Atlas Shrugged, gulp, Part I

Why did none of you Randian supergeniuses tell me they were making a series of movies out Atlas Shrugged? How many are we talking, I wonder, 35? Maybe Galt’s 70-page monologue/manifesto will make its own movie. I wonder how it will translate to film. Shakespeare tended to keep his soliloquies to a page or two. But what did he know?




Ayn RandAnyway, I’ll leave it to you fans to decide if this looks likely to honor the spirit of the Medicare and Social Security-loving Ayn Rand. No, really. She did. Collected it under her husband’s name so no one would know.

A heavy smoker who refused to believe that smoking causes cancer brings to mind those today who are equally certain there is no such thing as global warming. Unfortunately, Miss Rand was a fatal victim of lung cancer.

However, it was revealed in the recent “Oral History of Ayn Rand” by Scott McConnell (founder of the media department at the Ayn Rand Institute) that in the end Ayn was a vip-dipper as well. An interview with Evva Pryror, a social worker and consultant to Miss Rand’s law firm of Ernst, Cane, Gitlin and Winick verified that on Miss Rand’s behalf she secured Rand’s Social Security and Medicare payments which Ayn received under the name of Ann O’Connor (husband Frank O’Connor).

As Pryor said, “Doctors cost a lot more money than books earn and she could be totally wiped out” without the aid of these two government programs. Ayn took the bail out even though Ayn “despised government interference and felt that people should and could live independently… She didn’t feel that an individual should take help.”

Lovely hero, you have. Lovely ideology.

Creative Commons License illustration credit: DonkeyHotey

5 thoughts on “Atlas Shrugged, gulp, Part I

  1. Well, Billy, I finished the book, and from what I can tell by the trailer, it looks like the first part (at least) might hold true. I’m with you on the 70 page monologue. It totally ruined the end of the book for me. But, I’ll probably go see the movie. My very conservative boyfriend is all excited about it.

  2. Rand’s entire premise in the book is a hypocritical hyperbole. All the “great minds” go on strike? How in any way, shape, or form is that “individualism” or “objectivism?” You can’t organize a strike or show solidarity with one another through abject individualism. That would be what some folks would like to call an oxymoron. I can’t imagine how followers of Rand’s ludicrous pop philosophy can overlook, excuse, or be so blind to such failures in simple logic.

    • Yup, it’s me. And no offense taken, Billy. I tried posting a comment earlier. But it apparently didn’t send or something. Anyway, what I said, roughly, is that Rand’s “work” is nothing more than misanthropic dribble from a psychologically bitter and shattered mind. But hey, I guess we all have to have role models.

  3. And you’re on the side of the money grubbers and gold diggers? Or maybe just the wrathful and the sullen? I could go on all day. I have a thesaurus handy.

Comments are closed.