3 ms·

Atlas shrugged is awful, from a literary-critical point of view. The prose is thin at best. The narrative is hamfistedly didactic, at best. It's barely even a n

Atlas shrugged is awful, from a literary-critical point of view. The prose is thin at best. The narrative is hamfistedly didactic, at best. It's barely even a novel in the sense intended by novelists (or readers of novels, broadly). It's a weird example. Judged only by its artistic merits it would be down there with cheap genre fiction or bad soap romance as essentially political porn. Probably not a great litmus test.

roenxi 7y ago
I think I agree with you, but just to make sure it is said; Based on Atlas Shrugged; Ayn Rand was a terrible writer. There was no reason whatsoever to read that book apart from its political message. It wouldn't rate an entry in the database let alone a star rating. It was still well worth reading because it is the only representative of that political message out there. If someone is going to take to take that message to heart Atlas Shrugged may well be the only place to find it in the readily available canon.
- aasasd 7y ago
  I finally have to say it: Thelema is almost the same thing, except Crowley wrote better and had a soul. But he didn't get to ride a red scare and drove normies away with the mysticism. I'm yet to put in my proper dose of hair-splitting research of the classics, but I feel like Nietzschean themes don't vary too much over the years and movements.
aasasd 7y ago
The distinction of aesthetical merit and other notability works for me with movies. I watch a meh film if it's of special interest for me, but I know what I'm in for (unless I choose not to spoil it). Also I don't really need a ratings site for such works, since I'll hear of them anyway. However, now that I think of it, more books are read for reasons other than entertainment and aesthetics. In fact, for nonfiction books I'd prefer a different rating: an inverse of bullshit-o-meter. Might still be doable with a critic-ratings aggregator, especially in highly subjective cases like ‘Atlas.’

roenxi 7y ago

I think I agree with you, but just to make sure it is said; Based on Atlas Shrugged; Ayn Rand was a terrible writer. There was no reason whatsoever to read that book apart from its political message. It wouldn't rate an entry in the database let alone a star rating. It was still well worth reading because it is the only representative of that political message out there. If someone is going to take to take that message to heart Atlas Shrugged may well be the only place to find it in the readily available canon.

aasasd 7y ago
I finally have to say it: Thelema is almost the same thing, except Crowley wrote better and had a soul. But he didn't get to ride a red scare and drove normies away with the mysticism. I'm yet to put in my proper dose of hair-splitting research of the classics, but I feel like Nietzschean themes don't vary too much over the years and movements.

aasasd 7y ago

The distinction of aesthetical merit and other notability works for me with movies. I watch a meh film if it's of special interest for me, but I know what I'm in for (unless I choose not to spoil it). Also I don't really need a ratings site for such works, since I'll hear of them anyway. However, now that I think of it, more books are read for reasons other than entertainment and aesthetics. In fact, for nonfiction books I'd prefer a different rating: an inverse of bullshit-o-meter. Might still be doable with a critic-ratings aggregator, especially in highly subjective cases like ‘Atlas.’