Atlas analyzed
Christine Niles
As I See It ...
What do you do when you can't find a single existing religion you agree with? Why, you create your own.
After having encountered Ayn Rand fans on college campuses and online chatrooms (they always show up sooner or later), I thought I should finally get around to reading "Atlas Shrugged." Last summer, languishing in southern France, I was provided the opportune time to wade through the 1,000-plus page book.
The novel encapsulates all the major aspects of Rand's philosophy, something she termed objectivism, although the characteristic of objectivity comprises only one facet of her worldview. The story revolves around the industrial geniuses who keep the world going and carry it, like Atlas, on their backs. The enemies consist of the "moochers" and "looters" of the world, those who believe in sacrifice, mercy and taxes (this will make sense, I promise).
The title gives away the plot — what happens when Atlas shrugs? What happens when the movers and shakers of the world stop moving and shaking? The answer: the world goes rolling off Atlas' back to shatter into a thousand pieces on the floor.
One thing I will give to Rand — her philosophy is unique. One doesn't often encounter fervent pro-capitalism cheek-by-jowl with atheism. At times her story takes near-paranoiac turns regarding the plots of American socialists to destroy America's economic freedom through forced sharing. It is understandable when you realize Rand spent her early life in post-czar Russia, when the Soviet Union was just taking its baby steps. The communist government seized her father's pharmacy and henceforward Rand dreamed of moving to her ideal country, the United States. She eventually defected, married a Hollywood actor and spent the rest of her life in America. Thus, her work displays blatantly pro-capitalist, anti-communist sentiment — which doesn't bother me a bit. Her metaphysics, however, are another matter. More on this in another column.
There seems to be a great deal of good mixed with a great deal of bad in the novel. Rand lauds creativity, freedom, the courage to lift oneself from despair and strike out alone and the honesty to take responsibility for oneself rather than blaming society for one's problems. Some monologues are downright inspiring.
However, a fatal flaw exists in her work: her enemies are too easy. She paints a simplistic portrait of them: all those who believe it right to sacrifice a victim (usually money-laden) for the benefit of the State. Although she succeeds in making them out to be despicable, there is no complexity to their wickedness. They seem, rather, like straw men erected for the sake of easy conquest. They are altogether too uncomplicated, too simply sketched. They present no real challenge to the heroes and therefore the heroes' struggles are made all the less interesting and all the more predictable.
Wise men have said that one should never underestimate one's enemies. Rand ignores this and thus her story lacks the richness and depth it might otherwise have attained. Her metaphysics and epistemology equally lack depth for the same reason: Rand fails to take her intellectual enemies seriously.
The most striking aspect of the work is Rand's self-aggrandizement. One of the heroes, Dagny, is a woman of Rand's own heart — and an impressive figure she is. Not only is she a genius, she runs the most powerful transcontinental railroad business in the world. Plus she is beautiful, famous and brimming with confidence. On top of all this, she is loved by the three most handsome, powerful and brilliant men in the world, who never cease to effuse with praise for her. Dagny accepts it all with the false modesty of those who believe themselves superior. By page 700, one begins to think this love quadrangle is no more than the idealistic fantasy of an adolescent, times three.
There is a dark side to Rand's philosophy. In one disturbing scene, Rand systematically describes the occupants of a passenger train. She demonstrates how not a single passenger agrees with her worldview, before she sends them off into a dark tunnel to suffocate to death. Ironically, Rand's philosophy sets out to praise human worth, yet the final result is a conceited disregard for human dignity and the worthwhile perspectives that exist apart from her own. One gets the sense that Rand would not have been bothered in the slightest if all her political and intellectual enemies were eliminated as they were in her book.
Meanwhile, the Prime Movers are shepherded to a hidden valley in the Colorado Rockies, a heaven on earth of sorts. This place is known only to the elect few, and here they bide their time frolicking over verdant pastures while they wait for the world to self-destruct. Once that occurs, their mission is to return and rebuild the world, repopulating it with others of objectivist bent.
Like I said, a new religion.
Christine Niles is a student at the Notre Dame Law School Her column appears bi-weekly. She can be contacted at viewpoint.1@nd.edu.
The views expressed in this column are those of the author and not necessarily those of The Observer.
All Viewpoint Stories for Friday, January 18, 2002
