Use any part of these chapters for your blog:
"Frost," "Ubermensch," or "Slice of Life"
2. Focus on something specific (a specific scene, character, or idea) and explore it thoughtfully. Really take the time to EXPLORE possible insights, points of view, connections and interpretations. Do not feel like you have to cover all three chapters. Narrow your focus, but go deeper in your analysis.
3. Don't just list quotes. Take the time to do real analysis. Take the time to really examine the language and the way the author presents ideas. Take the time to ask questions and ponder possible ways to interpret what you see.
4. Remember to include a fitting title as well as your name.
Ethan Schalekamp
ReplyDeleteThe Cynicality of Miss Ayn Rand
I found Ayn Rand’s interlude into our narrator’s life to be very thought provoking, but at the same time unsettling. Her philosophy, which ultimately boils down to a dogma of self reliance and selfish ambition, encouraging people to “never be meek” and to “be bold… “refusing fear and compromise”, is in my opinion very respectable. If people were to follow Rand’s novel “morality”, the prevalence of poverty, debt, and homelessness might be replaced with wealth, knowledge, and societal advancement… in theory. Much of her view of modern society is antagonistically extreme, often preaching to “never sacrifice yourself” and that to do so is “worse than a common murder”. I agree with her ideals of self confidence and proactivity, but to suggest that one disregard the needs of others, to imply that acts of charity are sinful, is too much.
So where does this mindset of Ayn Rand’s come from? How did she come to the conclusion that neglect of the “unworthy” is the only respectable way to live? If we look closely, we can find hints of her life up to this point and assume that it has been hard. “In Russia, she said, as a student in Petrograd University, I studied by candle light. There was no firewood, the ink froze in our pens. Mr. Lenin’s altruists shot so many of us we had to rent coffins in which we carried our teachers and friends to their graves… I refused fear, I refused defeat.” This section in particular reveals so much about Rand’s history. From it we can infer that she grew up in poverty, having no one to rely on, surrounded by people quaking in fear of an all for one, one for all communist government. However, unlike those who surrounded her, she rose up out of her hellish childhood to forge her own successful life from scratch. With this understanding, we immediately see where her philosophy and moral code comes from, as well as the origins of its extremity. Extreme conditions endured throughout her childhood, especially the altruist society of Soviet Russia, led ultimately to her extreme resentment of reliance on peers.
All of this leaves me with one thought. Did Ayn Rand love? Was she ever married? With such high standards and prerequisite of virtue, could anyone have managed to touch her life in a meaningful way that could have maybe softened her glare? Sadly, my instinct tells me the answer is a resounding no.
To further your point about her history making her hate charity; in her early childhood (up until she was about 11) was very easygoing. Her parents had a pharmaceutical business and were somewhat wealthy. When the communists took power they basically seized the business and any wealth her parents had. It's easy to see why should would never ever want to give anything to anybody again, because everything she had, she had been forced to give.
DeleteI think that you make a very interesting point, where does she get her ideas from? You stop to wonder how her personal life was to see why she such different views on society. Was is it because where she was brought up, did living in Russia affect her life and make her view on American rights seem wrong. I think that because she lived in a Communist country it blurs her views on what the American society is.
DeleteLesley Yan Santos
ReplyDeleteAyn Rand
Ayn Rand is a very self-absorbed and scornful character. Her visit to the school shows her true colors, which I ironically believe she lacks. Overall, Ayn Rand is a straightforward thinker is incapable of showing any positive emotion towards others. Multiple times throughout the book she is portrayed in a negative way, with descriptions such as "dark", "bitter", and "dim". In this case, the only colors I see in her are dark and represent a vacancy within her.
This idea shows in her apparent lack of respect for others. Her only true love, remains herself as she claims she is one of the only "perfect" humans in the world. This shows her arrogance along with her contempt for others. In reality, no one is perfect and such a trait can only be seen in fictional characters and in some cases, God. This brings up the question of whether or not Ayn Rand is religious. Personally, I would say no, because believing in a god(s) would mean that you are placing someone else above you.
This arrogance shows not only through her writing but through her actions as well. The first thing she does after sitting down in the Morris chair, is pull out a cigarette. Considering the time, this would not have been unusual however in this particular school, smoking is strictly prohibited (due to the Blaine Boys incident). Her disregard for the school's policy is almost in a mocking manner as the "smoke from her cigarette drifted up past the picture of the Blaine Boys" (Wolff 81). This idea is further displayed as she "tore into our school motto-'Give All'-and urged everyone to ignore such drivel" (Wolff 79).
In her front-page interview, she states that "freedom is a fantasy achieved by shutting one's eyes" (Wolff 78). By this, she implies that to believe in freedom, is to believe a lie and that in reality, everyone is trapped by society. This is true to a certain extent, as often times, people do what they believe society wants/what they think is "socially acceptable". This takes away from your own freedom, as you never learn to "let yourself go" and be who you truly are.
I totally agree with what you're saying about how a scornful character Ayn Rand is. It was interesting that you noticed the descriptions of dark, bitter, and dim, because those words totally make sense with what you were saying on seeing her as a dark character. Her strong arrogance makes it look like that she thinks she's a God or something. Your impression on Ayn Rand is exactly what I thought when I was reading the chapters involving her.
DeleteI also have a similar opinion about Ayn Rand; I found it very interesting how you use darkness and vacancy to describe this emptiness and hard-hearted personality she has. I also concluded that wasn't a religious women not just because she wouldn't want to admit to something superior than her but also because of her philosophy "objectivism". Which not only states all men should strive for their own happiness without having to sacrifice themselves but also it is based on real logical evidence which implies that she wasn't religious. I also like how you address how freedom conflicts with what is socially acceptable and this still continues to apply to society today especially with the stereotypes of race and gender.
DeleteI agree with your opinion on Ayn Rand and how you said that you do not think she is religious since she doesn't believe in putting anyone above herself. Ayn Rand's ideas about not putting anyone above yourself does not work out because as children, your parents take care of you since you need help. The description of Ayn Rand in the book of being dark and dim contrasts the was Robert Frost was described in Old School. I also agree with how rude it was of Ayn Rand to smoke at the school. The repetition of the narrator mentioning the Blaine Boys makes the reader understand the significance of the incident, and Ayn Rand was being very disrespectful.
DeleteJonathan Rettig
ReplyDeleteThrough the end of chapter four and all of chapter five, the drastic change of the narrator's perception is quite evident. Through the beginning of chapter four, the narrator appears to share and admire the pessimistic and antagonistic views of humanity that Ayn Rand's philosophy follows. It seemed as though Ayn's novel, The Fountainhead, had almost brainwashed the narrator into believing that the two main characters, Dominique and Rourk, are the perfect people. This is quite evident when the narrator explains his admiration of the character Rourke. "Like Howard Roark, I kept a cigarette clamped in me executioner's lips...What I was doing was tanking up on self-certainty, transfusing Roark's arrogant, steely spirit into my own,"(Wolff 71). This quote shows the narrators attempts at channeling the character of Roark, right down to the facial expression. It seems as though the narrator wants to be Roark. It also seems as if he wants everyone else to be like Roark as well, as shown on page 69 where he compares his grandfather and his wife to Roark. "Roark had worked in a quarry, hewing granite blocks with a chisel, rather than take a job doing tame architecture. He refused to think as others would have him think. Had Grandjohn ever done anything else!? Had Patty ever thought at all? Christ!" (Wolff 69). The fact that the narrator believes that everyone should be like Roark clearly shows that he had adopted Rand's philosophy and what the "ideal" person is. This is actually quite contradictory to Rand's philosophy because it seems that one of Rand's greatest values is individualism, which I can appreciate, but she describes how everyone should be like Roark and Dominique but if everyone were to act like Roark and Dominique, there would be no more individualism. Everyone would act the same way, just like how the narrator tries to act like Roark.
After the narrator had met the notorious author Ayn Rand in chapter four, his perception of her philosophy had completely changed. After he had met Ayn, he could no longer read her novels without thinking of the scornful look she gave him for no other reason but the fact that he sneezed. "The problem was that I could no longer read Ayn Rand's sentences without hearing her voice. And hearing her voice, I saw her face; to be exact, the face she'd turned on me when I sneezed. Her disgust had power," (Wolff 91). After this look that she gave him, in addition to her response to the mention of the narrator's favorite author Hemingway, the narrators eyes have opened. He realizes that this philosophy that he used to follow is cruel, selfish, and pessimistic. This change in the narrator's mind is shown through his new opinion of his grandfather's friendliness. "The self-pity I felt at this betrayal dressed itself up as a fierce affection for Grandjohn and Patty, who had done all this for me," (Wolff 92). This is a drastic change from his disgusted former view of his grandparents. He now realizes that their kindness and affection is admirable rather than pathetic. I believe that this is a much more respectable and realistic view of his grandparents. The author the narrator now admires most is Ernest Hemingway, who will be the next author to visit the school.
Alanna Deery
ReplyDeleteAyn Rand
Ayn Rand, a visiting writer, gives us a glimpse into her conceited and pretentious nature whe she comes to Old School. She is deeply absorbed in herself and believes she knows all that is wrong with the world. Our narrator goes from adoration of Fountainhead to a quickly opposed view of her (of which no one could blame him for). He expresses this when saying: “It had become a fashion at school to draw lines between certain writers, as if to like one meant you couldn’t like the other. So far I’d avoided the practice. I liked most of what I chose to read and saw no point in reducing my pleasures by half. But Ayn Rand jolted me into taking sides. She made me feel the difference between a writer who despised woundedness and one for whom it was a bedrock fact of life.” (Pg 94)
In fact, he goes so far to explain exactly what he sees of her when reading The Fountainhead: “Her disgust had power. This was no girlish shudder, this was a spiritual disgust, and it forced on me a vision of the poor specimen under scrutiny, chapped lips, damp white face, rheumy eyes and all.” (Pg 91) It seems as though our author develops very strong opinions here about her, we know this because he spends many pages discussing problems with her. He then knows she has crossed the line when stubbornly attacking Hemmingway and denouncing other authors to be placed well below herself to be the very best author.
The narrator’s emotions easily switch to positive strong emotions as his strong admiration for Hemmingway which he dives right into at the end of “Slice of Life”, researching the author and being quite sure of a win for when he visits. Our narrator is quick to jump to conclusions about particular authors we learn, and may find to dislike yet another when Hemmingway visits. We would think that he would learn not to pick his literary heroes so quickly, but this is not the case.
I agree with what you wrote. The narrator adored author Ayn Rand at first but when he figured out how selfish she was and her perspetive of the world, we saw that his feeling towards her quickly changed. Although I think that the narrator will win and that he will still adore Hemmingway even after he visits the school.
DeleteI noticed that the narrator changed his views on Ayn Rand very quickly as well, and I think it is due to the fact that she might write well, but he might not agree with her personality. I wonder if Ayn's attack on Hemmingway made the narrator admire Hemmingway's work even more, because the narrator started taking sides with certain writers, like you stated in the first paragraph. Since he started to dislike Ayn Rand, the narrator could have started admiring Hemmingway because Ayn Rand spoke poorly of him.
DeleteI agree with you, but I think he won't develop a disliking for Hemingway. Through their writing, authors allow us a view of themselves, and Hemingway especially does this. He allows his readers to draw connections between him and the characters he writes about ("Knowing that readers like me would see him in Nick" (Wolff 97).). It gives you a glimpse into how imperfect he is, and you accept that and maybe like him more for it, because no one is perfect. Ayn Rand on the other hand, although her opinions and voice also shine through her writing, makes herself less relatable and gives you a false hope that you can be superior. But when the narrator actually meets her in person, he finds himself on the receiving end of this superiority and realizes how truly demoralizing it is to others when you act with this superiority, when Rand treats him and others he holds in high regard like they're inferior.
DeleteI agree with what you said about the narrator's feelings about Ayn Rand. He enjoyed originally reading Fountainhead but after meeting Ayn Rand, his feelings changed because of her harsh personality. I think that he especially did not like how Ayn Rand insulted Hemingway because the narrator really admires Hemingway's writing. I do not think the narrator will dislike Hemingway even after meeting him because Hemingway does not seem anything like Ayn Rand.
DeleteSubtle clues to a bold personality
ReplyDeleteEmil Friedman
Arguably the highlight (and most discussed) of the past couple chapters of “Old School” is Ayn Rand’s visit to the school. Rand made no reservations when it came to expressing her views, and many of her fundamental beliefs were directly spelled out by Rand herself. What I found more interesting, though, were the subtle clues in the physical description and mannerisms of Ayn Rand that can be interpreted to point towards Rand’s personality.
Ayn Rand is first comprehensively described when she holds her follow-up session in Blaine Hall. Upon entering, Rand “shrug[s] off her cape, hand[ing] it without a glance to the tall guy….” First of all, a cape? Along with her hair (“shaped like a helmet”), Ayn’s physical appearance is peculiar at best. To me, a cape implies a dark and mysterious personality. Further, a cape - even back then - isn’t a common article of clothing. Might wearing a cape indicate Ayn’s individualistic, rebellious, and almost mocking personality? She goes on to “shrug off” the cape. The author could have used another verb, like “take” or “pull.” But he goes with “shrug.” “To shrug” is often connected with a smug, uncaring personality. Coincidence? I think not. Finally, she hands the cape to the tall assistant “without a glance.” These additional three words are, in my opinion, necessary. They show how Ayn has not a care in the world for what others do. In accordance with her beliefs, she lives her life for her and her alone. It makes perfect sense that she’d see no need to thank or even acknowledge her assistant.
Later comes what I believe to be one of the most important events of this section of the reading. I initially thought that the author’s lengthy description of the history behind the no-smoking rule at the school was less than fundamental to the book. Here, it comes back into play, though subtly. Ayn whips out a cigarette, and “[t]he smoke from her cigarette drifted up past the picture of the Blaine Boys.” Given the book’s time period, smoking in and of itself isn’t a big deal. Particularly for a visitor who presumably doesn’t know about the school’s smoking rule, simply having Ayn smoke wouldn’t be noteworthy. But here comes the bigger part: “...drifted up past the picture of the Blaine Boys.” That’s the important part. It indicates to the reader that Ayn is fully aware of the no-smoking rule. She’s fully aware of the history of the rule, and the historical importance of the Blaine Boys. But Ayn ignores all of this. She truly doesn’t care. What happened, or is happening, to others does not apply to Rand, so why should she care? Ayn Rand wants a cigarette, so - agreeing with her most broad beliefs - she’s going to have that cigarette. Indeed, when one lives one’s life with an individual (selfish, I think) approach, such rules are to be ignored.
It’s really only a sentence in the book. For me, though, the situation was very telling about Ayn Rand. Her political beliefs are one thing, and I believe that they are perfectly valid; I might even go on to agree with some of her ideas to a degree. But her lack of respect crosses the line. In a human society, mutual respect has to be a prevalent component. Ayn Rand doesn’t show human respect. It’s all for her, and her alone. And I can’t bring myself to agree with this part of Rand’s personality.
I like how you took that one sentence and shaped a personality from that. I agree, Ayn Rand has a bit of a misanthropic air about her. I think she tries to live in a world like her books, where there are "perfect" human beings, and she fancies herself as one of them. Also, her disregard for the rules do show her arrogant side, a personality trait which makes her such a dislikeable character.
DeleteEthan actually discussed why she behaves like this in regard to her background (and I commented with some more information about her early life) and it's mostly because when she was a little younger than us, the communists took Russia. Her wealthy family owned a pharmaceutical business that had taken years to build up, and all of that was taken by the communists. All of this is almost a result of her depressing past.
DeleteI agree. Ayn Rand's disregard for others is alarming, to the point of being plain rude. The manner in which she removed her "cape" and gave it to her assistant, made it really clear that she had no respect for him whatsoever. In the book, she even proceeds to tell Mr. Dufresne that "no further introduction will be necessary (Wolff 90). Being so self-absorbed, she expects everyone to know who she is and how "accomplished" she is. As you pointed out, Rand also smoked despite the schools strict rule against it. Considering how the cigarette smoke "drifted up past the picture of the Blaine Boys", its almost as if she's mocking the school. This makes you wonder if she was ever physically told about the rule, and why no one tried to stop her.
DeleteI find your take on the description of Ayn Rand very thought-provoking. I love how you specifically focused on one passage in the text, and then really delved into all the small details that the sentence had to offer. By doing this close analysis, it allowed me to discover things that I actually just skipped through without paying much attention to, such as the fact that "the smoke from her cigarette drifted up past the picture of the Blaine Boys." I agree with you that this plays a key role in the characterization of Rand.
DeleteYou, along with the other people who commented above, also made a point on how Ayn Rand clearly has an arrogant and "misanthropic" attitude. I think another pieces of evidence that supports this claim is how Ayn Rand assumes that everybody knows what she's referring to when she mentions John Galt. This fact just demonstrates her belief that everybody reads her books because they are just "so great;" she thinks she is superior.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSarah Cook
ReplyDeleteDiscovering Your Voice
After having Ayn Rand, the visiting author come to the school, I think that the narrator has discovered his voice. Through out Old School you don’t know a lot about the author. The author gives his opinion on people but you never hear his opinion when it comes to other things like life. I feel as if when Ayn Rand gives her perspective on life and many other things this is when we hear the narrators true voice.
Originally I had gotten the feeling that the narrator was infatuated with Ayn Rand, because of his love for the book Fountainhead. The narrator had read this book over and over again. I had the impression that he was starting to believe in Ayn Rand’s writing more and more. The more the narrator reads and re-reads Fountainhead his own opinions and his own voice starts to fade. He begins to agree with Ayn Rand’s opinion of the world. The narrator considers “how shabbily this world treats a man who is strong and great” (Wolff 67). The narrator begins to consider his personality portrays him as a “weakling, a slave” (Wolff 68). Slowly but surely the narrator’s voice starts to diminish.
The narrator’s voice starts to reappear while he is listening to Ayn Rand talk to the school. Ayn Rand gives her opinion about a person’s value and worth, and her view on other writers. When asked what she believed the greatest work by an American author would be, she replies Atlas Shrugged, a novel written by her. Then she goes on attacking other writers and their novels. After meeting with Ayn Rand and getting to see whom she really is as a person. "The problem was that I could no longer read Ayn Rand's sentences without hearing her voice. And hearing her voice, I saw her face; to be exact, the face she'd turned on me when I sneezed. Her disgust had power," (Wolff 91). The narrator realizes and opens his eyes to see how Ayn Rand’s ideas and opinions were crazy. The narrator begins to develop his voice that he lost by being influenced by what he had read.
I too think that the narrator has found his voice in this chapter. When the narrator first started reading Ayn Rand's book The Fountainhead he seemed to get sucked into the writing of Ayn Rand and he himself stated how to started "discovering the force of [his] will (Wolff 68)". He seemed to be influenced greatly by this one writer and I was sort of happy when realization hit him. It's okay to really like a writer but when their ideas start to controll you, there is a problem. As shown in the book the perceptions we get of people through writing versus in person is extremely different. People can make themselves seem to be one thing through the words they write but in person they could be just as rude and close minded as ever. I think that the discovery of the narrators voice is a turning point in this book because it's the first glimpse of the "true him" we get. Before he was constantly ridiculing others and not really letting people know much about him or his views but through this interaction with Ayn Rand the reader now has a glimpse of who he really is.
DeleteThe author Ayn Rand, is portrayed as a self-centered person who thinks she knows everything. As Ayn Rand makes a visit to the school because she is chosen as one of the authors for the writing competition, her insouiance for others is shown. She does not care for what other people got to say, and is not tolerant enough to listen to others ideas. Multiple times throughout the chapter Ayn Rand is decribed as “dark”, and “dim. This is the impression she creates to the students, and the narrator.
ReplyDeleteThe insouciance in her personality is because of the moral by which she lives. Ayn Rand believes that only people who deserve to be respected and loved are the people who earned it by doing something great. She also thinks that gaining one’s own happiness can only be done by the individual and no one else. This structure is life is what makes Ayn Rand arrogant in the school. When she is asked who her favorite author is, she states herself. She describes Hemmingway as weak, and completely malevolent sense of life. This contributes to the idea of lack of care, because she does not appreciate others work, and just finds cons to them. Another place where this can be seen is at the part when the narrator accidently sneezes during the conference. Ayn Rand is described to as fixed him with her dark, deep-set eyes. This shows that her arrogance cannot be seen in her talking only, but in her actions as well. She is does not care that he’s sick but sees the part where he is interrupting the silence of her conference.
I think that Ayn Rand has a good point but does not know how to get it across without rejecting others ideas. If she learned how to be persuasive opposed to arrogant, then people would not consider her mean. She came up with her own belief that she called randism, but because of her lack of care of concern for others, she was not able to get it anywhere.
I agree with your idea that Ayn Rand is a self-centered person. Not only for her morals, like you mentioned, but for her disregard for the school policies. I also wonder if her followers make her feel more confident and act more arrogant than she would normally?
DeleteI agree with your main points. Self-confidence and high self-esteem most certainly have their place, but I do think that Rand's personality crosses the line. In a literary school - a place where literature is widely known and valued - it's pretty ridiculous for her to claim that she is her favorite author. I don't know that any other author would do that sort of thing; it was absolutely impolite and arrogant to say the least!
DeleteI especially agree with your last paragraph. Ayn's ideas do, in fact, have value and validity to them. If Ayn could be a bit more "human-like" and personable in her communicating, her ideas might actually be considered by a wider audience.
Dilip Aaron
ReplyDeleteImpressions of the Characters and Writers
There are many impressions that one can make from every character in the novel Old School. One impression from the writer Ayn Rand is that you can clearly see is that she has a totally different view on society them most common people. Ayn Rand believed that everyone should work for themselves and not be helped by others. As in the book Old School she says, “If they sacrificed themselves for mine, they died weakly and, I should add, irrationally, even immorally.(Page 86)” This comment by Ayn Rand referred to soldiers in war fighting for their country. I find it very cold hearted for anyone to say such a comment for the people who fight for our and your freedom. Men were laying out there lives so that people back home could live their own free lives. For her to also make this comment around the 1960’s must mean that she also has a lot guts. Before the 1960’s World War 2 had just ended and over 60 million people had been killed in the war. Her making this comment was like saying that it was pointless for men to fight for our freedom and that every American man who died didn’t even matter.
I personally think that Ayn Rand is a self-centered woman who thinks that she is the most powerful person in the world. She even sort of hints something like this in the book when she is asked what the single greatest work is by an American author, she says, “Atlas Shrugged (Page84).” Which this just happens to be her book and when asked about other authors she says that all of them were wrong in some aspect of their writing. I think that this woman has to get her head out of the sand and reevaluate society for her ideas are crazy for an American society.
I agree with you. I think it was really wrong of her to talk about the war in that kind of manner. People sacrafied their lives for our freedom, including Ayn Ramds. For her to say such a thing demonstrates how self- centered and "cold hearted" like you said before.
DeleteGideon Schmidt
ReplyDeletePersonality Check; “Big” and “Little” Jeffs
It’s interesting how the author chooses to refer to the Purcells as “Little Jeff” and “Big Jeff” in the way he does; size what it may be, they are somewhat ironic given the personalities of the people they accompany. “Little” Jeff has a much more forceful and a bigger mental presence than “Big” Jeff, who clearly has a soft heart and a much smaller mental presence. There’s not a ton of pages devoted to telling this but the few there are tell a whole lot of this story.
Little Jeff hates being called Little Jeff; he resents the fact that Big Jeff forced that name on him, and it sounds to me as if the size difference was negligible which makes Little Jeff dislike it even more. That might have also shaped some of his more forceful personality. His response to the fact that Big Jeff won the Ayn Rand competition shows all of this clearly. “Because the blood of an artist funs in Big Jeff’s veins. Because he’s a two-fisted, bigger-than-life, award-winning author and not one of your local artistes who give themselves orgasms by forswearing capital letters and boring the living shit out of everybody.” Clearly he has a forceful personality, and this is exaggerated tenfold when talking about Big Jeff. His tone of voice and choice of language show that he’s not a little boy, and he’s sick of being “little” Jeff.
Big Jeff seems to have a soft heart. He’s an animal and science enthusiast (that’s how he became a vegetarian) the story he writes for the Rand competition shows it, and the narrator illustrates that well, saying that he wrote it to “combine his vegetarianism with his interest in space travel.” This is a couple of character traits I’m familiar with, since my siblings cover both of them (my sister is a vegetarian, my brother is into rockets). Clearly, someone who chose to not eat meat in order to spare the lives of animals has a soft spot on his heart, and somebody who thinks about space travel has a somewhat carefree attitude towards life in general. His personality is definitely a much lesser thing than Little Jeff’s.
What interests me is the author’s craft of these two characters, and how the mentally bigger, more forceful character is the little one on the surface, and the more altruistic and less forceful is known to paper as the big one. It’s a sort of irony. It’s an interesting form of how the author shapes these characters so that they are pretty much opposites of their names.
I've never considered the Big Jeff vs. Little Jeff comparison before, but I agree with your interpretations. The quote you selected from Little Jeff ("Because the blood...") really does indicate his true, bold personality. This is in accordance with the narrator's characterization of him from the very beginning, when he was declared a tough, no-nonsense guy.
DeleteBig Jeff, on the other hand, does seem to be a bit "softer." I agree with your character interpretation of him, and I'd even go so far as to classify Big Jeff as a bit goofy. His alien story wasn't intended to be a declaration against socialism - it was just a juvenile story with a vegetarian twist. Big Jeff has some innocence to him that the other boys don't seem to have, and it's refreshing.
I agree with you. Big Jeff did not write his story for whatever reason that Ayn Rand thought he wrote it for. He wrote his story because of his interests. Also, I don't think that he deserves the praise that he is getting. He wrote a children book about the evils of the slaughter house, not about capitalism or the plight of the intellectual.
DeleteYou bring up an interesting point, with Big Jeff and Little Jeff having such completely different ideals, and how their names might have influenced that. Little Jeff had to go through his upbringing always being called the smaller child, so naturally, he tried to make this up in his own personality, forcing himself to become different than Big Jeff. Meanwhile, Big Jeff, a name you'd associate with a much larger and imposing man, has none of the toughness and the grit of Little Jeff, instead having a kinder heart and being - as Emil said - a bit goofy.
DeleteThinking about it, it is very curious that Ayn Rand would pick his work, considering that his personallity is very calm and easygoing. whereas Ayn Rand is rude, obnoxious and pretty stubborn. True, she did pick his work because she misconstrued his message to fit her views, but a writers voice is captured in their work, and Big Jeffs kind and caring soul must have been in there somwhere, and it should have been repulsive to Ayn Rand
DeleteShallow Thinking
ReplyDeleteBy: Matt Ziegler
In Chapter 5 of "Old School", the narrator is being very critical of Ayn Rand and the way she carries herself. It seems as if he has very little respect for her, both as a person and as a writer. "Her heroes were hearty, happily formed, and didn't have brats."(Wolff, 95). I understand that he is judging her against Hemingway, but that is simply her style of writing, and probably the reason so many people like her. In the narrator's case, he is so used to reading very complex writing with lots of different parts and different types of characters. Rand's writing may be a little bit simpler, and she may be quite full of herself, but these are all reasons why people even read her writing.
I think the narrator is perhaps a little bit jealous of Ayn Rand. I know sometimes when I am listening to a song I don't like, I say to myself: "I could have done a better job with that song." This is probably the case with the narrator, just with writing. He reads Rand's writing and possibly says: "Hemingway, or even I, could do better than that, but she is famous and I am not."
I think another reason he is so critical of her is because of her obvious distaste of Hemingway. She thinks of herself as the only talented American writer, which the narrator obviously does not agree with. When we make comparisons to the narrator in this story, we have to remember that writing was basically all he had. Sometimes we get frustrated when someone likes a certain band more than our favorite band, or a certain sports team more than our favorite sports team. This is the same thing with the narrator and Hemingway. He likes to think that Hemingway is the best writer, when in reality, he probably is not.
In conclusion, I think it is important that we not draw any conclusions on Ayn Rand based on the narrator's description of her. I think it is perhaps a little bit unfair for Tobias Wolff to portray her in such a way, but that is the way the free press works, and we have to make judgements for ourselves.
I disagree with that. Having seen the video of her being interviewed, I feel that how she is portrayed in the book and what she's like in real life are very similar. While the narrator might be biased towards Hemingway, the presence of reality in his writing compared to the perfect people in Rand's writing make Rand seem like the shallow thinker rather than the narrator. I don't think that the narrator makes any rash judgments that can't be backed up with some evidence; Emil's blog is a good example of that, I think.
DeleteI feel like his opinions on Ayn Rand as a writer and a person can be chalked up to more than just jealousy and her dislike of Hemingway. The narrator obviously didn't always have such a dislike of Ayn Rand, being almost intoxicated in her ideas after reading The Fountainhead. He seems to fully accept her ideas, scoffing at a shoe salesman, who in his opinion, has "chosen to kneel (Wolff 70)" when men are meant to be great. This only changes upon him actually meeting her, and realizing the conflicting values she tries to uphold. She views him as weak, purely for being sick, something that is almost completely out of his control. I agree with Gideon in that these aren't just sudden judgements he's making based on only his love of Hemingway, his dislike of Ayn Rand has to do with her morals and ideals conflicting with the narrator's own.
DeleteAlthough I believe that this is a interesting take on the narrator's views on Ayn Rand, I generally disagree. I don't believe that the narrator had little respect for Ayn Rand in the beginning of this chapter, I think he had almost too much respect for Rand. Before the interview occurred, the narrator became one of Ayn's followers, trying to live the life of the characters in her novels. He almost worshiped Rand but once he met her, and realized who he was actually following, his eyes had opened and his opinion of her changed dramatically. I believe it was then that he had no respect for her.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJoy Keat
ReplyDeleteWriter’s intent vs. Interpretation of the Reader
In chapters “Frost” and “Ubermensch” guest authors Robert Frost and Ayn Rand come to the school and pick a literary piece amongst the contenders. However both authors interpreted the pieces in ways that were different from what the authors’ originally intended.
The first visiting author Robert Frost ultimately picks George Kellogg’s poem, which is humorously titled “First Frost” as homage to the author. George intended the poem to be a tribute to Frost using similar notions of Frosts poems like “the farm, the folksy tone, and the snow”. However a telephone interview with Frost reveals that he picked George’s poem because it seemed like a satire or burlesque piece to him. For example Frost found it funny that George described the milkmaid to have soft hands when in reality George never intended that to be a joke. But Frost did seem to enjoy the piece and the narrator describes Frost as sly and boyish “the lord of misrule” and shows that it wouldn’t be much of a surprise that Frost would pick a piece that was humorous to him.
And another example of a discrepancy is between guest author Ayn Rand and “Big” Jeff Purcell; Purcell’s story was inspired by him being a vegetarian, how domestic animals like cows are cruelly treated, and how if cows were in a higher position what they would do to us. But like fellow author Frost, Rand completely misinterprets what Jeff was trying to convey through his story. Ayn interprets Jeff’s story as a “depiction of the victim kissing the whip”. Rand’s misinterpretation might be an expression of her being a self-idolized, close-minded person which differs from Jeff’s goodhearted intentions.
This brings up the question of who is truly right and wrong when it comes to interpreting a literary piece. I believe neither the writer nor reader is “wrong” for the reason being that the writer is the one who creates the piece typically with some kind of initial meaning. But this does not necessarily make the reader wrong if they see and or interpret it differently because like Rand or Frost everyone has had different personal experiences. Therefore it is the job of the author to hint at or present their intents to the viewer, and the reader is to take the information given to them and view it through their own eyes.
I completely agree with you! I also noticed that what ever the student's interpretation was when they submitted their pieces, that's not the message that came across to the esteemed writers. I think all the Authors looked at the pieces through their personalized lens; their writing style. I agree that neither the writer or the reader is wrong in their interpretation because it is just that, their interpretation. Every story is in the eye of the beholder and the reader understands it in their own way, from their personal experiences, as you said. I like how you said everyone interprets things differently based on their personal experiences.
DeleteI also agree with you and I think that this idea is very interesting. I also think that what the writers such as Frost and Rand interpreted the boys pieces as was not what the authors indented. I also think that everyone's own interpretation is based on how they relate to the piece and it might not be in the same the the author related to it or intended to reader to. I like how you say that the author should give hints of their own intentions but the reader "is to take the information given to them and view it through their own eyes." because I completely agree!
DeleteI agree with you that both reader and writer can have different views completely. However, a work of literature is similar to a puzzle; and if there is a 'cheat sheet' for that puzzle, it takes away the enjoyment. A puzzle you know can be built in many different ways to make the same thing, and each way it is done is considered right. A piece does not have to be hinted at nor presented in a particular way by the author to be properly enjoyed or interpreted by all who come across it.
DeletePerspective Change
ReplyDeleteMolly Nealon
Although much happened throughout chapters 3, 4, and 5, the event which was most influential on the narrator's perspective for the rest of the book occurred in chapter four, Ubermensch. The chapter starts off with our narrator reading Ayn Rand's book on the train home from Baltimore and ends with her visit, which was, in addition, very important in terms of character development. Everything about Ayn Rand, from her writing, to her attitude in person, seems to have a great impact on the way in which the narrator not only views himself, but also how he views those around him.
Immediately after the narrator begins reading Ayn Rand's novel, he begins comparing not only himself, but also people and things around him to the characters and situations in it, explaining "My cheeks weren't hollow and my eyes weren't gray, but my mouth surely tightened with contempt over the next weeks as I read and re-read "The Fountainhead" and considered how shabbily the world treats a man who is strong and great, simply because he is strong and great." The narrator compares himself to the main character in the story, Roark, and immediately sympathizes with him, and contrasts those around him to Roark, "That was where the contempt came in. I had stayed with my grandfather and his wife on other vacations, and found them kindly but dull ... I watched [them] with a cold eye... I began to feel their kindness as a form of aggression." The narrator begins to become bitter towards those people, and it ruins his vacation, him analyzing over and over the lives of his relatives, and considering himself better than them, to a certain degree.
The narrator returns to school, more arrogant than ever. He, of course, wants to submit a piece of writing to have a chance to meet Rand, however he is so confident that he will be able to write something incredible without any effort, that he puts it off to the last minute. This obviously doesn't work out for him, as he gets sick and is not able to write anything. He still, however, attends her seminar, although he is still a bit sick. There, he discovers just how cynical Ayn Rand really is, and how mean she can be, when he sneezes during her speech, and instead of blessing him, Ayn looks at him with disgust, as if his sickness means he is a weakling, not worthy of her taking the effort to pause and say "bless you."
This completely changes the narrator's perspective on everything, in that he began the chapter as this cocky little kid who was so moved by Ayn's writing that he actually began to believe it, and aspired to be like the characters in her novel; however, by the end of the chapter, he had lost all of that confidence. In the next chapter, Slice of Life, the narrator explains how he is unable at this point to even read The Fountainhead, which he previously had read multiple times, as it reminded him of Ayn Rand's look of disgust which she gave him.
This damaged him not only in that he is now unable to read her book, but now all of her philosophies seem to be completely irrelevant in his mind. He went from being so confident in his writing that he put it off until the last second before it was due, to not even writing anything of his own, just rewriting something which another great author had written. I predict that this situation with Ayn Rand's disgust towards the narrator will impact how he looks at himself and the people around him for the rest of the book. Words, or, in this case, looks of disgust can have that kind of impact on people, forcing them back into their shell, and I think that is somewhat the message which this chapter was trying to get across.
(continued)
(continued)
ReplyDeleteAyn Rand, I believe, is supposed to represent the struggles in life, and if you take it too literally (as the narrator did with her writing) you will end up acting out. Sometimes you just have to look past the things in your way if you want to succeed, and not end up like the narrator, completely backtracking in terms of development, just because of a small action someone did against you.
Although I agree with your initial statement about the narrator, I disagree with your concept that his character development regressed. Sure, when he was inspired by Ayn Rand, he had strong feelings and was sure of himself, but it was mostly him being filled with contempt for others around him. My personal opinion is that through and because of the entire Ayn Rand scenario, the narrator learns about humanity and how no one can truly achieve perfection. I feel that by coming to this conclusion, the narrator has actually grown and not regressed in character development.
DeleteEmilie Ravena
ReplyDeleteChange of Opinions
The narrator was surprised to find himself totally immersed in Ayn Rand’s novels, particularly The Fountainhead, which he picked up as a joke, but got caught up in the story and continued reading. He was so into the book, he almost missed his train to buy it, and wouldn’t let a girl borrow it to read for the train ride. The book made an obvious impact on the narrator, when he would go out he would make little connections to the text. “The Fountainhead made me alert to the smallest surrenders of will. Passing a shoe store, I saw a young salesman in the act of bending over a customer’s foot. I stopped by the window and stared at him, hoping he’d sense my rage and disgust (Wolff 70).”
This all changed when Ayn Rand made a visit to the narrator’s school. Once he experienced Ayn’s presence and personality, the narrator’s views of her novels changed. The narrator found that her views of society and herself were very different from most people. Ayn’s actions and movements in her meeting alluded to the narrator that the author wasn’t at all what he’d expected. From the moment she walked through the door, Ayn gave people the intention that she was important, better than everyone else in the room. She seemed annoyed with the narrator’s valid question, and disgusted by his sneezes, which were beyond his control. “At that moment the sneeze I’d been trying to hold back exploded wetly. Ayn Rand fixed me with her dark, deep-set eyes as I wiped my lip and gave my nose a final clearing blast (Wolff 82).”
After the meeting with Ayn Rand, the narrator started to have a hard time finding any interest in Ayn’s pieces because he knew too well the personality of the person who wrote them. “And hearing her voice, I saw her face; to be exact, the face she’d turned on me when I sneezed. Her disgust had power (Wolff 91).” That power of disgust she had was enough to stop the narrator from reading her books because it created a mental image of her that he couldn’t shake. The narrator started to notice flaws in her writing now that he was aware of what Ayn herself was like.
It is very interesting how before Ayn came to visit the narrator’s school, he liked many aspects of different writers, no matter how different they all were from each other. After her visit, he realized how big the differences were between writers. The two writers he compared were Ayn Rand and Ernest Hemingway. Hemingway’s pieces were so deep and thought provoking, the narrator found himself losing even more interest in Ayn’s books. It is also interesting that when the narrator asked about Hemingway in the meeting with Ayn Rand, she seemed offended by the mere mention of his name. It seems that both of the writers have opposite writing styles, and Ayn believes her style is superior.
I agree with your characterization of Ayn Rand. She definitely thinks she is superior to anyone and everyone. This is very evident when the headmaster asks her what the greatest piece of American writing is she chooses her own book. When he asks again, she chooses yet another one of her own books.I also agree with you Ayn Rand visiting was not the only thing that ruined the books for the narrator.The narrator starts to read Hemingway's work and this also tears him away from Ayn Rand. This whole idea of "Change of Opinions" makes me wonder what will happen after Hemingway visits and if the narrator will continue to admire his work.
DeleteI think you make a really good point that I honestly didn’t realize while I was reading the book. I think it’s interesting how the narrator didn’t think he would enjoy Ayn Rand’s stories until he started reading them and couldn’t stop; however his opinion on her seemed to turn around completely after seeing her in person. I think this can relate to the saying “don’t judge a book by its cover” (Ayn metaphorically being the book). After reading Ayns work, I think it was really shocking for the narrator and many other students to find out who she really is and what she believes in.
DeletePriyanka Vijay
ReplyDeleteAyn Rand’s influence on others
In Old School, Ayn Rand is portrayed as a narcissistic, stubborn, and opinion inducing writer. Everyone has mixed views on Ayn Rand’s philosophy and frankly I mostly disagree with her. On one hand, she is so strict about maintaining a strong view on objectivism which I don’t agree on, and on the other hand, I grudgingly find myself agreeing with her on a few topics such as having a high self-esteem and wishing people to “be bold…”
On page 82 she says, “Remember this: when someone calls himself your brother, he does so with one desire-that you will become his keeper, a slave to his own incapacity and idleness, Above all, save yourselves from your brother.” This quote demonstrates the level of independence she wants everybody to have. She believes that you should never let someone boss you around and you should never become their “slave”. Bottom line- nobody owns you, you are your own person and you shouldn’t have to conform to someone else’s rules. I don’t completely agree with this philosophy because being so independent isn’t very plausible in all situations.
In terms of brotherhood, her philosophy is not justified, why would your brother make you responsible for him or work for him? You are equals (you are brothers). Family is something you have to have, you can’t be without them. Family is the best example of people who will never take advantage of you. Although she can’t accept the perception of love and good honest people, In the real world outside of family, I can see how this idea can be applied. The search for individuality could be summed up with her ideals. Not letting people define who you are, is something I agree with.
According to Ayn Rand, you should “Never sacrifice yourselves-never!” which is completely against my morals. I think that donating your services to a great cause is purely admirable human nature; I do not think that charitable causes are a “common murderer”. Just because you may not receive a reward for your generosity, you are deemed a remarkable, selfless, and courteous citizen; something Ayn Rand seems to lack.
I agree with you. I think that Ayn Rand is a stubborn, and arrogant character, that wants to push her idea of objectivism out into the world. I feel like Ayn Rand does have good points in her idea, but she does not know how to express them. She makes everything so blunt , and awkward. In the interview she answered most questions with a yes or a no. Also in the book, when she was asked who her favorite writing was, she said herself. I think that if Ayn Rand knew how to express her ideas, she would of gotten somewhere with her idea. She needs to be more persuasive, and less forceful about her ideas. Also I agree with ur statement that family is something that you need to have. Ayn Rand believes that people need to earn love, but parents love their children no matter how many mistakes they made, I feel like her understanding and intrepretation of what love is, is wrong.
DeleteI completely agree with you in the fact that Ayn Rand's ideas are definitely hard to agree with and some of them don't really make sense in the modern world. I also think some of the ideas she has make sense though. I think when she talks about never becoming someones "slave" that you can interpret it multiple ways. On one hand yes, it is good to help others so I don't agree with her that you should make other people fend for themselves. The thing is though, you have to have some level of independence or you won't get very far. I think to a certain extent, you have to be able to stand up for yourself and tell people no, especially if they are trying to get you to do something you don't want to. I think her interpretation of not becoming a slave is that you should not help others at all, which I completely disagree with, but if you interpret it slightly less literally or boldly, her idea makes a little bit more sense.
DeleteI completely agree with you. As Ayn Rand's personality is revealed in the story, it's hard not to criticize her. She not only is going against the normalcy of societal norms and relations but she also contradicts herself constantly. She wants to spread her ideas and get her point across but she also wants the other person to feel like what she is saying is right and for that sole reason, she goes back and forth, giving them a little of her personal life and then what those specific experiences taught her. She's manipulative and she knows that. Some horrible experiences may have led her to be the person she is but her not accepting them/moving on from the extremes is causing her to indulge in her ignorance.
DeleteNarrator's Attitude
ReplyDeleteRicardo Rivadeneira
After the chapter "Slice of Life," I would hope that the narrator's attitude towards life and other people will change. He seems to realize in this chapter that he is just as weak as anyone else, and that it's nonsensical to have a society of all-powerful and individual people. It's ironic that Ayn Rand actually turned him away from her ideas with her extremely disgusted look at his sneeze when only a few days before he did the same exact thing to the young salesman at the shoe store in his grandparents town.
"The Fountainhead made me alert toe the smallest surrenders of will. Passing a shoe store, I saw a young salesman in the act of bending over a customer's foot. I stopped by the window and stared at him, hoping he'd sense my rage and disgust. You-- is this your dream? To grovel before strangers, to stuff their corns and bunions into Hush Puppies? And for what-- a roof overhead and three squares a day? Coward! Fool! Men were born to soar, and you have chosen to kneel!"
I think the author does a really great job of describing what it is like to be captured by an idea, and then (almost unrealistically) completely shed that idea from your thought process. He realizes that everybody has their problems and weaknesses and that it is important to enjoy the little things. Even though he overall misinterpreted Ayn Rand, making his own beliefs that are basically just less radical versions of her beliefs, he does completely turn away from them after her talk with the school which seems strange, merely because you might think he would still maintain his own interpretations while disregarding Ayn Rand's more radical beliefs. I thought the narrator actually took an almost anti-consumerist interpretation on the books. The quote above is basically saying that the man shouldn't settle for the job he has or the things he owns.
It's strange how the book is almost written in a way to make you not like the narrator, but still gives you a strange understanding of where he's coming from, which isn't easy considering how strange nearly all of these characters are (because of their backgrounds, setting, etc), as well as their overall erratic nature (being teenagers). This strangeness comes from the fact that the boys channel their erratic nature through ideas rather actions. The understanding that the book gives us of the narrators thoughts is furthered by the fact that the book is very honest. For example --
"It didn't seem right that Lance,. who defied the decorums of language and bourgeois morality, should have to look on while Robert Penn Warren walked the garden with a sentimentalist like Kit (whose story, through its vulgar nakedness of feeling, had moved me to secret tears)."
He is basically saying that one story made him feel great emotion, but didn't deserve to win just because. The narrator is obviously just going through a confusing time in his life, and this weird phase of being disgusted by anyone who has weakness is just the narrator trying to find out who he is and what he believes. This book is a really clear example of a journey of self discovery.
I like the way that you compared the narrator sneering at the salesman who was kneeling over the persons foot, to Ayn rand staring disgustedly at the narrator after he sneezed. That connection I had never noticed before and looking back on it, it makes a lot of sense. I also agree that the book is made to make you not like the narrator because as I read the book I got the same feeling.
DeleteI also like that you pointed out the hypocrisy of the narrator when he sneers at the shoe salesman. Like you said, I think the narrator is just going through a confusing time in his life and is still trying to figure out what his beliefs are. I think this confusion contributes to his inability to write about himself in a truthful way since he is not completely sure who he is.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMelissa Stuart
ReplyDeleteContest Winners
In chapters 3-5 of Old School, I noticed similarities regarding how the winner of the writing contests was chosen. Frost and Rand had chosen the winners of the writing contests based on their connections to the student, and their work. The authors were able to relate to their ideas and writing styles, and I think people tend to gravitate towards others like them without even knowing it.
The first visiting writer was Robert Frost, who chose George Kellogg’s poem as the winner. I think this has to do with Frosts’ idea that the best writing comes from real experience. After George spoke with the narrator, it was clear that he was feeling real emotion while writing this poem, and I think Robert Frost felt that this showed in his writing. I think Frost saw that George was striving for some real world experience instead of being sheltered by the school, and as a result he created real feelings for the characters in his poem. I believe that Frost recognized this desire and chose his poem because he wanted to have the chance to help George get that experience “Frost said I was wasting my time in school. He said I should go to Kamchatka. Or Brazil” (Wolff 59).
The next winner was Big Jeff, whose story was chosen by Ayn Rand. They both have similar views in that they both believe in abstract ideas that other people would reject. Big Jeff believes in space travel and that we should colonize other planets. Ayn Rand believes that doing charity work shows weakness in character. Both of these ideas are not popular views of most people. Ayn probably didn’t even realize it when she chose Jeff’s story, but she must have felt some kind of connection with him because of the diversity of his beliefs. That’s why Ayn chose Big Jeff’s story, because he was brave enough to write about something he feels passionate about and put it out there for others to read and judge.
I completely agree with you! I too feel that the authors picked winners based on how close the student was able to "mimic" their personal writing style. Frost really focuses on small details and incorporates real life instances and emotions into his writing while Ayn Rand is abstract and tends to take a blunt approach as did Big Jeff when stating his vies on the slaughtering of cows. When reading your entry it made me wonder if I agreed with the way that the student writers are chosen. I actually don't think that they should be chosen that way because it should be based on the content of their writing and the meaning as opposed to how well they can copy the same style of the author who is choosing the winner. But then again the author is going to have a bias.
DeleteI didn't notice how the writers were chosen until I read your blog, but I definitely agree with you. Both Robert Frost and Ayn Rand felt some type of connection to the pieces they chose, and that is because writing usually moves you more if you have a personal connection to it. I wonder if the reason why Robert Frost didn't choose the narrator's poem is because he didn't connect to it, and I think that this might be a reoccurring problem the narrator has. Maybe the narrator would have more luck in winning the contest if he connected to his own work, which would be a step in the right direction for getting others to enjoy and feel more involved in his story.
DeleteI, too noticed this as we were reading the book, and I think it's a very interesting thought, that people tend to gravitate towards others like them. Many people think this to be true in personal relationships with others also, that you go for what you're familiar with. Maybe this has something to do with Frost's ideology that you should write about what you are familiar with, things that you know about? Your entry, in addition, makes me wonder whether Hemingway will choose his writing piece based on these same principles.
DeleteYou are completely right in that the authors choose their winners based upon their own styles, preferences or mimicking qualities. But I personally believe they did it deliberately, it seems not to be accidental that they chose works so similar to their own. I think perhaps the students may not realize that they wrote so similarly to the author (especially Big Jeff). In Big Jeff's piece he writes about going against the majority of society which is what Ayn Rand believes in. However, Big Jeff meant to write about a topic for far kinder reasons than Rand's. I believe that this biased choosing is unfair for students trying to be unique and original, although students that can match most closely to the author's style may deserve it based on cleverness and observation alone.
DeleteWhat does it mean to discover your voice?
ReplyDeleteResearch one of the allusions in the book that we didn’t look at in class.
What does it mean to discover your voice? I think it means that you are no longer influenced by others ideas, but are able to express ideas to others, like the narrator started to do in Ubermensch. After he reads Fountainhead by Ayn Rand the narrator describes the passion and empowerment he feels as a result. He talked about “discovering the force of [his] will (Wolff 68).” He desperately wanted a chance to meet with Ayn Rand and he was devastated when he was not able to win the competition.
But once Ayn Rand comes to the school the narrators vision of her shift just as quickly as if came. We see Ayn Rand through the narrator’s eyes as a conceited woman who is stuck on herself. At this school most boys drew “lines between certain writers (Wolff 94)” but the narrator had tried to avoid that practice because he saw “no point in reducing [his] pleasures in half. But Ayn Rand jolted [him into taking sides] (Wolff 94)” He started to see how hypocritical Ayn was. In one breath she would say that everyone “has a sovereign right to seek his own happiness in his own way (Wolff 85)” but yet she wants everyone to think as she does.
Also during the narrator’s realization of the harshness and reality of Ayn Rand, he mentions how he really loves Hemingway and he read the short story Indian Camp. I decided to read Indian Camp too and by doing this I got a better understanding of what the narrator meant when he said, “hard things happened in these stories, but the people weren’t hard (Wolff 96).” Indian Camp is a story of a father and son and the son’s initiation into manhood. Nick, the son, was taken with his dad to help a woman in labor and ended up watching a c-section. He also witnessed the woman’s husband commit suicide. Through this all he comes to question death and life and comes to the realization that “he would never die (Wolff 95).” After I read this poem I was able to connect to the emotions the narrator got when he read Hemingway. This short story touched on so many topics but you barely noticed. In one story Hemingway/' was able to talk about male superiority, child labor, the role of women, suicide, and death, yet he managed to leave the reader feeling satisfied and not tormented by the gravity of the subject matter.
From the narrators description of Rand I can only imagine how “bloated and cheesy” Rand’s books are and so far removed from real life “that you can’t believe a word of it (Wolff 96).” I imagine that Rand’s writing reflects her as a person: far removed from the realities of the world, close-minded, and conceited. I think that the narrator finally was able to find his voice after Rand’s visit in the sense of he was able to create his own judgment of authors based on good writing rather than emotions.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNoah Daviero
ReplyDeleteAfter reading chapters 3-5 of Old School, and listening to the interview of Ayn Rand with Mike Wallace, I came off with a low opinion of Ayn Rand and her beliefs. Some of the things that Ayn Rand said in the book and the interview struck a negative chord in my brain. One reason that I didn’t like Ayn Rand was because her manner was so overbearing it was hard to watch or read. For example, during her interview, when Mike Wallace started talking, she would just keep talking over him because she thought that her opinions and ideas were more important.
A quote that I would like to get into is her quote in the book that says, “The dream of universal equality leads not to paradise, but to Auschwitz”. When I first read this quote, I was shocked that anyone would say such a thing. To imply that a mass killing of minorities would be necessary for everyone to be equal, might be as horrible and self-centered a thing that I have ever heard. This initial reaction showed, in essence, what I thought of Ayn Rand and her ideas.
As I re-read the quote, I started to wonder why Ayn Rand would say something like this and what she meant by it. As I began to interpret this quote I began to think that Ayn Rand was just expressing her contempt for the dream of social equality by using the worst thing she could think of, Auschwitz, as her metaphor, and not actually trying to say that social equality led to Auschwitz. The reason I think this is because even though she was an atheist, she was born into a Jewish family and wouldn’t just throw around the concentration camps lightly.
The other way you could look at the quote was that Ayn Rand hated her Jewish roots and was trying to rebel against them by using the concentration camps in her writing as her path to reject her heritage. If you look at the quote this way, Ayn Rand’s interpretation of how to gain social equality becomes shocking and ghastly because you have to take a more literal approach to looking at her words.
Either way that you interpret the quote, whether it be very literally as her referring to the concentration camps or as a metaphor for her hate of social equality, her use of Auschwitz in this quote was unnecessary and unneeded especially so soon after these horrible events occurred.
I agree that this was a pretty crazy thing to say, and I agree with your idea that she was simply using this as a metaphor. Of course, it is hard to know with Rand, but she seems to have enough pride to not talk about her own religion in such a way. Also, this seems like the sort of metaphor she would give, being controversial and radical.
DeleteI agree with you about your views on Ayn Rand, although I interpreted her Auschwitz quote differently. I think she was saying that if there was equality among everyone, then we would live the life as those in the concentration camps of Auschwitz, meaning no one would have freedom or a fulfilling life.
DeleteFareena Aslam
ReplyDeleteWriters’ Superiority
In chapters 3-5, very important authors visit the school and are analyzed by the narrator and the boys of Old School. The first one being Robert Frost. Frost plays an important role in the school and even in the boys lives. He's an influential author. As Frost walks through the walls of the halls, he sees several wealthy, ignorant kids who base their writings off of the very examples he provides for them.The incident with Mr.Ramsay proves that Robert frost's not only justifying his writing but justifying how an author should be. He tells them about literature and the qualities an author truly needs, experience. His answer to Mr. Ramsey's question was more than just a bold remark. He was lambasting the whole conviction of following literary techniques. He abhors the fact that these boys imagination is confined within Old School. As I read the chapter, I felt as if though he felt that the boys were too technical to comprehend what he was saying. His advice to George, “Mr. Frost told me I was wasting my time in school. He said I should go to Kamchatka. Or Brazil.” was also an indicator that Robert frost thinks the boys should think beyond what they are taught in schools and put themselves in the situation of an outsider and step outside to see the real colors of the world. My original impression of Robert Frost was not how he was portrayed in the book, he was more carefree and boyish in the book whereas, I originally thought he would be more sophisticated and uptight.
Ayn Rand was the second author that was introduced in the book. The author laid out a generic idea of Ayn Rand for the readers but Ayn Rand was the exact opposite. The narrator saw her as a perfectionist whose ideology was the epitome of good writing. She was obstinate, self-absorbed and criticized whatever went against her personal beliefs. Ayn Rand shattered the perfect image the narrator had of her. She was a conceited, pretentious woman who ignored and didn’t value others. “Let me tell you what your value does not derive from. It does not derive from the self-sacrifice demanded by some party, or state, or from the church of some ludicrous god. It does not proceed from the people. In exchange for your reason and your freedom they may give you a certificate of virtue, even some power, but this is worthless......” (82-83) She superiorly states her philosophy to the boys in an attempt to captivate them with it.
As these literary masters were introduced and characterized in the book, several thoughts were weaving together in my head, one of them being the whole idea of perception vs. reality. We read all these books and create this whole image of authors in our head but in reality, they might be completely different people. An author has the power to create a false perception which does not necessarily reflect their personality. This in a way was a moral for me, if you admire a certain piece of writing that doesn’t imply that you will like the mastermind behind it.
Julia Wagner
ReplyDeleteMeeting Hemingway
Before Ayn Rand came to visit, the narrator decided to read The Foutainhead, one of her books. He was very captivated by the book, and had a connection with one of the characters, Dominique. He read it, the first time, without even putting it down. He then read it three more times. Soon after he finished reading the book the fourth time, Rand came to visit the school. After listening to her views and observing the way she acted relative to others and their actions, the narrator had changed his opinion on her and her book. Every time he tried to read one of her books he couldn’t because he would hear her voice and see “…the face she’d turned on me when [he] sneezed. Her disgust had power.” (Wolff 91) He went from loving this book and relating with characters to not even being able to read the book.
After Ayn Rand visited the school, the narrator started to re-read some books of Hemingway and read all the stories that were available to him. He was noticing all the differences between the characters in Hemingway’s works and the characters in Rand’s books. “[He] became touchily aware that both Roark and Dominique looked great and never had a sick day between them.” (Wolff 92) while in Hemingway’s characters were sick, injured and imperfect. The narrator now admired Hemingway and looked up to him “So much, in fact, that [he] began to copy his stories…in order learn what it actually felt like to write something great.” (Wolff 98)
The headmaster announced that Hemingway was going to be visiting the school just like Ayn Rand and Frost had. Obviously, this was exciting news for the narrator. This got me wondering about what might happen to the narrator’s opinion on Hemingway’s work after he visits. The narrator used to love Ayn Rand’s book until the intentions of her writing were revealed when she visited. There is a repetition of the narrator’s feelings towards the writers Ayn Rand and Hemingway. This makes me think that the pattern will continue and narrator’s perspective on Hemingway will change after the writer visits.
I agree with you! I really like how you noticed the way the narrator's view changes on the author's books after they come and visit. I am also curious to see how he feels about Hemingway after he visits. I thought Ayn Rand's Personality in real life was completely different than the one the narrator could connect with in the book. I don't think he should change his opinion about a book because the author did something unsettling, its too drastic. I think Hemingway would be more exciting for the author because The author has always been waiting for him to come, aside from Frost and I didn't see this excitement for Ayn Rand.
DeleteI completely agree with you on how the narrator's perception of the visiting authors change after realizing their true intent in their writing. I also think that the narrator's view of Hemingway will change when he meets him face to face. Even with Robert Frost when he was reading his poem "Mending Wall" to the boys the narrator says that he thought that he understood the poem but after Frost read it aloud the narrator says that he caught the "narrator's ironic superiority". Making the him realize that good fences truly make good neighbors. I think the reason why his view of the authors change once meeting them is that he gets so engrossed in their writing that he doesn't notice the slight hints at the writer's true intentions which is also similar to how Ayn Rand and Frost misinterpret Jeff and George's pieces.
DeletePatrick Chi
ReplyDeletePoint of Views
Between chapters 3 and 5 of Old School, Frost's visit to the school was definitely one of the most important elements of the plot. The way that the students regard Frost, and vice versa, is particularly worth noting. Both of these perceptions play a key role in the characterization of Robert Frost, while simultaneously giving the reader an even better sense of the setting of Old School.
The first thing worth pointing out about Frost’s visit is the immediate response to his arrival. With the boys at the school looking up to Frost and using his work as an example, there was definite excitement for his arrival. However, the first reactions were unique, and unlike anything seen before. "When [Frost] appeared in the dining hall [...] the ordinary din died almost to silence. We kept eating and tried not to stare, but we couldn't help ourselves." (Wolff 44) There aren’t that many things that could make a bunch of loud boys, creating a cacophony in a dining hall, suddenly die to complete silence, but that is exactly what Frost’s initial appearance did. In addition to this, the fact that all the boys are staring at their plates trying to get furtive glances at the Frost shows even more their respect for the great poet.
On the other hand, Frost’s perception of the students and teachers at Old School is very different. In his eyes, he merely sees a bunch of kids who are constrained within the walls of an elite, private boarding school with little to add to their intellect from the real world. They are assigned to what they hear and what they see within the boundaries of the school. Frost’s disdain with the school is evident in the way he presents himself and addresses the crowd of students. While “[Frost] was watching [the students] watch him” (Wolff 46), it could easily be seen that Frost felt superior to the people in his audience, “[reciting] poem after poem.” Although it is not arrogance that Frost is trying to display, the key message that Frost was trying to give was that anyone can stand in a hall and recite poem after poem despite their achievements. One should go out and look for something new and not follow an agenda. It is clear that this was the message that Frost was trying to convey when he said to George “[You are] wasting time in school. [You] should go to Kamchatka.” (Frost 59) The obvious meaning behind this is that instead of being bottled up at Old School doing what his teachers tell him to do, he should go outside and explore the world to gather more inspiration.
I agree completely with your thought process. Frost was a huge influence on the many of the boys at the school and his arrival was almost in a way, toned. The tension was evident between the boys and frost and i think that has to do with the whole idea of the environment, which you incorporated very well. Frost definitely wasn't pleased with the whole curriculum and attitude of the school and wanted them to step out of that box.
DeleteI agree with you in the sense that Frost's visit was important, however I would say that Ayn Rand's visit was equally as important. As they had different ideas and personalities, they presented themselves in different ways. With this in mind, I feel as if the visits end up being competitions for the authors as well. Although it is not direct, I feel as if they are competing to see who is the best author, and who has the biggest influence.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteVeronica Liu
ReplyDeleteAyn Rand within Old School
Within chapters four and five of Old School by Tobias Wolff, the visiting author Ayn Rand is portrayed as a disrespectful individual with radical thoughts.
Her way of thinking, objectivism, is so off-the-wall that the conservative teachers, and most of the school, dislike her. The teachers disagree with the idea of her visiting, saying that the school would lose ”no less than a part of its soul by playing host to her”. During her talk, she not only attacks President JFK, who the boys idolize, but also verbally attacks the school’s motto, “’Give All’”. Considering the school invited her as a guest, this is extremely rude. By criticizing the school's motto, she shows that she is against what the school stands for. Students walk out while she talks, and not many students come to her meet and greet.
Ayn Rand’s values are personified in her book The Fountainhead. The characters, being physically beautiful, unable to get sick, not anchored to reality by family or friends, and surrounded by inferiors, barely seem human, and sound more like gods than people. Ayn Rand believes that she is this type of person, stating that she has “always acted rationally” and has made no mistakes in her life.
However, it is impossible to live in accordance to Rand’s ideals. In her world, there are “no brats at all” and one’s personal happiness is the only thing worth fighting for. Even the narrator, who initially used Rand’s book The Fountainhead as a guide for his own life, comes to the conclusion that “the true failure lay in Ayn Rand's grasp in humanity.” Her view of the world is skewed, and she believes that everyone should selfishly look after themselves, instead of helping others.
I completely agree with you. Ayn Rand is a person who believes that everyone should earn their right to be happy, and earn their right to be loved. As you said it is impossible to live according to this idea because the world we live in is not perfect. In a perfect world, no one would make mistakes, and life would go as how the individual plans it, but now that is not the case. Ayn Rand also is very arrogant. I feel like this attitude comes because of her theory of objectivism. She feels the need to force her ideas into people because no one agrees with her. I feel like if she learned the tactic of persuasion rather then forcing, many people would consider her idea.
DeleteI, as well, completely agree with this thought that Ayn Rand's theories are completely rejected by the school. However, the case may not be that her ideas are entirely incorrect. I think the immediate discomfort and rejection of Rand's ideas demonstrated by the students are, in fact, logical, however I think they may be have increased by the sheltered life the kids at the boarding school lead. I'm not trying to say that I agree with Ayn Rand's ideas, because I don't, but I think that anyone who has lived in the real world and realizes that different people have different opinions would not have been so dramatically impacted by her ideas and theories, but rather they would have just shoved it off and ignored it. In conclusion, though, I definitely agree with your statements here.
DeleteYeah, Perfect You, Being Your Own Man. Yeah, Tell It To Your Fans
ReplyDeleteTo Ayn Rand, Ayn Rand is a god. She’s the bee’s knees. The best thing since sliced bread. And she loves being a god, the guy in the sky whom the people worship and slit their wrists for. Oh, but she’ll never give in. she’ll always say, you can be your own god. You can live for yourself. You don’t need people to follow you and respect you, the same way the people love me. Ayn Rand lies, and in the book, it shows how she is a hypocrite. She says “You are born to be giants, not sacrifices to some tribal deity or some idiot fantasy of earthly paradise…” She’s basically saying that you can dream big and think big and be who you want, however, she said this, shortly after a man cheered for her in the audience.
For someone who claims to not care what people think of her and to isolate yourself from people who will demand something of you, she sure has large fan base, and she clearly is proud of it, as shown with her correction of the number of fans she has from thousands to “millions”. Even though she clearly is aware of her fan base, it doesn’t seem that she thinks much of it. She doesn’t realize that in her analogy that she is the tribal deity whom the people sacrifice themselves for, the tribe being this group of people, sorry, individuals that would follow her to the ends of the earth, and, hell, maybe grow weak and would die for her in a war. Only Mrs. Ramsey brings this point up, saying that if her followers knew she was a vegetarian, that they would also sacrifice meat for her. The narrator loses sleep and time reading her book four times if you really need proof. Even though she doesn’t see herself as a god to all these people, she thinks that she is godlike, that she is a giant. She says that she has always acted rationally, which if you really lived such a hard and grueling life in Russia, “renting” your coffins, you’ve felt fear. Maybe you didn’t let I take you over, but you’ve felt fear, no doubt. And even if you’re going to lie about it and say that you’re perfect, you should at least admit that your followers aren’t doing a very good job, if they love you so much, even though, deep down, Ayn Rand, you know that.
You have a very good point here that I had not thought about. Her followers are doing exactly the opposite of what she preaches to people. They act like her underlings and she consents with their inferiority. This is even stranger since she seems to respect them, though they trail behind her to the ends of the Earth and seem to regard her higher than themselves ("Hear hear! barked a man in the front row. Ayn Rand dipped her head in acknowledgement" (Wolff 83).). How can she respect these people who act so inferior, even to her? It is true that if not for them, she would not be as "superior" and she seems, but isn't her whole idea that inferior people do not deserve her respect? Also, if these are her followers, and they agree with her idea of individual superiority, then why are they asserting their inferiority towards her?
DeleteI wonder what Rand was like in her earlier years, before the growth of this beloved fan base? Even if she's corrupt or hypocritical in her thinking now, perhaps in the beginning, she was the true epitome of her own teachings. Great points Sawyer.
DeleteI completely and absolutely agree with your sense of animosity towards Ayn Rand. It's clear from all the subtle details in the text (like what Emil wrote about) that Ayn Rand is obviously has an arrogant and misanthropic attitude that simply isn't tolerable. Another key detail that proves that Rand thinks that she is superior to everybody else is when she says "The dream of universal equality leads not to paradise, but to Auschwitz." This quote clearly explains her point of view because she believes that if everybody is equal, then she won't be able to be "the best." However, Rand wants to be the best which is why she believes in that. This clearly demonstrates her arrogance throughout her visit.
DeleteRegarding Ethan's question on what Rand was like in her earlier years, I actually found out that Rand's opinions might have begun from her childhood. When Rand was a schoolchild, she easily breezed through the required coursework. This might have been her first belief that she was superior to the people around her. I don't know if this is all that significant, but to me it definitely may have played an important role in characterizing her.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAyn Rand and Her "Perfect" Heroes
ReplyDeleteAnjuli Smith
As the narrator notices on page 97 after reading a poem by Hemingway, (“readers like me would see him in Nick...” (Wolff)), authors sometimes model their characters after themselves, giving you an image of the author themselves. In fact, in most pieces of writing, the author’s opinions and feelings shine through their words, allowing the reader a look into the authors head. This is definitely true of Ayn Rand’s writing. Her characters are “great and never had a sick day between them” (Wolff 92) which makes them rather unrelatable. In The Fountainhead, they lack compassion even in the “rape scene” and follow Ayn Rand’s view of self-reverence, doing things only to satisfy themselves.
As the narrator notices, Dominique and Roark…[seem] to have no relatives or even friends--only inferiors” (Wolff 92), which is understandable because people like them are unpleasant to be around. Ayn Rand acts the same as her characters, and the narrator (understandably) can’t imagine them “driving eight minutes, let alone eight hours to nurse a sick relative” (Wolff 92).
None of the people the narrator has met seem capable of the “perfect rationality and indomitable exercise of will that Ayn Rand demanded as a condition of respect” (Wolff 94). Everyone and every family has that one black sheep or that one imperfection that prevents them from being superior to everyone else. This is because people like Rand’s characters do not exist. As humans, we are all subject to error and imperfection, so I believe it is impossible for someone to be the way Ayn Rand describes. In fact, for Ayn Rand to think of herself as one of these super-humans is just her foolish hope, especially to claim that her books are the greatest, (“If you had to name the single greatest work by an American author, what would it be? Atlas Shrugged...And after that? The Fountainhead” (Wolff 84).) Robert Frost was able to make a show of reading when he read his poetry to the boys, so though, her demeanor doesn’t suggest this, perhaps Rand is also acting when she brings herself in front of the boys. She might pretend to be so aloof and superior because she is unhappy with herself, and likes to writes about ideal people to make up for her view of herself. The narrator describes his first impression of her as “short and blocky” (Wolff 80) and says he was expecting a woman resembling Dominique. She could be hiding behind this guise of superiority, so that people don’t see how imperfect she actually is, especially as physically, she looks so different from the way she has described her heroine. She is “built squarely” (Wolff 81) and based on the narrator’s reaction, looks very different from the way she has described Dominique. Since she does not physically look the way she imagines a heroine, she tries to go to extremes to act the way she thinks is ideal, perhaps to make up for her lack of ideal physicality. Ayn Rand models her characters after the way she presents herself to others, and after meeting her and getting a true view of her, the narrator cannot read her books again without seeing Ayn Rand in the characters. Her attitude towards “imperfect people” like the headmaster with his wen and the narrator’s sickness “...made it hard for [him] to read even the novel [he’d] been so captured by” (Wolff 92).
This usage of “ideal people” makes Rand less liked than someone like Hemingway, because people can relate to Hemingway’s characters. It seems that all of his characters have their own unique imperfections which people can understand and empathize with more than Rand’s heroes.
Pushing away
ReplyDeleteAshley Groesbeck
Throughout chapters three through five of the book Old School by Tobias Wolff, the narrator continues to push away his feelings. Whenever the narrator experiences strong feelings, he makes the decision to hide his feelings and not share them. One example of this was when the narrator wrote the fire fighter poem and he would not submit it to the competition because it was too close to home for him. He said that he did not enjoy writing the poem, which I found strange. The narrator was so afraid that the other children at the school would read too far into his poem and learn about his life outside of school such as his mother being gone and his father. I think that the fire fighter poem would have had a better chance at winning than the elk-hunter poem because even though the poem was not provided, it seemed to have more detain and deep emotions and greater meaning. But the narrator rather risk losing the writing submission that have someone learn about his true feelings.
Another time, the narrator’s friend George Kellogg had a conversation with the narrator about a character in his poem, First Frost. George’s milkmaid character became very real to him similar to how the fire fighter character in the narrator’s poem became so real to him. George consults the narrator about this feeling, “I found myself in a state of, you know… arousal. Has that ever happened to you?
Nope. I got up to leave.” (Wolff 42). The narrator, instead of sharing his character’s realism, he denies it and just gets up and walks away. The narrator seams so afraid to admit his feelings and let others inside that he boxes out everything and keeps in deep, inner thoughts kept inside.
When Ayn Rand came to visit the school, she was very different than I expected her to be. Ayn Rand is very bold and self-centered. One of her beliefs is that people should live for themselves and that people are not deserving of love if they are a burden on you. When talking about soldiers dying in war, Rand says that “If they died fighting for their own happiness, they have my respect. If they sacrificed themselves for mine, they died weakly, and I should add, irrationally, even immorally.” (Wolff 85-86). I do not agree with what Ayn Rand says because I think that they died respectfully and bravely for their country. The narrator read and enjoyed Ayn Rand’s book, The Fountainhead several times before meeting Miss Rand. But after meeting Miss Rand and observing her views, his opinions changed on the book and he could not read anymore of her writings. It make sense that the narrator’s ideas conflicts with Ayn Rand’s ideas because Rand is so bold and forward and the narrator is more quiet about sharing his feelings. After seeing the narrator’s reaction to Ayn Rand’s visit, it make me, as a reader wonder what made the narrator feel that he has to hide his feeling and what his life is like back home. Maybe it is that he does not want to be reminded of the past and his mother.
I agree, it seems that many boys in the school are running or hiding from their past or who they are. The narrator does this many times, such as when he would not submit his firefighter poem, the only poem that had actual emotion any in it when he wrote it. Instead, he decides to submit a meaningless poem about hunting an elk. This shows that he often hides and conforms to what other people are. Another example is when he had the chance to tell Gershon that he too was Jewish, but he hid it instead and his roommate also hid the fact that he was Jewish. The students in this school are afraid to be themselves. The school claims to have an egalitarian society where everybody is equal, but this seems like they are too equal; nobody seems to want to be an individual.
DeleteI agree with you when you say that the narrator is constantly pushing away his true feelings and hiding his past. I think that is part of the reason why he hasn’t made any really close friends, such as his roommate. It is hard to be good friends with someone when you do not know much about them, and because he is keeping so many secrets, it is difficult to build a strong friendship. I also completely agree that the narrator probably dislikes Ayn Rand because her personality is so opposite from his.
DeleteAyn’s Attitude
ReplyDeleteby Danielle Duguid
In Old School, Tobias Wolff seems to often tell you about the characters life and their thoughts and opinions by exploring that persons writing. People write about what they know, or care about, as Ayn Rand wrote about how she thought people and the world should be like. During this scene she discusses her views and opinions, which many people in the room disagree with.
While she is in the Blaine Hall, she declares that anybody who has any kind of weakness is not worthy of being declared a hero, and real heroes don’t have weaknesses. Ayn also claims that she herself doesn’t have weaknesses. As the narrator rereads her work later, he discovers that the characters live in a “perfect world”, and “the heroic life apparently left no time for children, or domestic cares, or the exertions of ordinary sympathy” (Wolff 92) This seems to be how Ayn Rand is except I do not believe that she does not have any weaknesses. Everybody has weaknesses, in some form or another. Her characters are completely unrealistic compared to normal people which I don’t understand since I believe that is why some books are so great to read when you can relate to them.
Another way that Tobias Wolff characterized Ayn Rand was her behavior. She was wearing a cape, and was smoking blatantly in the Blaine Hall, the very hall that was built in the honor of the 13 boys who died from a fire caused by a cigarette; The cause of the school’s strict no smoking rule. This shows how she believe that she is above any rules set for people because of who she is. Another example of her rather large ego was when asked what her favorite author was, she proclaimed it was herself, since all other authors were inferior to her.
I really like the idea that having weaknesses makes a character more interesting. This idea is really common in literature which makes it even more outrageous that Ayn Rand would write characters without any flaws. The concept of heroes who are imperfect has been used forever, even in mythology. All of the greatest heroes like Hercules and others had to have a fatal flaw because it was part of the archetype. I think that is part of the reason so many people can read and understand a character or a hero even if they are completely unrealistic is because they have flaws just like every human does.
DeleteI like what you wrote about Rand's characters, but could it be that her books became so popular because of the aesthetic of these said characters? Take, for example, a fashion magazine. Nobody can be that perfect, not even the models themselves, but everyone wants to be, therefore, everyone feels drawn towards them.
DeleteEthan, I think that is an interesting point, and another thing we should remember is that most people never actually met Ayn Rand, and lots of people who read her books probably didn't see her on television. Before the narrator met Ayn Rand in person, he seemed to sort of enjoy her book, but it was after meeting her when he found his disapproval of her.
DeleteEric Koessler
ReplyDeleteWhy Ayn Rand is Wrong
The moment that Ayn Rand started to speak in Old School, I knew she was out there. The thing that struck me most about her ideas is that of self-sacrifice being weak. She says, “If the wound is received through an action undertaken for the happiness of the man himself, it might be heroic. If for the sake of others, as self-sacrifice, I would call it weakness.” This struck a nerve with me when I read it. From what she said, if you’re in a war and you see a grenade fall near a group of men and only you see it, it would be “heroic” to run away and save your life, but it would be “weak” to risk your life by using yourself as a shield as to save the lives of everyone around you. It would also mean that firemen who go into burning buildings to save people are weak because they are sacrificing themselves for others. She also speaks on the idea of welfare and that this encourages mediocrity. She most likely thinks that everyone on welfare is inferior because they cannot afford to support their families, even with an equal opportunity as everyone else, and by giving them money, we encourage everyone to be lazy. I disagree with this because there are many who do not have opportunity to find a well-paying job, such as those who live in the inner city, where the schools are bad and the only jobs they’re going to find without a college education are minimum wage jobs. There may be people out there who take advantage of the system and don't bother trying to find work; however, they are greatly outnumbered by hardworking people who are unable to find a decent job that pays for their living and food expenses.
Another thing that I felt was wrong was Ayn Rand’s idealism. When talking about the characters in her novels, she says, “And please don’t tell me that my characters are unreal because they live out their ideals. Of course the second-handers will tell you that the ideal is impossible, that a real story can only be a story of the folks next door, those frustrated imbeciles - a story of toad-eaters and mediocrities - a story of compromises and failures.” She seems to believe that there are people in this world that don’t have flaws, and that simply is not true. She talks about how only inferiors think the ideal is impossible, and it is. The ideal is what a society should strive for; however, it is ridiculous to think that everyone could be at peace with one another, given how differently everyone has been raised. Any society that appears or claims to be completely ideal is lacking in some other aspect of life, either in freedom or justice. Ayn also claims that she herself is perfect. She literally never says anything bad about herself or anything she has ever done, calling her novels the best novels ever. She basically says that she has no flaws, whereas I would say that thinking and portraying yourself to that high of a degree is in itself a flaw. Anyone who is a true “genius” would know that it is right to act humble around others.
While I disagree with most of what she says, I do agree that she is very good with words and she can give you a rush of self importance. She says that you are meant to be a giant and you should listen to no one but yourself. While she praises having self esteem, which is a good thing to have, I think that people latch onto this thought too much and forget all the other radical ideas that she has that greatly water down this idea. While in theory her ideologies might sound like they would make the world better and more efficient, when applied to real situations, you can see how wrong they really are, making it evident that Ayn Rand’s philosophy is nothing more than self indulgence.
I completely agree with many of the ideas in this blog entry because I too believe that putting others before yourself and being a selfless person is one of the most admirable things a person can do. I believe that the types of people that Ayn Rand describes as weak, are some of the bravest, strongest and most important people to a successful society. I believe that if more people acted more for others, rather than themselves, earth in general would be a better and more peaceful place. It is people like Ayn Rand and her followers, that always put themselves over anyone else, that can corrupt and negatively impact society. If everyone were to act only for themselves, like Ayn suggests everyone does, human beings would not be able to work together and nothing would get done.
DeleteTruth in a Story
ReplyDeleteJill Armenia
In old school, much of the writing done by the boys is in some way linked to their personal identities and backgrounds. I think identity has a lot to do with the way we express our emotions in writing because it shapes how we think and how we behave. Writing is something that comes from the author so his personal opinions and knowledge will affect the outcome of the story.
This, however, goes both ways. not only does an authors life reflect in his storytelling, but the storytelling can also appear in his life. A person's life is simply a story he or she is telling about him or herself, and they are sharing it with the world all the time. In the way that we shape our own identities through actions and choices, and the ways others shape it for us, through influence or even peer pressure, we create these stories for ourselves that become easily intertwined with others.
I think this is most prominent in the book when in chapter 5 the narrator decides he has no respect for Ayn Rand, but instead decides to admire people like his grandparents, who would go out of their way to help someone in need. It even leads him to think of his original home before he came to the school. He decides that in telling his own story he wants to portray his family as good, kindhearted people, even though Ayn Rand believes them to be weak. He says "She had no idea what went on between such beleaguered people, how infinitely complicated it was and dramatic," but he knows what it's like and that in itself is part of his own personal story even though he doesn't necessarily share it with anyone else. The narrator chooses what he is going to share in his life story, because he decides it is better if he not share his past with the rest of the boys at the school and that he doesn't want them to know he got in off of a scholarship, "...for years now I had hidden my family in calculated silences and vague hints and dodges, suggesting another family in it's place." His own thoughts and actions while at the school are essentially the narrator writing down his life as though he was going to submit a poem for a writing contest. Most of the time his writing is controlled and thought out, but sometimes, such as with his fireman poem, it slips out of his control.
I like what you said about the narrator creating his own story and how he sees people in his life. It is very interesting how after Ayn says that people such as his grandparents were weak for helping people, he jumps to their defense and cannot read any more of her work. This follows the common belief that you can complain about your family, but as soon as someone else says something bad about them, you jump to defend them. I believe the narrator also realized after Ayn said helping others was weak, that his grandparents had been there for him his whole life, even though he didn't necessarily want the help at times. It is interesting how even after he came to the conclusion that it was people like his grandparents that he should be like, the narrator still does not talk about his family at school, only giving "vague hints and dodges, suggesting another family in it's place."
DeleteNoah Rohde
ReplyDelete10.14.13
White
The Reality of Humanity
The Fountainhead, Atlas Shrugged. Both of these books have “perfect” characters. They lead interesting lives, meet interesting people and are seemingly above the average person. Are they really? Our narrator, after consuming the personas of Dominique and Roark from The Fountainhead, compares everyone and their mother to the two. “Had Grandjohn ever done anything else? Had Patty ever thought at all? Christ? How could they last another hour like this without cutting each other’s throats?” (Wolff 69). The Fountainhead, by Ayn Rand, to the narrator is a mind opener to how we all bend over to others without question and accept things for how they are. How we don’t do things for ourselves, and if it is not exactly to your liking, you can’t change it so why bother. He, the narrator, more specifically sees the opposite of Dominique and Roark in his grandparents. Through his highly judgmental he perceives his grandparents as the reason to strive for independence. Upon recalling his grandfather's life, he calls him out for spending thirty years in the air force and never once flying a plane.
As the day of Ayn Rand’s visit draws near, the narrator, time after time, revisits his ideals from The Fountainhead. On the day of, our narrator is met with surprise. Ayn Rand, the author of The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged reveals a much different side to the her novels that the narrator had never seen. She, Ayn Rand, reveals how Dominique and Roark are not perfects but are selfish, unforgiving and are completely inhuman. Their supposedly perfect lives are really just vain and fantasy. Through all of his reads of The Fountainhead, the narrator somehow missed how the two characters never did normal day to day things. Dominique and Roark are not real, they could never be. But they symbolize the psychotic up interpretation of the world, as seen by Ayn Rand. Rand’s main vision, that you must only care for yourself and others who are worthy, is senseless. You can not live your whole life completely independent. Love, is a thing that requires sacrifice and effort to others. Also, to learn and become yourself you have to learn from others, see their mistakes or successes and respond to them as you see fit.
After his revelation of Ayn Rand and The Fountainhead, the narrator changes how he sees others in a complete reversal of his original understanding based off of Ayn Rand. He sees how the giving to others is beneficial to oneself. Also, and more importantly, the little mistakes and differences of all humans is what makes us all unique. Just because we can’t all act like Dominique and Roark doesn’t mean that we don’t strive for excellence or better yet achieve it.
I like the way you compared what the narrator thought about Ayn Rand and her books before he met Ayn Rand and what the narrator thought after Ayn Rand came. This comparison I find to be one of the most important turning points in the story and is a great choice for a blog. The other thing that I liked was that you said "the little mistakes..of all humans is what makes us unique." which I think is a great interpretation.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete