Anthem by Ayn Rand

January 9, 2009

Sorry iluv2read for abandoning you.

I have read several books since my last post, but I’m going to start back up with a book I just finished.

“Anthem” is the first Ayn Rand book I’ve read.  I picked it because it was the shortest out of the 3 on the shelf (the others being “Atlas Shrugged” and “The Fountainhead”).

I don’t know much about her philosophy, but just judging from this book, I can tell she believes people should focus more on the individual than on society.  This book made me consider whether it wasn’t so bad to be selfish, and on the flip side, whether it was always good to do things for others.

The premise of the book is that a future society has regressed, and focuses solely on “we”–the society.  No individual has much importance.  Every person is given a distinct role, and no one questions it.

However the main character breaks from the pack, re-discovers an invention from the past, and tries to present it to the others.  I’ll stop here, so I don’t ruin the ending for others.

“Anthem” is one of those good books that makes me re-evaluate how I think, what I believe in.  Here are some excerpts I liked:

  • “The Teachers had said to us all:  ‘Dare not choose in your minds the work you would like to do when you leave the Home of the Students.  You shall do that which the Council of Vocations shall prescribe for you.  For the Council of Vocations knows in its great wisdom where you are needed by your brother men, better than you can know it in your unworthy little minds.  And if you are not needed by your brother men, there is no reason for you to burden the earth with your bodies.’”  (22)
  • “This would wreck the Plans of the World Council,” said Unanimity 2-9913, “and without the Plans of the World Council the sun cannot rise. It took fifty years to secure the approval of all the Councils for the Candle, and to decide upon the number needed, and to re-fit the Plans so as to make candles instead of torches. This touched upon thousands and thousands of men working in scores of States. We cannot alter the Plans again so soon.”

    “And if this should lighten the toil of men,” said Similarity 5-0306, “then it is a great evil, for men have no cause to exist save in toiling for other men.”

    Then Collective 0-0009 rose and pointed at our box.

    “This thing,” they said, “must be destroyed. (74)

  • “I know not if this earth on which I stand is the core of the universe or if it is but a speck of dust lost in eternity. I know not and I care not. For I know what happiness is possible to me on earth. And my happiness needs no higher aim to vindicate it. My happiness is not the means to any end. It is the end. It is its own goal. It is its own purpose.

    Neither am I the means to any end others may wish to accomplish. I am not a tool for their use. I am not a servant of their needs. I am not a bandage for their wounds. I am not a sacrifice on their altars.

    I am a man. This miracle of me is mine to own and keep, and mine to guard, and mine to use, and mine to kneel before!

    I do not surrender my treasures, nor do I share them. The fortune of my spirit is not to be blown into coins of brass and flung to the winds as alms for the poor of the spirit. I guard my treasures: my thought, my will, my freedom. And the greatest of these is freedom.

    I owe nothing to my brothers, nor do I gather debts from them. I ask none to live for me, nor do I live for any others. I covet no man’s soul, nor is my soul theirs to covet.

    I am neither foe nor friend to my brothers, but such as each of them shall deserve of me. And to earn my love, my brothers must do more than to have been born. I do not grant my love without reason, nor to any chance passer-by who may wish to claim it. I honor men with my love. But honor is a thing to be earned.

    I shall choose my friends among men, but neither slaves nor masters. And I shall choose only such as please me, and them I shall love and respect, but neither command nor obey. And we shall join our hands when we wish, or walk alone when we so desire. For in the temple of his spirit, each man is alone. Let each man keep his temple untouched and undefiled. Then let him join hands with others if he wishes, but only beyond his holy threshold.” (95-96)

  • “I look upon the history of men, which I have learned from the books, and I wonder. It was a long story, and the spirit which moved it was the spirit of man’s freedom. But what is freedom? Freedom from what? There is nothing to take a man’s freedom away from him, save other men. To be free, a man must be free of his brothers. That is freedom. This and nothing else.” (101)

Entry Filed under: books, excerpts, reviews. Tags: , .

3 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Kristan  |  January 11, 2009 at 5:20 pm

    LOVE pgs 95-96 and 101. Wow.

    Interesting because there’s a very biblical feel to this style, and I wonder if that’s true of all her other books. It also seems very dense (perhaps a bit hard to read) which I have heard IS true of her style.

    Very cool, though. I’m more intrigued by this than I have been by my dad just saying, “Read Ayn Rand.” “Why?” “Because I had to.”

    Reply
  • 2. Diane  |  January 11, 2009 at 10:01 pm

    Huh, I didn’t think about it being bliblical until you mentioned it…but I can see that now. I think it’s because the main character is recording his lessons regarding the re-discovery of “I” is a sea of ‘we”. It’s a revolutionary idea, and it’s something that requires faith from believers, in themselves.

    I also didn’t feel like it was dense while I was reading. Either I have a high tolerance for this type of writing, or I got so into the story and felt it was easy to follow that I didn’t think the style was hard to get through.

    And yeah, I’ve also heard about Ayn Rand’s books…people make references to them, and I have no idea what her books are about. But this book is short enough, and apparently is a condensed version of the philosophy of her other books, so you can get a feel for her ideology without much trouble.

    Reply
  • 3. Thaddeus Lindsay  |  January 19, 2009 at 11:25 pm

    Ayn Rand is the progenitor of Objectivist Philosophy; you should try “Philosophy who needs it”? It will really give you a feel for Objectivist Philosophy.
    Ayn Rand said “most philosophers have left their starting points to unnamed implication”. The base of Objectivism is explicit: “Existence exists—and the act of grasping that statement implies two corollary axioms: that something exists which one perceives and that one exists possessing consciousness, consciousness being the faculty of perceiving that which exists.”

    Existence and consciousness are facts implicit in every perception. They are the base of all knowledge (and the precondition of proof): knowledge presupposes something to know and someone to know it. They are absolutes which cannot be questioned or escaped: every human utterance, including the denial of these axioms, implies their use and acceptance.

    The third axiom at the base of knowledge—an axiom true, in Aristotle’s words, of “being qua being”—is the Law of Identity. This law defines the essence of existence: to be is to be something, a thing is what it is; and leads to the fundamental principle of all action, the law of causality. The law of causality states that a thing’s actions are determined not by chance, but by its nature, i.e., by what it is.
    What ever you read by Rand will be enlitening, great modern day Philosepher, Thad

    Reply

Leave a Comment

Required

Required, hidden

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Recent Posts

Categories

Recent Comments

xalwaysdreamx on The Bonesetter’s Daughte…
shaunduke on Science Fiction is not just fo…
Thaddeus Lindsay on Anthem by Ayn Rand
Diane on Anthem by Ayn Rand
Kristan on Anthem by Ayn Rand

Blogroll