Dániel Boros Posted July 21, 2012 Report Share Posted July 21, 2012 I think that the difference between the bad guys in Ayn Rand's books and in reality is that Rand's bad guys are consistent. Unlike many businessman of today who play capitalism while hating it. Well maybe Peter Keating could be an exception since he started thinking at the end. Gail Wynand was a good guy, who started bad and ended worse, but for the most part he was a good guy, but he wasn't consistent. If you think about Hank Rearden a good guy, he was not consistent at the beginning since he applied different morals in his private life and at his job. Or Dominique who had a habit of rational self torture. Of course Roark and Galt were quite consistent all the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oso Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 (edited) Would you call James Taggart or Orren Boyle consistent? These characters have very close real life counterparts. Edited July 22, 2012 by oso Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairnet Posted July 22, 2012 Report Share Posted July 22, 2012 Doesn't being consistently evil leave you dead? Harrison Danneskjold 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harrison Danneskjold Posted April 3, 2013 Report Share Posted April 3, 2013 I don't think the majority of her villains were consistent, at all. In Atlas Shrugged the villains were the looters and the parasites, and throughout the course of the book she revealed that they were motivated by hatred and fear; a desire for themselves to die and for the human race to cease to exist. If someone consciously realized that emotion, reaffirmed it and began acting on it consistently, they would be actively trying to kill everyone and themselves. They might blow themselves up in the streets or they might do something else, something less dramatic, but the goal would be the same. Most of her villains seemed to be motivated by some deep, dark urges that they could neither confront nor forget; things that would linger just outside of their conscious minds for years on end. Notice that in the end, when James Taggart finally realizes what he really wants, he essentially has a nervous breakdown. But while I doubt that most of her villains were philosophically consistent, off the top of my head, there is one in AS who was: Fred Kinnan, who knew full well what he was doing and why, knew he was evil and really didn't care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.