Atlas Shrugged – Intermission – RMINPO. . .
I didn’t even realize there were parts. And I missed a day! Dang. So as I’m off schedule, maybe now would be a good time to pause for some RMINPO — random musings in no particular order. . .
Triumph and plotting. That’s the ticket here in part 1. So let’s look at how Rand divvys up the players on the field.
Dagny Taggart: She’s obviously the Rand ideal. Innocence and purity in an “objectivist” sense. She’s the goddess. And unlike Hank, she bears no guilt, no remorse for anything she does. She’s driven almost beyond practicality.
Francicso d’Anconia: The male Dagny (or maybe she’s the female version of him, dunno), only with inside info. He’s obviously part of some larger plan to deal with the “looters” and thieves he sees in the world. And one thing more, he suffers nobly for doing the right thing. (Who wouldn’t want to be him!) His inability (for whatever reason) to let Dagny in on what’s going on has caused him to give her up which, I get a sense, is worse than giving up all d’Anconia Copper. I’d root for these two to hook up in the end if it wouldn’t be so damned contrived. A hero’s exit of some sort? We’ll see.
Henry Rearden: Brilliant, driven, guilty. Not necessarily in that order. There is nothing he can’t do — except bear the weight of the guilt his family heaps on him. He’s created a new wonder metal that will revolutionize not only industry but life as we know it. And the family has made him feel guilty — not so much about doing it, as about how he has done it. With ruthlessly efficient, laser focused business skills. With a “don’t count on anyone else” attitude.
Jim Taggart: He is complacency in business, and mediocrity in everything else. We can lump him in with most of the rest of the characters: Orrin Boyle, Mowen, Mouch, Scudder, Phillip Rearden. . . The whole crew. He is the government, the hangers-on, the “hamburger skills” with a taste for caviar.
Speaking of which, there’s an old saying about wealth, “it takes one generation to make it, one generation to exploit it, and one generation to piss it away.” (I am, as usual, paraphrasing.)But when you think about it, it’s probably truer than not. Off the top of my head, could Paris Hilton accomplish the same things the Conrad did? Doubt it. If she couldn’t live off the fame of her name (and the family fortune) what would she do? Porn? Who knows.
Fitzgerald: “The rich are very different from us”
Hemingway: “Yes they have more money.”
But back to the hamburgers and caviar. Hank, born with a hamburger palate has risen to caviar status. He is unimpressed with the trappings of his success. His joy is doing well in business. Good business and the principles that uphold it are the end in itself for Hank.
Generationally this says something — Like Nat Taggart, Hank is first generation wealth. Dagny and Jim are third. Hmmmmmm. Yet these two really could not be more different. Dagny wants to make Nat Taggart proud. Jim, well just wants to be a Taggart.
He does smack of “social progressivism” as I suppose Rand would label that cardinal sin. I’m still not sure if he uses it as an excuse (or cover) for his inabilities or whether he genuinely believes it. I think the former, but Rand gives me a sense that he is somehow genuine. But maybe I’m reading too much into the character. What should be a clear cut character is giving me some problems for some reason.
Dagny goes to build greatness standing toe to toe to battle her nemesis of big G, while Jim appears to be sinking to the “dark” side. In line with the politicians — possibly protecting Taggart’s interests by “playing ball.” Is he trying to use the skills he does have to protect Taggart? (Does he, or anyone, really have those skills?) Or is he just playing to save his own skin. I suppose in the end it doesn’t matter. The course he’s chosen is obviously wrong and morally, he’ll have to pony up in the end.
Jim strikes me more like an Eddie Willers — someone, who for whatever reason, didn’t / couldn’t reach the heights of greatness — didn’t study hard enough, just didn’t have it. Whatever, they are what happens to the two guys who diverge on the path of the ordinary men (except of course that Taggart is heir to an empire and Eddie is not.)
But Eddie certainly has a greater respect for how shit needs to get done. There’s the ticket I think. Respect and appreciation of wealth. Of what wealth represents. That’s where the generational argument kind of blows up here. Francisco d’A (3G zillionaire) was most respectful of his empire — “you had to earn the d’Anconia name.”
But there’s another relationship I’d like to watch. . . (hopefully it doesn’t end as obviously as it would appear to.)
Cherryl Brooks Taggart: What is to become of poor Cherryl. I found myself wishing that Dagny would have walked into that five and dime for those tissues. She strikes me as the lump of clay in this story so far. Not the Eddie Willers, not the Owen Kelloggs. They both seem to know the rightness of things in their own way. She is the ultimately impressionable one. And as an awe struck youth, looking to escape an unacceptable past, she’s fallen in with the wrong guy.
So my wonder / question / interest, is what happens to her as a result of the “Britney syndrome?” Trailer trash to sudden, overnight wealth. I wonder how that works out in Rand’s world. Wait and see for that.
Lillian Rearden: I think is evil. She appears supportive, but we already know the marriage is a sham. Her deal, as I see it, is the female of the species, she has never had to earn anything in her life. But it would now appear that she has to do some work to keep it. I foresee more manipulation and plotting ahead.
Akston / Stadler: This is an interesting pair. Both men of equal brilliance. But Dr. S’s fatal flaw is that he doesn’t seem to comprehend the real world. Or if he does comprehend it, he doesn’t want to acknowledge it. And if he is somehow acknowledging it, he simply can’t be bothered to deal with it — to live in it.
The key triumph is Dagny’s rebuilding of the John Galt line with Rearden Metal. Against severe economic times and an encroaching government stacking the odds against her, she shoulders the entire burden of saving her family’s business and is victorious.
Only problem with that we can’t have too much success and brilliance.
Stage is set, battle lines drawn, and from where we stand with the “victory” (?) against Ellis Wyatt, it’s establishment (1) – industrialists (0). Can’t end this way. . .
Wondering about the Wyatt episode when he threw his glass. Almost as if he knew this end was inevitable.
Anyway, the struggle is afoot! Back to the story! . . .