Atlas Shrugged: Day 2

Day 2: On page 182 of Atlas Shrugged, I fig­ured out who John Galt was.

Major Objection: 18% of the way through the book. The sto­ry on­ly holds my in­ter­est be­cause of the char­ac­ters’ in­ter­nal di­a­logues. Character de­vel­op­ment does not seem to be Ayn Rand’s strong point and her use of nar­ra­tive de­vice on­ly seems clich?. I AM, how­ev­er, en­joy­ing the book. She deals in ex­tremes, the Prime Movers, Rearden, Dagny Taggert, and d’Anconia are demigods, and all oth­ers are syco­phants and whin­ers. An ap­pro­pri­ate use for her since the Prime Movers are al­so the Prime Examples of Objectivism and its ex­treme ra­tio­nal­i­ty, while all oth­ers mere­ly toss out in­fan­tile rant­i­ngs and tem­per tantrums. This ploy would be ef­fec­tive if it weren’t so ob­vi­ous. Ayn Rand’s schiz­o­phrenic use of straight­for­ward decla­ma­tion with un­so­phis­ti­cat­ed at­tempts at sub­tle­ty makes me feel that she is des­per­ate­ly try­ing to get some­one to agree with her. An at­ten­tion get­ting in­se­cu­ri­ty.

I am one hy­per­crit­i­cal mutha­fuc­ka. They are just opin­ions but I feel the great­est hon­or I can do to an art­work is to do my best at an­a­lyz­ing it. For that shows that I take its ex­is­tence se­ri­ous­ly. If I am not crit­i­cal of some­thing it is be­cause I think it is friv­o­lous and there­fore not wor­thy of dis­sec­tion. There isn’t any­thing wrong with that is there?