"When I read it I was a young and hungry lunkhead who was just realizing that the world was leaving me behind: her perfect reader. I’d been a screw-up in high school and only in my senior year had started to realize that a certain train (Success) was leaving the station and that I might not be on it. Atlas Shrugged seemed to say that my being left behind was not my fault – the whole system was corrupt, and run by whiny jerks, and such an unjust system naturally discriminated against genuine and uncorrupt people like me. I also liked the idea (if Rand was to be believed) (and she was so forceful!), that all I had to do to be good was to believe very strongly/selfishly in myself – which, lo and behold, came naturally. I liked the easy way the Rand reader was encouraged to understand and dismiss suffering as the fault of the (weak, self-indulgent, handout-seeking) sufferer. This eliminated a lot of things I didn’t like: ambiguity, confusion, the struggle of ideas, the possibility that all was not known. In my defense, I hadn’t read a novel since third grade, so the very act of reading a novel was pretty wonderful – all those pages, situations, speeches! Rand’s ideas seemed to be coming to me from a world I had never been to – they seemed European, encoded, sophisticated. All that certainty! All those apparent rapes that actually were, we would later find out, pretty much consensual!"
Writes George Saunders in "The Book That Made Me A Reader..."
59 comments:
Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man by Joyce made me a reader and a better writer later in life.
Required reading in college for me.
Rand’s ideas seemed to be coming to me from a world I had never been to
If you haven't read a novel since the third grade, this shouldn't be surprising. He hadn't been to that world.
– they seemed European, encoded, sophisticated.
Rand's ideas have nothing to do with Europe. Her opponents were/are mired in Europe's old discredited ideas.
All that certainty! All those apparent rapes that actually were, we would later find out, pretty much consensual!"
So you're saying that Rand was a modern day SJW?
Heinlein made me a reader, Shakespeare made me a better reader.
Mine was Little House on the Prairie. Don't judge. I was grounded to my room for a crime I didn't commit. It's the first book I ever read. Even when my mom came up to tell me she was wrong and that I could come out, I declined because I was so engrossed.
That book might have made him a reader, but if that was what he got out of it then it didn't make him a very good reader.
The Hobbit probably would be the one for me. We read a chapter in 6th grade, then I went and got the book so I could read the rest.
Hemingway was a bit of a fraud. He wrote some great stuff -- The Sun Also Rises is my favorite -- but I doubt his world is much closer to reality than Ayn Rand's. But it is more interesting and better rendered.
Rand exposes the bigotry of her simple critics. A good read, indeed. A good philosopher, indeed, that reveals the recesses of human nature.
"So you're saying that Rand was a modern day SJW?"
Read it again. You've got it backwards.
"Away all boats"
Ken Dodson
In the 4th grade. I borrowed it from the Manila Army&Navy club library, which was a treasure, long gone now.
Dodson's book was a contender for the great American WWII novel, along with "From here to Eternity", "The Naked and the Dead", " A Bell for Adano", "The Caine Mutiny", and etc., which I gobbled up soon after, but even today IMHO better than any of them.
Read it again. You've got it backwards
You're saying that the SJWers are disciples of Rand?
If they understood that they would find it an insult.
Saunders didn't become a reader until his senior year in high school?
Churchill didn't become a reader until he was a bored lieutenant in India.
Atlas Shrugged seemed to say that my being left behind was not my fault
I liked the easy way the Rand reader was encouraged to understand and dismiss suffering as the fault of the (weak, self-indulgent, handout-seeking) sufferer.
The book evidently didn't make him a very good reader.
Actually, I'm not sure what that rapes line means. Haven't read AS. Does Rand characterize the sex as rape or not?
It is an interesting series with many more economical entries. For example, Stephen King on Doctor Seuss, or Junot Díaz on Richard Adams' Watership Down.
The question is ambiguous, which invites the range of response. For people who remember always having read books the answer to "[what is] the book that made me a reader?" seems to resolve to a change in a former status quo. It is either a book that awoke an awareness of craft and imagination, or, in Saunders case, a book that inspired more voracious reading.
I'm not sure I can answer the question for myself at all. I think of the picture books in doggerel rhyme by Bill Peet that I adamantly decided at age 6 or 7 were better than Dr. Seuss (years later, as a father, I found Peet's books pretty painful as reading-aloud material and my kids never took to them).
Then there was Roald Dahl's Charlie and the Chocolate Factory which I reread repeatedly until I had memorized most of it. Or, not much later, Tolkien.
But if I think of all this reading as a simple love of story, I can say that a book that did change the way I read was Barbara Tuchman's A Proud Tower. I was in my teens and it was the first history book I read that really captured my attention. The characters were as real as any of fiction, and the description of the time period was as unexpected and intriguing as that of the science fiction and fantasy stories I loved.
Does Rand characterize the sex as rape or not?
Oh, absolutely. You can read them cover to cover and find nary a mention of a consent contract.
My kids could not get enough of Bill Peets "The Caboose Who Got Loose" and some other train thing of his. They were train fanatics.
The image of Dagny Taggart striding through the Taggart Terminal carrying a mattress on her back will stay with you forever.
Tom Robbins, Ken Kesey, and Hunter S. Thompson did it for me.
I'm thinking he needs to read it again.
Atlas Shrugged is merely a great stepping-stone to The
Fountainhead, which shows a style surpassing that of the Bible [see I Chron 26:18]. The Bible, dumb as it is, doesn't stoop to Eugene Volokh's level of "forbid s.o. from [doing something]." The KJV correctly says, "forbid s.o. to [do something."
The juxtaposition of Saunders' recollection of his self:
I’d been a screw-up in high school and only in my senior year had started to realize that a certain train (Success) was leaving the station and that I might not be on it.
and Rand's message:
I liked the easy way the Rand reader was encouraged to understand and dismiss suffering as the fault of the (weak, self-indulgent, handout-seeking) sufferer.
hovers on the edge of recognising that Rand does not appeal most strongly to the powerful, the rich, or the successful, but to people who otherwise would be weak, self-indulgent, and handout-seeking, but feel, somehow, that this would be wrong. People who aren't yet strong and free and independent (teenagers, particularly), but very fiercely want to be. Manichean she may be, but her work has been inspirational to a lot of people, and I think a lot of her critics don't really grasp why it appeals so much to people who aren't powerful, rich, or successful. And hate that it does.
I don't think he ever really read that book. It's not that difficult to read and really nit that difficult to understand. It is really not that difficult to pretend to have read it, either, since so many people have dropped it due to length, content, etc... Given this idiots explanation of the book, it seems pretty clear that he was given a synopsis by someone who hates the book, or someone who hates Rand or both.
Re: Althouse:
Actually, I'm not sure what that rapes line means. Haven't read AS. Does Rand characterize the sex as rape or not?
My vague recollection is that all the sex was pretty rapey but consensual.
On the other hand, sex contracts seem, in some way, like exactly the kind of thing a Randian hero or heroine would draw up.
Mrs. Piggle-Wiggle made me a reader.
I think Saunders is confusing Atlas Shrugged in the sex is unambiguously consensual (and political), with the Fountainhead, in which the sex is personal, and also starts out rapey. Which means he read more Rand before he moved on to Hemingway. Ha!
Rapey like Deckard and Rachel.
I agree with everyone who says this guy didn't get the point of Atlas Shrugged. I probably became a reader at a very early age reading Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn. God only knows how many times I've read those books. Later, Heinlein and Kenneth Roberts and Hemingway. Rand in college, Tolkien in law school. Tom Wolf in there somewhere.
Thank God for all the authors!
“Love is blind, they say; sex is impervious to reason and mocks the power of all philosophers. But, in fact, a person's sexual choice is the result and sum of their fundamental convictions. Tell me what a person finds sexually attractive and I will tell you their entire philosophy of life. Show me the person they sleep with and I will tell you their valuation of themselves. No matter what corruption they're taught about the virtue of selflessness, sex is the most profoundly selfish of all acts, an act which they cannot perform for any motive but their own enjoyment - just try to think of performing it in a spirit of selfless charity! - an act which is not possible in self-abasement, only in self-exultation, only on the confidence of being desired and being worthy of desire. It is an act that forces them to stand naked in spirit, as well as in body, and accept their real ego as their standard of value. They will always be attracted to the person who reflects their deepest vision of themselves, the person whose surrender permits them to experience - or to fake - a sense of self-esteem .. Love is our response to our highest values - and can be nothing else.”
― Ayn Rand
I read some of Ayn Rand's books in high school. I can't remember anything about them. Whether the sex was rape-y or not, it wasn't hot. Back in that era one would sometimes read books for the hot sections. Peyton Place had some good parts. So did Lady Chatterly's Lover. Molly Bloom's soliloquy was a huge disappointment, as was God's Little Acre. Mika Waltari had some historical novels, most notably The Egyptian, that had some good parts.......I think nowadays only women read books for the sex content.
I loved him the The Saint movies, but he was kinda limp-wristed in All About Eve, as you pointed out last week. And who has time to read when you are married to Zsa-Zsa Gabor?
Oh, wait...
Althouse famously has declined to waste her time reading Atlas Shrugged. Maybe George Saunders can stimulate her interest.
The sex scenes aren't rape-y. They are just stupid because they are infused with a pseudo-sophistication that leaves traditional vows of fidelity in the dust if one is just uber enough (not in the shared-ride sense).
I seem to have some sort of subconscious defense mechanism re: Atlas Shrugged. I've bought three copies so far, and lost every one of them somewhere around page 200. Oddly, the three movies are not bad.
I think A Wrinkle in Time made me a reader in third grade. I started rereading it a couple years ago but stopped after a few pages. It's a book for children and doesn't appeal to the adult version of me. I have other things to read.
I read AS in my late forties - early fifties. Her villains are quite good. She nails crony capitalists, traditionalists, good government types, bleeding hearts. Her heroes are ridiculous, but I could see them appealing to a kid. I don't remember the sex as rape-y. More fraught with deep meaning, empowering, acts of an independent spirit. Easy to parody.
The thing about AS and Rand's other novels was that you could tell pretty quickly who the good and bad guys were just by her physical descriptions. Tall and angular? Good guy. Round and pudgy? Bad guy.
Also missing was the "good-bad" or "bad-good" guy, or the person who changes and grows through the story. If you were a looter, you stayed that way--if you were a producer, same thing, though you might escape to Galt's Gulch.
I don't recall rapes in AS, but I thought there was a rape-turned-consensual scene in Fountainhead.
"My vague recollection is that all the sex was pretty rapey but consensual. On the other hand, sex contracts seem, in some way, like exactly the kind of thing a Randian hero or heroine would draw up."
"I think Saunders is confusing Atlas Shrugged in the sex is unambiguously consensual (and political), with the Fountainhead, in which the sex is personal, and also starts out rapey."
Okay, I take it that the sex in AS was consensual but with an exciting, ravishing edge.
Now what does the Saunders line mean: "All that certainty! All those apparent rapes that actually were, we would later find out, pretty much consensual!"
I took it to mean — when I said "So you're saying that Rand was a modern day SJW?" had it backwards — that Saunders was saying that Rand ultimately explained the sex as consensual even though the reader had the impression it was rape. Saunders was being funny, I thought, and expressing what he knows now: sex like that should be put in the category of rape, and Rand's theory of what was going on was wrong.
But I really don't know. Maybe Rand presented it as rape and remained, in all that certainty, sure it was rape, and Saunders on his own found out, later, that the sex was consensual.
I get it that the sex reads as rape-y, perhaps with physical struggle and vocalized rejection, but that somebody — Rand or Saunders —believes that it wasn't really rape, perhaps based on that old, dangerous idea that the man knew what the woman really wanted, deep down inside, and therefore delivered a great benefit that relieved her of her repressed suffering.
I find it hard to believe that a present-day man would write that. It's more likely that he'd mock Rand for running with that kind of theory, so I'm guessing my first interpretation was correct.
"Molly Bloom's soliloquy was a huge disappointment"
But it was a great example of the "yes means yes" affirmative consent contract in action – she says "yes" every other second.
Atlas Shrugged helped me take responsibility for my life. As someone said above, the villians were perfectly described as was the corruptive effect of power, especially government power, on politicians and their cronies. I never thought Rand was a good writer. Great story and helpful philosophy but not well written. I agree that the heroes are generally unrealistic.
I don't recall the sex being rapey. Maybe more like the woman being unable to resist the raw masculine sexuality of the man. Succumbing to the passion, or something along that line. The woman didn't like being powerless over her lust but ultimately gloriously surrendered to it..... But I may be confusing Atlas sex with Fountainhead sex, myself.
Atlas Shrugged seemed to say that my being left behind was not my fault
He may could read but he sure couldn't comprehend or he read a different book and confused it with Atlas Shrugged.
Ann Althouse said...
Okay, I take it that the sex in AS was consensual but with an exciting, ravishing edge.
This.
Someone could write "Atlas Shrugged" today, they would just have to self publish as no "real" publisher would take it on.
Never heard of George Saunders.
I have heard of Ayn Rand.
George Saunders doesn't begin to understand, or at least chooses not to give an accurate view of her work.
This guy has no clue about what Atlas Shrugged was about. Such a limit intellect so publicly displayed. Rand celebrates the vision of mankind and the importance of great individuals. Maybe this idiot was, you know, a failure because he deserved to fail.
"That book might have made him a reader, but if that was what he got out of it then it didn't make him a very good reader."
To the contrary; that's about the most concise and accurate evisceration of ATLAS SHRUGGED I've ever seen. (And yes, I have read ATLAS SHRUGGED, preceded by THE FOUNTAINHEAD. I read them both while I was in college. I liked THE FOUNTAINHEAD, but ATLAS SHRUGGED seemed a bit lunatic to me even as I read it, and months after I had finished it, I could look back on it and realize it was contrived and juvenile, a fascistic super-hero comic book in novel form.)
"Actually, I'm not sure what that rapes line means. Haven't read AS. Does Rand characterize the sex as rape or not?"
Yes, unequivocally. But, it's okay, because the raped women love it and love the men who rape them. This floored me when I read her books; this is not my faulty remembering of books I read decades ago. Rand's female protagonists are depicted as so powerful and self-sustaining that most men around them are (depicted as) wan, insufficiently decisive...impotent. Only men who are strong enough to conquer them by physical strength and force are worthy of their love.
Many women purportedly entertain rape scenarios as part of their sexual fantasies; Rand simply depicted her rape fantasies for the world to see.
My dad made me a reader, by his example, and by his reading bedtime stories to us when we were little. I well remember the visceral excitement I felt being able to read my own stories when I started with the Little Golden Books and Dr. Seuss...and comic books, of course. I moved on the The Hardy Boys and Tom Swift. Books are a pain in the ass to store and move, but they are the greatest things in the world to have. I do have (and have read) ebooks on my iPHone and iPad, but I still prefer to have and read books printed on paper and bound between covers.
Robert Cook said...
To the contrary; that's about the most concise and accurate evisceration of ATLAS SHRUGGED I've ever seen.
Another individual identifies himself as a not very good reader.
Oh, no..IIB...I'm a good reader, as I was even as a callow youth in college. I can smell bullshit when I read it.
So this genius read that special Straw Man edition of ATLAS SHRUGGED that the "liberal" Hive publishes. It's the one where Wesley Mouch (the fictional counter-part of Obama) and Ivy Starnes (ditto, Hillary Clinton) are the good guys, and are just on the verge of restoring the economy when evil pro-freedom forces subvert the recovery.
By the way, speaking of geniuses, do any of you of the pro-freedom persuasion think that Robert Cook will ever wise up and realize that the Big Brother he so slavishly plays "Uncle Tom" to has absolutely no regard for him, and will throw him in the meat grinder to make Statist Sausage as easily as anyone else?
Robert Cook:
As others have pointed out, no competent reader could come away with both my being left behind was not my fault and that suffering [w]as the fault of the (weak, self-indulgent, handout-seeking) sufferer.
The part about ...the whole system was corrupt, and run by whiny jerks, and such an unjust system naturally discriminated against genuine and uncorrupt people... does sound rather juvenile and comic-bookish. In fact it sounds a lot like many of your posts.
...they seemed European... ?!?!?!? Atlas Shrugged is very clearly about avoiding the path Europe has followed.
I don't remember the sex scenes reading as rape, but don't remember them clearly enough to say one way or another. I would have to reread those parts, and don't feel like scanning the whole book to find them. But it seems the people who characterize them as rape manage to mischaracterize every other aspect of the book, so there is that.
Robert Cook- continued
I also liked the idea (if Rand was to be believed) (and she was so forceful!), that all I had to do to be good was to believe very strongly/selfishly in myself – which, lo and behold, came naturally.
This idea is, of course, nowhere in the book. All of the serious villains in the book believe very strongly/selfishly in themselves. To not be evil you had to not actively harm others, you had to not physically harm them nor take from them things which were rightfully theirs.
My impression ( though not clearly spelled out in the book ) is that to be good, you had to go beyond that and pursue your rational self-interest by engaging in free trade, thus meeting your needs by producing goods or services that meet other people's needs.
While I personally don't think that is sufficient, it is a far cry from what Saunders portrays. That is another failure on his part. And apparently yours.
Robert Cook said...
a fascistic super-hero comic book in novel form.
From Dictionary.com: fascism
noun
1. A governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
I don't think that word means what you think it means. It certainly doesn't describe anything advocated ( by the protagonists ) in Atlas Shrugged. Looks like another failure on your part.
Freeman Hunt said...
I think A Wrinkle in Time made me a reader in third grade. I started rereading it a couple years ago but stopped after a few pages. It's a book for children and doesn't appeal to the adult version of me. I have other things to read.
National geographic for me. At 5 years old my older brother needed tutoring in reading. I was 3 or 4 at the time and my mother dragged me along on the sessions. I remember sitting there my little legs dangling and following along as my brother read out loud. At one point I remember that the letters underneath the pictures were describing what the pictures were about. I also remember later, in school, Dick and Jane bored me to death.
The thing about AS and Rand's other novels was that you could tell pretty quickly who the good and bad guys were just by her physical descriptions. Tall and angular? Good guy. Round and pudgy? Bad guy.
Yeah, James Taggart, the man with "a tall, slender body, a body with an elegance of line intended for the confident poise of an aristocrat", he sure was a good guy.
Also missing was the "good-bad" or "bad-good" guy, or the person who changes and grows through the story. If you were a looter, you stayed that way
Yeah, the character of Tony, the young man who started at the beginning as a government bureaucrat-enforcer for the Fair Share law hampering Rearden, and at the end actually gave up his life to save Rearden, he didn't have any change or growth throughout the story. He was a looter at the beginning, and so was all the way to the end.
I mean, seriously. There's plenty of things to criticize about Atlas Shrugged, but every time I've seen people critiquing it online, they've demonstrated fairly rapidly that they didn't read the book with even an elementary level of comprehension.
@Brando @Steven
Or, how about Dr. Robert Stadler, who begins the novel as highly intelligent, unenvious, focused on achievement, and then descends into the utmost moral depravity, selling his soul to the state, to the point where he creates machines of destruction and torture, while deflecting responsibility on the grounds that he is just a "theoretician". True, the philosophical flaws which caused his downfall are there from the beginning, but this was part of Rand's point (and her cleverness in interleaving plot and theme): she lets the decay unfold slowly, so that the reader can see the layers of philosophical premises that lead to particular corruptions.
Those that disagree with her will almost always find fault in her artistry. I have yet to see a critique that is based on anything but pure subjectivity. Indeed, above, I do not see a single example of her allegedly bad writing. This is not a blog of literary criticism, but c'mon - just one example with some analysis?
In any event, as Steven points out, the statement by Brando that all of her characters are essentially good or bad, and not mixed (or, the related claim made by some that her characters are "one dimensional"), are easily disproven by those that have read the books. Yes, some of her characters are "pure good" and "pure bad", archetypes of the philosophical antipodes she is presenting. Perhaps that is unacceptable to some in a novel. But, if so, then Rand just isn't for you, as you are not willing to engage her art on its own terms.
I don't think that word means what you think it means
Bolshie Bobbie (like all good Communists) uses the term fascist as if it meant "evil enemy". It is a left over from the struggle between fascists and communists over the same supporters.
After World war II, the Left made a determined effort to revise History to remove all knowledge that fascism was a Leftist ideology, and instead project that it was Rightwing.
Am I the only one who wishes that the comments themselves had like buttons?
I only got round to Atlas Shrugged last year, and I think Saunders is full of it. The sex doesn't strike me as at all "rapey," though admittedly I'm that rare woman who pretty much skims the sex scenes. Saunders is (as others have suggested) probably confusing it with The Fountainhead, which I haven't read, but does include what most people think is a rape. In AS, there are only two positive female characters, Dagny Taggart and Cherryl Taggart
As to the rest, the quality of the writing and so forth: Well, the only thing I skimmed more quickly than the sex scenes was John Galt's interminable 40-page radio speech. As for the villains, I think they're actually a nicely varied bunch. Read the discussion around Directive 10-289 for a sense of what I mean.
" We the Living" is Rand's best work. You should read it first. Yes, her sex scenes were male dominated, and the women in them liked it.
George Saunders evoked "Who?" from me.
Post a Comment