DragonMaci Posted January 20, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 20, 2007 Such as? Marrying Peter Keating and Gail Wynand because she thought they were the worst people there was for her to marry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunterrose Posted January 20, 2007 Report Share Posted January 20, 2007 I don't think she did that because it was bad for her. She didn't defile herself in marrying these men; she realized (and valued) the difference between Roarks and Keatings, and she knew that she would never become a Wynand. In the same situation, a lesser woman might have cracked (like Catherine did). Dom believed that a man of Roark's nature would inevitably become domitable, and she needed to validate this premise when she learned of Roark. Marrying those other men was a rather ... odd step in testing her premise, but it wasn't done for the sake of harming herself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~Sophia~ Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 (edited) Not quite. She wanted to destroy them before other people ruined them. Try re-reading what she writes about the Enright House after Enright shows her around, it's very explicit. Or what she said about the Stodard Temple. I re-read what Dominique said about Enright House, her favorite books, the statue of Helios, and I think her motivation went beyond wanting to protect the things she loved, products of someone's genius, from ruin or desecration by others. For her it was an act of justice - she did not think the world deserved them. The same thing goes for Roark's buildings - she was trying to prevent him from building because the society, as it was, did not deserve his buildings. That is also why she did not want to do any good work herself. The world did not deserve to see it. At that time, freedom was the only desire Dominique permitted herself, freedom from that terrible world. "To ask nothing. To expect nothing. To depend on nothing." She did not want a job she would enjoy and did not want to loose. She did not want to want anything (even ideas) or anybody. For her, doing so ment dependency on the world she despised. That is why she only allowed herself things she did not care for, including husbands. The only exception to this was her sexual encounter with Roark. That is why it made logical sense, for Rand, to make it violent - for Dominique to fight him off. She did not want to want him - yet wanted him. He understood that. Edited January 22, 2007 by ~Sophia~ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cogito Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 Oh, it is possible. I will not comment on it here on the forum, though. How could it go further than that? If instead of the situation being a human loving another being, the situation were a human loving himself... So intellectualammo, does this mean that your twist involves somehow two characters ending up as the same or something? Or is that way of base? Eh, I know you won't answer anyway, I'm just curious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonMaci Posted January 22, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 How could it go further than that? If instead of the situation being a human loving another being, the situation were a human loving himself... So intellectualammo, does this mean that your twist involves somehow two characters ending up as the same or something? Or is that way of base? Eh, I know you won't answer anyway, I'm just curious. That is a damn good question. I was wondering the, "How could it go further than that?" msyself but didn't ask because like you i expected no answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alessa36 Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 Ahh, but Dominique was not unsure about her values, not in the slightest. She was close to the ideal of complete integration. Her values were the same as Roark's: true, consistent, and rational. She saw Roark as the moral ideal, but mistakenly thought that, in her rotten world, the ideal is not practical and thus doomed. I think the main difference is that Roark says he "only let's the pain go down so far". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intellectualammo Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 I think the main difference is that Roark says he "only let's the pain go down so far". Yes, now take that further...Dom granted more significance to it than Roark did, more metaphysical significance. He let it go down only to a certain point. Dom let go down even further than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonMaci Posted January 22, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 Yes, now take that further...Dom granted more significance to it than Roark did, more metaphysical significance. He let it go down only to a certain point. Dom let go down even further than that. Sounds right to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alessa36 Posted January 23, 2007 Report Share Posted January 23, 2007 (edited) Yes, now take that further...Dom granted more significance to it than Roark did, more metaphysical significance. He let it go down only to a certain point. Dom let go down even further than that. Yes, thats it, to a certain point. Roark had a purpose to his life and to himself. He was an architect. He defined himself by his own standards, philosophy, etc, despite what existed in the world. Dominique really had no purpose and had a waste of a life that lacked any honorable passion until she met Roark. What he ignited in her gave her a cause or a purpose in her life. Like reading Ayn Rands books probably did for a lot of us objectivists, defined what we knew inside of us but didn't have the words and definition for. In a way we all have some Dominque in us. Roark in the story, as does his character for those of us who read TFH, Shows how to be people like us in a world like that. Dominique was reactionary and emotionally spinning in a way when she recognized the injustice regarding achievement. Objectivists struggle too ya'know. Edited January 23, 2007 by Alessa36 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonMaci Posted March 22, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 22, 2007 I am now reading Atlas Shrugged and I have to say, I love Dagny Taggart more than Dominique. I also love Henry Rearden, Ellis Wyatt, and Ragnar Danneskjold (sorry if I spelled that wrong). They are the only good ones I have "met" so far (I am only up to page 530 odd). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonMaci Posted March 22, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 22, 2007 In fact my personal message in Windows Live Messenger is a quote from Dagny. It is, "I won't work as a slave or as a slave driver." 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.