Reading+Reflections

9/22/10 In the book so far, the author has drawn sharp contrasts between the characters Howard Roark and Peter Keating. Howard Roark is an egocentric who is obsessed with his work and is apathetic to anyone else's opinion of him. Peter Keating is a man who is dependent on other people to make decisions and cares very much about what people think of him. Also he does not question the current establishment and submits to society. Howard does not submit to society because he wants to do his own work. He does not want to have to bow down to a client, he wants to build what he so desires to build. he is an individual who always makes his own decisions on what he does and does not depend on any one else. I can't relate to either one of these characters, especially since they represent the 2 extremes: being dependent on no one, and being dependent on everyone. there is no middle ground that anyone can stand on.

James,

While I agree that Rand draws a stark distinction between Keating and Roark, I am not sure I agree with (in terms of precision) of some of the descriptors. Egocentric implies a consumption/fascination with oneself, I think that Roark is more consumed with the idea of being autnomous and independent as you note in the close of your post. I think he is indifferent to others' opinions, not apathetic. He is actively hostile to outside influence: this is not apathy.

Ayn Rand is playing with gender stereotypes here as well. The contrast could be seen as the contrast between the archetypical anti-social male (think cowboys on the range, outside of normal society) and the oversocialized female who is too concerned with the opinions of others. This contrast is often drawn between nature and technology where nature, both positively and negatively, is described as female and technology/science is portrayed as male. Rand, I believe, is making Keating seem effeminate (i.e., momma's boy, indecisive, etc.) and Roark is the "man's man" (think John Wayne with a slide rule). While this contrast is common in literature, it is curious to have it being made with these valences from a female writer.

I think you are right to see Rand painting in broad strokes and bold colors. However, I think, throughout the book, she will introduce intermediate characters -- Gail Wynand, Ellsworth Toohey, Dominique Francon, etc. -- that will fill in the gaps between the polarities of Keating and Roark. I would be interested to see if you view any of them more favorably, but for now, I agree the goal is not independence or dependence, but interdependence.

Mr. Brunelli

10/11/10 Currently Ann Rand has introduce the characters Ellsworth Toohey, and Dominique Francon. these characters for the most part stand on the middle gownd between Roark and Keating. Ellsworth Toohey is like Roark in the fact that he is not ambiguous in his values and he is consistent. unlike Roark though, he has a preference for classical architecture and discourages experimentation. He asserts in his writings that people should build tried and true designs that will make the costumer happy. Dominique is Toohey's assistant and loves things that are different and unique. She also seems to get a certain joy in criticizing her fathers work. Dominique seams to be a female version of Roark at first but the further you go into the book the more they are different. She is rebels because it gives her satisfaction as apposed to Roark who is the way he is by nature. She is acts on emotion much like Keating.

12/7/10 Flat land was both the most thought provoking and the most boring book I have ever read. it was thought provoking in the sense that it helped visualize dimensions very well. If 2 dimensional beings ever existed thy would probably live like they did in the book. Also the book is a satire of English society. When I found that out, the book maid much more since. Despite this though, the book was still boring. It did not have any plot and the characters are nothing much to speak of. It looked at how the society was structured much more than the main protagonist. this maid the book a little hard to read. I am use to reading books which have a clear story. overall though it was better than I initially thought

12/14/10 Christine is a book about a teenager named Arnie buys a car from a man named Lebay. He instantly falls in love in the car much to his friends dismay and brings it to a garage in order to repair it. The car is a 1958 Plymouth Fury and it is in poor condition. It has a cracked windshield, the engine barely runs and it is covered with rust. But the more Arnie works on the car, the more it changes him. He starts gaining more traits from its former owner Lebay. It is an interesting book so far that is a very insightful take on our relationship with machines. It shows that we tend to put ourselves into our possessions. Christine seams to be a look at the worst possible relationship between a human and a machine.

1/10/11 In Christine, Buddy and his gang trashed Christine to get back at Arnie for getting him kicked out of school. After this Christine starts to repair itself and kill all of the people that trashed her. Every time someone is killed Arnie wakes up with his back killing him. He also has dreams where the corps of Lebay driving Christine. Later in the book, he has a conversation with Lebay in Christine implying that the car is haunted by Lebay's spirit. Arnie also is acting more like Lebay. He lisins to old ratio stations, curses more and starts smoking. Another thing that points to a haunting is the similarity of the events in Arnie's life to Lebay's life. Both have bad backs, and both have had people choke in there car.

I Robot is the next book. It is a collection of short stories that start at the beginning robots to when the technology has fully advanced. the first of these stories is about a robot named Robby. He is used as a made in the house of a family and the dauter often plays with it. This makes the mother uneasy. She is very suspicious about the robot and wants it out of the house. It is unclear why she wants to through it away. I think it is do to an unjustified belief that the robot is dangerous. This may come from ignorance of how the robot works. so far it is a great book.

The next story is about the robot named speedy. Speedy is very advanced as compared to Robby. He can talk and he is designed to mine minerals on mercury and is relatively autonomous. On one of his expeditions he started to go around in loops around the targeted aria. the reason for this perplexed both the scientists on the planet. It is then determent that Speedy is in a logical loop do to a conflict with the first and third law of robotics. this is very common in the book I Robot. Most of the shorts center around some kind of conflict with the laws.

The book The Soul of a New Machine is about engineers in a company called data general that want to build the first 32 bite computer that Data General had ever made. Unfortunately the job was given to the team in South Carolina because they work for less and the company does not have to pay as much in taxes. So the Massachusetts team decides to work overtime and build the computer anyway to prove that they can do it better. The book deals with the question of what really motivates people. The engineers in the book do not seem to be motivated by money, but by the compition with the other team.

The new book that we have been assigned is Cat’s Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut. So far the story seems to be a commentary on religion and the publics understanding of science. The public seems to think that scientists can do anything if we spend enough money on it. This is shone when the military general comes in and asks one of the scientists to invent a way to get rid of mud. It is also shone in the character of the secretary. She does not understand what her employer is doing and she does not make an effort to understand it. I can’t help but feel the public reacts in the same way as the secretary. They tell themselves they can’t understand even though they have not tried.

In Cat's Cradle the main charicter is going to the country San Lorenzo and meats up with Dr. Hoenikker's children. Both of them have ice 9 with them and we get a good sense of their character. In short they do not seem to be the best people to poses a weapon that can destroy the world. It would appear that Vonnegut has a very pessimistic view of how humanity deals with technology. the way that things are going at this part of the book that the world is going to be destroyed.