On The Meaning Of What We Do II

Freddie deBoer (h/t Andrew Sullivan) has this to say about Ayn Rand:

People far abler than I have prosecuted the case against Rand,

and I don't intend to rehash it here. But this tendency of her writings

and her philosophy to compel people to slap concrete on the foundation

of their own ideas, to build a moat around their intellectual life, to

categorize the whole world into the tiny fraction who are worthy and

the great horrid mass that are simply not to be listened to in any

circumstance... this is the greatest failing of the woman and her

teachings. There are a worse things to inspire people towards--

genocide, war, ethnic cleansing-- but still, a philosopher whose

greatest contribution is a vast incuriosity is a dismal thing.

Emphasis mine. What a beautiful turn of phrase, and a beautiful metric by which to judge an author's efficacy: can they really turn their prose into something concrete, through the minds of the assembled?

What's interesting about this is that it points out something to me that has always been fascinating about Ayn Rand. I find her literary style -- not just her philosophy -- to be alienating and abhorrent. I dislike the way she renders characters, and the quality of the worlds she inhabits. But I have seen her prose transform other people in ways that very, very few other fiction writers have. She really was the L Ron Hubbard of her times. Her words carry a power that, to this day, still holds people in her sway. I wish she had chosen a more positive way to make her impact.