Tweak

InsaneJournal

Tweak says, "Giddyup pinky toe!"

Username: 
Password:    
Remember Me
  • Create Account
  • IJ Login
  • OpenID Login
Search by : 
  • View
    • Create Account
    • IJ Login
    • OpenID Login
  • Journal
    • Post
    • Edit Entries
    • Customize Journal
    • Comment Settings
    • Recent Comments
    • Manage Tags
  • Account
    • Manage Account
    • Viewing Options
    • Manage Profile
    • Manage Notifications
    • Manage Pictures
    • Manage Schools
    • Account Status
  • Friends
    • Edit Friends
    • Edit Custom Groups
    • Friends Filter
    • Nudge Friends
    • Invite
    • Create RSS Feed
  • Asylums
    • Post
    • Asylum Invitations
    • Manage Asylums
    • Create Asylum
  • Site
    • Support
    • Upgrade Account
    • FAQs
    • Search By Location
    • Search By Interest
    • Search Randomly

box_in_the_box ([info]box_in_the_box) wrote in [info]scans_daily,
@ 2009-08-28 14:38:00

Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:creator: steve ditko, theme: objectivism

"If only that Ditko fellow was less subtle and more overt regarding his personal politics ..."
For as much fail as it churns out, Big Hollywood occasionally offers some genuine gems.

I can't stand Objectivism, but I find Steve Ditko's treatment of it irresistibly compelling, perhaps because the comic book medium is a far more appropriate venue for such a Manichean philosophy than the thousand-page rape-justifying tomes that Ayn Rand routinely shat out (it certainly helps that none of Ditko's characters ever barfed up a 70-page screed like John Galt, not to mention the fact that Ditko actually managed to create characters who were more believable as human beings than any of Rand's strawmen or Mary Sues, even when his characters were radioactivity-powered superheroes).

The following four pages constitute "In Principle: The Unchecked Premise," a short story originally published in the 160-page graphic novel Steve Ditko's Static in 1988:






As crudely simplistic as it is, it's still better than either reading or watching the "fireplace scene" between Howard Roark and Dominique Francon in The Fountainhead, but then again, so is getting punched in the crotch until you hemorrhage internally and die.


(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]kingrockwell
2009-08-29 03:08 am UTC (link)
Anyone who defends Rand does so because they agree with her views, you cannot possibly enjoy her books as literature. And Objectivists have tendencies toward Libertarianism often, to the point where I almost associate the words "fiscally conservative" with Randite.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Died of a theory
[info]jlroberson
2009-08-29 08:32 am UTC (link)
We had an Objectivist in charge of the economy, and he now admits he was wrong. Which is good, as his policies led directly to the mess we're in.

His name is Alan Greenspan.

If you go through the collections of Rand's essays, you'll also find ones by Nathaniel Branden(with whom Rand had a yech, affair with for some years, which she justified through, guess what, Objectivist principles, and who eventually broke with her and faced a quite emotional wrath for it), and also a younger Alan Greenspan. When I saw he was made chairman of the Fed I remember my jaw dropping and breaking the floor.

He tried to put what principles of hers he could into action as chairman. And they murdered our economy.

So if you judge it by the results, FAIL.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]psychop_rex
2009-08-29 10:50 am UTC (link)
You can if you're a fan of BAD literature. Hey, there are websites out there that are specifically devoted to reviewing the worst movies ever made, so I wouldn't be surprised if there's a bookish equivalent.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


(Read comments) -


Home | Site Map | Manage Account | TOS | Privacy | Support | FAQs