couldn't really hide what he did, but at the same time, Roark couldn't be found guilty or there wouldn't be an uplifting ending.
It's like Dominique literally rubbing handfuls of broken glass on her skin after the building blows up, to the point where she's nearly dying by the time she's found. Yet in the next scene, she's fine, with just "a few thin red scars". Medical realism goes out the window as well.
And with Wynand, I like to think that Roark did to him what he'd previously done to others: took one thing he was passionate about and destroyed him with it.
That's a great way to look at it! Honestly, if you forget about Roark's, um, devotion to Wynand, this makes a lot of sense. It's like the universe's revenge on Wynand for ruining so many people's lives.
While the ending appeared pretty rushed and somehow open, I don't believe it was a happy ending. As soon as the Wynand's skyscraper was completed, I'm pretty sure that he'd finally off himself because what else was left for him to do.
In the film, he actually does shoot himself at the end. Because the film was made back in the day, so they couldn't have a divorcee marry the hero. A widow, on the other hand...
First, so-called great people aren't created in a vacuum, they owe who they become to society. I'd like to see him becoming this so-called great architect without the education he was able to receive and his predecessors he could use to prop himself on.
The story does acknowledge Henry Cameron's contribution to Roark's professional development, but I don't think Rand felt society (as in, any sort of collective) could support the growth of any such genius. Unless this was a society where everyone was a perfect Objectivist, like in Atlas Shrugged. For her, great people tend to leap into existence like Athena from the head of Zeus, and society either holds them back or worships them. It's pretty black-and-white. At least The Fountainhead had some people who don't do either.
Second, so-called great people shouldn't be above the law... Really, I can't see that he 100% won't do something like this again, and this time get people hurt... He wasn't the one paying for it, he wasn't the one building it, but of course his only legal recourse with his design getting corrupted would be suing and getting stuck in bureaucratic hell and an act of domestic terrorism was easier.
Now I'm imagining a follow-up where Scrapper is trying his best to make sense of this world where architects seem to own the buildings they design, such that the design of these cannot be changed. Bonecrusher : "And if the designs are altered, the architects - the architects, not the demolition experts - blow up the buildings?" Scrapper : "Apparently so." Bonecrusher : "...Okay, the Giant Purple Griffin is looking slightly less insane in comparison."
Anyway, interesting book, but it's better not to draw inspiration from it, save for inspiration of how not to do things.
Heh. I agree with everything you've said, but I actually do find one thing about the book very inspiring, which is why it's one of my favorite novels.
What I find inspiring is the importance of being true to yourself and doing what you find personally fulfilling. I'm originally from a culture which places huge emphasis on obedience to parents and where the needs of the community take precedence over the needs of the individual. Because of this, my parents did their best to stop me studying science and being an atheist. I never had any encouragement when it came to my writing either (the literal response was "When your book's in the front window of Barnes and Noble, I'll read it").
So for me, it's extremely validating to read a book that assures me it's all right to do what I'm passionate about, even if the world disapproves. It's all right to be myself, rather than to be what my religious, conservative family insists I should be. What happened to Peter Keating or Catherine Halsey at the end could easily have been me if I'd given in and become the obedient daughter that my parents wanted. For me, this book is like Gone with the Wind - hugely problematic in some ways, but when it works for me, it works so well that this outbalances the flaws.
That's a very individual view, of course, and I don't expect anyone else to like The Fountainhead. I usually agree with critiques of it, just as I do yours. I also have no doubt there are other books which have the same message of being yourself without the problems of The Fountainhead, but this book came along at a time in my life when I desperately needed support, and it holds meaning for me because of this.
Anyway, it's been a really interesting discussion, and I've enjoyed hearing your thoughts on this so much. If you ever decide to tackle Atlas Shrugged, I'm there for that too!
I haven't had a chance to take my old computer to the store yet, and I'm dreading that everything on it will be gone. To my relief, I found my Halloween fic on my flash drive (so I had a moment of common sense somewhere in the past), so I'll start posting chapters of that in October. But the Christmas and New Year's fics were on the old computer. :(
Oh, it's so good that the fic you're needing now the most has been preserved ! I also found what I needed in my backup notebook and probably should be able to pull off what I had planned for October, so at least that's good. If the standard repair shop won't be able to retrieve data from your old computer, there are more advanced services specializing in it - data labs they call themselves, I think? - which are miracle workers in this regard, but it's gonna cost more, unfortunately. In my poorish country it starts from around 200 dollars, and I know that when my brother-in-law had his hard disc destroyed he opted to send it to his home country instead of having data retrieval in Germany. But we gotta do the thing when we gotta do the thing, as long as we have options... I hope that the standard procedure will suffice though!
And Wynand discovered the hard way that there were a lot more of the Great Brainwashed Them than there were of the Enlightened Him.
It reminds me of Rupert Murdoch and various Fox TV hosts suddenly horrified by their audience supporting the views that seem wrong to them (i.e. about COVID or Trump) but are only a natural consequence of all the information they've been feeding to them for decades. Wynand was looking at the monster he'd helped to create and had no problem with that until the monster appeared on his doorstep and demanded to be heard. The Fountainhead can be prophetic in some ways, but not how Rand would like it to be ;)
I'd say the second weakest aspect of Rand's writing are the courtroom scenes.
It was so jarring because up to this point, the story was reasonably realistic (save for Gale's instant infatuation with Roark, of course). All the stories about how and why clients would accept or reject Roark's designs presented a broad spectrum of human views and influences, and it was clear that Rand had some idea about architecture and human views on architecture. Maybe she blatantly decided to ignore how legal proceedings work in real world... Or maybe she thought that her vision was possible - back in the 1930s and 1940s there weren't many resources to do your research (and the realism in contemporary literature probably reflected that) and she hadn't had personal experiences with criminal justice which, good for her.
That said, she'd kind of written herself into a corner there. Roark had to blow up the building so everything could build up to the climax of the implosion of the Banner, and he couldn't really hide what he did, but at the same time, Roark couldn't be found guilty or there wouldn't be an uplifting ending.
I've just thought that Roark might have as well treated the guard to some chloroform and then simply vandalized the buildings together with Dominique, writing on the walls what exactly was wrong with this final version of his design. Wynand would defend him all the same, Toohey would manage to orchestrate his downfall anyway, and maybe the public would sympathize with Roark more (I surely would) - but, of course, it wouldn't be as impactful, and he'd probably already had his speech ready so, why bother. Terrorism for the win!
That's a great way to look at it! Honestly, if you forget about Roark's, um, devotion to Wynand, this makes a lot of sense. It's like the universe's revenge on Wynand for ruining so many people's lives.
It must be truly devastating for him - the only two people he'd ever loved betraying him like that! And the movie killed him off? Now I'm relieved that it wasn't poor Petey ;)
The story does acknowledge Henry Cameron's contribution to Roark's professional development, but I don't think Rand felt society (as in, any sort of collective) could support the growth of any such genius. Unless this was a society where everyone was a perfect Objectivist, like in Atlas Shrugged. For her, great people tend to leap into existence like Athena from the head of Zeus, and society either holds them back or worships them. It's pretty black-and-white. At least The Fountainhead had some people who don't do either.
I think that the story pretty much claims that Henry Cameron had sprung out of nothingness to change architecture forever, while in reality he should had his own teachers and sources of inspiration as well, just like Frank Lloyd Wright had, but Rand didn't acknowledge it, obviously. Read today, many concepts in this exactly(!) 80-year-old novel has aged poorly but, of course, back in 1920s, 30s, and 40s the myth of self-made men was still prevalent while psychology (especially developmental), sociology and, well, economy weren't that developed yet, and in the 1940s people probably really were afraid that the world was going to end in one totalitarian hell or another. I suppose that Rand developed her philosophy largely drawing from her own experiences - and it's usually easier to remember all the obstacles society treats us with than all the support it gives us. She surely didn't think about her, so to speak, unfair advantages like her comfortable initial upbringing and the people who helped her get to the States. Also, in the 1920s Soviet Russia in order to give something to certain people it had to be literally taken from other people, while in America she wasn't eligible for any government help unlike some so, right or wrong, it's understandable why she was against taxes and welfare state, and all for capitalism. Her problematic views on leaving the poor without support because their situation is clearly their own fault, and I dread to spell out what she seemed to think about "subnormal" children... What is sad though is constant rigidity of her views suggests that she didn't feel compelled to test her theories against new evidence.
Now I'm imagining a follow-up where Scrapper is trying his best to make sense of this world where architects seem to own the buildings they design, such that the design of these cannot be changed.
Oh-my-god, it's perfect! I'm thinking of watching the movie and now I want to watch it when thinking "What would Bonecrusher comment about it?" Like a Mystery Science Theater, but more along the lines of "A professional architect and a professional demolitionist react to The Fountainhead"!
What I find inspiring is the importance of being true to yourself and doing what you find personally fulfilling. I'm originally from a culture which places huge emphasis on obedience to parents and where the needs of the community take precedence over the needs of the individual. Because of this, my parents did their best to stop me studying science and being an atheist. I never had any encouragement when it came to my writing either (the literal response was "When your book's in the front window of Barnes and Noble, I'll read it").
Oh... I'm sorry, it had to be really hard... Of course, there's no wrong source for inspiration as long as the inspiration is positive, and at various stages of our lives we respond to different messages! My family didn't discourage me, with no knowledge of how the literature market and, well, capitalism work, and now are probably baffled how I'm not a famous writer and I grew up to be perfectly average. My mom's questions whether I considered self-publishing, and when I'm gonna publish my childhood scribbles she knows of, or "So-and-so has such interesting (meaning: perfectly common) WW2 memories, you should make a book out of it!" When you're an outlier in your family - as opposed to following generational traditions - they somehow always react in worst ways possible, good intentions or not… Heck, I keep writing about Starscream working for a university and hating his life because I know they wanted this for me, but I luckily didn't listen to them!
That's a very individual view, of course, and I don't expect anyone else to like The Fountainhead. I usually agree with critiques of it, just as I do yours. I also have no doubt there are other books which have the same message of being yourself without the problems of The Fountainhead, but this book came along at a time in my life when I desperately needed support, and it holds meaning for me because of this.
I feel you, I can't ditch Lovecraft for similar reasons even though he would literally hate my guts ;) The three parts of The Fountainhead were very interesting to read as observant and possibly satirical, but the last part with Wynand's martyrdom and Roark's actions rubbed me the wrong way. Currently, we have a problem with one libertarian party (they're actually fascists in disguise) and while the Libertarian Movement would probably come into being anyway without Rand, I can't help but think that she has started something that can affect my life in very real and very negative ways, hence I can't be, well, completely objective about her views.
Anyway, it's been a really interesting discussion, and I've enjoyed hearing your thoughts on this so much. If you ever decide to tackle Atlas Shrugged, I'm there for that too!
Thank you, I enjoyed it as well! I'm not sure about Atlas Shrugged, its size is a bit intimidating, but who knows what's in the cards for me :) Have a nice Sunday!
Comment on WELCOME ABOARD – WE HAVE ENERGON COOKIES!
QoS on Chapter 5 Tue 05 Sep 2023 04:09AM UTC
Comment Actions
Satoru on Chapter 5 Tue 05 Sep 2023 04:48PM UTC
Comment Actions
QoS on Chapter 5 Sat 09 Sep 2023 07:52PM UTC
Comment Actions
Satoru on Chapter 5 Sun 10 Sep 2023 11:11AM UTC
Last Edited Sun 10 Sep 2023 11:22AM UTC
Comment Actions
QoS on Chapter 5 Tue 12 Sep 2023 03:55PM UTC
Comment Actions
Satoru on Chapter 5 Fri 15 Sep 2023 10:28PM UTC
Last Edited Sat 16 Sep 2023 01:08PM UTC
Comment Actions
QoS on Chapter 5 Sun 17 Sep 2023 12:49AM UTC
Last Edited Sun 17 Sep 2023 12:50AM UTC
Comment Actions
Satoru on Chapter 5 Sun 17 Sep 2023 01:12PM UTC
Comment Actions