Customer Reviews

The Fountainhead

5 star:		(387)
4 star:		(64)
3 star:		(46)
2 star:		(35)
1 star:		(61)

 

 

I bought a copy of The Fountainhead at a used bookstore. At the time I had never even heard of Ayn Rand. After reading The Fountainhead I began searching for information about her and was surprised to find how prolific she was. Most people either love her or hate her; no middle ground. Rand has been much criticized for events in her personal life. Let me just say that if all philosophers were discredited on such grounds, there would be few who could withstand such scrutiny. Human beings aren't perfect. Rand's mistakes in her personal life do not detract from her brilliance. Her support of logic over emotion is just plain good sense. She encourages everyone to be self-sufficient and to base their decisions on reason rather than blindly accepting what others would tell you is right based on their own agenda. However, don't take my opinion or that of anyone else. Simply read the book for yourself and draw your own conclusions. Even if you don't agree with Rand's philosophy, the story is riveting. But I must say that the validity of her ideas is illustrated every night on the six o'clock news! Since reading this book I have viewed politics, philosophy, and human relations in an entirely new light.

I am a 30 year old architect. I read fountainhead for the juicy details of big time architecture. Rand wrote a story that is both bigger than life and true to life. She was a voracious researcher and a highly imaginative writer.

Art imitates life in Fountainhead, in glorified fashion. I can attest from personal experience that a career in architecture does indeed include elements such as school rivalries, office politics, insecurities, megalomania, long hours designing, critiques, skyscrapers, mansions, engineers, contractors, tradesmen, and wealthy clients.

There is mediocrity in American architecture, and there was a modernistic movement in the early twentieth century. Rand abridged it for her story. The lives of her magnified characters are entangled in destiny. This could never happen in real life, could it?

Many scenes are so confident and gritty I cannot forget them. Also, her building descriptions are vivid and beautiful.

As you can tell, I needed some extra excitement in my 9 to 5. I thank Rand for the greatest American story about architects that I know of.

Only, I wish she would have finished it.

I have a big problem with the last third of the book. A misplaced dialectic of philosophy cuts into her ending. The ending is missing something. If only Rand would have kept her artistry and philosophy more separated.

Thus, as is, Fountainhead ultimately is not literature to me, but propaganda. And every person should be wary of propaganda. The message of this story is not universal. It is a mistake for young readers to imitate Rand's protagonist.

Roark is the most wooden hero. He is a robot programmed to design masterpieces. A puppet in a book, not to be confused with a real life fountainhead.

Instead of anthropormizing Roark, look for real life leaders who struggle and ultimately change our world. I know I'm just a regular architect. If I was a fountainhead, I would know it. Don't be a player hater.

This novel is like a drug. It's so good, no matter how much of it you read, when you put it down you feel the pull. It lures you back. It's just that good.

Rather than simply telling a story, Ayn Rand wraps her tale around an overarching philosophy -- Objectivism, her own creation. This basically revolves around self-interest, occupying yourself with your own affairs and nobody else's, and preserving your integrity at all costs. It seems that Rand carries this through to its illogical conclusion; she rejects any act of altruism as evil, for example, yet freely acknowledges that some people are born to succeed as individualists (Roark) while others are born to fail (Keating).

Whatever you think of her philosophy, this is a great story; who would have thought the architectural profession could be so exciting and dynamic? The central conflict is Roark vs. the world, and it's inspiring to see how he fights against incredible odds. Once one understands Roark, what motivates him, and how he thinks, it becomes easier to understand his struggle.

This is a good book -- lots to think about. Nobody should go through life without reading it and thinking about what Rand has to say. Read it!

I first read this book in 1986. It was the first serious piece of literature I read outside of school and it had a dramatic affect on me. I was struck by Howard Roark's unfaltering adherence to his values when society in general portrayed him as "dangerous" and a "failure." While society happily jumped on the latest bandwagon without a second thought, Roark continued on his own journey even in the face of personal and economic tragedy.
A self-proclaimed "non-conformist" at the time, this novel forced me to re-evaluate many of my beliefs. Was I truly marking my own path, or was I just conforming to a smaller group of outsiders? This novel does not attempt to prove that the "good guys win in the end" - so how far was I willing to walk my own walk?
To this day, I am still asking those questions. I re-read The Fountainhead last month and found it no less profound than I first did in 1986. I can't help but picture Roark as the subject of Robert Frost's prose, "Two roads diverged in a wood, and I--I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference."
In the end, whether or not one agrees with Ayn Rand's picture of man and his role in society, The Fountainhead will stimulate thought and discussion - and in that respect, this novel serves its social purpose.

While I was reading this book every paragraph seemed to give me a different feeling. Most parts were laughable on how blunt the woman could be to get her point across. Others stuck a nerve to a deep realization that what she says has truth. While reading this novel you can definitely tell she wasn't writing for the casual reader. Speeches drag on, characters disappoint you, but for some reason people have latched on to her like she is the goddess of objectivism and can't be question with. I did enjoy the novel to the point where I respect the thoughts it contains and what the novel has done for many peoples lives. For my own satisfaction I would not read the novel again. It did teach me many lessons but after reading the Fountainhead there seems to be no hope for mankind and leaves a deep depressing thought in ones mind after reading. Many people would just say I don't understand and comprehend, but you can't believe everything one woman says just because she was one of the first that questioned society this way.

Like most people, I read THE FOUNTAINHEAD in high school, right in the midst of feeling out of control and feeling like no one "got" what I was trying to do with anything. I found the struggle of Howard Roark fascinating, the characters intensely developed, and the massive, epic sweep of the novel astounding........Later on through......ouch, this book is flawed, on some kind of basic level. First off, the whole Objectivist philosophy is pretty abhorrent, unless you think that the planet would be better off if everyone was totally self serving. Howard Roark is a Fascist, refusing to see anything but what he wants to see. Which isn't a problem, except the book makes a hero out of him, wants us to realize that being just like Howard Roark is the highest standard one can acheive to be. But that's just philosophic differences. The book itself, is pretty pathetic. Everything in it, the plot, the characters, are just tinsel and paint that cover up Rand's manifesto. The characters are deeply developed, but come off feeling like one dimensional caricatures, their dialogue pathetic, their motives worthless. Howard Roark moves through the book like a walking Deux ex Machina, all at once omnipotent and always functioning with total flawlessness of actions. Still, I'm glad I read it, just to realize how far I wanted to set myself away from it.

THE FOUNTAINHEAD actually changed my life. Some of it for the better, some not. I took it way too literally when I first read it, and started looking at everyone differently.

Stylistically this book is better than decent. Overall, most would say that it is a resounding sucess. So what makes me reticent to readily agree with the status quo? The characters are not as sympathetic as in Atlas Shrugged. I

n this book there are no clear rights and wrongs and these seems to be antithetical to Rand's purpose of furthering her philosophy. While Roake does stand-out as being a man above reproach, the rest of the cast is a confusing lot. Whether to condemn Gail Waynad or deify him is a hard call. To kill Dominque or to pity her is a difficult. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate a good story but I think that this was supposed to be an allegory more than a work of fiction. T

HE FOUNTAINHEAD was meant to teach the floundering human race. It does no such thing effectively and completely. There is a visage of Objectivism in the book but it is not inudated as ATLAS SHRUGGED is. This is a great piece of literature. If you're looking for a quick entertaining read such as McCrae's "Katzenjammer" or Sedaris's "Me Talk Pretty" this is not it. THE FOUNTAINHEAD is deep and it will make you think beyond anything you've expected up to this point.

The Fountainhead's enduring popularity remains a mystery to me. Really, this novel is a fairly standard romance with a lot of heavy-handed philosophy thrown in. Howard Roark's rugged individualist shtick isn't anything we haven't seen before in other novels. Sorry, folks, but this novel is absolutely not what it's cracked up to be.

As a Brit, I'd never even heard of Aryan Rant until I moved to the USA a couple of years ago.

Once here, her name cropped up many times, especially when Alan Greenspan (a former disciple of hers) was mentioned, or I talked to some of my young American colleagues. They seemed to idolize Aryan Rant, and speak of her and her works with great reverence.

So, with much anticipation I bought this monster of a book, fully prepared to read and enjoy a cult piece that had escaped my attention, or failing that, get a view of Architecture during the peak of the Modern Movement - the people responsible for all those huge concrete cubes in every city in the Western World.

Months later, its sad to realise that at the age of 35, I came to this book at least 20 years too late. Its an immature, second rate novel, challenging only because of its great length and turgid writing style (forgivable perhaps, since English was Rant's second language).

As for its philosophy; "fascism with an adolescent face" might summarise it in five words. The main character, Howard Roark clearly believes himself above all other men (and especially women). He never feels doubt or uncertainty, and acts towards everyone with humorless contempt. Amazingly we observe that he's bitter, isolated, and can't relate to anyone. He also feels desperately misunderstood and undervalued by an ignorant and cruel conformist society. Boo hoo! How cruel the world is to unrecognized genius!

Which I suppose, explains this novel's enduring popularity among bright (mainly male) adolescents - this is a character they can REALLY relate too, although unlike Salinger's Holden Caulfield, he shares his creator's complete lack of wit and humour.

Seldom have I struggled so hard to finish a novel, Moby Dick was a breeze compared to this weighty turgid lump. Occasionally there's an illuminating thought to be extracted like a piece of soap trapped deep in a sodden sponge. But mainly I felt disbelief; amazed at the extraordinary naiveté of the author, did she imagine any business, let alone architecture, functions in this way? I was stunned that someone held to be master philosopher and Literary (note the capital L) author could create so many two dimensional forgettable characters, and so many forgettable scenes, each to be dissected and explained for us idiots in the next 30+ pages, just in case we missed the point the 4th time it was made.

In desperation, I read around the book a little and started making excuses; Rant's sole exposure to architecture was a six month stint (working for free mainly as an observer) in Frank Lloyd Wright's office. This is a philosophical novel, bravely expounding a fascist viewpoint when America (and the rest of the free world) was busy fighting Nazi Germany and its ally Japan. Rant, openly admitted (years later) that she knew nothing of psychology (quite an admission for a novelist, you might think).

Eventually, I emerged from finishing "The Fountain Head" as bewildered as I had been by page 30. This is an adolescent book, written by an intelligent but deeply flawed author, who creates deeply flawed cardboard characters and overtly manipulates them to explain, at great length, a philosophy so unrealistic that it cannot apply to a world any of us recognises.

The truth is The Fountain Head spouts bilge. Gallons and gallons of toxic bilge. Pity the poor adolescents who lap it up - sooner or later it will do them terrible harm.

Of course, this is more than a novel. This is Ayn Rand's attempt to use the vehicle of fiction to present her philosophy of objectivism. In addition, she used another epic type novel, Atlas Shrugged.

In terms of literary value, there is a lot to be desired in this novel. It is long. It rambles in places. It could have used a great deal of editing and rewriting to make it tight and the characters at times seem shallow and are revealed for the literary vehicles they obviously are to make her point.

Why give it 4 stars then?

Because this book has succeeded in what it set out to do. It has stood the test of recent time and grown in popularity. It has had a profound impact in philosophy, politics and simple human values and as such it can be said to truly be a classic.

Lest you think that means that I'm a huge fan of the message of the book, I am not necessarily.

You have to put the book into context however.

Ayn Rand grew up in Soviet Russia and viewed the impact of collectivism and the impact that it had upon the individual when society's needs were elevated above opportunity for the individual to rise and shine. She chafed and wrestled against it.

Introduced to the US and capitalism, she swung in rebellion to her upbringing and sought to elevate selfishness to a virtue which was to be encouraged and allowed with minimal restraint and influence from "Big Brother."

The Fountainhead, in my opinion is better than Atlas Shrugged, because here Rand achieves a more personable protagonist in which there is a sense of idenitification and sympathy. In that context, her philosophy takes on a rosier glow and seems more inviting and palatable

Of course, ultimately, for me as well as many others, this philosophy breaks down. As others note, the presentation breaks down in many areas. There are no children, no dirty diapers, human emotions are kept in check to logic. This is what I have found with objectivism as well when I flirted with it. The constraints against abuse are artificial and rest too deeply in an idealism that itself doesn't pass the reality test for me.

It does a wonderful job though of demonstrating the folly of the opposite extreme, that Rand saw in Russia and her evaluation of that system and its viability in the long term has been borne out by history.

That's why I like and recommend the book. You don't have to agree with it to benefit from reading it. It has driven me more to the middle rejecting either extreme. That wasn't Rand's goal. But she did a good job presenting her case and I felt able to make some choices and evaluations. I was affected and that is the measure of a good book.

The success of a book isn't necessarily in garnering your support and agreement. If it presents its case well enough that you can form an independent opinion and grow for the experience of reading it, then it is valuable whether you adopt objectivism or not.

Read it. Enjoy it. Learn from it. Interact with it.

It's a gripping read in the realm of thought, even if literarily it falls a little flat.