> The point is that Howard Roark lives for his own happiness and his own values and actually achieves them Roark doesn't provide a useful model for how to achi

> The point is that Howard Roark lives for his own happiness and his own values and actually achieves them Roark doesn't provide a useful model for how to achieve this, because he is sui generis -- a genius. IIRC, there were characters that were first-hand that had ordinary jobs, but the book didn't dwell on them. It may be because first/second-hand make a big difference for an artist, but not so much difference for a grocery clerk. > Because dominating other people is not a means to happiness It's not a means to happiness, but it's clearly a means to capital accumulation, according to the book. > Dominique was psychologically perverted because she didn't believe that values were possible in a world full of second-handers But she came around by the end, and lived happily ever after with the hero, didn't she? I read the end quickly. It got strange. I haven't read Nietzsche, but Roark is a kind of perfection, given that he is artistically-gifted, has total confidence in himself, and loves his work. He has strong values that he never wavers from. He has trouble achieving success in the market, though. I guess you could say that that's because the market is dominated by second-handers, who don't value people like Roark. If ideal capitalism requires every participant to be a Roark, then it's not any more achievable than ideal Marxism.