Rogue

I left with very mixed thoughts toward the movie. Visually, it was by far the best Harry Potter movie yet, and perhaps one of the best I have ever seen. The cave scene was incredible. But it is getting harder and harder for me to get past the horrible acting of the 3 main characters, it seems as if it has gotten worse and worse each movie, or maybe it's just me? All though I was pleasantly surprised with Tom Felton's acting, he hasn't really had the chance to show his acting chops in the way the other 3 have and I think it's safe to say he's the best of all the "students." I thought the relationship scenes were terribly awkward, Ginny and Harry specifically, there scenes together were poorly acted and lacked any chemistry or romance. I did love the soundtrack as well. The flashback scenes with Tom Riddle were very well done and I thought Slughorn was a wonderful addition to the cast and characters. And, of course, the crowning jewel for me, as it has been in all the movies, is Alan Rickman. I can't wait for the next film where they can really dive deeper into Snape's character.

It looks absolutely beautiful, the set, the costumes, the effects, the music and just the entire mood of the movie seems so optimistic and courageous. The trailer alone made me tear up! I can't wait to see it.

Scariest thing I have ever done in the world, but I did it. You were completely correct (you and the many others who said it). I think I knew it had to happen eventually. I came forward and told my family, and they stood behind me when I made the decision to confront him. However, in our attempt to make contact with him, something we have not done in years, we discovered that he is currently doing time in prison for selling/possessing drugs (ironic, considering neither me nor my father think this should be a crime at all). Either way, things are finally getting delt with and letting my family, especially my father, who is also a strong objectivist, has helped tremendously. Thanks so much to everyone for the advice and contributions.

Yeah that's exactly what I told him. I told him he needed to read the full book, and understand the character they were talking about. TThat Ayn Rand would not turn her heroine into some mindless trophy wife, but he's just so hung up on the word possession, that it became very hard to discuss and it got all muddled up in my trying to defend that single world. Thanks! Yeah, that's about what I told him as well, he's just so superficial he can only think of possession and that sense and keeps hitting on that one single word, and it's hard to make him imagine it meaning anything else. This also what my dad said, but that I shouldn't bother because the guy doesn't sound like he can grasp abstract thought :-) But thank you, this is very helpful and much more eloquent than my explanation. That's what i'm still trying to develop, I discovered Rand young but only later started applying her ideas to my life, and I still don't have it to where I can completely explain all of it, even if I understand it!

So me and this other guy were arguing about this quote from Atlas Shrugged. "the man who is certain of his own value, will want the highest type of woman; the woman he admires, the strongest-because only the possession of a heroine will give him the sense of achievement." It's one of my favorites but he said it merely transforms a woman into a prize to reflect a man's own success. So I told him, he's right, that's exactly what it is, in the sense that the quote assumes the man to be one who is aware of his own value, and takes pride in himself, so he pursues a woman who reflects his own values, and yes his success in obtaining those. He had nothing to say to that except for saying "you missed the part about possession." And I'm trying my best to explain it, but in all honesty this was really hard for me to understand in the first place, so it's very hard for me to explain to someone else. I understand how it's the ultimate form of recognition to his own worth that the woman he most admires would allow him that sort of possession, as well as for her, I guess I'm just having trouble explaining it. And I don't think I would be able to explain it adequately and I was just hoping for some help it how you would explain the kind of possession to someone.

I'm just having trouble trying rationalize my feelings toward certain things that happen to me. When I was little my little sister became terminally ill, and as if often the case with families like that, all the attention went to my sister. Which was fine, I never resented that and I understood, but this also led to me having to stay with a family member. I often stayed with my aunt and uncle, and when they worked my 16 year old cousin would babysit. He was, to put it mildly, sicko...in a bad way. Things rapidly went from abuse, to molestation, to rape...I was 8 years old when it started and it went on for two years. I kept silent because he threatened me constantly, threatened to go after my even younger sister, and constantly reminded that my parents were too busy worrying about my sick sister...so I just kept quite. It continued to grow worse until my little sister died. But by then my parents were just so depressed, and I couldn't bring myself to tell them. I wasn't sure how my parents would deal with that, especially my father, his child just died and then to have to worry about the fact that his other daughter had been abused, I didn't know what that would do to him. So I kind of shut down. I don't know how to describe what happened, but I kind of just turned into a robot. I functioned solely on neccesity, I took care of my little sister, decided it just wasn't worth it to think about it. I didn't enjoy my life at all. But when I was around 14 I discovered Ayn Rand's philosophy. And I had a renewed love of life. I didn't just assume responsibility for things, and didn't think that I was doomed to live out a life of pain or numbness. I stopped living only to take care of my family. They never put that on me, it was jut self-imposed because I was confused and didn't know what to do. Things turned around for me, and I thought I was going to be all better. But over the past few months, I've been having horrible nightmares. I have no idea why, or what might have caused is, but it's opened up such a terrible can of worms. It's hard for me to sleep, I feel sick all the time because every time I sleep i dream about it and it just makes me sick to my stomach so I can't keep anything down. And I hate it, because I feel so weak. Sometimes I find myself feeling guilty when I wake up, and I hate it because I feel so stereotypical and weak, and I tell myself "there is no sin worse then the acceptance of undeserved guilt." And I feel like such a bad objectivist. I know for a fact that there should be no guilt on my part, but sometimes I feel that way, when I feel sick or gross. I feel like a failure because I've given this creep a power over me that I he shouldn't have. I feel awful because I'm scared and I know for a fact that I shouldn't be. I know that it is completely within my power to be happy, and I am happy, but this is just causing me so many problems that I can't figure out. I guess my question is, am I doing something wrong? I am a firm Objectivist, but I feel like the way I've been dealing with it doesn't reflect it. Maybe I'm jut confused or missing something. Also, how could I further apply objectivist philosophy to this circumstance to help me to completely be done with it? Any time I've almost talked ot someone they talk about, "the eternal scars that just make you stronger" and crap like that. I don't want to have scars, I just want to be done with it, I don't see that it has to be something that will "never go away" like I've always heard people say when the give advice to those who've been through similiar circumstances. Any brief experience I've had seeking advice, it's always been a bunch of people who take some sort of morbid pride in their battle scars and wear "abuse" like a badge of honor...it disgusts me. I'm sorry if my question or concern isn't quite clear, I really just could use some advice or help, instead of pity.

So my father is a very ardent Ayn Rand admirer and a strong Objectivist and believes strongly in an inherent immorality of the public schools system and I was just curious if this is just him or a common feeling amongst Objectivists. I am also trying to reason out my opinion on it, which is difficult when you are raised always just assuming the good of "public education" "charity" "welfare" and only recently having come upon Objectivism I'm trying to reapply this philosophy to all the things I've grown up thinking. So I was just wondering how an Objectivist looks at public education?

I agree that of all the Harry Potter films this one had the best graphics, the Ministry scene was absolutely beautiful. But for me this movie over all was not on the same level of the previous two. It just felt very disjointed and a bit choppy on parts, and the dialogue was kind of flat for me, but the Fifth book was also one of my least favorite of the books. I kind of felt like if this were a movie of itself and I hadn't seen the previous 4 I really wouldn't have cared about what was happening as far as the characters, they just weren't conveyed as well to me. With the exception of Umbridge, I do think that they did very well with her characters, and she was actually the one I was worried about, I thought "no way were they going to make her as evil as she was in the book" but they actually did a good job with that.

At the back of my copy of "The Fountainhead" there is a list and description of each of the characters, and Peter Keating is described as a man who "never could have been" and I wasn't quite sure what this meant. I understand that few become great because of the work and genius it takes and it is a rare and exceptional person who is able to achieve it. I always thought that every man COULD be great. But does every human have the potential to be great even if few are, I mean according to Ayn Rand? I just find it strange that she says Roark is what a man should be and Keating is a man who never could have been...

Hey, thanks so much for helping me out with the formating problem.

The mind. It is what moves the world. It is the building block of all greatness of humanity and it is man’s ability to reason by means of this tool that separates him from the beasts of the fields. Nothing can impede the path of the logical unadulterated well-reasoned mind. Such a minds is the motor of existence, such a mind is to be thanked for all creation, for every step down every road that any human has ever made. This ability comes from the mind that sees a problem and knows that the strength of his mind is by far greater then any obstacle. There is nothing in the world more awe-inspiring than the mind of a man, nor is there anything so underestimated or undervalued. The human minds a bottomless treasure trove that we have only begun to tap into but so many people seem to be under the impression that we are scraping the bottom of the barrel, but this has always been the case. Before man created fire I am sure men wished there was some way to cook their meat, heat their caves and light the dark, but they assumed it would not be possible; until some man said I can figure out a way to solve this problem. I am sure many people wished for a better way to travel than a buggy, man’s answer the automobile, a better way to communicate, mans’ answer the telephone, a better way to simply live, man’s answer medicine. The list of man’s achievements are endless and it continues today as new inventions and ideas are mothered and old ideas improved upon and perfected, ideas that at one time or another were seen as impossible of evil to society. The human mind should never be underestimated and nor should we put an imaginary boundary and say this line will never be crossed, for there has always been one man, one thinker who bulldozed over the wall that stood in its way. But after that wall is bulldozed society always feels the need to build another one that says, “O.K man will never be able to…” and that wall will stand until some one man wishes to tear it down in order to see his dream and his vision become a reality. Besides being underestimated the mind is also undervalued. A great mind is no longer seen as the greatest of virtues but it has been replaced with such ideals as a “compassionate heart” a “sympathetic soul” and “loving and open spirit.” For proof all you must do is look around you . What is the battle cry in every “love story” that we are fed on a daily bases, “follow your heart.” The heart has become the decision maker and those who think and decide with their minds are considered “unfeeling” “cold” and “dead-inside.” But thinking with your heart can only lead to one thing, the annihilation of the mind. The heart and emotions are all well and good but they serve their own function, and they are not interchangeable with the mind. Decision’s made based on your emotion and made with your heart are rarely accurate and are usually dangerous. Your judgment is clouded and you can’t see more than 3 inches in front of you. Emotion leads to decisions made by what you feel at the moment in time. This sort of impediment leads to a compromise of values and convictions in order to meet the needs of your “heart,” and before you know it you are married to a person who made you “feel” good but who holds none of you’re values, beliefs or moral convictions. How do you determine these things…through your mind and these are the things that should determine who you fall in love with and who you value. If you follow this through to the end you come to the logical conclusion that the mind should determine who you truly fall in love with. But we are taught that our hearts are what falls in love and the mind has taken on a secondary role. The mind has almost become demonized, something only to be used by scientist’s and mathematicians but otherwise an obsolete tool. This leads to compromise and misery. How? Because when the mind is undervalued so to are the things which are spawned from the mind, again, things such as convictions and morals. These things are what creates a mind and how willing society has become to sacrifice the thing that makes humanity great. It is the worst sin in human history, for there is no act so disgusting, so vile, so brutally destructive as the prostitution of the human mind and that is what has happened. We have become a world of prostitutes. We are willing to sell our minds, and in turn ourselves, for temporary verification and affirmation from our “fellow man.” We have been taught that if we use our minds we are inhuman robots and therefore we handicap our minds in order to strengthen our “heart,” but this only weakens both. But the mind is the source of all greatness, all love, all truth, all achievement and all beauty, nothing can every be produced, no idea can be birthed and no plan formulated without the mind. The mind that exists in all humans but few use. Few wish to apply the amount of work time and effort necessary to make that mind great. Everyone wishes for that greatness of mind but few want it enough to make it great. So rather then be great they try to create a world in which the mediocrity is seen as great, how do they do this? By handicapping the mind, by propagating the lie that only matters of numbers should be left to the mind. They create a world in which greatness is measured by how sensitive one is or how in touch they are with the feelings. They create a world in which greatness of mind is not allowed to exist, and in such a world it is easy for mediocrity to be seen as great. . The truth is, it is easier to be a prostitute, and sell your mind to the masses, compromise it, change it and eventually destroy everything that holds any value in this world. It is easier to sell yourself and look great to the world, then to actually be great. It is easier to kill greatness and try and pass it off as selfishness rather then face it every day. They would rather imprison greatness then allow it to exist and serve as a constant reminder of what they could and should be

Tis' true what I read was just a quote by Rowlings, so maybe it was out of context. I certainly hope your right, I am fond of everyone in the trio ( as I was of Sirius) and I don't care to see any of them die

Thanks...for the back-up, and perhaps I should have been more informative on what I know of her motives behind it before posting. But yes I have looked at her motives and you are right it reeks with altuirism and I can't see how she could possibly agree with Rand... So here are some quotes from Ms. Jolie herself...I am not saying they disqualify her from playing the role, but I think they serve to help prove my original point that she is not objectivist and does not understand Rand if she claims to be a fan of her philosophy. "Without pain, there would be no suffering, without suffering we would never learn from over mistakes. To make it right, pain and suffering is the key to all windows, without it, there is no way of life."-Jolie " BUT I LOVE FLAWS, and I love real things, and I love scars and wrinkles that I see coming--I love it. When you see life on a face or a body, it's beautiful." -Jolie Hardly characteristic of a woman who is supposed to be looking for a "face without pain...or guilt" and this also leads me to believe that she seens pain as the greatest virtue, which clearly goes against Rands philosophy. Also, it shows what she values in people...flaws...a very popular romantic belief that our flaws are what make us beautiful and "real" but one I don't think you can hold as an objectivist. "That's the reason we kind of exist. It's like our Job. To give to each other. And learn from each other. To capture moments of people. So it's really strange to have somebody ignore the obvious human being right in front of them." Jolie There's her motive behind her charity, because she believes it is her job to give, the reason she exists.. These are just a few quotes by her that make me believe that she is not an objectivist, as I did not provide any evidence on my original post as to why I believe that she doesn't understand Rand. I do not think that just because she gives she is not an objectivist-it is her motives and reasoning behind it that make me believe it.

Yeah I've gotten pretty tired of all the death to, that's why I have been hoping that Harry won't kick off in the 7th book...though that seems to be the predominant prediction, but maybe she'll surprise us all.

What do you guys think is going to happen? Rowlings has already stated that two of the trio will die...Who do you think it will be? Everyone is saying that Harry is going to die, that has been the prediction of all my friends, that's what I thought but I was hoping that maybe she would throw a curve ball and Harry would come out alive, but then I read that and thought man that would suck for harry to have lost his two best friends, his mentor, his godfather and his parents, talk about bad luck ! So any speculations?