What is this thread all about?
Just a place for general discussion. A place to unload whats on your mind and talk about anything - personal, health, help needed, achievements, daily highs and daily lows, theories, predictions and what have you.
Does not need to be Q related.
Eh, "sort of" on "well read."
Um yeah basically still Rand sorry. I think we've even discussed previously, but to recap, I get if one does not like her style. I also think AS, as great as it is, is forced in some plot elements (unsatisfactory love triangle resolution for example)(which she claimed never to use plot in service of theme but it's too forced to believe that). I think TF works better as actual literature and is better from that standpoint, despite it being only a portion of what AS is philosophically.
And of course, her non-fiction body of work is huge and barring a few topics I don't fully agree on (abortion being the biggest/most obvious) generally she defends individualism and capitalism, and attacks socialism/communism/totalitarianism, better than I've seen anyone else do due to her ability to always tie it in to philosophy which means the arguments stand hierarchically down to first principles (axioms).
I think for enjoyable rereading Dune still is better than both. I also think Watership Down is great and should be on liberty-minded person's list if they haven't read it, or only saw the animated one decades ago as a kid or whatnot.
Thanks, I will look into.
Now, I've been considering this further, as obviously there is a subjective component. I'd say I'm probably on the same sort of wavelength as her, enjoy her characters - who often behave like I might. Probably Roark (edit: though TBH the name is an eye-roller) in TF the most, but also how the non-Dagny protagonists operate in AS as well. Not that I'm at any of these characters' level mind you. She is also particularly skilled in depicting the bad people, even some minor character that's a loser will be clearly and hilariously described as a loser.
I forget if we discussed as to which part you think is total barf bag/doesn't work for you, so I'm curious about which part(s) there.
Interesting reply, I do remember this gist now, thru my CRS.... So clearly we're talking about AS in particular. I dunno on the unnecessary length part, since the thing is plot-driven and everything that happens or is described advances the plot, and quite a lot happens - yes the basic story could be told but there are intracacies to all the subplots - I don't know what I'd really excise personally in terms of "plot chunks." Even the lengthy speeches (in both TF and AS) are part of the plot. Seemingly minor subplots serve functions, like underscoring the moral bankruptcy of antagonist characters for example (Mrs. Rearden comes to mind).
I almost want to reread these as it's been some years to see what I'd edit, or where I go "yeah that could have been better."
Now, like I say, I already admitted she's not the most literary in terms of style - this does not bother me as I'm more an engineer type in this regard anyway I guess. I do think sometimes it's a bit herky-jerky and like I said already AS has a couple plot issues that are forced to make her philosophical point. TF is more focused (and shorter of course) and works better in this regard.
Now, ego/all that she thought she was - I'd say yes/but yes she was, and probably then some. Her body of nonfiction is where this really becomes clear, as any criticisms of novel style or editing or whatnot fall by the wayside and no philosopher has integrated the ideas of those that came before her into such a complete, non-contradictory system. She also excelled at not just presenting a topic and discussing it, why it's so etc, but also anticipating questions or criticisms of it and including that in the same essays. She was quite the advanced thinker.
(Now, this is of course independent of her personal oddities and hypocrisies (e.g. sex life/affair stuff) but unlike many where you have to (I will not) separate an artist's beliefs/actions from their art to enjoy the latter, at least she wasn't actually evil.)