Comments | erudito: Film, media and art links

erudito

Film, media and art links

Oct 26, 2010 07:49

Correcting a truly spectacular typo.

A wonderful parody of science journalism: the comments are brilliant too.

Amusing skit on Green voters.

Media outlets refusing to run an issue of Non Sequitur manage to make the cartoonists’ point.

It’s John Scalzi, he is writing about Atlas Shrugged: enjoy.

A website explaining the Hockney-Falco thesis ( Read more... )

media, links, films, art

Leave a comment

Back to all threads

It's John Scalzi, BTW. korgmeister October 25 2010, 23:15:25 UTC

There's one critique of John Galt's actions in Atlas Shrugged that I don't quite understand. He's frequently perceived as someone who could choose to save all of mankind, but decides not to - thus making him a genocidal prick. However, this interpretation hinges on the notion that the world of Atlas Shrugged is one that can, in the whole, be saved.

Whereas I always felt the point was that he couldn't and he was apparently the only one who understood he couldn't. Galt always came across like an adult in a society of children who believed, with the naiveté and wonder typical to children that because he was a grown-up, he could do anything.But the sad reality was there were limits to his ability to fix things and they were inadequate for how far gone things were. Take for instance his suggestions to Thompson for what he'd do if he were an "economic dictator". Massive, sweeping reforms that would cause widespread chaos and disruption - Thompson is quite right that they were impractical. Galt's mind just doesn't work effectively on any ( ... )

Re: It's John Scalzi, BTW. erudito October 26 2010, 01:47:38 UTC

Thanks for the correction, have fixed.

Your interpretation seems more Randian to me.

Re: It's John Scalzi, BTW. korgmeister October 26 2010, 08:56:15 UTC

Strange, I thought I'd got over my Randian phase.

Still an influentual book in terms of my worldview, I must admit.

Re: It's John Scalzi, BTW. jordan179 October 29 2010, 03:55:37 UTC

Yes, that's a good point. It's doubtful that the collectivists would have allowed Galt and his associates to do what would have been needed to be done to save that world, because (after all) they weren't letting them do it in the FIRST PLACE.

One is reminded of the withdrawal of the learned to the monasteries in the final century of the Roman Empire.

Re: It's John Scalzi, BTW. korgmeister October 29 2010, 06:51:59 UTC

See, the thing is that I'm of the opinion that Galt didn't have it in him, period. He was good at philosophy and engineering, but that was about it ( ... )

Back to all threads