Anthem

Mention Ayn Rand around anyone familiar with her works and they'll likely either groan or nod approvingly. A poster girl for capitalism and a founder of a "philosophical movement" called objectivism, Rand is not without her supporters and opponents, even today. As a moderate libertarian myself, I've wondered for some time now whether or not Ayn Rand's works were for me. And inspired recently by BioShock (yes - video games can inspire higher reading! who knew?) and its Rand-inspired underwater society, I decided it was time to take the plunge. But The Fountainhead clocks in at 700 pages or so and Atlas Shrugged, her magnum opus, clears a four-digit page count and then some. Yikes. Luckily, I recently stumbled upon Anthem, a little 100-page novella. I had found my point of entry. Anthem was in many ways a very, very run-of-the-mill "dystopian future with oppressive totalitarian regime" story. But it was written in 1938, predating classics in the same genre like 1984, Fahrenheit 451, and A Clockwork Orange by a considerable amount of time. The theme of this particular dystopian future is a loss of individuality; everything is done for the good of mankind and not for the good of man. It is frowned upon to be better than one's fellow man in any way. In this regard, the book reminded me a little bit of Vonnegut's short story "Harrison Bergeron." Tasks and careers are assigned to people when they come of a certain age. This aspect reminded me of The Giver by Lois Lowry. But the calling card in Anthem had to be the absolute outlawing of singular pronouns. The concept of "I" was not only forbidden, but made obsolete. Characters referred to their individual selves as "we" and singular other people as "they." The plot was memorable but basic, and as I'm sure you can fathom, it's based on one young man questioning and challenging the long-accepted norms and conventions of the dystopian brotherhood. I won't reveal his ultimate fate, or that of the people he encounters, but suffice it to say, he eventually rediscovers the word "I" and what it means. And it was at this point that I stopped completely enjoying Rand's writing and began to understand why some people are so put off by her philosophies. It's the ridiculous degree to which she promotes individualism. She sounds less forgiving and more selfish than even the most stereotypical far right Republican when she talks about the beauty and glory of living for oneself. Naturally, anti-socialist views are commonplace and expected, but Rand takes hearty and rugged individualism to whole new levels of self-centeredness. The way the main character begins to worship himself as godlike (not an exaggeration), upon learning about the concepts of "self" and "me" and so forth, was very off-putting. I described myself above as a moderate libertarian, and the key concept there is the moderation. The book was mostly enjoyable, but man, did that self-worship mark a turning point for me. Afterward, the book almost seemed like a vicious satire lampooning capitalism and the Republican party. And that's not a good thing for an author who so championed such causes. So the jury is still out for me when it comes to Ayn Rand and her objectivism. One complaint I certainly don't have, however, was any sort of difficulty reading or getting into the story. She may be a bit extreme, but Ayn Rand is definitely a decent writer and storyteller based on the brief sampling I've had. More of her works will follow, I'm sure, but not for a while; I've got plenty of backlogged books with some heft to them as it is, and the last thing I need right now is another 700-pager.