THE FOUNTAINHEAD

By Ayn Rand

What is the mystery all about? When you asked someone for a short little synopsis of the Fountainhead, they without exception respond the same, dumbfounded looks, vague half sentences, stammering, and finally after gasps for air and grunts they are able to articulate "you just have to read it to understand". Tested it out and it became my own little party joke. I'd ask about 6 people at time, rapid fire style, and watch them all fall into a spasmodic fit, looking at one another for the answer. Their bodies controlled by semi-elliptic jolts, they would in succession utter the same "you have to read it to understand." A few also gave the warning that it would surely turn a girl like me into a lesbian. Truly a social phenomenon and once I can find a wealthy benefactor to offer me grant money, I'm going to test my theory cross culturally somewhere off the Adriatic. For now though, I'll stick to strangers and friends. This did raise the curiously bar, so after some procrastination, (the lesbian comment scared me a little, I like boys), hunkered down and bought a copy. Have to say, I don't understand the hoopla. My conclusion, that those who can't explain it, didn't get it.

Perhaps people have a hard time separating the plot from the message, and thus find it inexplicable. Understandably so. There's no argument that it's a well written complex piece of literature. The development of people and personality types, social patterns is intricate and stunning. I'm not going to rehash the standard pro and con arguments for the theory of Objectivism, that's been done to death for the past few decades. Allow me to offer a different slant.

Has anyone ever seen a photo of Ayn Rand? I've done a little search, and yet am I to find one on the back of her books. There's a reason for this; she's ugly. I'm talking seriously homely and ugly. Thus the conundrum. Who would be the perfect real embodiment of Objectivism?....Perhaps the founder of the philosophy? So why would Ayn describe her ideal so physically different from herself? Howard, the model of Objectivism in male form, is descried, not at all classically good looking, a-typical and standing against all common and perceived ideas of form, as did his architecture. Dominique is a sultry siren, perfect in form, stunningly beautiful, leaving men quivering in their tracks and yields her beauty cruelly like a possessed gin sue knife set. Anyone else see a contradiction here? Unattractive red haired Howard triumphs over society with integrity and patience, while Dominique triumphs with her body and bitchy attitude.

My take is this: Ayn Rand is an ugly woman with power domination issues. She writes her ideal character as an cold beautiful woman with no interest in sex until raped by a not so good looking Howard Roark and then falls in love with him. Once they do begin a relationship, the entire thing is a power play, struggle to destroy, and all about dominance and masochism. Not the "tie me up in chains and whip me kind", but an emotional and mental combat. All throughout the book Dominique uses her beauty and artic manner to display and define the values of Objectivism. Ayn, would never have that as a tool, so why was her elevated female be given it as her strongest weapon? Ayn was bitter and didn't like herself. She created an ugly faithless philosophy that over does self-interest and self-gratification as a coping mechanism to handle self-disdain, and basically thinks all people suck, because she couldn't get a hot date to the prom, or turn of the century Russian equivalent.