The Economist's review of two recently published works on Ayn Rand (Ayn rand and the World She Made, Anne Heller, Nan A. Talese; Goddess of the Market: Ayn rand and the American Right, Jennifer Burns, OUP) displays a sitting-on-the-fence approach quite uncharacteristic of a publication proud of its 'advocacy journalism'. This aberration is puzzling in more ways than one. Given the subject matter of the review is one of last century's preeminent champions of laissez faire capitalism, a cause zealously promoted by the magazine, one would normally expect a glowing piece of panegyric. But, as even the readers most resistant to what 'The Observer' viewed as the publication's refusal to see "any political or economic problem that cannot be solved by the trusted three-card trick of privatisation, deregulation and liberalisation" would concede, it always backs up its pronouncements with considerable gravitas and rigorous analysis. We can pooh-pooh the stodgy arguments as pretentious, wring our hands over the unwavering allegiance to its version of 'economic liberty', but dare we dismiss them as loosely argued or inadequately thought-through. Also legendary is its intolerance towards intellectual quackery of any hue. So, one would also expect it to steer clear of imparting legitimacy to tall claims made on behalf of a low-brow pretender to the 'hallowed legacy' of Adam Smith, whose 'cult status' has been rightly diagnosed by Johann Hari to be the result of "drilling into the basest human instincts" (that Alan Greenspan and Jimmy wales feature among Rand's so-called acolytes is a conundrum I am at loss to delineate, and a sad commentary on a section of American intelligentsia's occasional baffling failure to distinguish between genuine scholarship and charlatanism). One would hope it to expose the intellectual impostor lurking behind the pseudo-profound economic philosopher. But, sadly the review leaves these expectations in tatters and one feels horribly let down.
The vacillation is discernible at the outset itself, when the reviewer marvels at Rand's abiding popular appeal even as the short shrift that she has received from the intellectual establishment, even from those of the 'right' side of the political divide, is touched upon. That her works appeal to a huge chunk of 'Middle America' despite the virulent ways in which critics and political theorists flayed her "cardboard characters and tabloid style" strikes the reviewer as a phenomenal enigma that it is constantly invoked as if it was the 'riddle of the century' (Of course, the mediocrity/popularity equation is a no-brainer for reasons too obvious to be enumerated). However, the review offers one refreshing insight as it examines how America's alleged shift to the left, embodied by Barack Obama's elevation to presidency last year, has given Rand's ideas a new lease of life and reinstated her "at the heart of the political debate".
"Conservative protesters carry posters asking 'who is John Galt?', referring to one of Rand's heroes. Conservative polemicists suggest that Mr. Obama, by stepping in to rescue the banks and industrial behemoths such as General Motors, is ushering in the collective dystopia that Rand gave warning against. Sales of "The Fountainhead" and "Atlas Shrugged" have surged."
Interestingly, Jennifer Burns' hypothesis on Rand's influence on the American right is an idea that received one of the above-mentioned short shrifts in a well-received book co-authored by none other than the present editor-in-chief of The Economist, John Micklethwait. In that insightful study of the American right, titled "The Right Nation", Micklethwait and fellow Economist correspondent Adrian woolridge dwell on the fringe right-wing movements that held brief sway over the public imagination during the 'red scare', and thrived on paranoia and conspiracy-theories. The major examples they cite - The John Birch Society and, wait for it, Ayn rand and her disciples.
After dithering its way through attempts to resolve the central dilemma of whether to offer Rand a paean as the herald of supply-side economics or to subscribe to the overwhelmingly damning mainstream critical view, the review concludes by throwing in a face-saving reflection on how Rand's ideas are gaining currency in free market's fledgling but fertile new breeding grounds, India and China in particular.
"Her insight in 'Atlas shrugged'–that society cannot thrive unless it is willing to give freedom to its entrepreneurs and innovators–has proved to be prescient. ...John Galt is back in business in China and India"
What is conspicuous by its absence in an otherwise laborious process to throw light on Rand's ideology is the telling fact that her vigor in championing the virtue of the individual, entrepreneurial creed over the collectivist nightmare did not extend to other pressing concerns of the era that coincided with the time of her active intellectual involvement, such as civil rights for blacks, women's rights, etc. In this sense at least she is a true forerunner of the free market miracle workers who hold the magic wand of "the invisible hand" and proclaims it to be the ultimate panacea. Of course, nobody said it was gonna be easy. For the path to paradise, at least for the underlings, is fraught with bumps and ditches ...Subprime mortgage, SEZs...
This is too heavy for me to digest... but there are simple things that i found in that huge book which fascinated me... Apart from the beautiful descriptive writing, and the systematic character development, there are lines... that stay, conversations that linger on...
ReplyDelete"If you want my advice, Peter," he said at last, "you’ve made a mistake already.
By asking me. By asking anyone. Never ask people. Not about your work. Don’t you
know what you want? How can you stand it, not to know?"
Nothing can be reasonable or beautiful unless it's made by one central idea, and the idea sets every detail.”
“That love is reverence, and worship, and glory, and the upward glance. Not a bandage for dirty sores. But they don't know it. Those who speak of love most promiscuously are the ones who've never felt it. They make some sort of feeble stew out of sympathy, compassion, contempt, and general indifference, and they call it love. Once you've felt what it means to love as you and I know it - the total passion for the total height - you are unable of anything else.”