The Fredösphere

Considering the number of times I have seen the movie version of The Fountainhead, it's odd how few of Ayn Rand's books I have read -- Anthem is the only one, really.  So I find myself at this late date plowing into Atlas Shrugged.

Rand picks the act of literally getting trains to run on time as the symbol for the pursuit of excellence.  Her heroes and heroines are smart perfectionists who work like dogs to get the job done.  Those who fail, do so because of cowardice and laziness.  They prefer to hide their failure through consensus decision-making.  There really is a fraternity of incompetence, a League of Extraordinary Mediocrities; failure loves company.  Rand hates that attitude and exaggerates it so we cannot fail to get the point.  Note how the loser is completely comfortable with impotence and decline; the one disaster that must be avoided is taking blame:

    "The Rio Norte Line is a pile of junk from one end to the other," she said.  "It's much worse than I thought.  But we're going to save it."
    "Of course," said James Taggart.
    "Some of the rail can be salvaged.  Not much and not for long.  We'll start laying new rail in the mountain sections, Colorado first.  We'll get the new rail in two months."
    "Oh, did Orren Boyle say he'll--"
    "I've ordered the rail from Readen Steel."
    [...]"But the Board hasn't authorized it.  I haven't authorized it.  You haven't consulted me."
    She reached over, picked up the receiver of a telephone on his desk and handed it to him.
    "Call Rearden and cancel it," she said.
    James Taggart moved back in his chair.  "I haven't said that," he answered angrily.  "I haven't said that at all."
    "Then it stands?"
    "I haven't said that, either."
    She turned.  "Eddie, have them draw up the contract with Rearden Steel.  Jim will sign it."  She took a crumpled piece of notepaper from her pocket and tossed it to Eddie.  "There's the figures and terms."
    Taggart said, "But the Board hasn't--"
    "The Board hasn't anything to do with it.  They authorized you to buy the rail thirteen months ago.  Where you buy it is up to you."
    "I don't think it's proper to make such a decision without giving the Board a chance to express an opinion.  And I don't see why I should be made to take the responsibility."
    "I am taking it."

It's refreshing to see those mealy-mouthed shirkers held up to scorn.  It's also uncomfortable because there have been times when we have met the mealy-mouthed shirker, and he is ... us.  How about you?  Is your record unblemished?  Be honest.

The arrogance that everyone notices in Rand's writing is present here, of course; indeed, it shouts from every paragraph.  What do we think of a person who devotes so much time to despising weaklings?  And why does she never confront the unpleasant truth that some people fail simply because they, through no fault of their own, were born stupid?  Or how about the even more unpleasant truth that even very smart people are dumb at certain times or in certain areas of life?  Or that not all weakness is weakness of character?

Suppose you are the newly-appointed manager of a factory that makes widget extension handles.  You are shocked to discover that the failure rate for these handles is 25 per million.  Because of your brilliance and hard work -- in short, your awesome competence -- you beat that failure rate down to 1 per million.  Quite an accomplishment!  And yet, there's still that fly in the ointment, that one per million that fails.  What should we think about a failure rate of 1 per million?  What if a failure rate of 0 per million is not humanly possible?  Will that satisfy the customer who gets stuck with the widget extension handle that breaks off in his hand when he grabs it in an urgent situation?  Or will he have the right to rage at the "incompetence" of the factory manager ultimately responsible?

I would like to know if Rand ever addresses that question.  The typical scenario in a Rand novel is to contrast the weaklings and cowards who hate and fear excellence with those super-human geniuses who bravely take responsibility, aspire to greatness, and never, ever screw up.  In the real world, one of the jobs responsible people assume is that of fixing (as best they can) the screw-ups they cause in spite of their best efforts to avoid them.  You never, ever see a Rand hero in that position.  (Do you?  Somebody tell me if I'm wrong.)  It is that unreality that, more than anything else, bugs me about Rand's fiction.

Rand's lack of proportion is astounding.  She looked to one group -- the visionaries, the inspired inventors, the captains of industry, the superlative artists, those who are geniuses and know it -- and her message to them is:  You are too humble.  You need to assert yourselves more.  Riiiiiiight.