There is this discussion I had in Orkut communities sometime back that turned out pretty interesting. The community discusses Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged, and this was reason enough for me to be interested. Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged are among my all time favorites, and I have recommended the book to a lot of friends.
This particular discussion was about something everybody who reads Atlas Shrugged would identify with. Many people understand and accept Ayn Rand's reasoning, while many others find it as some sort of a scar in an otherwise terrific piece of work.Is Dagny Taggart right in leaving Francisco De Anconia and Hank Rearden for John Galt?
There are a lot of ways to look at this issue, and the explanation that Ayn gives in the book is perfectly valid. Here is my point of view, better formatted than from Orkut.
Does anyone know what Ayn's views on marriage were? The fact is she approved marriage very much. She even thought it was very important in one's life. I think that is commitment.She actually did something very close to Dagny in her life. Not three men, but two.
She was married to Frank O Connor. Ayn was in love with him, but he was not in love with her (he married her because Ayn persuaded him to marry her for her immigration purposes).And ayn had a student of her philosophy, Nathaniel Branden. She persuaded another student of hers, Barbara to marry Nathaniel. They were living happily. Until Ayn at an age around 60 started loving Nathaniel, and Nathaniel out of respect confided he loved her as well (he was not in love actually, as Ayn came to know later).
She caused extreme pain to Frank, Nathaniel and Barbara, the 3 people she supposedly loved most in the whole world, and she caused the divorce between Nathaniel and Barbara.She might have persuaded the readers about this in her novel, but causing unimaginable pain to the very people you love is ugly in any philosophy. I love her philosophy and I respect her and her books. But because she says a lot of good things, doesn't mean everything she says is right.
I have been thinking about this ever since I first read Atlas Shrugged and then Ayn's biography. I have concluded that what Dagny did is right and what Ayn did is wrong. The only difference is that what happened to their earlier lovers (Hank and Fransisco - Dagny and Frank - Ayn). Hank and Fransisco don't seem to be concerned about Dagny leaving them, at least they don't seem distressed and hurt. But, Frank was hurt to the point that he started drinking very heavily and ruined his life. The fact that Ayn caused such agony and misery to the person she loved most in life (she dedicated Fountainhead to Frank earlier), is unforgivable.
Although what Dagny does doesn't seem to affect the earlier lovers, it should be remembered that it is fiction, an extremely well written one, but still fiction. May be Ayn wanted Frank to react like how Fransisco and Hank did in Atlas Shrugged, and because of this wishful thinking, the whole situation was created in the novel. Anyway, I think the only way a lover will react to an act like that of Dagny's is how Frank reacted.If a women or a man is already in love, and he/she finds a great person, may be even greater than his/her lover, why can't he/she have a relationship without a romantic connotation, especially when you know that you are hurting your earlier lover? For example, if the man/woman finds his/her sister/brother, or any person from the same sex as a great person, the relationship is great, as between two sensible people interacting, enjoying each other's company, and obviously without any romatic connotations. Why can't there be a relationship like that just because they are not related by birth, or of the same sex? Why should there be sex involved in all relationships? (I am not saying sex is wrong by any means. But I definitely think to have sex with every great man you see is foolish, impractical and most important of all, uncivilized). And it is the same when somebody says I give my soul to one person, but I would give my body to different people, at least until I find the person who I can give my soul to.
(Facts about Ayn's life are from her biography, Passion of Ayn Rand by Barbara Branden.)
3 Responses to "Ayn Rand vs Dagny Taggart"
Nice to see a discussion on Taggarts, Galts, and d'Anconias. I think it is for Dagny to decide; nobody else has a right to come in, not even avid fans of Ayn Rand. :-)
December 29, 2008 at 4:12 PM
Happy to know you read Ayn Rand RV!
I can see where you are coming from when you say nobody should make the decision for Dagny. I would readily agree with this on a simple work of fiction.
When it comes to a work of philosophy like this though, I tend to think the author has much more responsibility than simply writing up a character for the plot, and Ayn Rand does that brilliantly for the most part. And that is essentially why both Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged are such great works.
I think if we are to accept everything the author writes as complete, there is no reason why we should read Ayn Rand :)
Hello,
I am a great fan of the book, I just came across your site and read your essay with great interest.
There are a couple of points I would like to make. By the way I also read Barbara Branden's biography of Rand, I have read The Fountainhead, and many of the essays of Rand. I believe very strongly in Rand's overall philosophy even "where it hurts", although I would not call myself an "Objectivist" (Her novels are enough for me, labels not needed).
1. First off, Dagny was single and beautiful. She held herself with great poise, emotional control and stiff upper lip--so refreshiing a change from the sloppy let-it-all-hang-out emotional chaos and immaturity glorifed in today's media about single women.
2. Dagny was an heiress but also a serious hard worker, and her "view of life" is what she wanted to see mirrored in the man of her life. She wanted to meet a male Dagny, so to speak, a great man and lover made of the same stuff.
3. Her lover Francisco was not married. Hank Reardon was, but it was an emotionally abusive, cruel (from Lillian's side), physically and spiritually absent marriage that--let's face it--had us really cheering to see Dag and Hank come together. Galt, of course, her ultimate man, was single.
4. With Rand, we know the story that her marriage was for the sake of convenience--for her immigration--but I had the impression reading Branden's biography that while Frank was perhaps not full of passion for her, he did love her, was proud of her accomplishments, and often played a good second-string to her dominating lead. He was involved in The Fountainhead and Atlas suggesting titles, certain turns of speech, reading the drafts. Yes, we know things tanked when the Brandens came along (Nat, that is) but they had already been married--what 30, 40 years by then?
5. Rand was not Dagny in looks--this we know. Nor did she have Dagny's in-bred emotional cool, although she understood that cool intellectually (thus, her excellent rendering of Dagny's personality, as well as the others).
6. If Rand was indeed "volatile" think of what she was up against. I mean, she was living a Howard Roark. Her homeland torn to pieces by mad ideologues, her constant financial fears early on in the States, the idiocy she encountered seeing her first plays and screenplays be turned into things she didn't write by various producers, the rejections of the Fountainhead manuscript, the stupid reviews, the 14 years writing Atlas, the further stupid, arrogant reviews, the Branden episode, her frustrations with Frank---I mean, give a girl a break. She was fiery all right, but she won. She wrote one the best novels in the history of 20th century literature as far as I am concerned, and she lived those principles of sticking to a goal and using your reason in as high a manner as you can. She suffered for it, but she won,
As to your original question: should Dagny have left Francisco or Hank for Galt? No! I say. I was rooting for Francisco all along, with Hank a close second. But one does not argue with Dagny!
Post a Comment