Fun Stuff > BAND
Coldplay sued by Joe Satriani
Dimmukane:
--- Quote from: BrilliantEraser on 11 Dec 2008, 17:51 ---
--- Quote from: Alex C on 11 Dec 2008, 17:44 ---Well, people also use white noise machines for getting to sleep at night, but white noise machines don't get record deals and critical cred, so I sort of see what he's saying.
An analogy: If I were to use a copy of Atlas Shrugged to level my coffee table and it performed the task admirably, I still wouldn't understand why so many people have boners for Ayn Rand's writing.
--- End quote ---
You just made me so sad. I am a few chapters into Atlas Shrugged and the writing is just mesmerizing. Different people like different things. Me trying to explain to you why I like Ayn Rand would be similar to a physicist trying to explain the String Theory to me (they have tried it before). No matter what, it is just a difficult concept to grasp. ::shrug::
--- End quote ---
Everyone on QC seems to not like her very much. I haven't figured out why. I don't like her either, because once she presents you with an idea she bashes you over the head (there is a speech towards the end of the book that is 50 pages long and takes up 3 hours in the timeline of the novel. No descriptors in between, just one dude talking for 50 pages) with it repeatedly/her protagonists have no flaws/I could go on and on. But I don't know why the board doesn't like it.
Alex C:
I disagree a bit with the String Theory analogy (I don't understand String Theory either though). I have a good handle on Rand's body of work; mostly I just think she should have stuck to essays. As Dimmukane pointed out, her characters are such thinly veiled vehicles for the ideas she's peddling that I would rather have had her abandon the narrative conceits and get right down to business. As it is, her stories are couched in such absolutes that I find them a bit ridiculous whenever I read them-- there is after all, a happy medium between charity and martyrdom. Plus, she was too quick to demonize people who didn't go along with her mindset for my tastes. That reputation was a bit hard for me to shake when I was reading her books, since, after all, they exist only as vehicles for expressing her philosophy.
Nodaisho:
Yeah, if I am going to read something chock-full of someone's philosophy, I am going to pick one that I agree with. I would mention Pratchett here, but he manages to fit convincing and entertaining characters in with his jokes and philosophy, so it isn't really an author tract like hers.
MadassAlex:
--- Quote from: Alex C on 11 Dec 2008, 20:44 ---they exist only as vehicles for expressing her philosophy.
--- End quote ---
Isn't that largely the point?
I mean, literature isn't always about explaining one's philosophy, but if there's nothing to express via the book then what's the point?
Alex C:
My problem is with the execution as a whole, not any one facet of what she's attempting. Her characters are thin enough that it's hard for me to approach the book as anything but an expression of her views, and since I often disagree with her, the whole narrative just becomes harder and harder for me to accept as the story heads to its conclusion. As I said before, I just feel like she should have stuck with an essay, since that merely requires me to read her ideas and then base an opinion, not slog through her shoddy narrative.
Anyway, all I'm trying to say with my posts on Rand is that I dislike her work due to my own personal tastes, not because I have failed to grasp her message.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version