my feeling is that it's a "badge" book and by that i mean, you wear it as a badge in order to signal your fluency in pro/anti objectivism conversations. conversations about it remind me of my post-high school experiences with peers while discussing movies. people always chose apocalypse now, the crying game, or the usual suspects as the "best movie in recent memory" and the reasoning was generally because they wanted to appear thoughtful/cerebral, but edgy, but also down with a little popcorn movie violence or other human vice. it was a signal, not a preference.
as such, i found atlas shrugged to be a dull, self-indulgent thought piece that was aesthetically and technically unappealing. however, it is an important work that has influence on philosophies of human politics.
IMO a piece of fiction works better as a “badge” in this sense if it can be defended as a really good work of art in-and-of itself, without the message behind it. Part of the game is that being the one to obviously introduce ideology into the discussion is a bad opening move.
Like what if the other party doesn’t take the political bait and starts talking about train sex or whatever?
wholeheartedly agree. i guess the message i was trying to convey is that i see people wearing familiarity with the work of art as a badge, not that i've badged them with it.
anyway, yes, political conversations would be far more productive if they discussed train sex over against rand-based political/economic theory
When I was younger "2001" was my favorite movie. As I grew older, "The Wizard of Oz" moved into the front. There's never been another movie remotely like it, before or since. It stands alone.
as such, i found atlas shrugged to be a dull, self-indulgent thought piece that was aesthetically and technically unappealing. however, it is an important work that has influence on philosophies of human politics.
but that's just, like, my opinion, man