Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Publius
Dagny’s act of shrugging is the key moment of the novel. What was the tipping point that made her finally take Galt’s Oath?

Although the loss of the Taggert bridge may seem to be the reason at first, the real reason is from earlier in the chapter-

"She knew. She knew what they intended doing and what it was within them that made it possible.They did not think that this would succeed. They did not think that Galt would give in; they did not want him to give in. They did not think that anything could save them now; they did not want to be saved...

They did not want to live; they wanted him to die."

I view Dagny's shrugging not as a change of mind but of acceptance of reality. She now understands that not making a choice is giving sanction to the Looters.

6 posted on 08/01/2009 9:05:55 AM PDT by whodathunkit (Shrugging as I leave for the Gulch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: whodathunkit

Excellent. Hank made that realization at the decoy meeting at the Wayne-Falkland where the looters discussed the Steel Unification Plan. Now Dagny has had her hard collision with reality — as Galt predicted.


7 posted on 08/01/2009 9:09:12 AM PDT by Publius (Conservatives aren't always right. We're just right most of the time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: whodathunkit
She now understands that not making a choice is giving sanction to the Looters.

I don't understand this. If she knows that NOT making a choice (NOT taking charge?) is giving sanction to the looters, why is she doing it - effectively giving her sanction?


9 posted on 08/01/2009 9:13:12 AM PDT by definitelynotaliberal (So how about, in honor of the American soldier, ya quit making things up? - Gov. Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: whodathunkit; Publius; Billthedrill
The whole paragraph with that quote is, I think, more enlightening.

She knew. She knew what they intended doing and what it was within them that made it possible. They did not think that this would succeed. They did not think that Galt would give in; they did not want him to give in. They did not think that anything could save them now; they did not want to be saved. Moved by the panic of their nameless emotions, they had fought against reality all their lives-and now they had reached a moment when at last they felt at home. They did not have to know why they felt it, they who had chosen never to know what they felt-they merely experienced a sense of recognition, since this was what they had been seeking, this was the kind of reality that had been implied in all of their feelings, their actions, their desires, their choices, their dreams. This was the nature and the method of the rebellion against existence and of the undefined quest for an unnamed Nirvana. They did not want to live; they wanted him to die.

I've known people like that since I was a young child. It's difficult for me to grasp the truth of their existence. They live to hurt others, not physically, but by inflicting as much harm as they can. Some were gossips, some were thieves, some were liars. They took pride in the accomplishment of hurting others, as if the power of destroying beauty around them was somehow superior to the pride of creating beauty. I'll never understand it, but to deny it would be to deny what's passed before my own eyes.

The two most evil men of Rand's time were Josef Zdugashvili and Adolf Schiklgruber. These were the failed altar-boy and the failed artist. Neither could create anything of value but they could steal and kill to affirm their self-righteousness. Cuffy Meigs and Floyd Ferris, reminiscent of Heinrich Himmler (failed chicken farmer) and Josef Mengele await those who acquiesce to brutality. Perhaps this is why Rand was so careful not to paint a tale of violence and woe. It would be too easy to compare such to the October Revolution and Kristallnacht. Doubtless there were Germans who thought of Caligula and told themselves that Adolf was not a drunk and he wasn't married to his sister. Stalin and Hitler didn't give a damn about the people at whom they preached the common good, they killed them by the millions and tossed their bodies into unmarked, mass graves.

It's interesting that Rand, as well as the tyrants of her time and the tyrants of her books, expressed no interest in religion. Rand's perspective seems to be that religion offered nothing for the present and no means of increasing achievement. I imagine she got her idea from the great unwashed who attended church weekly, rather than inventing motors and generators. She saw achievement as the highest possible goal. Her own ambitions and accomplishments were strong, but she forgets that, according to Judge Smails, the world needs ditch diggers, too.

Religion does not turn a person away from achievement any more than the lack of religion turns one away from being a decent human being. But she confuses the cliches of religion with the deeper currents. Most people really don't want to run railroads or steel mills. Rand mentions this a couple of times. She adds detail when Dagny tries to hire Hugh Akston as a chef, and when Dagny hires the man from Twentieth Century Motors. She takes notice of it with the railroad employees when they need a crew to run the first train across the new bridge on the John Galt Line. But mostly, her heroes measure their lives in terms of millions of pounds produced and thousands of miles of track operated.

It's okay if she wants to ignore religion, but she paints it with a broad brush. Most people don't want to think deeply about all the things that concern the world. This doesn't mean they won't do their jobs, and do them well. It simply means that they prefer to accept answers from someone who will not force them to contemplate the meaning of all existence.

"Father, how should I treat my neighbor who did this?" It may be a simple question that returns an answer that can be called a platitude, but it indicates a person who accepts that someone else has a deeper understanding of right and wrong. Rand heard only the platitudes. People have souls.

They did not want to live; they wanted him to die.

This is not a lesson from the Bible. It is an observation of the way some people chose to live.

28 posted on 08/01/2009 6:14:11 PM PDT by sig226 (Real power is not the ability to destroy an enemy. It is the willingness to do it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson