Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

Daniel's Reviews > Anthem

Anthem by Ayn Rand
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
4695
's review

it was ok
bookshelves: 2009, erica-and-diane-club

Mocking, Childish Review

The ending, with the Statue of Liberty emerging from the beach, was a nice twist. "You maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell!" As it turns out, it was Earth all along.

And, yes, for those keeping score at home, I do intend to use this exact same review for every dystopian novel I read. At least I amuse myself and, really, isn't that what matters most?

Slightly Less Childish Review

Look, I fully appreciate how Ayn Rand and her family suffered at the hands of the Soviets before she fled for America in the 1920s, and I understand how that would lead her to develop her virulently anti-socialist philosophy and write novels decrying the most dehumanizing aspects of communism. But, as with most propaganda -- and I don't use that word pejoratively, but simply to mean literature used to promote a cause -- it's got an expiration date. It's been two decades since the Berlin Wall fell, and for the vast majority of the world, communism isn't much of a threat anymore. So, aside from studying the history of communism, is there much reason to read such propaganda at this point, especially propaganda as lacking in literary value as "Anthem" and Rand's other books?
I owe nothing to my brothers, nor do I gather debts from them. I ask none to live for me, nor do I live for any others. I covet no man's soul, nor is my soul theirs to covet.

I am neither foe nor friend to my brothers, but such as each of them shall deserve of me. And to earn my love, my brothers must do more than to have been born. I do not grant my love without reason, nor to any chance passer-by who may wish claim it. I honor men with my love. But honor is a thing to be earned.

Aside from plus-sized, pain-killer-addicted Republican talk-radio hosts and octogenarian former Federal Reserve chairmen, who takes this horseshit seriously at this late date?

OK, in addition to the aforementioned, I guess there's one other group of readers for Rand's novels even in the 21st century: self-centered, bookish teenagers seeking affirmation for their assumptions that they alone are individuals, they alone have it all figured out, they alone understand how the world really works, and everyone else is a mindless conformist. Stupid sheep! Then, at some point, Lord willing, those readers grow the hell up, realize that no man is an island after all, and switch to reading real literature. (If not, they become the voice of the GOP, I guess.)

As for the rest of us? Readers wanting to reacquaint themselves with Rand's writing -- especially given the two new biographies out, and much media attention being paid lately to both Rand herself and her ongoing influence on the Republican Party -- can knock off "Anthem" in less than an hour, and not have to waste their time with the brick-sized "Atlas Shrugged" or "The Fountainhead." So "Anthem" gets an extra star for being mercifully short, I guess, and available for free on the Internet. And it's a slightly better book for teenagers than "Twilight," I suppose, with a marginally better message. Marginally.
81 likes ·  âˆ� flag

Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read Anthem.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

Started Reading
November 1, 2009 – Finished Reading
November 2, 2009 – Shelved
November 2, 2009 – Shelved as: 2009
November 3, 2009 –
page 21
30.88%
November 5, 2009 –
page 68
100.0%
December 6, 2009 – Shelved as: erica-and-diane-club

Comments Showing 1-35 of 35 (35 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

Louise I think I liked this book. Quick, short read. I get this mixed up with We in my head a lot though.


Daniel I have a strong aversion to all things Ayn Rand, and it wasn't my choice to read this, Louise. (Why I'm reading it would take a bit of explaining.) I'll let you know what I think when I finish it, which fortunately won't take long.


message 3: by Jennifer (new)

Jennifer Ayn Rand, Daniel?


Daniel Don't ask, Jennifer. In the end, I imagine, reading this will just reaffirm my hatred. You know how much I like keeping the fire that is my anger stoked.


message 5: by Bram (last edited Nov 05, 2009 10:43AM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Bram Better message than Twilight, Daniel???

(I really am skeptical, actually).


Daniel Well, it's hard for a book to have a worse message than telling teenage girls to fall in love with old, creepy stalkers who want to kill them, right?


message 7: by Bram (new) - rated it 1 star

Bram Good point, but we're talking about Ayn Rand here.


Louise I like that now, "well at least it's better than Twilight" is a valid point.


Aerin I guess there's one other group of readers for Rand's novels even in the 21st century: self-centered, bookish teenagers seeking affirmation for their assumptions that they alone are individuals, they alone have it all figured out, they alone understand how the world really works, and everyone else is a mindless conformist.

Ding ding ding! I do believe this explains Rand's continuing popularity. I am a rock, I am an iiiiiisland...


message 10: by Jennifer (last edited Nov 05, 2009 01:49PM) (new)

Jennifer Daniel, was it you who dragged me to some old 3-hour Ayn Rand movie in L.A.? It was torture. That and now this review have convinced me to keep Ayn Rand off my reading list.


message 11: by David (new)

David This is a most excellent review. I particularly liked the dead-on identification of those groups to whom Rand is likely to appeal. But you might just be doing those "Twilight"-lovers an injustice.


message 12: by Bram (new) - rated it 1 star

Bram Agree with David.


Daniel Jennifer, I did not drag you to any Ayn Rand movie, three hours long or otherwise, nor would I ever. You're my friend; why would I want to torture you like that? Why would I want to torture myself like that? Must've been one of your enemies.


message 14: by Jennifer (new)

Jennifer Could have sworn it was you. Oh, wait, I think it was Cheryl. and I thought she was my friend!


message 15: by Bram (last edited Nov 05, 2009 03:37PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Bram I should tell you, Daniel, I find it hilarious it worries me that you are so easily mistaken for a Cheryl.


Daniel Oh and by the way, I am definitely not endorsing Ayn Rand's writing, or saying teenagers should read her books just because they're not quite as bad as "Twilight." I mean, dog vomit doesn't smell quite as bad as dog diarrhea, but that doesn't mean you should eat either one. (And sorry for that metaphor.)


Daniel Bram, I am equally shocked that Jennifer mistook me for Cheryl. For one thing, Cheryl often has a parrot on her head, while I never do.

Elizabeth, you make a good point. On the other hand, reading Ayn Rand will at least give you some insight into the thinking of some of the awful people who occupy high positions in U.S. government and finance, while reading "Twilight" won't teach you anything except that people who like "Twilight" are retarded. I guess that's sort of useful, if you didn't already realize how retarded the vast majority of people are.


message 18: by Jennifer (new)

Jennifer Bram and Daniel, now that I've stopped laughing at both of your posts, I'm just going to leave you with the mystery of how I would mistake you, Daniel, for Cheryl.

And no, I'm sure it's not just that I have a bad memory and knew I had seen a movie at the Egyptian with both of you but couldn't remember which film with which person.



message 19: by Bram (new) - rated it 1 star

Bram The damage has been done, Jennifer. My mind's eye will always see a Cheryl when I think of Daniel. Sorry, D.


message 20: by Jennifer (new)

Jennifer If that's the case, Bram, I hope you also see him with a bird on his head.


message 21: by Jen (new) - rated it 4 stars

Jen I need to read that biography. I want to know how many friends she honored with her precious mind love.


message 22: by Stephen (new)

Stephen This thread has lost it. I love it.


message 23: by C. (new)

C. It's been two decades since the Berlin Wall fell, and for the vast majority of the world, communism isn't much of a threat anymore. So, aside from studying the history of communism, is there much reason to read such propaganda at this point, especially propaganda as lacking in literary value as "Anthem" and Rand's other books?

An interesting question, not to mention review. To see what things were like, I guess? Even though I can't stand the way she writes, I certainly find Rand interesting.

A lot of the time, the nature of propaganda seems to be antagonistic to artistic merit, so I think it's important not to single Rand out on that matter. Not that you were or anything - just wandering off on my own little tangent.


message 24: by David (new)

David Speaking purely for myself, I always welcome Choupette's contributions to any discussion here on goodreads, even her tangential ones. Maybe especially here tangential ones .. (hi, Choupette!)


Daniel Good points, Choupette. One interesting comparison for Ayn Rand's novels might be a book I had in the back of my mind when I wrote my review but didn't mention for some reason: "The Moon is Down" by John Steinbeck. It, too, is a work of propaganda, and as such hasn't aged nearly as well as Steinbeck's best books. Yet, unlike "Anthem," it's still well-written, features compelling characters, and can be appreciated as a work of literature apart from its ideological goals. Can the same be said of anything Rand wrote?


message 26: by Bram (last edited Nov 06, 2009 08:54AM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Bram And it's not just the fact that it's propaganda. The issue is also with what she's propagandizing.


Daniel Well, Bram, not to be too forgiving of Ayn Rand, but I have to go back to what I first said: Given her personal history and her own experiences with communism, I can understand how her ideology developed and why she was so passionate about her way of thinking. But that's a separate issue from whether her ideas and novels are useful today. They're not.


message 28: by Bram (new) - rated it 1 star

Bram Fair enough.


message 29: by Dray (new) - rated it 2 stars

Dray "I guess there's one other group of readers for Rand's novels even in the 21st century: self-centered, bookish teenagers seeking affirmation for their assumptions that they alone are individuals, they alone have it all figured out, they alone understand how the world really works, and everyone else is a mindless conformist. Stupid sheep! Then, at some point, Lord willing, those readers grow the hell up, realize that no man is an island after all, and switch to reading real literature. (If not, they become the voice of the GOP, I guess.)"

The big problem with this very true statement is that people who feel this way (unfortunately I know some who are no longer teenagers...) are already generally pompous assholes. Rand's work only justifies their behavior and makes them feel further intellectually superior. It pains me.

Great review, by the way.


message 30: by C. (new)

C. Hi, David!

Daniel wrote: "Good points, Choupette. One interesting comparison for Ayn Rand's novels might be a book I had in the back of my mind when I wrote my review but didn't mention for some reason: "The Moon is Down" b..."

I've only read Atlas Shrugged, but I do think it has some (not much) literary merit. Her writing has real emotional force, and there are some things she depicts quite well. Especially when you compare it to some of the so-called 'art' produced in Soviet Russia or the ballets choreographed in China during Mao's rule, this actually seems like quite good stuff, even if it's not as good as the Steinbeck you mentioned. It's a continuum, I suppose.

I wonder if part of the difference lies in who or what they were propagandising for? Rand and Steinbeck (I assume, not knowing anything about the book) were writing propaganda to promote their own beliefs, original ideas they had thought up themselves, whereas the propaganda-art produced in totalitarian states was actively discouraged from being original in any way (though I'm sure there are exceptions, of course - Riefenstahl?). I think this is why I have some respect for Rand. Maybe it's wrong of me, but I do admire her for believing in something so strongly.


Morgan There are a lot of people who believe this message. In fact most Americans believe it. People are sick of being constantly asked to sacrifice for the common good when the common good is just really allowing people to live up to their potential. This philosophy isn't anarchy. It's "don't get in my way and were cool" mentality.


Nallie Sprouse Novels relevance should not be measured by how useful they are in this time. They are good or not good. Many novels are not useful, more than half of the great novels written are not useful. This doesn't mean they're irrelevant.


Jesse Cheshire I can't help but feel the original review was given from a lack o.f understanding, and therefore a reiterated hate speech, or a total understanding that hit a little to close to home. From the comments of friends and followers quick to jump on ship with the ignorance, I am sure it is the latter. I am very sorry to offend everyone but the eagerness of sheep to follow popular thought, likely due to peer pressure, sickens me in the worst way. Which is what the book is about, not nearly as much as her experience, and dislike of communism/socialism.


message 34: by Midas68 (new)

Midas68 I'll comment since it's election time.

First off the quotes you use as a affront to your sensibilities is something all humans feel at regular intervals in life. In fact most of life is about "ME/I", Course it also almost as much about the We/Us.

If you did not choose a political side in your review(By condemning one side several times) of which obviously is to lead us to assume you to be on the more enlightened other side, and ironically the tolerant side, of which we forget means inclusive.
Then I would accept your review for a honest unbiased opinion.

look, The Right is just as much part of America and the people as the Left is, In fact it's basically the Yin and Yang of America.

Everyone is Conservative and everyone is Liberal to a certain extant. Only a fool who wasn't honest with themselves and a shallow thinker has not already come to this conclusion.

Now one can choose to think of one side as bad and one side as good but that's a fools prejudice errand. The good and bad is inherent in both.
It's like When Bush was Bad(and hated for) His
Mid-east Conflicts
NSA
The Patriot Act
But the same people that hated him for supposedly his policies and not that he was Right/White. Not only forgave Obama for doubling down on those very same polices but refused to even acknowledge that those former hated polices were now even a problem worth mentioning.

Those were not even enlightened Sheep.

I learned the hard way(Former Liberal) but I now admit the truth and don't just blame one side and pretend I'm better because I think I'm on the side of the Angels.

Comes a time when one has to put down foolish things like believing in Santa Claus or Angels.


notgettingenough I'm afraid you are wrong, Daniel. Who takes this shit seriously? Still? I know people in the US who cannot get through a day of their lives without referencing it to Objectivism. It's alive and well and scary. Know your enemy.


back to top