Analysis

Ayn Rand is known internationally not only her successful career as a novelist, but also her strong political and economic philosophies. Her writings, both fiction and nonfiction, have been taught in classrooms for decades, and her presence in American History is eminent. However, it is disputed whether or not her writing belongs within the American Canon due to the fact that Rand was born and raised in communist Russia, not arriving in the United States until the age of 25.

Much of Ayn Rand’s strong philosophies, such as Objectivism, are deeply rooted in her disdain for communist societies. Growing up within Soviet Russia during the Russian Revolution, Rand experienced the terror of a collectivist society. Thus, when she moved to America and was introduced to the freedom of a capitalist society, she had the unique ability to contrast two extremely different worlds. In many of her fictional novels, she approaches this juxtaposition by conflicting the dystopian world of collectivism, where freedom is not a plausible concept, and a utopian world which usually revolves around individualism and capitalism.

A great example of disparity is seen within one of her most renowned novels, Atlas Shrugged.  Published in 1957, the central theme of the novel is Objectivism, however, she also incorporates the importance of capitalism within society as well. The plot of the novel revolves around a dystopian America where capitalism has been oppressed and all the creative and intellectual minds and individuals of the society go on strike to live in a utopian commune centralized on an independent free economy.  The leader of this group is a man that goes by the name of John Galt. Also a central character in the story is a man that goes by the name, Francisco d'Anconia. Also a part of the utopian commune in the story, he has a famous speech during the novel that advocates the importance of capitalism:

“So you think that money is the root of all evil? Have you ever asked what is the root of money? Money is a tool of exchange, which can't exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value. Money is not the tool of the moochers, who claim your product by tears or of the looters, who take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce. Is this what you consider evil?” (410-12)

This dialogue goes on for about two to three pages, and is one of the most quotable parts of the book when discussing the apparent connections between capitalism and individualism within the novel, Atlas Shrugged.

Clearly, Rand utilizes the themes within the dystopian world to represent communist Russia while she creates a utopian world that mirrors that of American Culture. Capitalism supported and reinforced Rand’s philosophy of objectivism. Through liberty and property rights, citizens have the opportunity to pursue individualism.

American Culture is also highlighted within her earlier novel, The Fountainhead, which was published in 1945. The novel is sent in New York City, and is a commentary on how American society gives individuals a chance to pursue their own happiness and rational self-interest. The protagonist is a young man named Howard Roark pursuing a career in Architecture. However he is present with the obstacles of people she called “second-handers”. These people basically were interested in riding the coat-tails of others, and therefore putting other people’s ambitions above their own. Basically, Rand is demonstrating the importance the individual and the self, and how American Society cultivates this belief. Through her writing she also illustrated her physical love for America, New York City in particular. In one description she writes:

“I would give the greatest sunset in the world for one sight of New York's skyline. Particularly when one can't see the details. Just the shapes. The shapes and the thought that made them. The sky over New York and the will of man made visible. What other religion do we need?” (143)

This is just another example of how the Russian born author wrote fiction as it pertained to American culture.

Not only did Rand focus on objectivism and capitalism within her fiction, but also her philosophical essays. In Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, Rand wrote:

“The recognition of individual rights entails the banishment of physical force from human relationships: basically, rights can be violated only by means of force. In a capitalist society, no man or group may initiate the use of physical force against others.”

When Rand discusses capitalism, she almost always connects it with the individualism that is highlighted within her philosophy of Objectivism. For her, the two concepts go hand in hand. However, she is consistently also connecting these viewpoints with American Society, making her a likely contender for a spot within the American Literary Canon.

Because the American Canon has no specific requirements, it is difficult to pick and choose which pieces belong in the Canon and which are excluded. Because there are no set guidelines, critics have disputed whether or not the author needs to be born in America, the literary piece needs to be exceptionally written and praised by literary critics, and whether the content of the literary piece needs to be a commentary on American Culture. There is no particular right answer for any of these questions. Instead, literary critics focus on examining each piece of literature not as it relates to a clear set of requirements, but how it personally affects the American world of literature, and American culture in general. Thus, Ayn Rand can be praised throughout several canons of literature, including the American canon.

Nevertheless, Ayn Rand has not just gained positive praise from literary critics. Many critics have a lot of negative judgments to make about her novels, in particular her hypocritical philosophy as well as the gratuitous length of her novels. For instance, In Tallulah Morehead’s article, The Insanity of Ayn Rand: The Fountain-Brain-Dead, he wrote that, “Ayn wrote every word of dialogue, and forbade a word of it to be changed. She was the Howard Roarke of screenwriters. What she was not was a good writer of dialogue, none of which sounds like human speech…” While this was meant to be a humorous article, it is a truly large criticism of her work. As for her philosophy, many economists and liberal political critics viewed her concept of objectivism as somewhat idealistic. In Paul Nevins’ article, Ayn Rand and the Paradox of Selfishness, he wrote:

“The grim news from the current Great Recession has, for example, once again confirmed one of the central paradoxes of the political philosophy of individualism as it plays out in the liberal democracy of the United States: the inability of that ideology to reconcile the tension between the pursuit of self-interest and equality.”

Here, he explains how the current state of the American economy demonstrates the inaccessible utopian nature of Rand’s Objectivism.

However, while these criticisms have been accepted as valid, it has not stopped teachers and professors from educating their students about the works and ideas of Ayn Rand. Yet, Rand is not only discussed in classrooms and lecture halls. She is also celebrated for founding the now widely recognized theory of Objectivism, associations such as the American Libertarian Movement and The Nathaniel Branden Institute owe much of their basic foundations on Rand’s philosophical concepts. David Nolan, one of the founders of the Libertarian Party of the United States in 1971, said “…without Ayn Rand, the libertarian movement would not exist.” With her fictional novels, Rand popularized the idealistic notion of individualism and displayed self-interest not as selfish, but as a necessary facet to a successful society.

Subsequently, no matter how much critics argue that Ayn Rand’s writing is too superfluous, and how much economists see her philosophies as idealistic, Rand has made a mark on American Culture, that no critic will ever be able to erase.