Ayn Rand continues to sell hundreds of thousands of books each year many years after her death. One reason is the deeply personal reactions many people have to the ideas in her novels. Her ideas have influenced generations of conservatives, libertarians, and even liberals.

Jennifer Burns has written an absorbing and wonderfully readable biography of Ayn Rand. It is a biography and not an explanation of her ideas. Although sympathetic to Ayn Rand it provides the voices of her many critics. It is very much worth reading for the background it provides on the development of America's right-wing movements. In particular, I was fascinated by the stories about the anti-FDR factions who opposed the New Deal. Also interesting was how her ideas spread and were modified after the schism in the Objectivist movement.

My personal favorite quote about Ayn Rand unfortunately does not appear in the book: “Two novels can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other involves orcs.” [Kung Fu Monkey -- Ephemera, blog post, March 19, 2009]” ( )

Impartial and illuminating ( )

I really didn't know a whole lot about Ayn Rand. I read [b:Atlas Shrugged|662|Atlas Shrugged|Ayn Rand|http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1358647812s/662.jpg|817219] about 15 years ago and liked the overall idea presented, although I thought it was way too long and heavy handed.
So, I saw this one come through the library one day and remembered that I had seen the author discuss the book with Jon Stewart on The Daily Show awhile back.
This is a pretty thorough book. Burns went to a great deal of research and has extensive notes and sources, including an essay on the reliability of the sources themselves (some of the works written about Rand after her death by her followers are shown to have tweaked and edited source material). The best part is, it is extremely balanced toward Ms. Rand.
She essentially "escaped" Communist Russia in the mid-1920's after the Bolshevik's completed their revolution and Rand's father went from successful businessman to poverty. Having seen the effects of Communism firsthand, no one could begrudge her the intense hatred she had toward the system. And so, as she adjusted to life in the U.S., it is no surprise that she should be hyper-vigilant to the growing interest in Communism that she saw in her new home country.
I completely agree with her on many things, largely economic issues and government involvement in people's lives, but unfortunately, Ms. Rand wasn't satisfied with simply being a loud voice against big government (largely in response to the overreaching tentacles of FDR's "New Deal"). No, Rand wanted to essentially be some sort of philosophical guru.
Her creation was Objectivism, a philosophy intended to show people the best way to live. Emotion was something to be overruled and replaced by logic (Hmmmmm... are Vulcans Objectivists?). There's a lot of other stuff to it, but if you don't know then I suggest you read the book.
At any rate, as her movement gained steam and more people flocked to her, she became power hungry and despotic... pretty much she acted the opposite of what taught. She ended up alienating nearly everyone she ever met and went from admired to tolerated by all but her staunchest supporters. And her critics despised her. Although, in fairness, she despised her critics and often despised people that still cited her as a positive influence.
And there was no political faction that she didn't find fault with. Obviously, she had nothing nice to say about the Liberals. But she couldn't stand the Republicans due to the increasing influence of Christianity (Rand was an atheist). She found the Libertarians, a group she indirectly helped create, a nuisance at best. Anarchists were just ridiculous.
In the end, she resembled L. Ron Hubbard more than a serious thinker. She was a Draconian in how Objectivism was to be used and any student (She and her small inner circle were the only Objectivists... all others were students of Objectivism) that attempted to start they're own little branch (i.e. school clubs, local newsletters, etc) were told in no uncertain terms that they were not allowed.
Simply put, she was a complex person who had some fascinating ideas but fell victim to her own hubris, insecurities, and intellectual shortcomings. ( )

It can't be easy trying to write an objective biography of the 'founder' of objectivism, in part because it's like writing an objective biography of Marx: no matter how good it is, not matter how objective, at least half of its readers will hate it, because they take 'objective' to mean 'with no independent judgement, in either direction.' Damned if you damn, damned if you don't damn, damned if you deify.

But Burns does a great job. The early chapters are a bit dull, but then I find the opening chapters of every biography dull: they inevitably go into too much detail (because the author spent a lot of time researching these microfacts that nobody cares about, and reasonably enough wants to put them to *some* use), but once Rand gets to Hollywood things really pick up. Burns shows how Rand's ideas developed, debunks some of the myths, does a fantastic job showing how she was mixed up in the resurgence of 'American' conservatism in the post-war U.S., and deals sensitively with the idiocies of Rand's later, messianic phase.

As a special pleasure, she regularly pulls out gems like this: an editor "advised Rand to prune all unnecessary adjectives, a change that would have gutted the novel. Rand did, however, find some of her suggestions useful." This is simple, objective reporting--the editor suggested the superfluous adjectives be removed, Rand thought that would gut the novel. But the irony is delicious. These moments are rare, and Burns mostly keeps a straight face, but she picks her spots well. ( )

It's a unique experience to read a biography about a person whom one knows of only distantly, and for whom one has little sympathy. Reading Goddess of the Market didn't change my thinking or feeling about Ayn Rand, but it did make me more acutely aware what those thoughts and feelings are.

I read both [The Fountainhead] and [Atlas Shrugged] in my early 20s. I remember them mostly for the mechanical click of the prose and for thinking, at the end of Atlas Shrugged that whatever premise Rand had been pursuing, she counteracted it with her choice of ending. I think I was reacting to the hate and anger that underpin the novel, themes I didn't consciously recall but which, in Burns's analysis of the book, I now see quite clearly. I'm planning on rereading them both.

As far as Rand's philosophical and political ideas, yeah, a lot of people really feel strongly about them one way or another. I don't agree with a lot of them because I don't agree with the basic assumptions upon which they are based, and I think they skip over or simply deny a good many other ideas that have more traction and durability, and can be better demonstrated through rational, scientific means. But that's neither here nor there, as I was never one of the converts. I read those two books and moved on. They didn't rock my world. Rand died while I was still in high school (within a month of my own mother's death, now that I think back on it) and she wasn't even a topic of conversation among my peers.

But there's no arguing that she has influences that affected my life. Learning about her as a person, as Burns is careful to do in this book, gives me a little more sympathy for her but also reduces any chances I had to really respect her. The weaknesses and flaws she had are particular ones I find most distasteful and work hardest to eradicate in myself -- a lack of self-awareness, a reluctance or inability to connect her thoughts, beliefs, and reactions to the particularity of her origins, and most especially her arrogance in insisting her ideas had sprung up, new and whole, independent of any influence. That she was also scarred, insecure, and seeking love, support, and acceptance, that she was amazingly strong and intelligent, that she was human -- those made it possible to read this book about her life without rejecting it from the first.

As a book, Jennifer Burns has written a very engaging, interesting, and intriguing recount and analysis. I admit, I had to hit the dictionary a few times (I love adding new words to my vocabulary) and yet she didn't talk down to her reader. It felt even handed and even mostly neutral, although I may have just not heard any note of bias in either direction because of my own stance.

In general, I enjoyed it and it has given me some new fodder for thought. ( )