Jump to content

Talk:Atlas Shrugged

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 51kwad (talk | contribs) at 21:48, 20 May 2016. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Misleading...

"The working title throughout her writing was The Strike. According to Barbara Branden, the change was made for dramatic reasons––Rand believed that titling the novel 'The Strike' would have revealed the mystery element of the novel prematurely."

She did this with all of her novels, giving them titles that would help remind her what the central theme was, but then changing the titles to something that would not be understood by the reader until after the novel had been read. This is explained in Anthem Centennial Edition with Introduction by Ayn Rand (ISBN-10: 0452286352 ISBN-13: 978-0452286351), at least.

The above sentence makes it appear it is a quality of the book, while it should emphasize it was really a quality of the author's style.

For example: Airtight became We The Living Ego became Anthem Second Hand Lives became The Fountainhead

Small suggestion to an excellent article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.80.142.62 (talk) 19:08, 18 September 2009

"100 best novels of the 20th century" blurb should be removed [uncredible source].

The source being used is an Internet poll: http://www.modernlibrary.com/top-100/100-best-novels/

Which is highly sensitive to 'blitz voting', which is also why non-professional reviews on Metacritic are rarely used, and even looking at that list 4 out of the top 10 are Rand books, and 3 out of the top 10 are Hubbard's, showing a very high Libertarian slant. It's not nearly as subject-varied as the professional list on that same page (which doesn't include the book in its top 100). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.69.69.30 (talk) 20:21, 23 September 2013‎ (UTC)[reply]

Totally agree, some of the books on that list are laughable. The current one is a very minor and forgettable work of fiction. 51kwad (talk) 21:48, 20 May 2016 (UTC) 51kwad (talk) 21:48, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing

I've just tagged a few paragraphs for sourcing issues but could tag many more. For example, we say that John Galt expresses Rand's personal opinion but we don't seem to have any verification of that: he is just a character in a novel. Novelists create many characters, some traits of which may reflect the writer's own opinion while other traits may not; or none may be a reflection; or (in rare cases) all may be a reflection. We cannot interpret primary sources, such as the book itself, because that constitutes original research. - Sitush (talk) 11:35, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've just tagged the entire "Theory of sex" section as OR. The rationale should be obvious. - Sitush (talk) 17:46, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Rand refers to and quotes from Galt's speech in her philosophical essays, confirming that his words reflected her views. There's not interpretation required, so no possibility of original research. MilesMoney (talk) 05:58, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reason magazine

We currently say "... the title of the libertarian magazine, Reason: Free Minds, Free Markets, is taken directly from John Galt ...". That is unsourced, although a quote from Galt is present. What concerns me more is that a look at Reason (magazine) and in particular at the image shown in the infobox there suggests that Free Minds, Free Markets is a strapline, not a title. The article title itself seems to bear that out, so perhaps this sentence needs to be tweaked as well as sourced? - Sitush (talk) 17:03, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Based on http://cloudfront-assets.reason.com/assets/db/1350587890858.pdf, it's a strapline, albeit one that's used consistently and prominently. It's also found in it's self-description at http://reason.com/about. I don't believe there's any doubt that Rand is the source of the quote. MilesMoney (talk) 06:12, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Movie profitable?

The text says that the movie turned a profit on home video, but this is not supported by the citation and I find it a dubious claim. If there isn't a WP:RS for it, it should be removed.KaturianKaturian 12:51, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Added information about the DVD and Blue Ray sales. As I suspected, the movie still lost money.KaturianKaturian 14:49, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Atlas Shrugged. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:15, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Atlas_Shrugged&oldid=721295789"