So I just finished Atlas Shrugged
20 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: imgres-1.jpg]
I just finished this damned thing that took me too long to read and I wanted to hear your thoughts on it.
Overall, her style of writing is too dense and over descriptive for my taste to read in an entire book. However, some of her passages, specifically in regard to character's emotions and reactions were very well done.
The plot was cool for the most part. I think she did a good job of capturing the mood of a society taken over by the government(not as well as 1984, but still good). I wish the love triangle of rearden, dagny, and francisco(maybe galt too?) had played out fully.
In regards to her philosophy as it pertains to humans thinking-I totally agree with the objectivist train of thought, but am aware that it just isn't fully practical in real life. Humans are emotional beings and are not capable of fully commiting to some emotionless 24/7 rational state of mind.
Her vision of 100% laissez faire economics has plenty of holes in it, but so does a fully planned economy. I think we can all agree a mixed economy is best for society, how much of the former and the latter is where people disagree.
Thats all I got
6 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: 1362697503990.jpg]
Should literature be judged with historical context in mind, or should we throw out concerns like that when we're determining something's aesthetic merit? It seems like if we choose the latter option, originality and influence lose their value, and if we don't, we have to judge books that are potentially equal in virtuosity and intelligence as being better or worse simply by that fact that one was released before another. Modern authors get shat on all the time and I wonder if it's justified. We don't really judge them and the great canonical authors on an equal playing field. 400 years ago there was a lot more potential for originality simply by virtue of there being a lot less literature, whereas today literature doesn't really have anywhere to go. But then they also had less to work with and imitate.
I'm not sure what to think.
4 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: 1.jpg]
Who are the greatest science fiction writers of all time, /lit/? From that Heinlein thread I gather that many of you do not agree with the "Big Three" (Asimov, Clarke, Heinlein), and I'm inclined to agree. Good 'ideas-men', but not great writers by any means.
3 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: 1364393601901.gif]
>B.S major in Mathematics, Minor in Stats
MS in Mathematics
Ph.D in Math; Thesis on bounded harmonic functions
attended SFU for B.S, and caltech for MS and P.hD
>parents are both structural engineers, so inspiration I guess, and gifted in math
>currently working dead-end field research job, hope to apply for professorship in next 15 years
>MFW I so fucking wish I went to med school instead