Book Review: The Fountainhead -Part 5 (Ayn Rand)
Before you read Part 5 below, here are Parts 1, 2,3, and 4.
Chapter 5 does not exist in the Fountainhead. But I promised one for this review.
I walked around last night because my book group on WhatsApp suddenly shut the posting rights off. It made me think of the different types of people we meet. Quiet, observant, non-participative, selectively contributive, administering — if in a WhatsApp group of a few people, we could find so many varieties, that too, strangers who expose only their ‘interesting’ part, imagine our entire lives.
Chapter 5: The Context
The context should be obvious. The Fountainhead Universe has five primary characters and a lot of supporting cast. Unlike other authors, we have rare insights into Ayn Rand’s notes on the Fountainhead and her writings and speeches on her philosophy. So unlike other fiction writers ( or most of them anyway), Ayn Rand used fiction as a medium to expostulate her philosophy. The characters are her messengers. They serve her cause. If we have to choose between the plot, the characters, and the author — the author reigns.
The character — particularly the protagonist becomes her messiah. Ayn Rand, however, denies this in her letter to the readers on the eve of the 25th edition of the book.
“This is the motive and purpose of my writing; the projection of an ideal man. The portrayal of a moral ideal, as my ultimate literary goal, as an end in itself — to which any didactic, intellectual, or philosophical values contained in a novel are only the means.
“Let me stress this: my purpose is not the philosophical enlightenment of my readers…My purpose, first cause, and prime mover is the portrayal of Howard Roark [or the heroes of Atlas Shrugged} as an end in himself… “I write — and read — for the sake of the story…
My basic test for any story is: ‘Would I want to meet these characters and observe these events in real life? Is this story an experience worth living through for its own sake? Is the pleasure of contemplating these characters an end in itself?’…
There is one more character in the cast which I will introduce now — the reader. I would set the context here again — I was introduced to this book by two avid Ayn Rand fans. They had read The Fountainhead in their childhood, and swear by Ayn Rand and the pantheon of characters. But only one has traveled with me on my journey of reading and review.
The individual who parted ways disagreed with my analyses because her standpoint resembled Ayn Rand’s — she identifies with the characters and draws comparisons to others, yet she rejects the existence of the ideological foundations. Of course, it had to happen.
The second individual is more open and is more appreciative of my fundamental difference with Ayn Rand while giving her nuanced feedback on the characters.
My summarized view of Ayn Rand’s writing is as follows: Philosopher, Philosophy, Author, Plot, and Characters. This encompasses my analysis of Chapter 5 — Ayn Rand.
The Dominique Point of View
Dominique is NOT Ayn Rand. Dominique represents us more than any other character. The pessimistic or even sarcastic view of the world where the corrupt (Peter Keating) and the evil (Elsworth Toohey) revel in success and where the uprighteous ( Henry Cameron and Howard Roark) undergo penitent suffering has been long and generally seen as the norm. Dominique starts with such a view until she meets Roark.
Roark gives her the destination she never intended to travel to. Her journey is not straightforward, like that of the typical reader. She has to traverse through other characters—Toohey, Keating, and Wynand—before she reaches her destination, Roark.
Considering I am a standard reader, Dominique is the character I would relate to the most. The men whose names after which the chapters are named are the kinds we could see in our lives (considering that we are in a self-discovery process and journeying towards self-actualization like Dominique.
“Mr. Roark is way up on top by the water tank. Who’s calling, ma’am?”
“Mrs. Roark,” she answered.…
She rose above the broad panes of shop windows. The channels of streets grew deeper, sinking. She rose above the marquees of movie theaters …
…
She saw him standing above her, on the top platform of the Wynand Building. He waved to her.
The line of the ocean cut the sky. The ocean mounted as the city descended. She passed the pinnacles of bank buildings. She passed the crowns of courthouses. She rose above the spires of churches.
Then there was only the ocean and the sky and the figure of Howard Roark.
Once one has finished nearly 600 pages of the novel, we arrive at the final scene. With pride, she utters "Mrs. Roark," revealing her destination. She is at the bottom of the under-construction building. She sees Roark above at the top platform. Her journey, like through the novel, has been from the bottom ( the pessimistic, sarcastic view, of the scheming demagogues, spineless sycophants, and soulless contradicts — the second-handers) to the top ( the self-sufficient, principled view, resembling man’s achievement — the first hander). The metaphor cannot be exaggerated.
She raises slowly above the city — the city ‘descends’ and the ocean mounts’. She crosses the peaks and crowns of the buildings that stood tall — banks, courthouses, and churches — symbolizing money, disputes, religion, and then she sees only the ocean, sky, and Roark — where the first handed ‘creator’ stands on top with only the vastness of nature in view.
The last scene is meticulously constructed between the traveler ( Dominique) and the destination (Roark) and everything in between. No other character is present — just nature. This is the ultimate construction of Ayn Rand’s philosophical narrative.
Ayn Rand’s pitch with these two characters — the protagonist and the ‘lover’ who is accepted completely by him, yet the patient penance for the second part of her perspective to come out — the completeness of the ‘human’ is the first step towards a ‘complete’ relationship.
The Ayn Rand version of romance is 'romantic realism.' I wonder if we will ever meet a character like Roark, but we are probably early-stage Dominique. If we want to find our Roarks, we must be ready to be like Dominique—letting go of the sarcastic worldview and becoming complete in ourselves.
The last point about Dominique is that she is the only other character who transcends involuntary influences, and she transforms on her own volition. This is a key ingredient in Rand’s character — both the male and the female protagonists are not ‘subjugated’ to external pressures.
Through a tale of romance as the cornerstone of her philosophy, Ayn Rand has shown her hand as a philosopher-in-disguise. Now it must be clear why I relate to Dominique more than any other character in the book.
‘Roark must win’:
Roark must win is not only the summary of her plot but also the cornerstone of her philosophy called ‘objectivism’. She picks Nietsche’s views and elaborates on the similarities and differences in her notes about the book.
Man is a product of his ideals and premises and not situations. The intrinsic code of ethics, not subject to any external factors, like God or society, guides man to stand firm in the tumultuous journey of life — its ebbs and flows and ups and downs.
“Since my purpose is the presentation of an ideal man, I had to define and present the conditions which make him possible and which his existence requires. Since man’s character is the product of his premises, I had to define and present the kinds of premises and values that create the character of an ideal man and motivate his actions; which means that I had to define and present a rational code of ethics. Since man acts among and deals with other men, I had to present the kind of social system that makes it possible for ideal men to exist and to function — a free, productive, rational system which demands and rewards the best in every man, and which is, obviously, laissez-faire capitalism.”
Now, we know the time and place of the story — the 1920’s and 30’s New York City. We know that is the time the city suffered from the Great Depression. While the novel is a work of fiction, it does not take into account an iota of this reality — as we know the novel was published in 1943, four years after the end of the Great Depression. It started with the Wall Street Crash of 1929, leading to the Great Recession. As the world suffered as a result of the ripple effect across — the rise of nationalism and communism took center stage. The end of the Depression and the corrective measures indicate a more hybrid approach than the laissez-faire capitalism that Ayn Rand suggests.
The bottom of the pyramid contains those people who want to find their next meal and survive, and if they want to raise, they become Wynands — for they defy the odds, and their mission is to prove a point — do unto others, what was done to them. Wynands are the typical rags-to-riches players, and most successful capitalists are closer to Wynands.
Are Wynands wrong? No, but they desire to be ideal, so the Roarks appeal to them. They vacillate, introspect, self-denigrate, and then, reset. They are remorseless and obsessive. Their richness is superficial because they do it as a matter of obligation to themselves. Attaining Dominique is a feat and retaining her is more so — the seclusive arrangements and the exalted treatments that she receives are the result of Wynand’s desire to possess those trophies of ideals that he appreciates and yearns for including his secret art collection, Roark, and Roark’s buildings. His efforts to convert his wrought-iron yellow journals to advocating Roark, his ideals, and work, is a clear effort to shift from the down-in-the-dirt and soulless pandering ( which had been his life’s work) to a testimony of his yearnings for ideals.
Wynand is again a person without that ‘intrinsic code of ethics’, external factors like the board battle of the Banner, reset him to another plane — he switches to shutting down the Banner and resetting his relationship with Roark to a personal one ( let’s not forget his dismay when he learns about the Roark-Dominique relationship. He is not wrong, because many warriors of the rags-to-riches battle spend their lifetime justifying their success in relationship with their past ( which was punishing penury in the dumpster — like Hell’s Kitchen).
This world is made of Wynands, Keatings, and Tooheys who act at various layers of the pyramid. In the aftermath of the Great Depression success came from Wynands and Keatings, often built without fundamentals or principles, but with the help of Tooheys. While such success may not last far, as is proven by Wynand’s and Keating’s failures, the city searching for motivation needed such stories. Then, add to that, it was wartime in Europe.
Roark does not need any external stimuli; they act on their own volition. They are religious (to their principles and work ethic), empathetic (to Keating and Wynand), fall in love (with Dominique), and make friends (with Keating, Mike, Wynand, Mellory, Enright, and Heller). They are not social, but sociable.
To summarize, Roark is a near-perfect character representing Rand’s ideology. For Rand’s philosophy to be reckoned, Roark must win. Roark lives a higher standard of living, and Dominique evolves into, what Wynand aspires for, which Keating won’t understand and that Toohey despises and stands against. In the end, Roark must win in Rand’s words:
‘The story is the story of Howard Roark’s triumph. It has to show what the man is, what he wants, and how he gets it. It has to be a triumphant epic of a man’s spirit, the hymn glorifying a man’s “I”. It has to show every conceivable hardship and obstacle in his way — how he triumphs over them and why he has to triumph.”
Ayn Rand:
Ayn Rand — Alice O’Connor had a Roark in her life — her husband Frank O’Connor. It is there in plain sight and I am sure that better analysts of Ayn Rand’s work have quoted them.
Frank was the fuel. He gave me, in the hours of my own days, the reality of that sense of life, which created The Fountainhead — and he helped me to maintain it over a long span of years when there was nothing around us but a gray desert of people and events that evoked nothing but contempt and revulsion. The essence of the bond between us is the fact that neither of us has ever wanted or been tempted to settle for anything less than the world presented in The Fountainhead. We never will.
There is a man behind the woman — Frank behind Alice, and of course, Frank who inspired Howard. Now we know that there were two people under the same roof, who aspired for the society that the Fountainhead created — a society that celebrated the talent and creativity of individuals, a society that the US of A represented, the one which Roark lived by.
After the book, Ayn Rand has lived to establish the philosophical framework of ‘objectivism’, and has not changed. The Fountainhead is successful because it appeals to people, notwithstanding its critiques. In Ayn Rand’s own words:
It does not matter that only a few in each generation will grasp and achieve the full reality of man’s proper stature — and that the rest will betray it. It is
Those few that move the world and give life its meaning — and it is those few that I have always sought to address. The rest are no concern of mine; it is not me or The Fountainhead that they will betray: it is their own souls.
I hope, by now, the reason for Part 5 is clear. This book gives me a lot to think about, especially the author’s unique philosophical perspective, which is different from most books I usually read. I also read that the book didn’t receive much praise from literary critics, which motivated me to write a five-part review.
~Ashok Subramanian © 2024
