Location: State Science Institute, Room 101

Atlas Shrugged. 1984.

[orwellrand-blog]

Atlas (Vector) by DecoEchoes

[elenanapoli]

Illustration inspired by “1984”-George Orwell

[orwellrand-blog]

Atlas Shrugged Triptych by DecoEchoes

[wemetzagain]

“War is peace. Ignorance is strength. Freedom is slavery.”

[technicallylibertarian-deactiva]

[orwellrand-blog]

1984 by DaddyPancakes

[al-shaytan-deactivated20170323]

I win by means of nothing but logic and I surrender to nothing but logic.

Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

[iscumaliom]

Perhaps one did not want to be loved so much as to be understood.

George Orwell, 1984

[orwellrand-blog]

Physical and Emotional vs. Rational

This is where Orwell and Rand really start to diverge in their view of human nature. Orwell sees man as a being controlled both by the mind and the body, not without free will, but with a free will that is strongly influenced by the pressures that physical sensations exert. Winston is not able to withstand his torture in the Ministry of Love. John Galt, in the State Science Institute, is. John Galt is a man of rationality alone, who feels physical pain, but does not allow it to override his decision making process. Galt has a clear view that the mind is supreme and the sensations of the body that he deems to be “irrational” or “unnecessary” ought to have no power over it. Rand believes that this supremely rational state that John Galt has achieved is actually the natural state of a thinking man (a view she, ironically, shares with Christians in their conception of man in the Garden of Eden). Orwell’s view is ultimately more realistic and relevant, since man fell from Eden, but Rand’s is not without merit, as she correctly identifies the ideal state of man.

[orwellrand-blog]

Atlas Shrugged by artisticXexpressions

[orwellrand-blog]

1984 by paragonx5

[orwellrand-blog]

The Superman vs. the Everyman

There are two conceptions of heroes in modern literature: one is that of the superman, whom the audience can look up to and try to emulate, and the other is the everyman, whom the audience can identify with and become emotionally invested in. Rand shoots for the superman; Orwell throws us an everyman. Dagny Taggart is supremely competent; Hank Rearden is supremely productive; Francisco d’Anconia is ideologically pure; and John Galt is simply the ideal man. Because Rand’s philosophy does not permit her to see human beings as innately valuable, all of her main characters must have almost entirely positive traits in order to make them worthy of the audience’s attention. However, Orwell’s conceptions of humanity does allow for the innate value of the human being (as evidenced by the desire of the Party, who can always be taken to believe the opposite of what Orwell believes, to avoid any system where all humans would benefit from production), and so Winston Smith is a relatable combination of bad health, cowardice, and steadfast beliefs (until the Ministry of Love, that is) and Julia is a relatable combination of self-centeredness, low intelligence, and rebelliousness.

[orwellrand-blog]

There needs to be a 1984 fandom. I have so many feels about this book and no one to share them with.

While I’m waiting for an actual fandom to spring up, here are our potential ship names.

[orwellrand-blog]

Atlas Shrugged cast by SRegan