sweet quote from the FOUNTAINHEAD

[drmota]

so I read this last night at around 4 AM and it was one of those moments for me where you just know that you're reading the right book at the right time, and what a great coincidence it is.

"Only when you can feel contempt for own priceless little ego, only then can you achieve the true, broad peace of selflessness, the merging of your spirit with the vast collective of mankind. There is no room for the love of others within the tight, crowded miser's hole of a private ego"

I especially like that last part. This perfectly reflected a lot of my sentiments in doing secondary essays- that I have become somewhat disheartened with the rabid egocentricism of American society that has made us lose sight of what's important. And to any of you who have been involved with people who seem way too involved in their own lives to be able to fall in love or even put anybody but themselves first, you know what this quote is all about. I know I may be coming off as a sap right now, but this quote just did the deed for me and you all might want to think about it while doing your essays as well.

bloc party said it best: "stop being so american...why can't you be more european?"

-mota

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[cfdavid]

Howard Roark rules!

 

[Aesculapius]

Your interpretation is rather ironic, given that Ayn Rand's opinion on "selflessness" is most likely diametrically opposed to your own.

 

[drmota]

Your interpretation is rather ironic, given that Ayn Rand's opinion on "selflessness" is most likely diametrically opposed to your own.

well, the author's view- yes, but that quote was in regards to ellsworth toohey.
-mota

 

[newguy357]

Your interpretation is rather ironic, given that Ayn Rand's opinion on "selflessness" is most likely diametrically opposed to your own.

Yes, that's what I was thinking when I read his interpretation. It's funny Ayn Rand was brought up, because I just happen to be reading Atlas Shrugged and came on this quote today (which is long, but I saved it on my computer because it was interesting to me):


"I quit when medicine was placed under State control, some years ago," said Dr. Hendricks. "Do you know what it takes to perform a brain operation? Do you know the kind of skill it demands, and the years of passionate, merciless, excruciating devotion that go to acquire that skill? That was what I would not place at the disposal of men whose sole qualification to rule me was their capacity to spout the fraudulent generalities that got them elected to the privilege of enforcing their wishes at the point of a gun. I would not let them dictate the purpose for which my years of study had been spent, or the conditions of my work, or my choice of patients, or the amount of my reward. I observed that in all the discussions that preceded the enslavement of medicine, men discussed everything--except the desires of the doctors. Men considered only the 'welfare' of the patients, with no thought for those who were to provide it. That a doctor should have any right, desire or choice in the matter, was regarded as irrelevant selfishness; his is not to choose, they said, only 'to serve.' That a man who's willing to work under compulsion is too dangerous a brute to entrust with a job in the stockyards--never occurred to those who proposed to help the sick by making life impossible for the healthy. I have often wondered at the smugness with which people assert their right to enslave me, to control my work, to force my will, to violate my conscience, to stifle my mind--yet what is it that they expect to depend on, when they lie on an operating table under my hands? Their moral code has taught them to believe that it is safe to rely on the virtue of their victims. Well, that is the virtue I have withdrawn. Let them discover the kind of doctors that their system will produce. Let them discover, in their operating rooms and hospital wards, that it is not safe to place their lives in the hands of a man whose life they have throttled. It is not safe, if he is the sort of man who resents it--and still less safe, if he is the sort who doesn't."

 

[pancarre12]

well, the author's view- yes, but that quote was in regards to ellsworth toohey.
-mota

...AAAND Ellsworth Toohey is the book's despicable antagonist, trying to attain power by BS-ing everyone into idealizing things that are sub-par and despising what is actually exceptional. If you can IDENTIFY with that speech, then I don't know how you can continue to read the book...

I get defensive about Ayn Rand. Everyone thinks she's some sort of Nazi who condones greed and unrestrained power. Contrarily, she's quite the opposite. I see her as a convincing advocate of man's potential, encouraging peace, order, and prosperity VIA man's ego. She has (actually, HAD) great goals; her idea of how to reach them annoys people because it disregards emotion and relies upon pure reason and logic. Alright...I'll stop before I do this for 12 pages.

I guess I'm only saying that I disagree. Reading a speech by one of her "bad guys" like Toohey makes me want to stick a finger down my throat and choke myself.

 

[veridisquo]

Regardless of the fact that I disagree with your interpretation (for reasons I can't coherently go into at 2 AM 😱 ), but it is a good quote, and an amazing book. There are many hidden gems in there.