Atlas Shrugged, Part 1 Chapter 9: The Sacred and the Profane

Posted by nsnelson 9 years, 9 months ago to Books
44 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Summary: Dagny and Hank converse about their relationship. James Taggart “stoops down” to Cherryl Brooks. Dagny and Hank converse more back in Philadelphia. Mr. Mowen discusses the Equalization of Opportunity Bill and other Big Government ideas with Owen Kellogg. Dagny turns the John Galt Line back into the Rio Norte Line, and then consoles herself with Hank, making plans for the future. They decide to go on a vacation, then decide to explore the 20th Century Motor Company, where they found the model of the motor, the paper plans for which were just over 10 years old. They left to seek the inventor.

Start by reading the first-tier comments, which are all quotes of Ayn Rand (some of my favorites, some just important for other reasons). Comment on your favorite ones, or others' comments. Don't see your favorite quote? Post it in a new comment. Please reserve new comments for Ayn Rand, and your non-Rand quotes for "replies" to the quotes or discussion. (Otherwise Rand's quotes will get crowded out and pushed down into oblivion. You can help avoid this by "voting up" the Rand quotes, or at least the ones you especially like, and voting down first-tier comments that are not quotes of the featured book.)

Atlas Shrugged was written by Ayn Rand in 1957.

My idea for this post is discussed here:

http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts...


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 2.
  • Posted by VetteGuy 9 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Good point, Mamaemma. Yes, at that point he revealed himself to be evil.

    I was mainly thinking of JT as presented earlier in the book, espousing altruism, and everything being for the "good of society".
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Vetteguy, think about the end of the book when Jim Taggart was enjoying watching Galt being tortured. That's not misguided; that's evil. Especially when you consider the reasons he wanted to see him tortured.
    Edit: clarity and to correct autocheck!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by VetteGuy 9 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Re being "more forgiving" ... ouch! :-)

    What was it that Frisco said to Rearden about forgiveness?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by VetteGuy 9 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Maybe I'm giving JT too much "benefit of the doubt". That seems to be the common consensus, anyway. :-) I certainly didn't intend to make excuses for Jim's actions, which were clearly wrong-headed at best, no matter his intentions. Kinda like the difference between manslaughter and murder, maybe?

    I interpreted JT as really, honestly WANTING to do the right thing, just having such a warped view of the world, that his idea of the "right thing" was always contrary to logic.

    This in contrast to say, Mouch or the union boss, who didn't give a flip about right and wrong, they just wanted more personal power, no matter who or how many it hurt.

    I actually see Cheryl as having the RIGHT ideas, but being too timid in the face of Jim's overpowering, domineering personality. She seems to be a warning to the rest of us to stand up to the illogical "bullies". She didn't, and when the truth finally hit her, it was sadly too much for her to handle.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 9 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I don't understand your unwillingness to call Jim evil. His actions were evil, we agree. He habitually chose evil actions over good actions, and I think that is what most people commonly mean when they refer to a person as evil. I think that is fair.

    Some people would say that he is not evil because his education was faulty, so he didn't know any better. Even if it were true, I don't accept that excuse. Not knowing murder is evil does not make it any less evil. But I believe every human being knows morality proper to human beings. It may be suppressed, buried deep down where they won't be confronted with it, but they cannot ultimately plead ignorance. They are without excuse.

    Some people say he is not evil because he had good intentions. Same answer. Committing murder with the good intention of bettering society (the greater good) does not make murder any less evil.

    Jim may have been confused, misguided, call it what you will. But he was also evil. That is one of the points that this whole story was building up to. Just read Ayn Rand's description of his end:

    "He was seeing his face as the face of a killer whom all men should rightfully loathe, who destroyed values for being values, who killed in order not to discover his own irredeemable evil."
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by jimjamesjames 9 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Jim Taggart, as well as most liberals, are always looking for ways to minimize their responsibility for themselves and to excuse their failure.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Lucky 9 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    My interpretation of the Jim Taggart character, and a few others, is that he is not a real person but an embodiment of much of the stupidity, if not evil, that there was round then, and now.
    Cherryl Brooks on the other hand is real and believable. She has moderate education and morals/ethics. She is not a strong intellect or producer but when faced with stupid remarks she can ask good questions. Her level of intellect, or maybe insufficient moral strength, leads to her death as she is unable to put the right questions to herself.
    The character of Cheryl Brooks is crucial to the theme of the book. Here is a person who could be happy and productive if only she had been 1. luckier in relationships, or, 2. if she had the skill to think thru her situation and make the right decisions in her own interests.
    1. plays a part in life, but, 2. as it is said, you can make your own luck.
    The reader cannot avoid liking Cheryl despite her weaknesses which proved fatal.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 9 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    So if we apologize for their immoral actions for whatever reason aren't we complicit in some way? Cheryl was misguided. Taggart knowing worked to destroy the property of others.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by VetteGuy 9 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I see this argument a lot. "If you don't see things my way, you just aren't sufficiently enlightened." Frequently, but not always, accompanied by name-calling.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by VetteGuy 9 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I have to admit, I don't see Jim Taggart as evil. The concepts, yes.

    Jim, I see as ... misguided? Probably a better word for it, but he was just a product of his education, which is even scarier in its own way. The bad thing about JT is that he was misguided AND in a position of power (as CEO of the railroad). There are a lot of people out there who got the same type of education, and took it to heart with no real thought or skepticism. Some in power, but many many more who keep them in power (or allow them to stay in power).
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 9 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Sometimes I just really enjoyed her prose. She really is a good story teller. Sometimes some of the dialogue feels contrived (she was trying to communicate her philosophy, after all), but other times she is very poetic.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 9 years, 9 months ago
    “There was a remnant of light on the hill, but a blue haze was moving in upon the valleys, and the red and gold of the leaves was spreading to the sky in strips of sunset.”
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 9 years, 9 months ago
    James Taggart to Cherryl Brooks: “I’ll tell you…I’ll tell you something…unhappiness is the hallmark of virtue. If a man is unhappy, really, truly unhappy, it means that he is a superior sort of person.”
    …. “What, Mr. Taggart? What is it you want?”
    “Oh, there you go! The moment you ask, ‘What is it?’ you’re back in the crude, material world where everything’s got to be tagged and measured. I’m speaking of things that can’t be named in materialistic words… the higher realms of the spirit, which man can never reach… What’s any human achievement, anyway? The earth is only an atom whirling in the universe – of what importance is that bridge to the solar system?”
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 9 years, 9 months ago
    James Taggart to Cherryl Brooks: “How do you know what’s good, anyway? Who knows what’s good? Who can ever know? There are no absolutes – as Dr. Pritchett has proved irrefutably. Nothing is absolute. Everything is a matter of opinion.”
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 9 years, 9 months ago
    James Taggart to Cherryl Brooks: “Because she [Dagny] thinks she’s so good. What right has she to think it? What right has anybody to think he’s good? Nobody’s any good.”
    “You don’t mean it, Mr. Taggart.”
    “I mean, we’re only human beings – and what’s a human being? A weak, ugly, sinful creature, born that way, rotten in his bones – so humility is the one virtue he ought to practice… Pride is the worst of all sins, no matter what he’s done.”
    “But if a man knows that what he’s done is good?”
    “Then he ought to apologize for it.”
    “To whom?”
    “To those who haven’t done it.”
    “I…I don’t understand.”
    “Of course you don’t. It takes years and years of study in the higher reaches of the intellect.”
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 9 years, 9 months ago
    James Taggart to Cherryl Brooks: “Rearden. He didn’t invent smelting and chemistry and air compression. He couldn’t have invented his Metal but for thousands and thousands of other people. His Metal! Why does he think it’s his? Why does he think it’s his invention? Everybody uses the work of everybody else. Nobody ever invents anything.
    She said, puzzled, “But the iron ore and all those other things were there all the time. Why didn’t anybody else make that Metal, but Mr. Rearden did?”
    “He didn’t do it for any noble purpose, he did it just for his own profit. He’s never done anything for any other reason.”
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo