Chris Winters Final Reaction

I enjoyed reading this novel even tough it might have been a pain trying to keep with the pace of our weekly blogs. Throughout this novel there were several parts that I found to be strange. The third part of this book is a bit off the ordinary. It’s definitely not the actual ending of the book, I’ve decided, but more of a choose-your-own-adventure suggestion. It’s kind of fun that way because any end that you, the reader, come up with will be better than the one Rand suggested. I found it amusing how Rand ends it with John Galt giving the most boring speech possible, and it lasts for an eternity. To make matters worse everyone heard the speech killing their heightened expectations. Galt’s speech was terrible yet the novel says, “The entire world was listening, ears glued to the radios, because Galt’s speech was the most brilliant thing they had ever heard.” Honestly it might have been the worst speech I have ever read, but maybe its merely because I had such high expectations of him.

Even though this was an exception novel, everyone I know, including myself, complain about the length of it. People complain about Rand’s writing, and I always think, “When was the last time you wrote a 1000 page book in a second language and pulled off a reasonably page-turning storyline?”  Also her constant use of diction to help guide the reader of the setting and the tension created by characters is outstanding. There was never one point in the story where I found myself bored except for Galt’s speech. I feel that this constant eagerness to continue reading was most certainly created by her amazing use of descriptions. Also considering how this novel helped me correlate to what is happening in our government today was something that I found incredible. Who would have thought that one of the English books I would be reading this year would have a direct correlation to the governments crash in todays society.

One of the most valuable things I got from this book was the idea that one person being unhappy doesn’t, and shouldn’t, make others happy. I think, in this way, it was particularly important to me that the protagonist was a woman. We constantly see women complain about their lives and families, whether it in movies or real life, but they say it’s all worth it because they’ve been able to devote their lives to making their husbands or children happy. Also people in today’s society constantly want to go to the needy and unfortunate countries of the world and sacrifice themselves to save them.

I can’t really say this with confidence, but for the most part women are raised to believe that the more selfless they are, the better off everyone else will be. I think it’s a pretty typical way that women talk themselves into staying in abusive situations – which their lives are worth less than the lives around them. And I found these characteristics to embody Hank Rearden. I love that Rand sets up characters that destroy this cycle of abuse. Although there might be many other reason to read this book but the main one that I found interesting was about her ideas being dangerous. It most certainly was not difficult to figure out that Rand’s mind set can create for a high amount of controversy. First off she conveniently ignores the very old, very young, and disabled to make a specific and extreme point. She does to express that they at the moment have no impact on how the economy, or well being of one can become enhanced. I don’t think her point is entirely without merit, though (in the sense that our lives are valuable, not in the sense of “kill the weak!”). Rand merely wanted to show that women have just as much value as men and with a cut throat mentality all businesses can and should be.

Hernan Prieto's Final Reaction

Ayn Rand’s, “Atlas Shrugged” was a peculiar read. When the novel was fist assigned, I was looking forward to reading it. I had heard a movie had been released on it, and that it showed promise. My expectations were very high, as I began to read the novel; unfortunately my emotions began to die out, but then returned. This was not because the novel was bad. On the contrary it was very good. I was hooked on a series of questions that my mind made as I read, but what I liked even more was the answers to those questions, because after a question was answered a new one branched off from that making a vicious cycle, that I found to be quite entertaining.

The introduction of each character and that mysterious question that echoed through my mind (“Who is John Galt?”) was what mainly kept me engaged. It was when I reached the middle of the novel that the excitement was slowly diminishing. Dagny’s affair with Rearden was the only thing that kept me awake. I noticed Rand became very repetitive, and her political views, which I found to be disagreeable, became clearer as the novel progressed. I found myself with feelings had gone bland. It was when I reached the 600s that the urge, or desire to continue reading returned.

            Rand used a technique that I found quite interesting. In my opinion she devised the novel to be the most exciting at the beginning in order to create a hook. Then using a very common technique; she left the best for last.

            Her characters were outstanding. She devised a wide variety of them, making it impossible for any reader not to identify themselves in at least one of them. For example, Dagny Taggart the Vice President of one of the only remaining viable companies shows a strong character, with no fear and no repercussion to anything. I for one thought she was brave, as we saw when she purchased a plane, to pursue another with no known location of to where is was headed. Then crashing it during landing. She also showed signs of fearlessness from anything; it was exemplified when she denounced the government on live radio.

Although not specified by Rand, I believe that the question of the hero in the novel was vested upon Dagny. It was not until towards the end of the novel that I realized this. Dagny, also being the main character, is the one whose ideas spark change in the reader; well at least in me. As I read, the character of John Galt was revealed. I was not sure whom to think of as the hero of the novel, either Dagny or John. Galt the man that formally initiated the strike against the government, that he vowed to stop and their abusive tactics, is the one that originally has the ideas of revolt, as it was said various times in the novel. Although he was the man to start the revolt, I believe Dagny’s brave decision to return to the real world, where nothing but negative ideals waited for her as soon as she arrived was the most courageous. She had experienced both worlds, and knowingly choosing the less appropriate one was mind-boggling. She was not able to bear the idea that everything was just abandoned, especially after the hard work dedicated to Taggart Trans Continental. This is what mainly sets her apart from the rest of the “disappeared”, she was not selfish to a certain point, in my mind making her the better person; better than Galt.

The feelings created by Rand’s political views were not my favorite part of the novel. It was clear of her desire to acquire a liberal government. I consider this type of government a bit to extreme, to the extent that selfishness is a problem and the individual citizen is allowed to do as they please; many people today find it a bit radical, I even received crazy looks from two teachers when I walked into their classes with the book in hand. Although my ideals of a neoliberal economy are also similar hers, I would have enjoyed the novel more if it would have been omitted, but then giving the book no purpose. So I do understand her choice to reveal her views to the reader in order to make the plot more convincing as a whole. I do believe though that an equilibrium can be reached. Removing the greed, and feelings of selfishness would make her views more acceptable in today’s society.

The novel as a whole is mind altering, although I don’t agree with all of Rand’s political views, I find that she implements them extremely well. The plot was very interesting and the various characters made a wide variety of opinions. Giving me a wider perspective to use today. Although I criticized the novel, I believe that it is a must read. The ending could not have been a better closure to all the issues presented by Rand, making this novel one of my favorite.

Meaghan Sylver's final blog

When I began Atlas Shrugged I would have told anyone that it would make it to the top of my list of “worst books I’ve ever read”. Perhaps this was due to the simple fact that I felt defeated every time I saw the monumental amount of pages I had left. However, after completing Ayn Rand’s novel, I have to admit; she proved me wrong. If anything, Atlas Shrugged would find itself on my list of “best novels”.

            After reading Atlas Shrugged, I would classify Ayn Rand as someone who is highly intellectual. It makes me wonder how she came up with all her ideas and different takes on life that I am able to agree upon. I heard someone say that it took Rand two years just to write the speech John Galt gives near the end of the novel. This is the epitome, to me, of an epic speech from an all-knowing character that shows the devotion Rand had. One reason this novel is so successful, I believe, is due to the fact that Rand took time into writing it, and because of this, the detail and language is perfect. Rand is able to describe scenes is words that convey emotions that I didn’t know was possible through reading. Although sometimes her descriptions can get a bit on the lengthy side, to say the least, it adds so much to the novel that if it were taken away, the novel would lose some of its glory.

            What kept me intrigued throughout Atlas Shrugged was the description and elaboration in the characters. Rand used character description to her advantage. Every character that was presented in the novel was illustrated in a specific manner. Rand gave her characters elaborate back-stories, and that is what made them even more believable. I love the fact that she did not think in the way that she was writing a novel and that was the only time her characters would exist. Instead, she looked upon it as that she was described a mere part of the characters lives. Finding the rest of their lives relevant to the story is what made her descriptions so successful and unique to any other author I have read.

            Rand gave me no choice but to become absorbed into the lives of her characters; feeling empathy, anger, or compassion when the time was brought up. One character I feel the most towards is Eddie Willers. I feel like Eddie is an unfortunate soul. He was a man with great talents, both natural and sought after, who wanted, in all of his power, to prove himself in his work. Eddie is one of the many intellectual men who fell in love with Dagny throughout the novel; however, he is one that never stood a chance. Dagny respected Eddie as a noble worker, but she would never have feelings of love towards him. This was the first of unfortunate events that made me feel bad for him. The other event is, in a way, the lack of an event. When the country was crumbling down, the society of those who lived and deserved to live in “Atlantis” were saved and would have a future. I believe that Eddie Willers deserved to be in this new world. Other characters saw that he was deserving of it too; however, he could simply not abandon the railroad, which he had already seen Dagny leave. Eddie took it as his job to save the railroads, even when Dagny realized it was impossible. I feel as if he did this maybe to have a chance at proving what he is capable of to Dagny. I believe, in his head, Eddie dreamed of a scenario where if he saved the roads Dagny would come back to him and she, with all her greatness, would owe him. However, he comes to a depressing realization that he is not capable of the impossible. Eddie dies collapsed on the railroad, I believe, symbolizing the fact that he has given his life to that of Taggart Transcontinental.

            In summary, Atlas Shrugged is probably the best novel I have ever read. Not only did it make me think outside the box, but it also made me question the society in which and the way in which the characters were living. The novel was almost too relatable in a gloomy way that I feel this experience could be possible within the world.

Countless days of staying up late forcing my eyes against their will to read the tiny font found on Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged, and now it is all over.

Zane Van de Put's Final Reaction

To my surprise, I enjoyed reading Atlas Shrugged. I will actually miss reading the thousand page book that prevented me from having fun weekends because I had to stay home and read a hundred pages a day. I felt accomplished to be able to read one of the longest books in the world. I found online that Atlas Shrugged has about 645,000 words in it. This was the first time in a long time that I actually thoroughly read a novel in an English class.

            The main aspect of the book that I enjoyed most was Dagny Taggart. In a world dominated by men, Dagny shows that she is smarter and better than every man except for one, John Galt. Rand includes a female protagonist to show that being successful does not matter with gender; females can just be as successful as males. Dagny teaches the readers that there is a way to solve a problem even if it seems impossible to solve. She shows us that there is nothing wrong with doing what you love.

            Obviously there were parts in the novel that got me bored or angry. For example, I was annoyed at the repeated times Dagny somehow saved the company when it seemed like the company was completely doomed. I also had a lot of difficulty remembering who the many characters were. I did not remember that Wesley Mouch was Hank’s Washington man until Ayn Rand reminded the readers much later in the novel. I thought Ayn Rand could have shortened the novel and it still would have had the same impact. The main aspect of the book I did not like was the fact that Dagny and John Galt seemed too perfect. They could solve anything and were superior to everyone. In real life, no one is that perfect. Everyone has faults and in the story I cannot find a huge fault with either character.

            Many of my peers did not like the insertion of the Project X weapon. However, I enjoyed it because it showed how dangerous people become in moments of desperation. Ayn Rand inserted Project X because she wanted to show the readers how far people are willing to go to protect their view and demolish the opposition. I think Rand includes this part to warn readers that there are people out to destroy you and that the readers should always be ready for disasters.

            After finishing the novel, I am still left with many questions. My main question was why did John Galt leave Eddie Willers behind? I felt that Eddie was a hard and honest worker. Even though Dagny did boss him around most of the time. Eddie used his intelligence to fix many problems with the Taggart Transcontinental. He went to California to stop the one of the fighting factions from holding trains for ransom. Even though Ayn Rand constantly talks about how dedicated Dagny is to her railroad; I think Eddie was more dedicated to the railroad than Dagny. Long after Dagny abandons the Taggart Transcontinental to live in Mulligan Valley, Eddie Willers is still fighting for the company. He refuses to leave the comet behind when everyone ditches it. Even though Eddie was not as intelligent as the other industrialists, he was still as hardworking as they were and I feel that he deserved to be able to go to Mulligan Valley.

            I was also wondering what happened to Jim Taggart and the other looters. Throughout the novel Ayn Rand makes it a point that the world cannot prosper with looters running the world. It is also Galt’s goal to get rid of the looters. However, at the end of the novel Rand never mentions what happens to Jim and his gang. I felt that Rand should have included a final destruction of all the looters. Some may argue that the destruction of the looters was Jim’s breakdown and the power loss of New York. I think that it was not a sufficient destruction. Maybe Rand did not include a complete destruction of the looters because she feels that there will always be looters in life.

            Atlas Shrugged has taught me many things. It has given me a different insight on how I should live my life. I can admit that I am a pretty lazy person when it comes to working. This novel has taught me that people who are lazy do not become successful in life. I need to solve my own problems and I cannot expect other people to solve them for me. I need to use my intelligence more often because it is the best weapon at my disposal. The novel has taught me that being selfish is not a sin and that it is in fact what I should be in order to become successful.

            Atlas Shrugged has become my new bible. It has all the information I need to become successful in business. I know in the future, wherever I will be; I’ll have a copy of Atlas Shrugged with me. 

Alex Williams final reaction

            Before I actually read Atlas Shrugged, I always thought that I would enjoy and understand the message it gives. I had heard much about Rand’s philosophy, Objectivism and I’ve been told many times that I would wholeheartedly agree. Throughout the entire book, I kept an open mind but slightly favored the industrialists like Rearden and Dagny. I thought this book would reinforce my own views on politics and economics. In many ways, it did. It also made me realize how insane and exaggerated everything in this book is. I would agree that the book is very well written and that Rand really gets her point across, but the downsides is that it’s extremely repetitive, overly exaggerated, and highly unrealistic.

            Throughout the course of the plot, Rand does not leave much room for interpretation. Sure there are a view characters that firmly stand on one side and have ideas that can be used for either side, but the majority of the characters are inelastic and represent one-sided views with not a hint of changing them. What amazes me even more is the way Rand paints certain characters as heroes and others as villains. Rand creates these characters to represent different beliefs and values, and by that I mean anything that doesn’t fully agree with her is tossed into the villain category.

            Examining the main actions of the characters in this book really makes me disagree with Rand. She molds everything to make her philosophy seem ideal and anything that contradicts it seem wrong. The affair between Dagny and Rearden is idealized as true love and how it should be. Rand casts Lillian as an evil manipulator who seeks pleasure in destroying Rearden’s life. To be honest, she should have a mindset like that.  Rearden ruined her life. He married her and trapped her in their loveless marriage. Rand made it clear that Lillian married Hank for his virtues and courage, with the intention of destroying them. But I highly doubt she wanted this from the start. Hank is a sociopath with nothing but his own interests in mind; he married Lillian for no reason whatsoever. Her hatred grew over the years, it was not there to begin with. I agree with everything he for the sake of making money and doing everything for his own benefit, I just think that he should’ve never married Lillian in the first place and definitely not act the way he did to her. He even threatened her with violence if she ever brought up his affair again. How can she still paint this man as a hero? In economic terms he is, but he also represents evil.

            Another thing I don’t agree with is her portrayal of John Galt, the real hero of this story. He is Rand’s hypothetical hero, the ideal man in her philosophy. From what I observed, this is a huge contradiction. He is the one who spent hours preaching to the world about self-interest and never living for another man. What I saw constantly throughout the book was everyone giving up their own self interests to serve him. Hank goes from punching Francisco in the face to admitting he knows Dagny loves Galt, and that he is fine with it. How is this self-interest? Francisco and Hank just gave up Dagny and from what I observed from the book, basically gave up women.

            I think Rand overly exaggerates everything in this book. First of all, this took place in under two decades and America became a complete totalitarian state. That just couldn’t happen with the way the world is. Sure if everyone suddenly became mindless then yes this story would make sense. But the way she laid it out is just not possible. She makes everyone except the protagonists just mindless drones who have no ability to do anything about their circumstances. In fact, the only people who she really makes capable of doing anything are the brilliant minds that were the protagonists. From what I observed, Rand does not have much respect for anyone unless they’re born with a vastly superior intelligence. People like Eddie Willers shared the same philosophy as Galt and the others, but because he wasn’t born an absolute genius like Francico, Ragnar, and Galt, she casts him as a loser, reaching total failure at the end of the novel, then a happy ending for the three geniuses and their friends.

            Overall, I agree with many of the views of Objectivism, but I think it’s highly unrealistic and itself not rational. There are too many contradictions in this book and the biggest of them all was Ayn Rand herself. While preaching of the evils of welfare and charity, about how taking alms for anything was a mortal sin, she herself received welfare and aid from the government. She like men of Washington in the book, expects everyone to pay their way, but its okay for her to reap the benefit of the hard work of others. I think this book is great, but greatly exaggerated to the point of losing the rationality that she preaches. 

Wesley Groves Final Blog

If there is one thought I can take away from this book, it is without out a doubt a famous quote, “Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear.”  You cannot take every word you hear as truth, the day we cease to question higher powers, is the day they can walk over us and do what they want.  If you question command, sometimes what you find will be better than what you would have done.

Now that this monster of a book has unfortunately/finally come to a close, I have very mixed feelings.  My first feeling is Joy, this is a result of the pure amount of time that has gone into this minibible.  My second feeling is also joy, because I am tired of having someone elses ideology crammed down my throat in the for of a story that gives you no option but siding with the “good guys”, this really aggravated me.  And my last feeling is true fear. 

I say fear, because I can easily mirror Atlas Shrugged with things that are occurring in society today, the only part that does not mirror it is the hidden society of “disappeared” business giants that are ready to swoop in and change the day, no.  Instead, society is taking a turn on a path towards horrible anti-capitalism and will only press on forwards in this path.  In modern day you are even viewed as evil if you stand in the way of the “progressive” or “liberal” agenda.  Ayn Rand makes me afraid of the society that John Galt is against.

I believe that Ayn Rand did a horrible job with getting her point across in this book, there were countless times when I would have to put the book down and stop reading because I was self-diagnosing death by boredom.  This book had a very powerful point, but would drown that point with endless romance, or forced summaries in the form of speeches.  Which brings me to my next point,  why did that John Galt speech occur… I mean, you cannot make it more obvious that this book is propaganda any other way.  Rand was basically telling us in that speech, “Hey look here guys, this is what I believe, and this is how I am going to tell you how to believe it.” 

The way this book was made, did a great job on getting Ayn Rand’s view across and while the example was a little extreme, she did show what she believes and shows why she believes it, there was no reason for that speech.  This is not your college thesis paper, you are not writing this to probe a point to someone, unintelligent people are not going to read this book, if someone is brave enough to read atlas shrugged, then they are smart enough to get what you are saying to them.  But noooo, Rand has the need to directly summarize every little point that this book has already made.  I guess she is far superior to us dumb folk and we cant understand her philosophy. 

I believe the points made in this book are very solid and concrete; I can not disagree with them.  But this point was already in my head before, had I not already agreed with her, this book would have done nothing in changing my mind.  Had the book been shorter, like I suggest it be, Rand’s point would come across much more strong and powerful.  But since this novel is laced with boring romance and long speeches, it takes away from the main plot.

All in all, this book was a very interesting read; many very strong points were made.  My suggestion to Rand would have been to cut down many parts.  This had the potential to be one of the best books I have ever read, if only it were shorter. 

All of this being said, I am very proud to have accomplished reading a book as large Atlas Shrugged, it felt like reading the bible.  While it was not exactly by choice, I am glad I did read it.  It showed me a lot about todays society and what is had become/what path it is on.  It is scary, but America is taking a turn for the worse.  The similarities between America in atlas and the real America are bone chilling and worry me deeply.  We do not have enough John Galt’s in todays society.  But then again, “Who is John Galt?”.

Alan Armony's FINAL REACTION!!!!!!!!

If I were to describe this book with one word, that word would be: different. There is really no other book like this one that I have ever read. Although I had to go on Sparknotes to remind myself of the many events that occurred throughout the novel, this is not a book that I will ever forget. Rand does many amazing things in this book. She keeps symbols going for a thousand pages, and the characteristics of her characters don’t change unless they are forced to through the passing events of the storyline. Although at the end of the book the story gets a little bit unrealistic, I realize that it is all to show the moral of the story and Rand’s views on the modern economy.

Before reading Atlas Shrugged, I had a sense of what must be done to be successful in the business world. One must be selfish. That is the biggest factor to being successful. It’s not about being a genius. If you are selfish in the right ways, you can be just as successful as Hank Rearden. The reason I enjoyed Dagny so much was that she always thought about herself first. In our society, people think that we should think about the less fortunate first and worry about ourselves later. But when you get on a plane and they go over the safety procedures, they tell you to put the breathing mask on yourself first and worry about others later. This goes to show that when it comes down to the basics, like life and death, we must be selfish to survive. John Galt was selfish in the sense that he took all of the geniuses and industrialists from the real world and kept them for himself. He let the real world destroy itself. The looters believed that everyone should think about the less fortunate first: those who couldn’t get Rearden Steel or those who didn’t have the newest technology. It was the Unification Board and all of its stupid policies that caused the economy to go down the drain the way it did.

Following Dagny through this story was one of the most interesting things I’ve done when reading a book. She brings you up and down and around, but always lets you keep up with her. By the end of the book, I’m pretty sure I fell in love with Dagny just like every other male character in the book. She had such an interesting mind, and captivating personality. My favorite part about Dagny was that she didn’t give up the railroad until it was to save the man she truly loved: John Galt. I can’t say that I knew she would stop loving Rearden, but I’m very glad with the way their relationship ended. She tried to keep it going when she told him how much she loved him, and it took him to tell her that she was speaking in past tense the entire time. I’m not one to get tangled up in the gushy stuff, but I really enjoyed that part. However, after this, their relationship seemed to slightly linger on until Hank left the note for Dagny reading “I have met him. I don’t blame you.” I feel like this was the most respectful way that Rearden could have passed Dagny on to Galt. On top of all this, Rearden even joins the other strikers to save Galt! For that, Rearden wins #2 in my book. In the beginning, when we first met Hank, I thought he was an a**hole. He showed no emotion with his wife or mother, he wouldn’t give a job to his own brother, and he never let a penny go in his business. However, I believe that his relationship with Dagny changed his personality completely. He finally learned to love someone. This made him realize that there is more to life than just making the maximum amount of money possible. Acquiring this knowledge allowed Rearden to open up and have a relationship with not only Dagny, but Francisco, and especially Galt. Had Rearden never met Dagny, I believe that Galt would have never picked him as a striker. He was not selfish the way that Galt needed him to be, he was selfish in the sense that he wanted all the power. Dagny changed this in him. For that, Rearden was thankful in my mind, and it is why he helped save Galt at the end of the book.

I enjoyed reading this book, even though it felt like it was a million pages long. As I reached page 1060 and the very end of the book, I realized that I did not have another 100 pages to look forward to, and I found myself wishing that there were. I hope the next book is just as interesting.

Atlas Shrugged Reaction (Whole Book): Libby Evans

I have never read a book like Atlas Shrugged. Sure I have read things with a political bias, but none as blatantly capitalist as this book. Though it was stressful trying to finish the book on time, I thoroughly enjoyed it. The romance, the conflict/mystery, the drama, it is anything you could ever hope for in a book (at least depending on what genre you like). Ayn Rand is the author of this book and should be commended for her fantastic work. You may think at 1000+ pages a book would get boring and repetitive, but Rand ingeniously made it so that each answer to a question just left the reader with two more questions. Every action of the characters all has significance and eventually effects all other characters. Such would be Dagny’s relationship with Francisco when she was younger affecting the current one she had with Rearden, which then complicated things between her and John Galt. The never ending trouble in love, soon turned into a love square (one step up in complication from a love triangle).

           Throughout the story people suddenly go missing, and it isn’t until 12 years later that Dagny pieces it together that a person deemed the destroyer is the cause of it all. Of course, when she meets this destroyer, it seems only fitting that he then seems to be destroyer for her by trying to make her chose between her beloved railroad, and a somewhat utopia in Colorado. How does Rand come up with this? She has taken characters which besides the confusion surrounding them, had the depth of a puddle on the street and has given the emotional depth of an ocean. Dagny has evolved from an unpopular business woman with an unknown past, to the only thing keeping the rail road afloat leaving the hearts of 3 men in her path. However, I cannot say my opinion of Jim or anyone of the other Washington boys improved over time. In fact, I disliked them more, despite the few times I pitied them. Jim remained a sniveling whiney little coward, but I did sympathize with his being overshadowed by his sister and feeling as if no one understood him. However, these brief moments were always ruined by his opening his mouth. I had similar pity towards Lillian, what with her unrequited love. However, her determination to ruin her husband and her overall awfulness ruined such moments. The Washington boys had no moments of pity, just frustration and immense annoyance towards everything they said and did. I mean, do they actually think it was a good idea to give preference to some foreign countries economy even though it was destroying their own? Also, the fact that they thought incompetence was means enough to take money from the rich in the name of general welfare was baffling. Some of the worst phrases they all said were whining about how it was not their fault and they did not have enough power (courtesy of Mouch) and saying that it was not their job (said by too many to count). Just thinking about it annoys me.

          Then moving on to the love square, Rand seems to have correlated all major events with Dagny’s relationship and business life. With Francisco, Dagny was still young and full of potential just as Francisco. She was not as experienced as in life same as in love. Dagny was just climbing up in power in the rail road business. When Francisco left her, Dagny became more focused on her work and bringing the railroad to a new level of success despite under Jim’s control. Then with the start of Dagny’s relationship with Rearden (which was the destruction of his marriage with Lillian), was the beginning of the destruction of all business. A love which developed between the two, all the while people were deserting their jobs and factories were being shut down. Then entrance of John Galt, Dagny’s railroad is near completed destruction. While she parades around flirting with Galt in the business utopia in Colorado, Taggart Transcontinental was on its way out. It was interesting to find out what happened with each relationship she entered.

         What was one of the most rewarding things about reading the book was having all the troublesome questions answered. In the beginning, the question was just what had happened to make Dagny the way she was and what happened between her and Francisco. When that was answered if lead to the question as to what Francisco’s secret was. I was kept on my toes throughout the book and happily surprised with the unexpected outcomes.