Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Rearden Meets Danneskjold

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

So I'm reading Atlas Shrugged for the second time and am to the part where Rearden meets Danneskjold for the first time.

Danneskjold explains his philosophy to Rearden and why he wants to annihilate the Robin-Hood philosophy. After Danneskjold is done with his dissertation, Rearden says, "Take that gold and get away from here. I won't accept the help of a criminal." (pg 544, 4th paragraph).

While reading this passage as the well as the relevant passages that preceded it, I was pretending as if I were Danneskjold. When I got to the above part, acting as Danneskjold, I respond to Rearden by wholeheartedly laughing at his hard-headedness. But according to the book, --Danneskjold's faced showed no expression.--

Danneskjold responds to Rearden by saying, "I cannot force you to accept the gold, Mr. Rearden. But I will not take it back. You may leave it lying where it is, if you wish." This response substantiates the fact that Danneskjold showed no expression. The response leaves me to believe he acted very professionally, like a mortician would after someone just cracked a joke about death.

So my question is this: Why is Danneskjold expressionless when Rearden says he won't help a criminal? After all the rational arguments Danneskjold has presented for his side, wouldn't he laugh at Rearden for not accepting his beliefs? And if not laughter--why not utter hatred towards Rearden? Had I been Danneskjold, if I didn't want to laugh at Rearden, I'd want to kill him.

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always took it that Ragnar was disappointed, either in his ability to communicate the ideas he wanted to share, or in Hank's ability to understand him. Perhaps more than anything, I think he was frustrated by the strain of trying to convince somebody of something so radical in such little time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People generally do not "get" complicated philosophical ideas in a few minutes of conversation. More often than not, they have to mull it over. Essentially, if the new idea is radical, it will mean changing various other less abstract ideas. So, even an excellent presentation won't do the task in minutes. An honest listener may be left with a whole lot of questions that he has to examine. It might be verbalized as: "but if that's true, what about X, Y, and Z? Do I have to change my ideas there? is there a way to reconcile those with this new idea? and so on... One could read Galt's whole speech and still be left with issues you have to think about and questions left unanswered.

So, if by wanting to "kill him" you meant that Danneskjold would be angry, I don't think that would be reasonable. Typically he'd feel a certain amount of frustration at not having achieved more than he wanted; however, he would also recognize the whole context and would not have started with an unreasonable expectation.

As for laughing at Rearden, that depends on what type of laugh you mean. The only type that an author might be able to pull off would be a friendly, fraternal laugh that meant something like: "I know I haven't convinced you but I see that you begin to understand, and I know you will work it out sooner or later." Such a laugh might have been more in character for Francisco.

Danneskjold does get Rearden to a point where the latter does not betray him to the police. That's something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So my question is this: Why is Danneskjold expressionless when Rearden says he won't help a criminal? After all the rational arguments Danneskjold has presented for his side, wouldn't he laugh at Rearden for not accepting his beliefs? And if not laughter--why not utter hatred towards Rearden? Had I been Danneskjold, if I didn't want to laugh at Rearden, I'd want to kill him.

Thoughts?

Hello Nxixcxk,

You have to keep in mind that Ragnar, as well as Francisco and Galt, viewed Rearden and the other capitalists as extraordinarily moral. They are great producers and their crimes are not that they ask for unearned benefits. They loath them in fact. But rather that Rearden especially, but the other producers as well, accepted unearned guilt. This hurts no one but themselves. Ragnar properly feels no anger towards Rearden for not sorting out an integrated view of existence from scratch while working 16 hours in a coal mine.

So my guess is that what Ragnar probably felt was disappointment, primarily in himself. See, he's the philosopher. It is his chosen moral responsibility to provide men with a proper philosophy for living. If he failed at providing a great man such as Rearden with the necessary justification for his life, then it was a failure on his part to a great extent. Obviously he is combating centuries of bad philosophy and I am sure he would realize that you can't fix someone overnight, but it would still feel like a failure to let a great spirit like Rearden toil under the weight of the world for another minute of his life. Ragnar wanted him to shrug.

Another emotion that may have influenced his expressionless face may have been admiration. People usually do not shrug until the weight becomes too much to bare. The fact that Rearden refused to shrug for so long is a testament to his great inner strength. That he could carry so much, when many people can't carry themselves has to be inspiring and saddening when they benefit their own destroyers with their effort.

Best Regards,

Gordon

Incidentally, what is it about Rearden that would make you say that you would wish to kill him had you been in Ragnars place? I can understand some frustration, but what had he done that you believe made him worthy of death?

Edited by aequalsa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Ayn Rand's description of RD's reaction made perfect sense. His mission was to plant seeds in HR's mind, while delivering justice to him. RD would know at what stage HR's progress was, because he's communicating with Francisco. Remember, it was Galt who would come to provide the final argument to the strikers. HR's reaction was just the sort of thing RD would have expected, at that stage of his development, because he knows that HR doesn't have the full context of knowledge required to properly evaluate him, and that HR's charge of "criminal" comes from his despair over the growing collapse of capitalist civilization, and his protest against the chaos. A doctor doesn't laugh or cry when an ill man coughs - he remains expressionless. RD was acting as HR's doctor, diagnosing his patient, and beginning to administer a cure. But RD would know that the real progress would be made as HR contemplated the event later that night, and in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you may have answered your own question, Nxixcxk. Ragnar was acting as a professional who was performing his job. He's unconcerned with Rearden's opinion of him because he knows he's no criminal. He knows it so completely that it doesn't even faze him. He doesn't laugh because he's on serious business. The context simply isn't right for laughter: they are still almost strangers, not trusted friends who can laugh between each other.

RD was acting as HR's doctor, diagnosing his patient, and beginning to administer a cure.

Yes, that's precisely what I was trying to say. He was acting as a professional. Thank you, Mr. West.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I got to the above part, acting as Danneskjold, I respond to Rearden by wholeheartedly laughing at his hard-headedness.
A laugh might have been more in character for Francisco.
Agreed, probably just means you're a Francisco-type too, Nxixcxk ;)

Danneskjold responds to Rearden by saying, "I cannot force you to accept the gold, Mr. Rearden. But I will not take it back. You may leave it lying where it is, if you wish."
There seem to be a couple of reasons why Ragnar didn't react in a Francisco manner.

Ragnar was placing himself in much, much greater danger than Francisco and Galt were. Ragnar would have been treated like bin Laden if he'd been caught. Given Ragnar's peril, it's understandable he wouldn't be amused.

I suspect that Ragnar was just curious/bored and wanted to see who had Francisco so excited, moreso than actually intending to plan a crucial role in getting another striker. If his intent wasn't specifically to sway Hank, but to see the man in person, he succeeded, and thus would be less inclined to reactionary emotions.

"Professional" was a good point you and others made. Ragnar's regal refusal to debase himself in taking back the gold (or his actions) sounds like what a dignified philosopher-turned-soldier might say to an ignorant civilian.

I doubt many of the things that amused Francisco would have amused Galt, just from personal differences. Ragnar was probably similar.

And if not laughter--why not utter hatred towards Rearden?
To the extent that they "hated" anyone, it likely would have been reserved for people like Stadler.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Helpful responses. . .you guys seem to be able to understand and observe context much better than I can.

My original response to HR was to laugh "at" him, but the laugh was entirely friendly--knowing that Rearden accepted the majority of my philosophy save a few aspects.

Yet at the time, my laugh came w/o thought. Then I began to ask why I thought HR's response elicited my laughter, and the more I explained it to myself, the more I became infuriated with HR's response. It seemed to me that Rearden had had plenty of opportunities to understand what was going on. Hadn't Fransisco enlightened him some--or at least enough to where Rearden would be able to see the bigger picture? Granted, he works arduously long hours, but if he has time to go to Lillian's party, then he has time to introspect and philosophize.

However. . .philosophizing, as all of us can attest, is no easy matter. And it is hard to see a hero like Rearden not understand how his hard and brilliant work is actually leading to his demise.

I wish I could comment further, but the context has already seeped out of my memory.

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.

Guest
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.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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