It's a good book but like anything else people extrapolate the points beyond recognition and additionally interpret it to re-enforce their own views, regardless of how unreasonable those views might be.
I read literally hundreds of books in school with socialist, feminist, existentialist, collectivist, or fatalist themes. I read exactly one author in all of American literature with the theme that an individual could shape his own destiny and that capitalism (you know, that evil economic system that has sort of created unprecedented global prosperity) is okay. That author is Ayn Rand.
I was an obnoxious Randroid for awhile. But Ayn gave me the ability to stand up for myself intellectually, to question establishment ethics and politics, and to eventually question and reject her. I think that's a valuable experience for a young person to have.
I suppose my parents thought I was a "selfish jerk" when, after reading The Fountainhead, I ginned up the strength to leave the religion that made me depressed and a little suicidal in my youth. I'm not sure that's a bad thing.
In my mind, the inventors of the computer revolution did more good for humanity than all the starry-eyed kids going into the Peace Corps or working soup kitchens. How often is a teenager going to hear that? It's certainly against establishment ethics. It's not something that you can safely assert in mixed company. People will label you a sociopath if you state it. But I think it's true.
Is the worldview of myself and Ayn so dangerous that people should be completely shielded from it? If so, watch out for this movie. If it's done right, it's going to fill lots of heads with dangerous ideas.
Personally, I like dangerous ideas. I think we could use more of them. When people's minds are filled with safe ones, the intellectual climate stagnates.
Lastly, to those who say her characters are not believable, I reply that neither were the characters in the movie "300". This isn't Hemmingway. She has her own style. You hate her politics so you're saying she's a bad author. Admit it and we can discuss the real issues.
I've yet to find one person that says "I think Ayn makes some great points, but I really think she writes like crap". Rather, it is usually "Ayn is a hateful and evil person. And besides, her books are total crap. Nobody should ever read her works for any reason."
I think Ayn makes some great points, but I really think she writes like crap
Someday, i might actually get the dust off 'Atlas Shrugged' in my bookshelf, and read it.
Personally, though, I find the "selfish jerk" thing more as a result of "The Fountainhead" than "Atlas Shrugged," though at the same time, I think TF is the right book to read before AS. TF prepares you for the "self", while AS applies all that to society.
All that said, while Atlas Shrugged can be an extremely depressing book (the constant feeling of "How can this get worse" coupled with the inevitable "Oh, this is how"), it's also a very uplifting book. After almost every reading session with AS, I found myself with a burning desire to work, to improve my business, to "go get it" and seize life. The heroes resonate very well with those who absolutely love their work.
The only other book that has come close to as uplifting a feeling as Atlas Shrugged (for me) is Founders at Work, because many of the people interviewed in that book share the same passion for their work as the heroes in AS, and pull off monumental achievements.
Will the movie be any good? I'm not holding my breath, but I'd love to see someone like Cate Blanchett play Dagny.
No it's not. It's really not.
I don't want to get into a big AS bashing here, but if you're looking for a good Ayn Rand novel on individualism I suggest you try 'The Fountainhead'.
The Fountainhead is the better book. It's better edited, the characters are better, and the plot is much more secure. Atlas Shrugged isn't nearly as good if you don't have Roark and Toohey and Dominique fixed in your mind, because Rand doesn't spend time making her characters realistic in Atlas. She just assumes that you can make the leap from her Fountainhead characters.
That said, Atlas is the more epic novel, and it's a conclusion in a lot of ways to the battle started in The Fountainhead. It's poorly-written, but in terms of pure pulp enjoyment there's nothing to beat it. That's why people get addicted to it: it lays out a fairly complex philosophical idea and attaches pirates, Spanish conquistadors, sci-fi weaponry, mad scientists, and - of course - all-American capitalists into the fray, and lets it culminate in lots of really fulfilling scenes that are terrific fun if you're okay with ignoring poorly-written stuff. It's a quagmire of a book, with several awful chapters leading up to two or three incredible moments - the ribbon-cutting of the train, the court scene with Rearden, the Galt's Gulch chapter - and those are the moments that stick in mind, especially the first handful of times you read the book.
So I say "fine" meaning "not terrible", which I know is a horrible corruption of the idea behind "fine". Atlas is worth a read for people who liked The Fountainhead, and it offers stuff that book doesn't have to offer, even if it's not as good a novel.
The first 25 pages were BRUTAL, but after that I was hooked. I finished the book in less than a week then bought the book for myself and read it again. I didn't need to make the leap from Fountain Head at all.