The Fountainhead - Ayn Rand

The Author and the Book

I knew seldom about Ayn Rand when I started reading this one. My urge to read this book was only driven by the fact that it was one of the most read and popular book among my colleagues and friends.

The book was supposed to be a work of fiction. I always thought fiction to be a product of human imagination with the plot and the entertainment value at the center. The Fountainhead was much more, I realized this after I was through the first part of the book - "Peter Keating"

The foremost question in my mind was - "Why the book has four parts called Peter Keating, Ellsworth Toohey, Gail Wynand and Horward Roark?" (These are four characters of the novel, Horward Roark being the protagonist and Ellsworth Toohey the antagonist)

The plot of the book was a work of fiction based upon a philosophy that Ayn Rand has herself developed and believed in ... Objectivism

While discussing the book with one of my colleague at office, I realized that the reason why she would have divided the book in four parts was because she was building typologies of human character.

The Plot

I will keep this section small as plot is the last thing one would like to talk about after reading this one. But just to build the basis ...

"The book is centered around architecture, architects and critiques. Horward Roark and Peter Keating are young, aspiring architects. Roark is expelled from the Stanton Institute while Keating graduates as the star student; Keating goes to work in the big and prestigious office of Guy Francon, and spends his time mainly on vicious office politics in order to sweep rival after rival out of his way; Roark goes to work in the rundown office of Henry Cameron in order to learn how to build - a disciple rather than employee.

Ellsworth Toohey is an architectural expert, who writes newspaper column in "The Banner", a newspaper run by Gail Wynand."

The Four Characters

Peter Keating

Peter Keating is what Ayn Rand calls a second hander. His willingness to build what others wish leads him to temporary success but kills in him the desire for originality and creativity.

Ellsworth Toohey

Ellsworth Toohey is a deep manipulator for whom the second handers are the guinea pigs for his social experiments. His method of destroying individuals is through preaching altruism and exploit the fundamentals of the same. He derives satisfaction from his power of manipulating the society.

Gail Wynand

Wynand is an individualist who has lost his aim to the desire of controlling the world around him. There is a great deal of similarity between his character and that of Roark. He is capable of admiring what Roark is and what his ideals are but is caught in his desire for power which finally leads to a self-realization that he could have been a first hander but his pursuit of power has made him one of the biggest second hander.

Horward Roark

Roark is a personification of the ideal of individualism. The person who believes that the greatest virtue of all is the pursuit of his own happiness regardless of the opinion of the outside world. For Roark, the development of modern architecture was above everything else. His work was condemned and disregarded many times but he refuses to divert of the path. To him, it is a sin to compromise.

In the end ....

The insight into the philosophy of objectivism aroused my interest and I was asking myself

"Why are religions built on altruism, and not objectivism, as basis?"

I will quote two of my friends here

Siraj - "I think there is a sense of insecurity in humans even in social groups which tries to instill ideas of collective good and by means of altruism, which in itself is mutually unspoken, tacit selfishness."

Mahima - "Well, religion, as i understand it, was invented as a class monitor to give direction to all the misdirected souls around. There's enough nudging people to do bad around. Even our basic instincts like greed, lust, anger.. So it only would have made sense to have an institution sharing with people the role models (Gods, Goddesses and other heroes) who did good and reaped the 'fruits'.
May be, thats why ."

Thanks to both of them for replying on my buzz ... :)

My view:-

There is nothing wrong with the idea of collective good (which is strongly opposed by Ayn Rand) as long as the society is able to take care of the interests of individuals too. It is people like Toohey who take advantage of this idea to manipulate and destroy the identities of individuals.

It is really hard to find the middle path ... but it's my hunch that the answer lies there.