Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

"OF" in Atlas Shrugged

Rate this topic


say_uncle

Recommended Posts

Upon a re-read of Atlas Shrugged, I found myself tripping over the phrase "music of Richard Halley." The phrase comes up often throughout the book, from the first chapter where Dagny asks the breakman, "You like the music of Richard Halley?"

Wouldn't it be much more simpler if characters just referred to it as "Richard Halley's music"? It's more natural and informal and would have helped the dialogue flow better. Do you think the use of "of"s was intentional to amplify the idea of ownership, capitalism, etc. in the book? Or is it just the way people spoke back then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Upon a re-read of Atlas Shrugged, I found myself tripping over the phrase "music of Richard Halley." The phrase comes up often throughout the book, from the first chapter where Dagny asks the breakman, "You like the music of Richard Halley?"

Wouldn't it be much more simpler if characters just referred to it as "Richard Halley's music"? It's more natural and informal and would have helped the dialogue flow better. Do you think the use of "of"s was intentional to amplify the idea of ownership, capitalism, etc. in the book? Or is it just the way people spoke back then?

I think it does express an added sense of the importance of Richard Halley, because of his music, to Dagny. As always, Ayn Rand knew exactly what she was doing. The dialogue cannot be improved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What always made me trip up was "I know it." I've never in my life heard someone say that. What I have heard is, "I know." I'm betting that the former is actually the proper way of saying it, and our society is simply degenerating, grammatically.
It is a striking usage, and I haven't seen any discussion of the point (for example it doesn't seem to be discussed by her talking about her writing, or by those who knew her). She almost never uses "I know that." which would be standard English usage -- once in AS (p. 274), a few times in Fountainhead especially where there are emphatic contrasts ("I know that... I know that, too"). I don't know about older forms of English such as Shakespeare or Middle English, but in Modern English, the exchange on p. 66-7 of AS:

"What's the matter, Eddie?"

"McNamara quit."

She looked at him blankly. "What do you mean, quit?"

"Left. Retired. Went out of business."

"McNamara, our contractor?"

"But that's impossible!"

"I know it."

isn't a context where "it" could be used. Either "I know it is", or "I know that", meaning "I know that fact is impossible". I think in Russian, in such contexts you'd say "Ja znaju eto" and there's no distinction made between "I know it" and "I know that"; I'd be hard-pressed to state the rule for when you need to use "I know it." vs. "I know that."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "of" that tripped me up was in Galt's oath, "I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine." While it is common to say "for the sake of...", it would be rather unusual to say, for instance, "I am doing it for the sake of Jill and for mine". It would be more natural to say, "I am doing it for Jill's sake and for mine." Any change would have ruined the artistry of Galt's oath, and in fact it probably shouldn't be as natural as dialogue, but I did trip over it.

Edited by Seeker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"What's the matter, Eddie?"

"McNamara quit."

She looked at him blankly. "What do you mean, quit?"

"Left. Retired. Went out of business."

"McNamara, our contractor?"

"But that's impossible!"

"I know it."

isn't a context where "it" could be used. Either "I know it is", or "I know that", meaning "I know that fact is impossible". I think in Russian, in such contexts you'd say "Ja znaju eto" and there's no distinction made between "I know it" and "I know that"; I'd be hard-pressed to state the rule for when you need to use "I know it." vs. "I know that."

I have heard that used in that sort of circumstance. It is an exlamation of sorts. Similiar in meaning to, "You're telling me?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
  • 5 years later...

"Don't let's talk about that, Jim" — Eddie Willers

Out of curiosity, I Googled "Don't let's talk about that" and it is has been used in literature since the 1700's.

"Please don't let's talk about that, dear heart." appeared in The Hypochondriac in 1739

and other similar usages:

"Good, good, hang him, don't let's talk of him." The Way Of The World, 1700
"Don't let's mind him." The Provok'd Wife, 1697

From Late Modern English Syntax

A comparison of incidence figures between don't let's and let's don't reveals that the former is used more frequently, i.e., except for the 1950s, the 1980s and the 1990s.

This practice dates back to the late 14th century, introduced by Geoffrey Chaucer (1342-1400) in Canterbury Tales, Ship's Tale, and Man of the Law's Tale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting back to the original question (never saw this thread til today). Does anybody here know Russian? In the romance languages, "of" is the standard way to express a possessive. If Rand grew up in a language that works this way, she would have used this locution through force of habit.

As for the current topic, "let's don't" and "don't lets" both strike me as awkward at best, illiterate at worst. Maybe they were current when she was writing sixty or seventy years ago. At one point in the story the railroads form a cartel "'the better to enforce'" laws and government policies. As I recall, the novel puts it in scarequotes, suggesting that Rand herself thought it was a lowbrow usage.

Edited by Reidy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Reidy said:

Getting back to the original question (never saw this thread til today). Does anybody here know Russian? In the romance languages, "of" is the standard way to express a possessive. If Rand grew up in a language that works this way, she would have used this locution through force of habit.

Russian declines its nouns, so the noun itself is altered, sort of like adding apostrophe 's'. But there is no individual word for "of" in Russian. The thing being owned usually goes first, and the thing that is owning gets modified and goes second (e.g. sobaka malchika = the dog of the boy). Personally, when writing, I use the "of" construct more often than apostrophe 's', even though English is my only fluent language. So, I doubt it's a language habit per se, it looks more like a stylistic habit.

edit: added a detail

Edited by Eiuol
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...