Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Objectivist Fiction

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

*** Mod's note: Merged with a similar topic. - sN ***

Who are the literary heirs to Ayn Rand? I realize that in her later life she turned from literature and film toward her original passion, philosophy, and that many organizations grew from her seed but has anyone continued her tradition of fiction with an implicit Objectivist philosophy?

Edited by softwareNerd
Merged topics
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

There are a couple of Objectivist novelists -- Andrew Bernstein and Edward Cline -- and their philosophy can be seen in the acts and thoughts of their heroes. However, without clearer definition of terms, I would not claim that that follow Rand's literary tradition.

I'd also add this caveat: one could write a novel that contains explicit Objectivist philosophy, but it could come off stilted and propaganda-like rather than as a gripping novel. Such a book would not be in Rand's literary tradition.

Edited by softwareNerd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a couple of Objectivist novelists -- Andrew Bernstein and Edward Cline -- and their philosophy can be seen in the acts and thoughts of their heroes. However, without clearer definition of terms, I would not claim that that follow Rand's literary tradition.

I did a quick google on Andrew Bernstein and found his website which lists some nonfiction but no fiction, though he describes himself as a novelist. A search on Amazon also give the same non-fiction list. Can you give me a name of a novel that he's written so I can search that way?

Edward Cline, on the other hand, is quite obviously a prolific fiction writer (and I see he's written lots of non-fiction articles as well). Apparently his Sparrowhawk series is quite popular. Has anyone read his works?

I'd also add this caveat: one could write a novel that contains explicit Objectivist philosophy, but it could come off stilted and propaganda-like rather than as a gripping novel. Such a book would not be in Rand's literary tradition.

Well, yes, this is quite important and Rand herself is not immune to this criticism. One must be a good novelist first but most fiction writers have ideas that they intend to communicate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

They do indeed. My major historical novel "The Outcasts"--about the struggles of a free-thinking boy at the dawn of the Renaissance--should hit the stands a couple of years from now. The manuscript has been rejected by one publisher; I'm submitting to two more soon, and if they don't want it I will self-publish. Several chapters of an earlier version appeared in "The Atlantean Press Review." Ed Cline (author of the "Sparrowhawk" series) says my novel "will become a classic in the 21st century."

And several years down the road, you can expect my next novel, "Raphaella di Piero." It's the story of a young girl with a heritage of murder, and her violent love for a boy.

BIll Bucko's novel is now available on Amazon in a Kindle edition.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few pre-publication samples from "The Outcasts" were published on another forum some years ago. Two links are below, and there are a few more in that same sub-forum:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Hello All:


There is one very HEROIC, ROMANTIC and I would say "OBJETIVIST" series of Science Fiction books which I find a tremendously magnificent vision: the Golden Age Trilogy by John C. Wright.  It falls quite short of a masterpiece of literature but it is a masterpiece of imagination and celebration of the human "spirit".  It is a compelling read that will resonate strongly with objectivists who appreciate a heroic sweeping tale.  If you decide to look into these books, we warned, the journey is not one without tragedy...


WARNING:  Before looking up the author, know this:  these books were written at a time in his life when he was a committed atheist and from his first three books, clearly an objectivist familiar with objectivist philosophy.  He knew his stuff... and in fact may have taken it a bit far by "externalising" how morality is objective, (see note below).  The work stands on its own and I CHERISH having read it.


The tragedy of which I speak will challenge your objective ability to read a work, hear an idea, appreciate a piece of art for what it IS, ignoring what person who made it or what they became...  i.e. it will challenge your ability to objectively judge a work on its NATURE and not its SOURCE.


The TRAGEDY is this.  AFTER this trilogy was published the author: had a heart attack, had life saving heart surgery (quadruple bypass?), and ... reported having visions of the Virgin Mary, Jesus Christ and God the Father Himself.  One can speculate re. where these delusions originated... some undetected brain damage that occurred during or about his heart attack or his surgery, a psychotic break induced by a stark encounter with mortality... the list goes on.  I truly think he really did have the hallucinations, and DID experience them AS reality.  He errs (greatly) in his assessment of their cause/origin.

He subsequently converted to Catholicism...


I only found this out after having read the series... and after determining that I must read more of his books... I was VERY disappointed (heartbroken even?) to know these three books are the only of his I will likely read. 



One way to look at it is this:  there once was an author who produced a great work I cherish.. THAT author understood, THAT author "spoke to me", and THAT author .. is no longer.  BUT still, irrespective of the author, the WORK stands on its own, I am able to objectively appreciate it, and I DO find it wonderful.



The Books:


The Golden Age

The Phoenix Exultant

The Golden Transcendence


Takes place 50 thousand years into the future....








Note:  He may have gone a bit far at one point extending the concept "morality" to God-like thinking machines, although arguably there may be an analogous type of concept those sentient beings would hold and use as a guide for their benefit... and the author seems to have imparted a platonic slant to morality as such... i.e. "right" and "wrong" almost emerge as objective existents (out there) rather than part of an internally held (but non-subjective) abstract guide to action which is objectively correct in the long-range relationship/causality/consequences between the actor and the external world.  Many objectivists can be tempted, in the spirit of accepting morality as "objective", to simply "externalize" a mystically tinged concept of morality he/she grew up with (recall morality as edict of God, or duty AS SUCH a la Kant), imbue something "out there" with the edicts of "wrongs and rights" as though the very universe were a tablet upon which is written "the code" for us to follow.  This clearly would be Mysticism and Platonism.   The author does not explicitly state this "externalisation"... but at one point ... it is something the reader can sense.   


NO matter how logical the personal code of morality, even if validly determined according to objectivist principles, to take a step of "projecting" right and wrong upon the universe itself is, is, quite simply, exactly the same mistake of crossing into mysticism persons of faith have made for millennia.  In a very real sense it is the same mistake as taking a mathematical abstraction which correctly predicts the behaviour of something in reality, and projecting that "formula" onto the universe itself... (Platonism).  In fact the abstraction, the concept, is internal, and only in the sense that it is useful and correct and not arbitrary or arbitrarily subjective is it objective.


That said almost ALL people who accept any form of "right" and "wrong" and who are NOT objectivists, subconsciously view morality AS an external existent ... a mystical "thing" that "just IS", "out there"... so how could the author have reached that audience without using language similar to what they could understand? ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
I highly recommend "Hunger for Atlantis
This a recently book that I take very seriously and regard it to be among the very finest and most important books one can read in Romantic Realism today. It was recently published. I've just reviewed it myself on Amazon, my 5 star review is HERE
Here are a few excerpts from the book: [no spoilers]


I wish to draw your attention to the School for Self-Esteem. The School is an excellent example of thriving children. Much smarter than the average child, they develop because they are given the freedom to develop. No hands force them. There are no ‘Hands All Over’ making them disciplined. They discipline themselves. They work peacefully. They are free to choose. No one tells them what to do. No one should tell us what to do.


They were very quiet, going about their work with reverence. They treated the learning tools delicately, as if the tools were sacred icons. They selected objects from the shelves. When  they were finished with didactic tools, they returned them, carefully placing the objects where they had found them. They talked quietly to others, in hushed tones, expressing their admiration for each other's work.


Professor Vandemeer thought that it seemed as if the workshop were not a part of a school - but that it were part of a temple. He thought that the children seemed happy, as if happiness came from work that they were doing. They were proud, as if pride came from how well they did their work.  They weren't striving to outdo their peers, but as if they were trying to outdo themselves; from a standard or a measurement that did not come from a teacher, not from the others, not from external surroundings - but that came from within.


He was driven with the thought that one day he would achieve his objective; his mind was the only motive force he knew; his will had kept him up throughout the night, the tortuous days, the long years.   He was driven by the pleasure of achieving according to his highest ability.


She simply wanted to be happy.  She stood on the cold earth, on the unforgiving and unyielding earth.   All she had was one simple desire: to do whatever was right.


Brock’s selection of paintings and sculptures at Sans Soucie portrayed a strong link to reality.   A man looked like a man, a woman like a woman, a flower like a flower:—shapes of objects as they appeared in reality—knowable images. […] Every artistic image had a strong resemblance to real life.


Danicka had replied, “Mrs. Glasson, there are no such things as natural ideas already imprinted on the mind.   The mind begins as an empty slate.   You can’t awaken what’s not there.”


He loved his work.   His rewards came from his sense of purpose, his accomplishments; and from his greatest tool: his mind.


One evening, she said to him, “Wouldn’t it be better to be happy today? Doing whatever you really love? Do it for yourself. Not others.” He studied her while she was speaking. “Like the children at the School for Self-Esteem. Shouldn’t you do it for yourself? Not for glory in the eyes of others. Use your mind to its greatest ability. Do it for the present moment. Wouldn’t that take care of the future? Do it today and tomorrow, everyday, one day after another. The future is just a collection of days. If you add up the days that you’re happy, you’ll be happy all along.
Edited by intellectualammo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...