Originally Published: 1943
Publisher: Plume (Centennial Edition)
ISBN: 0452286751
I tend to not read much fiction so when I do it is either a handful of authors that I know I like, or like this book, a recommended one. Recently I asked my boss, who I respect greatly, for some ideas on reading and research. He is a follower of Objectivism and recommended I read some of Ayn Rand's books. This was the first of the series he suggested I read.
The Book
If you are looking for true review of this work, I apologize that this will be brief. Rand tells a story that manages to be interesting even though, were you to read a short description of the plot, you likely wouldn't be interested. There are a few fascinating details here and there but mostly the novel revolves around the characters and their interaction. She is slow to develop the personalities and characters and she detracts from her purpose with some fitful dialogue in the beginning that is jarring for anyone wishing for a nice easy fiction read.
The saving grace of the book is the hidden pearls of exquisite prose that lie scattered throughout the pages of the book. Rand manages to evoke some incredible imagery from time to time which is something I always enjoy. Unfortunately these are highlights rather than the main fare of the book and neither the characters nor the plot really carry the book.
If you are simply looking for a novel to enjoy, I would suggest skipping this one. If you are looking for some insight into Ayn Rand and her philosophy then this is a good place to jump in.
The Philosophy
I have not studied any of Rand's other works nor do I know much about Objectivism so what I say here is truly the first impressions of someone being introduced to the ideas. About two-thirds of the way through the book, I wrote down a list of conflicts that I saw being developed in the novel.
- Humanism vs. Theism
- Invidiualism vs. Collectivism
- Originalism vs. "Second handedness"
- Self-sufficiency vs. Communism
Humanism vs. Theism
When my boss recommended the book to me, he mentioned that Ayn was an atheist. Knowing that I have a strong belief in God he felt he should warn me beforehand! I was surprised to note that Ayn wasn't truly an atheist in my opinion. Ayn is more of a humanist, the difference being that while atheists believe there is no God (or god), humanists believe that man (or mankind) is his own god (or God).
I always find it interesting when people like Rand devote such an intense energy to proving that Humanism makes more sense than Theism. She tries to contrast the two by saying that Theism requires its advocates to debase themselves and seek forgiveness from others for everything that they do. She fails to note that while many religions do strongly suggest that we should subject ourselves to a Higher Power, many teach that Man is made in the Image of God. If that is the case, then self-deprecation would actually be a negative reflection on God.
It is not that Mankind is a horrible Creation that reveals the depravity of Man but rather that God is so much greater as to reveal Man's shortcomings.
Individualism vs. Collectivism
Throughout the Fountainhead, Rand points out that what we should truly admire is the accomplishment of the Individual rather than that of the Collective. I think that our society has gone too far toward admiration of the Collective, although I don't think you should ignore it. Individual accomplishment in our schools seems to have become a bad thing in the name of preserving self-esteem.
Self-esteem however seems like it should be a by-product of not just "being part of something greater" but it should also stem from your contribution. If that contribution stands above those around you, then there is nothing wrong with it being recognized as such.
On the flip side however, there are a great many "star athletes" whose arrogance seems to suggest that they alone are the reason for their team's success. There needs to be a healthy balance between the two extremes of invididualism and collectivism.
Originalism vs. Second Handedness
Another strong theme, perhaps even the one that Rand wanted most strongly to come across, was the idea that we shouldn't take all of our ideas from others. Throughout the plot she mocks those who like certain books or plays or architecture, only because others have praised it. She makes a hero out of those who stick by their ideas.
At one point one of the characters, Kent Lansing, says "Integrity is the ability to stand by an idea." On the surface I like that, although I think the definition falls a bit short of describing integrity fully. The idea that a person has an idea and they stick by it regardless of what others think is one that lends itself to creativity because you are willing to step out from the crowd and try something different.
It is foolish however to ignore the biblical premise that "there is nothing new under the sun." Whenever people talk about creative genius I wonder if perhaps they are missing something. What if the Wright brothers had not invented the airplane... would not someone soon after have figured it out? If Einstein hadn't developed his theories, wouldn't someone else have eventually come up with them?
I believe that creative genius is not the sign of someone who comes up with things all on their own that no one else ever could do. Rather I think creative genius is someone who makes a leap that others aren't ready for yet. They are people who discover, codify, theorize or otherwise synthesize information in such a way that it is "ahead of its time."
Self-sufficiency vs. Communism
Much has been written about the ideas of personal and societal motivation with regard to self-sufficiency and communism so I won't delve into it greatly here. I do however think it is interesting that in general, those nations with a greater inequality of distribution of wealth, tend to be better off as a whole than those nations with greater equality.
On a micro-scale I think this notion should be noted by businesses. Rewarding creative genius within an organization can create an atmosphere of self-sufficiency such that the entire business can be better off even though some individuals may feel slighted by the policies. One of the crushing weights on large businesses in America is the notion of "equality"... that all workers must be treated equally. Fair treatment is imperative, equal treatment is silly. Not all workers are equal.
Conclusion
These are just some general thoughts I had after reading Ayn Rand's novel, The Fountainhead. Overall I thought the book was mediocre in quality. Some of the ideas and concepts expressed were outside the realm of what I would consider acceptable so I would have a difficult time recommending that anyone read this book.