Favorite Novels Not Written By Ayn Rand


Recommended Posts

Re John Irving, I read The World According to Garp many moons ago and thought it was hilarious. Some of the comical images creep into my conscious even today (especially brainless male sex—only being able to smile and say "Garp" while getting down—and hard-assed women who seek precisely that).

I later saw a film he was involved with called The Cider House Rules (based on his novel by the same name). It won some Academy Awards. I remember being deeply moved at the time, but on reflection, and even after looking it up, I simply can't remember what the damn thing was about...

That's all of Irving I know.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hah. Have you read Cormac McCarthy's The Road? It's, like, 300 pages, and the first 30 pages was just the same thing. Kid and his father walk through wasteland. Find empty stores. Nothing happens. Wash, rinse, repeat. On and on and on. I got sick of it and threw the book down and haven't gone back since. I don't really think I'm missing anything. They run into some cannibals later into the book, I believe.

No. I give authors 30pp to get to the plot. Heinlein's plots always start by the second page, sometimes the first sentence. I started and put down The Fountainhead three times over a few months before I got into it. I was going to read it before AS so as to be in chronological order. I couldn't. I was laughing out loud in AS as soon as Dagny had to talk to Jim about business, and was hooked. The Fountainhead doesn't really get going until p 100. Then it's rip-roaring from there.

See, the first 500 or so pages of The Fountainhead are enthralling for me, but then you get to this point where it seems like the book is nothing but Roark taking a cruise and Keating being rather pathetic.

Although my favorite scene, by far, does occur in this last portion of the book. Actually, it's a cap on my favorite storyline: How Catherine Halsey is slowly corrupted by Ellsworth Toohey. It's absolutely painful to read, though. You feel helpless, because Catherine is so innocent to what Ellsworth is doing to her, but you know EXACTLY what he is doing. That final scene is just absolutely heartbreaking, and features some of the book's best writing. I've never felt so deflated in my life while reading a book as I was after reading that scene.

AS has too many long segments which bore me to tears. The worst is the magical valley of Galt clones where everything is happy and perfect and ultra-capitalistic. The whole section was corny beyond belief.

I love getting fresh perspectives on Rand's novels. Have you read "We the Living" yet, Michelle?

I couldn't read AS cover to cover anymore, but I enjoy cracking it open in various places from time to time. As for Galt's Gulch it was okay with Dagny getting there, which was quite exciting; when Rand writes about things moving her descriptive power can be overwhelming as with the first run of The John Galt Line, ending of course, with sex. She kept it moving even when the train had stopped. But after Galt carries her down into the valley and they start meeting people I don't want to meet I now start skip-reading. Now when I think of the place I start imagining my own characters and harmony-everybody-is-rational-land gets quite contentious. And Francisco gets very upset when he finds out Galt is going to get first prize. I mean he gave Dagny up to go on John's strike and now John gets her!? Hell, NO! But see what is happening here: such in the Gulch means Francisco wouldn't have gone on that idiotic strike in the first place and the entire plot of the novel falls apart. We can't take this allegory literally for it makes sense unto itself. In any novel it's the reader's job to suspend disbelief or put it down and read the Cliff Notes.

The closest thing we get these days to Galt's Gulch is gated communities. Ugh.

--Brant

Edited by Brant Gaede
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hah. Have you read Cormac McCarthy's The Road? It's, like, 300 pages, and the first 30 pages was just the same thing. Kid and his father walk through wasteland. Find empty stores. Nothing happens. Wash, rinse, repeat. On and on and on. I got sick of it and threw the book down and haven't gone back since. I don't really think I'm missing anything. They run into some cannibals later into the book, I believe.

No. I give authors 30pp to get to the plot. Heinlein's plots always start by the second page, sometimes the first sentence. I started and put down The Fountainhead three times over a few months before I got into it. I was going to read it before AS so as to be in chronological order. I couldn't. I was laughing out loud in AS as soon as Dagny had to talk to Jim about business, and was hooked. The Fountainhead doesn't really get going until p 100. Then it's rip-roaring from there.

See, the first 500 or so pages of The Fountainhead are enthralling for me, but then you get to this point where it seems like the book is nothing but Roark taking a cruise and Keating being rather pathetic.

Although my favorite scene, by far, does occur in this last portion of the book. Actually, it's a cap on my favorite storyline: How Catherine Halsey is slowly corrupted by Ellsworth Toohey. It's absolutely painful to read, though. You feel helpless, because Catherine is so innocent to what Ellsworth is doing to her, but you know EXACTLY what he is doing. That final scene is just absolutely heartbreaking, and features some of the book's best writing. I've never felt so deflated in my life while reading a book as I was after reading that scene.

AS has too many long segments which bore me to tears. The worst is the magical valley of Galt clones where everything is happy and perfect and ultra-capitalistic. The whole section was corny beyond belief.

I love getting fresh perspectives on Rand's novels. Have you read "We the Living" yet, Michelle?

I couldn't read AS cover to cover anymore, but I enjoy cracking it open in various places from time to time. As for Galt's Gulch it was okay with Dagny getting there, which was quite exciting; when Rand writes about things moving her descriptive power can be overwhelming as with the first run of The John Galt Line, ending of course, with sex. She kept it moving even when the train had stopped. But after Galt carries her down into the valley and they start meeting people I don't want to meet I now start skip-reading. Now when I think of the place I start imagining my own characters and harmony-everybody-is-rational-land gets quite contentious. And Francisco gets very upset when he finds out Galt is going to get first prize. I mean he gave Dagny up to go on John's strike and now John gets her!? Hell, NO! But see what is happening here: such in the Gulch means Francisco wouldn't have gone on that idiotic strike in the first place and the entire plot of the novel falls apart. We can't take this allegory literally for it makes sense unto itself. In any novel it's the reader's job to suspend disbelief or put it down and read the Cliff Notes.

The closest thing we get these days to Galt's Gulch is gated communities. Ugh.

--Brant

Not yet. I've owned it for years now, but for some reason I never think to crack it open. I'll probably read it after I finish this current batch of books.

Same here. I've read AS and FH so many times now that I can just open the books to a random page, start reading, and know exactly what's going on at any point in the book.

Rand has a great descriptive style. The ride on the John Galt line is among the best passages in that book. Although I think, unlike others, that the book's strongest aspect is the dialogue. Not the various speeches, but just normal dialogue. I never found it 'stilted,' as people love calling it.

Personally, I'll never understand why Dagny chooses Galt. Sure, great guy, genius, is able to dominate her, terrific. But there is way more of a connection between her and Rearden and her and Francisco. Her and Galt never feels organic or right. But maybe that's because Galt is a robot with no personality.

The absolute worst part of the book, though, is the Robin Hood speech. A philosopher-turned-pirate (this, in itself, sounds like a joke) walks up to Rearden, hands him a bar of gold, and proceeds to rant about Robin Hood for about ten minutes. It was like Rand was making fun of herself.

Edited by Michelle R
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I'll never understand why Dagny chooses Galt. Sure, great guy, genius, is able to dominate her, terrific. But there is way more of a connection between her and Rearden and her and Francisco. Her and Galt never feels organic or right. But maybe that's because Galt is a robot with no personality.

John Galt is never fully fleshed out. He is more of a place-holder for Rand's idealizations than a plausible human character. I found Francisco to be the best developed character in the novel with H.R. running a close second.

I also have trouble figuring out Dagny Taggart. Why she did not split much earlier makes no logical sense to me.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I'll never understand why Dagny chooses Galt. Sure, great guy, genius, is able to dominate her, terrific. But there is way more of a connection between her and Rearden and her and Francisco. Her and Galt never feels organic or right. But maybe that's because Galt is a robot with no personality.

John Galt is never fully fleshed out. He is more of a place-holder for Rand's idealizations than a plausible human character. I found Francisco to be the best developed character in the novel with H.R. running a close second.

I also have trouble figuring out Dagny Taggart. Why she did not split much earlier makes no logical sense to me.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Because she was so dedicated to her work. She had to be Galt's greatest conquest--along with Rearden. It's all plot driven, really.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same here. I've read AS and FH so many times now that I can just open the books to a random page, start reading, and know exactly what's going on at any point in the book.

Rand has a great descriptive style. The ride on the John Galt line is among the best passages in that book. Although I think, unlike others, that the book's strongest aspect is the dialogue. Not the various speeches, but just normal dialogue. I never found it 'stilted,' as people love calling it.

Personally, I'll never understand why Dagny chooses Galt. Sure, great guy, genius, is able to dominate her, terrific. But there is way more of a connection between her and Rearden and her and Francisco. Her and Galt never feels organic or right. But maybe that's because Galt is a robot with no personality.

The absolute worst part of the book, though, is the Robin Hood speech. A philosopher-turned-pirate (this, in itself, sounds like a joke) walks up to Rearden, hands him a bar of gold, and proceeds to rant about Robin Hood for about ten minutes. It was like Rand was making fun of herself.

I always thought Rand's dialogue was special. Important people talking about important things.

When I first read Atlas in 1963 I thought the Robin Hood speech was a stretch, as if Rand was scrapping the bottom of her creative barrel to shoe-horn Ragnar in there and do a number on her idea of Robin Hood for good measure. And Rearden was ready to shoot the cops? There could have been a wonderful scene there in which Rearden was conflicted between shooting and not shooting the cops, but there was no conflict. If things had gone differently he would have shot them. But it's all part and parcel of AS and Rand's ideas. I don't know of one single way to significantly improve AS without actually destroying it. Rand had no doubts, but honest readers must deal with all sorts of things that aren't quite right--or even worse--and that's all part of living, thinking and being. I thank her for that for what she gave us goes on and on forever because she was a rock we can use for ideas and reference.

--Brant

edit: just as I finished typing my name I looked up and Fred Astaire was dancing on the ceiling in "Royal Wedding." I saw most of it. Damn! That was great!

Edited by Brant Gaede
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Orson Scott Card:

My favourite all-time work of fiction: Lord of the Rings. My favourite all-time nonfiction book: Guns, Germs, and Steel. Ask me again next week, you'll get a different answer.

Ulysses, obviously. It was an elaborate prank, and our supposed intellectual elite continue to fall for it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mysterious Island by Jules Verne

Space by James Michener

Starship Troopers by Robert Heinlein

Antarctica by Kim Stanley Robinson

The Danger by Dick Francis

Timeline by Michael Crichton

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am rereading Orson Scott Card's Speaker for the Dead. It is one of the most dramatic plotted and well dialogued stories I have ever read. I have to put it in my top ten, which I did not do above, or perhaps just expand my top ten to twelve. :)

Mysterious Island by Jules Verne

Space by James Michener

Starship Troopers by Robert Heinlein

Antarctica by Kim Stanley Robinson

The Danger by Dick Francis

Timeline by Michael Crichton

Jim

Timeline and Starship Troopers are great, although I'd put other books by each author higher on my own list. Timeline is good because it is perhaps not as ambitious and hence better implemented. I read Space as a boy when it came out, and enjoyed it, but doubt I'd want to read it again. I have enjoyed Robinson's Icehenge and his Wild Shore, but put down Red Mars halfway through. I could not get into Memory of Whiteness or Years of Rice and Salt but may retry the latter. Is Dick Francis the crime writer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I completely forgot this one, even though I have loved it for years...

The Stars My Destination by Alfred Bester

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the Ian Fleming Bond novels from Casino Royale to the Man with the Golden Gun

I've wanted to read the Bond novels for a long time, but I have this creeping feeling that they're probably nothing more than second-rate spy mysteries without the charm of the cinematic Bond.

Is this a notion I should be disabused of, or is it correct?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, I left out I, Claudius and Claudius the God, by Robert Graves. I also liked King Jesus, but not as much as the Claudius books.

I, Claudius is a book you'd recommend?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, I left out I, Claudius and Claudius the God, by Robert Graves. I also liked King Jesus, but not as much as the Claudius books.

I, Claudius is a book you'd recommend?

Highly. Very. Does that surprise you? Or was I just unclear that that was a recommendation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Agent of Chaos

Herzog

Running Scarred

All the Ian Fleming Bond novels from Casino Royale to the Man with the Golden Gun

Body by Science

O43

Can you expand? The books you mentioned except Herzog and the Bond novels (which I understand Rand read and liked) were not mentioned in wikipedia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, I left out I, Claudius and Claudius the God, by Robert Graves. I also liked King Jesus, but not as much as the Claudius books.

I, Claudius is a book you'd recommend?

Highly. Very. Does that surprise you? Or was I just unclear that that was a recommendation.

One's favorite novels are not always books one would recommend to others unreservedly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, I left out I, Claudius and Claudius the God, by Robert Graves. I also liked King Jesus, but not as much as the Claudius books.

I, Claudius is a book you'd recommend?

Highly. Very. Does that surprise you? Or was I just unclear that that was a recommendation.

One's favorite novels are not always books one would recommend to others unreservedly.

Okay, well, I'd go so far as to make I, Claudius required reading for any 14 year old. The BBC adaptation is excellent, a hint as how to do Atlas Shrugged. As for King Jesus, I doubt most Objectivists would like it. It is all about levantine mysticism. But I have read it twice.

Favorite books as secret vices? I suppose only Piers Anthony's work would fall under that category. I read everything he published until I was 16. (He has published lots since then that I have never read.) He is a hack juvenile writer. His plots are akll about contrived moral dilemmas usually set up because people make silly assumptions about what others are thinking, and they refuse to communicate, getting everyone in trouble - the typical sit com plot device. But I did recently reread Battle Circle, one of my former favorites of his 30 years ago. It was okay. I see why I liked it. But I wouldn't recommend it now except to a 12 year old boy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the Ian Fleming Bond novels from Casino Royale to the Man with the Golden Gun

I've wanted to read the Bond novels for a long time, but I have this creeping feeling that they're probably nothing more than second-rate spy mysteries without the charm of the cinematic Bond.

Is this a notion I should be disabused of, or is it correct?

The Ian Flemming novels are action pot-boilers. Ian Flemming portrays Bond's Consumer Fetishes in marvelous detail (shaken, not stirred etc. etc). If Flemming were not serious (in his intention) you could regard the Bond novels as parodies. In fact several parodies have been made (for example: Israel Bond Oy, Oy Seven :Loxfinger done by National Lampoon) and more recently The Spy Who Shagged Me. The difference between the lampoon and the "real" thing was not all that large.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agent of Chaos, as recall, was written by Norman Spinrad, who wrote a number of interesting books, including Passing Through the Flame, The Iron Dream, Bug Jack Barron, and The Last Hurrah of the Golden Horde [a collection of shorts] - all of which are recommended...

and yes, King Jesus was a very interesting book, one of the first that gave a logical view of a virgin birth, and who, in consequence, would had been the father..

Edited by anonrobt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agent of Chaos, as recall, was written by Norman Spinrad, who wrote a number of interesting books, including Passing Through the Flame, The Iron Dream, Bug Jack Barron, and The Last Hurrah of the Golden Horde [a collection of shorts] - all of which are recommended...

and yes, King Jesus was a very interesting book, one of the first that gave a logical view of a virgin birth, and who, in consequence, would had been the father..

Bug Jack Baron was a hoot. This was before radio and t.v. talk shows became all the rage. On the whole, though, Spinrad was not nearly as good a story writer as his buddy Harlan Ellison.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now