Category: The Atlasphere

All things Atlasphere can be found here, columns, podcasts, interesting anecdotes, and more.

DEMOCRACY SOCIETY

Posted on by TeamAtlas

BY JOHN ENRIGHT

This new dystopian political thriller by freshman novelist John Christmas is fast paced and funny, and explores important social and philosophical problems with the misguided ideal of unlimited democracy.

Imagine an America where people still vote to elect their government, but where the government has abandoned the Constitution and embraced redistribution of wealth and rule by rioting mobs. Do you think you have already caught glimpses of such an America? Well, you haven’t seen anything yet. That, at least, is the message of Democracy Society, the scary but funny new novel by John Christmas.

The novel opens with a historical prologue featuring secret plotting by some of the American Founders. But that goes by quickly, and we are plunged abruptly into a society where democracy has degenerated into a nightmare of seized assets and enslaved entrepreneurs.

Just to get an idea of how scary this society is, here is an excerpt from a scene in which the President of the United States, Roberto Rojo, campaigns for re-election:

“The Great Deal Party gave you a new human right. Free cash!

“These hundred-dollar bills have a picture of me instead of Benjamin Franklin since you don’t know who he was anyway!”

Rojo paused and made a mental note to ask an aide to figure out who Benjamin Franklin was, just in case the question ever came up.

This level of thinking may remind you of the 2006 film Idiocracy, in which society has become incredibly and comically “dumbed down.”

Democracy Society by John Christmas

Fortunately, all is not lost. There are intelligent and virtuous people fighting to restore the system of governance envisioned by the Founders, heroes who understand that the protection of property rights is one of the keys to the establishment of liberty and prosperity.

One such hero is David Goldstein, a free market economist, who is running a last ditch campaign for the Presidency, doing his best to explain the need for property rights to a citizenry low on economic literacy.

Leading the heroic charge for action, adventure, and romance are Jack Cannon and Valentina Zaiceva, an international pair who seem prepared for any physical challenge that life can thrown at them. They have been recruited for a dangerous mission by a secret society — a secret society which traces its roots back to the time of the American Founders.

The story is quite fast paced and often very funny; at least, it was very suited to my sense of humor. As befits a political thriller, the story is a roller coaster of twists and turns, with a big final twist which I did not see coming.

As befits a political thriller, the story is a roller coaster of twists and turns, with a big final twist which I did not see coming.

The author is focused upon a political theme. He is raising the alarm about what he calls “universal-suffrage democracy,” a term he uses to describe a political system where the many are allowed to oppress and loot from the few, a political system where all constitutional protections for individuals have been cast by the wayside, and in a nation where economic ignorance is widespread.

He goes so far as to contemplate the question of whether a wise hereditary monarchy might sometimes provide a freer system of governance. The huge problem of how a monarchy could be kept on a wise path, however, is not explored. Granted that contemporary democracies show many institutional and philosophical weaknesses, it seems obvious to me that historical monarchies showed a grim tendency to sink into tyranny. But it’s also true that monarchy was a dominant form of government for much of human history, and speculative fiction has repeatedly imagined its return. See, for example, Niven and Pournelle’s classic The Mote in God’s Eye.

As an aside, it is worth noting that the authors of The Federalist Papers tended not to use the word “democracy” to describe the form of representative government they were endorsing. They tended to see the word as having negative connotations of the dangers of mob rule. But over time connotations often shift, and de Tocqueville’s Nineteenth Century study Democracy in America is devoted to explaining how well democracy worked out in the U.S.

While our author is critical of trends in American democracy, there is another country whose democratic trends he finds even scarier. His fictional Russian president declares: “I decided to go for the presidency instead of just a seat in the Duma because my supporters told me that I was extremely popular because of my corruption.”

Author John Christmas (from his website)

The story line veers around the United States and around the world, and while the descriptions are not lengthy, they were very particular, giving the sense that the author had been to most of these places himself and taken note of their distinctive features.

While a number of the characters exhibit interesting personal outlooks and intriguing value conflicts, the pace of the story necessarily keeps us from getting into a great deal of psychological depth. This is not a book to take up if you insist on multidimensional character studies, or if literal believability is high on your list of literary virtues.

It’s more of a high-speed trip through a Looking-Glass dystopia, with the illogical villains showing off thinking processes reminiscent of Lewis Carroll’s Alice stories. Fortunately, the heroes demonstrate the common sense logic which Alice herself displays, and you have the sense, from the beginning, that the heroes will emerge triumphant.

John Enright is the author of More Fire and Other Poems and the novel Unholy Quest. He lives in Chicago with his wife, Marsha Familaro Enright, and works as a computer consultant. His regularly-updated blog is titled “Rhyme of the Day.”

I AM JOHN GALT: BUY THE BOOK!

Posted on by TeamAtlas

BY STEPHEN BROWNE

The new I Am John Galt is a rare and well-written book, shining a spotlight on the many ways in which Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged explains not only today’s headlines, but also the people behind those headlines.

I accepted a review copy of I Am John Galt, by Donald Luskin and Andrew Greta, with some trepidation. I was recommended to the publisher by a friend, and agreed to read and review the book on the explicit understanding they’d have my honest opinion — i.e., that if I thought it stank, I’d pan it. This is the kind of thing that can strain friendships.

I’m happy to say, my misgivings were unfounded. This is a good, readable, and vitally important book.

I was afraid the book would be meaningless to anyone who had not read Atlas Shrugged and was steeped in Objectivist literature. No such thing. One does not have to have read the novel, though I’d bet money a lot of people who read I Am John Galt will be motivated to read Atlas Shrugged.

This is not a book for archetypical heroes of fiction, titans of industry, or giants of philosophy. This is a book for you and me: People who produce, rather than steal, their living. And the book explains how this is our fight, too.

But this is no abstract, unreadable philosophical or economic tract. The authors, to put it bluntly, kick ass and take names. They take issues you’d expect to be as dull as ditchwater, make them vitally interesting, and put faces on them.

Cui bono? Who became wealthy beyond dreams of avarice from policies that have all but wrecked the economy of the richest nation on earth?

Meet Angelo Mozillo, who spent billions of our money to inflate the subprime mortgage housing bubble. (“Subprime” is an economic term that means “probably can’t pay it back.”) And meet the politicians who benefited from his largess in extending sweetheart real estate loans. They’re in here, names and all.

Meet Barney Frank, the politician and serial liar, corrupt to the core, who wields the power of a commissar over an economy he neither understands nor gives a damn about, so long as he can satisfy his basest appetites.

Meet economist, New York Times columnist, and toady to would-be tyrants Paul Krugman, who has been wrong in every single significant prediction he has ever made, but whose reputation as an economic pundit somehow remains undiminished.

And meet Alan Greenspan, the economist who was actually a friend and associate of Rand’s for many years, who at a crucial time inexplicably turned his back on his own principles and better judgment when he could have been a voice of opposition people might have heeded.

And how did incompetent nebbishes like Frank and Mozillo get the power to destroy wealth on a scale unmatched by any barbarian invasion of civilization?

The astounding revelation in the book is, largely because they wanted it. Men who can produce wealth — do. It is through the sheer indifference of the producers to political power that tends to cause it to fall into the hands of those whose only talent is networking with the like-minded. You’ll see this in the parable of Microsoft and the Lobbyists.

On the subject of Ayn Rand herself, Luskin and Greta are concerned with her ideas, and her almost-prescient picture of a collapsing civilization.

So who stands against them? Who’s on our side, in a conflict that increasingly looks like the beginnings of a revolution?

Meet Steve Jobs, who helped invent the modern world, from the sheer joy of creating technological marvels that were fun toys. And find out what they did to him.

Meet Bill Gates, who more than any other man made the personal computer into something more than “the world’s most expensive etch-a-sketch.” And find out what they did to him.

Meet John Allison, the banker who made Objectivist principles into rules for mind-boggling corporate success. A man of integrity who built one of America’s strongest banks, and actually attracted more business by making it the bank’s policy to extend no loans whatsoever for financing private property seized by eminent domain. And find out what they did to him.

Meet Milton Friedman, the brilliant economist who cogently explained how the principles of economic freedom translate into the greatest good for all — and, yes, how Ayn Rand dismissed this as “collectivist propaganda.”

My initial misgivings about I Am John Galt resulted from the fact that it compares characters and events from a novel with their counterparts from the real world. I feared it would land too close to what I call “the great book fallacy” — the notion that, at a critical moment of history, a single book comes along that rallies a vast inchoate resistance to tyranny around a central set of ideas. Tom Paine’s Common Sense or Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin are often given as examples.

A close examination of history shows that, in each of these cases, there was a long period of discussion in the marketplace of ideas before the issue crystallized around a brilliant summation. Historian of the American Revolution Bernard Bailyn showed the issues that the revolution was fought over had been disseminated and discussed in hundreds of now-obscure pamphlets that circulated on both sides of the Atlantic for fifty years before Common Sense and the Declaration of Independence.

Some have long hoped Atlas Shrugged would be one of those world-changing books, if only enough people could be persuaded to read it, or see a movie made from it. But after fifty years and millions of copies it’s evident something more is needed — including more books like I Am John Galt that help bridge the gap from fictional archetypes to real-world examples. They show Rand had actual, living people in mind when she created characters like Wesley Mouch and Robbert Stadler — perhaps even people she’d seen in Soviet Russia.

And now we’ve learned to our shock and horror that they aren’t caricatures, but living breathing men and women. And they have power over us, just as she tried to warn us, almost in vain.

What this book does is actualize the principles in the novel, pins them down and shows how they relate to what is going on all around us.

On the subject of Ayn Rand herself, Luskin and Greta are concerned with her ideas, and her almost-prescient picture of a collapsing civilization. They neither ignore nor dwell upon her faults as a human being, because they just aren’t relevant in the context of a discussion of her ideas. Likewise the schisms among her followers are not dealt with because they simply have no relevance to the discussion at hand.

I Am John Galt is readable, and this is the first criterion for a book written to take on the entrenched power supported by media whores endlessly repeating what “everybody knows.” There are graphs and sets of numbers, but they’re presented in a way that is easy to understand and does not get in the way of the narrative. This is, by itself, an impressive accomplishment — and I speak as a journalist who specializes in explaining policy, financing, and engineering infrastructure issues for general audiences.

So is it going to preach only to the choir? I have to step back and think carefully about this, because I am familiar with Ayn Rand’s writings, and have been since I was a teenager.

In the half-century since its publication, Atlas Shrugged has never been out of print, with sales each year jumping from the tens of thousands yearly, to the hundreds of thousands in the 1980s and ’90s. All told, with pass-around readership, that’s tens of millions of people who’ve been exposed to the book and the ideas therein.

However, one can’t help but notice there aren’t tens of millions of Objectivists or even libertarians around. Ayn Rand’s effect on the culture is undeniable; but if even half the people who’ve read Atlas were converted to the philosophy therein, we wouldn’t be in this mess.

That’s where this book, and others like it, come in. What this book does is actualize the principles in the novel, pins them down and shows how they relate to what is going on all around us.

As I read the book, each time I thought “Yes but…” my objection was answered within a page or two. Eventually I realized that what these two men have done is take the organizing tools defined by leftist Saul Alinsky and use them to advance a message of Capitalism and Freedom — the title of Milton Friedman’s work for laymen.

And it’s about time, too!

The book is available for immediate purchase, in traditional as well as Kindle editions, from Amazon.com.

Stephen W. Browne is a writer, editor, and teacher of martial arts and English as a second language. He is also the founder of the Liberty English Camps, held annually in Eastern Europe, which brings together students from all over Eastern Europe for intensive English study using texts important to the history of political liberty and free markets. In 1997 he was elected an Honorary Member of the Yugoslav Movement for the Protection of Human Rights for his work supporting dissidents during the Milosevic regime. His regularly-updated blog is at StephenWBrowne.com.

ATLAS SHRUGGED AND THE COMPOUND EFFECT

Posted on by TeamAtlas

BY  MARK LEWIS

Success magazine Publisher Darren Hardy discusses his Ayn Rand roots, his reactions to the Atlas Shrugged movie, the role of “the compound effect” in achieving real success, and what it means to live the good life.

Darren Hardy is publisher and editorial director of Success magazine and regularly appears on national radio and TV shows for CNBC, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and FOX.

A self-made millionaire, entrepreneur, and avid admirer of Ayn Rand’s novels, he is also author of The Compound Effect: Multiplying Your Results One Simple Step at a Time — which has been hailed as a modern-day version of Napoleon Hill’s classic Think and Grow Rich.

In this interview, Hardy answers questions from Atlasphere columnist Mark Michael Lewis about what it takes to be truly successful, his insights about America’s cultural heritage, his thoughts about leading the good life, and his reactions to the new Atlas Shrugged movie.

Mark Michael Lewis: Darren, I understand you saw Atlas Shrugged – Part 1 on its opening night. What did you like most and what did you like least about the movie?

Darren Hardy: I enjoyed revisiting the characters and Ayn Rand’s basic philosophy, particularly in the context of our current political and economic climate.

I was disappointed in the direction and production. A work of this magnitude deserves the quality of talent — direction, production, financing, distribution, and acting — that is personified in the book itself. I applaud whoever was behind getting something out; but in my opinion, it didn’t meet the standards of the material itself.

When I read Atlas Shrugged, it was like coming home. Finally someone was saying what I have always felt, but hadn’t put into words myself.

I’m sure it was a difficult task, but Dagny, Hank — my favorite character — and particularly Francisco did not live up to my mental picture. Thus the movie fell below my expectations. I am certain Rand’s vision is even grander, more strict, and more sensitive; and I am certain this version would have fallen significantly short from her vision.

At the same time, I enjoyed a movie based on the philosophy, character, and attributes of Atlas Shrugged, even though it didn’t match my mental pictures.

MML: How did you come across Atlas Shrugged? What impact did reading it have on your commitment to success and your confidence in your right to achieve it?

Hardy: It was recommended — no, promoted — to me with great fervor, by someone I admired greatly. When I read it, it was like coming home. Finally someone was saying what I have always felt, but hadn’t put into words myself. I felt understood. I no longer felt like I was the odd one. It really was the mass, or the mob, that was odd.

This was comforting and emboldening to me. It liberated me to be me, 100% me, as I am, as an individual, not as society would have me be. Even more so in The Fountainhead with Howard Roark. He is who I identify with the most.

MML: Your book The Compound Effect praises the cumulative power of making smart choices and taking confident action through time. What are you hoping to inspire in your readers?

Hardy: Number one, that you are 100% responsible for your life. No one or nothing has power over you. Only you determine your outcomes. The economy, the President, policies in Washington, the weather, the traffic, your spouse, your boss … no one is responsible for how you feel, how you perform and what results you create (or don’t) in your life but you.

You, at all times, in every circumstance, at every moment, are 100% responsible — by what you do, don’t do, or how you respond to what has been done to you. Disease, tragedy, heartbreak? Tell me your excuse and I will point out hundreds of people who had it far worse and chose to respond differently and today have blessed, abundant, beautiful, and wonderful lives.

And when it comes to taking 100% responsibility for your life it all comes down to your choices. Your life at this very moment is the cumulative effect of all the choices you have made, or didn’t make, up to now.

Your choices created your waist line, bank balance, relationship status, the success or failure of your business, etc. If you want to change the direction of your life, it starts by making different choices and then acting on those choices, consistently through time, each action building on the last like compound interest. The longer it builds, the more your results multiply, until the compound effect kicks in and you materialize exponential growth results.

You, at all times, in every circumstance, at every moment, are 100% responsible — by what you do, don’t do, or how you respond to what has been done to you.

MML: You say Hank is your favorite character in Atlas Shrugged. What do you admire most about him? How have you striven to be like him?

Hardy: I am most inspired by Hank’s unwavering strength, his consistent and steadfast holding to his principles. He does the right thing, because it is the right thing, without fanfare. I would like to say John Galt, but that dude is above my head, as that is essentially Ayn Rand herself. Hank, and Hank’s world, I understand and can identify with.

MML: Reading The Compound Effect made me think of Hank Rearden and his ten years of dedication to creating Rearden steel, or Dagny Taggart, as she worked diligently year after year to master the railroad business so that she could one day run Taggart Transcontinental. What is the role, in success, of sowing and reaping?

Hardy: This is one of the reasons I wrote The Compound Effect. I was ticked off. I witness a real injustice taking place in our society. People are being misled, tricked, bamboozled, and taken for fools. We are constantly bombarded with increasingly sensational claims to get rich, get fit, get younger, get sexier — all overnight with little effort — for only three easy payments of $39.95.

These repetitive marketing messages have distorted our sense of what it really takes to succeed. Then those with the sincere interest in learning what it takes to be more successful continually get distracted, frustrated, and disappointed when they don’t experience the results they are after. I was tired of watching it happen!

I wrote this book to return people to the basics, the truth and the core fundamentals of what it really takes to succeed. I wanted to clear the clutter, demystify the truth, and tell it straight, with no fat, bull, or fluff included.

MML: What is the difference between the focus on smart actions through time, that you promote in The Compound Effect, and the “law of attraction” or “magic of manifestation” approaches to self-help that have become so popular over the past decade?

Hardy: The law of attraction — or the way it has been explained, promoted, and exploited — is a bunch of crap. You cannot sit on your couch imagining checks coming into your mailbox. If you do, the guys in the white coats will come and haul you off, and bankruptcy court will come to get that couch. Look, you have to get off the damn couch, walk out the front door and make something happen. Action, not delusion, is the answer.

When it comes to explaining, practically, how all of the sudden you start to see things “drawn” into your reality, here’s how that works: You only see, experience, and get what you look for.

If you aren’t looking for something, you often won’t see it, even if it’s been under your nose the whole time. We are surrounded with billions of sensory inputs each day. To keep ourselves from going insane, we ignore 99.9 percent of them. You only really see, hear, or experience those you focus your mind on.

The Law of Attraction — or the way it has been explained, promoted, and exploited — is a bunch of crap. You cannot sit on your couch imagining checks coming into your mailbox

Did you ever start car shopping and then you started to see the model and make of that car everywhere? All of the sudden it seems like there are tons of them on the streets. More likely, they have been there all along, but you weren’t paying attention to them, and thus they didn’t really “exist” to you before.

So, when you define your goals, and start focusing on something, you give your brain something to look for. You give your mind a “new set of eyes” to see all the people, circumstances, conversations, ideas, creativity, and other resources, so it can go about matching up on the outside with what you want on the inside — your goal.

Suddenly it looks like you are attracting all this stuff into your life, when in actuality you are simply seeing, hearing, and paying attention to what has been swirling around you all along.

MML: What is the role of the mind in the continual refinement and unrelenting focus on those disciplines? How important is a consistent rationality in creating success? How important is it to train your mind?

It is critical to feed your mind positive, inspirational, and supportive input and ideas

Hardy: It is critical to feed your mind positive, inspirational, and supportive input and ideas. This includes stories of aspiration — people who, despite challenges, are overcoming obstacles and achieving great things. Strategies of success, prosperity, health, love, and joy. Ideas to create more abundance, to grow, expand, and become more. Examples and stories of what’s good, right, and possible in the world.

Most importantly, you choose what you feed your mind. You do it to yourself. No one has you locked up forcing you to watch the morning news, read the newspaper, listen to drive time radio or watch the ten o’clock news before you go to bed. All the garbage that is dispensed into your ears and in front of your eyes happens because of what you put your head in front of.

That’s why we work so hard at Success magazine. We want to provide you with those examples, those stories, and the key take-aways you can use to improve your view of the world, yourself, and the results you create. That’s also why I read something inspirational and instructional for thirty minutes in the morning and evening, and have personal-development CDs playing in my car.

I’m feeding my mind high quality fuel and compensating for the garbage and self-doubt that the media tries to feed us, and will succeed if we are not vigilant! Does this give me an edge over the guy who gets up and first thing reads the newspaper, listens to news radio on his commute to and from work, and watches the evening news before going to bed? You bet it does! And it can for you, too.

MML: The USA has always been the place to come for those who want a chance to succeed. Perhaps Jim Rohn said it best: People haven’t plotted and schemed for 50 years saying, “If only we could get to Poland, everything would be okay!” What is the role of choosing to create your life in the face of difficulties and disagreement?

Hardy: I think we have lost sight of our roots, what made us great as a burgeoning nation, society, and culture. Our character was chiseled and forged by hard work, discipline, and even struggle and strife that pushed us to become more and do more than we thought possible.

For the past 60 years we have lived in sheer abundance. It has made us lazy and slothful. You have heard the observation that money tends to skip generations. Why? Because the discipline, character, persistence, and determination that was forged in making the money to begin with, when shared or handed to the next generation, cripples them by not getting the benefit of that same journey upward. This is the same reason why every great empire ultimately failed: They failed to continue to do what got them there in the first place.

Here is a small dose of the truth: The process of success is mostly mundane, unexciting, unsexy, laborious, frustrating, tedious, and many times defeating. Success requires hard work, constant and continual effort, determination, persistence, discipline, mixed with a little pain, hurt and frustration — oh and also sheer exhilaration, joy, and utter elation.

The latter comes far more infrequent that the former, but it more than makes up for the difficulty. It makes the whole journey fun, exciting, and fulfilling.

MML: In Atlas Shrugged the heroes come together in community so they can inspire and work with one another to create the life they want. How important are our relationships and the associations we make with the people around us — our “personal politics” — to creating a thriving life?

Hardy: Have you ever been walking with someone and then suddenly realized you are walking much slower than you normally walk, to match their stride? Have you had the opposite experience where you found yourself walking at a much faster clip just to keep up with the person you are walking with? This is what happens in our lives. We end up matching the pace of the people around us.

Success requires hard work, constant and continual effort, determi- nation, persistence, discipline, mixed with a little pain, hurt and frustration — oh and also sheer exhilaration, joy, and utter elation.

Jim Rohn taught that we become the combined average of the five people we hang around the most. Rohn would say we could tell the quality of our health, attitude, and income by looking at the people around us. The people with whom we spend our time determine what conversations dominate our attention, and to which attitudes and opinions we are regularly exposed.

Eventually, we start to eat what they eat, talk like they talk, read what they read, think like they think, watch what they watch, treat people how they treat them, even dress like they dress. The funny thing is, more often than not, we are completely unaware of the similarities between us and our circle of five.

The influence your friends have over you is subtle and can be positive or negative; either way, the impact is incredibly powerful. According to research by Harvard social psychologist David McClelland, your reference group determines as much as 95 percent of your success or failure in life.

Zig Ziglar puts it even simpler. He says, “If you want to fly with the eagles you can’t continue to scratch with the turkeys.” Watch out! You cannot hang out with negative people and expect to live a positive life.

So, who do you spend the most time with? Who are the people you most admire? Are those two groups of people exactly the same? If not, why not? What is the combined average income, health, or attitudes of the five people you spend most of your time with? Does the answer frighten you?

If so, the best way to increase your potential for whatever traits you desire, is to spend the majority of your time with people who already possess those traits. You will then see the power of influence working for you, rather than against you. The behaviors and attitudes which helped them acquire the success you admire will begin to become part of your daily routine. Hang around them long enough and you’re likely to realize similar successful outcomes in your life.

The best way to increase your potential for whatever traits you desire, is to spend the majority of your time with people who already possess those traits

MML: You say that you like it when you face a steep challenge. What is the role of self-esteem in the compound effect?

Hardy: If change were easy, and everyone were doing it, then it would be much more difficult for you and me to stand out and become an extraordinary success. Ordinary is easy. Extra-ordinary is what will separate you from the crowd.

This is why, personally, I’m always happy when something is hard. Why? Because I know that most people won’t do what it takes; therefore, it will be easier for me to step in front of the pack and take the lead.

I love what Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said so eloquently: “The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge.” Only when we are presented with those challenges do we get to separate ourselves from other men. Jim Rohn said: “Time will either promote you or expose you.” I also think that, in times of challenge, you will either be promoted or exposed.

When you press on despite difficulty, tedium, and hardship, that’s when you earn your improvement and gain strides on the competition. If it’s hard, awkward, or tedious — so be it. Just do it. And keep doing it, and the magic of the compound effect will reward you handsomely.

MML: Over the past 20 years, you have used the principles you describe in The Compound Effect to build businesses, make millions, and create a tremendous platform from which to impact the world. What are you looking to create in the next 20 years on top of that foundation? What is the vision with which you inspire yourself?

In times of challenge, you will either be promoted or exposed.

Hardy: My highest value in life is significance. I want to know that what I do matters, that it has a positive impact. Not because I am altruistic and am self-sacrificing for other people. Quite the contrary. I measure my contribution by the reach and depth of the impact I am having in other people’s lives for my own soulful reward.

I also measure that value by the rational exchange of money people are willing to trade for my contribution. I don’t do it for the money; I do it for my personal “contribution score card” and personal achievement.

MML: Thank you, Darren, for spending time with us today. I look forward to discovering what you create.

Hardy: My pleasure.

To learn more about Darren Hardy, follow him on his blog, Facebook, or Twitter.

Mark Michael Lewis — also known as “The Thrive Coach” — is a productivity and profitability catalyst who coaches entrepreneurs, executives, and salespeople to get more done, have more fun, and make more money.

Mark is an author, speaker, and entrepreneur with over 20 years of experience in the life optimization field. In that time, he has been a consultant for hundreds of businesses, helped train thousands of people, and provided one-on-one coaching to hundreds of individuals and couples.

To learn more about Mark and his work, check out his Atlasphere profile and his videos.

BOOK RECOMMENDATION: THE LIEUTENANT

Posted on by TeamAtlas

BY KURT KEEFNER

How often do you find literary fiction portraying a principled and intellectually gifted “geek” with respect and even admiration? Kate Grenville’s new novel The Lieutenant does just this — with enjoyable results.

Ayn Rand was right. There’s a type of person who is an Atlas upon whom the world rests. This sort of person is usually ignored or made fun of. In high school he is likely to get stuffed in his locker by the jocks. And yet our “new economy” is carried on his skinny shoulders.

I am referring, of course, to the math/logic/science geek. Now I don’t like terms such as “geek,” “dork,” and “nerd,” and I hope you don’t either, but we all must admit that we know exactly who I mean when I use the word.

We know that I mean Bill Gates and Stephen Hawking and a lot of other programmers, engineers and physicists. These guys — and they are usually guys — are talented, ingenuous, naïve, playful and usually manage not to become resentful of less intellectual people despite the way they have been treated by them.

Such characters are fairly common in fiction genres such as sci-fi and mysteries — Sherlock Holmes comes to mind — but I haven’t seen him show up much in literary fiction. This is probably due in part to literary fiction being written mostly by verbal, rather than mathematical, people.

 

This is why it is all the more extraordinary to see this type as the hero of a recent literary novel, The Lieutenant, by Kate Grenville. The title character is Daniel Rooke, a lieutenant in the British Royal Marines in the Eighteenth Century. We follow his life, with one long gap, from childhood to death.

As a seven-year old, we see Daniel discover prime numbers and seek a pattern in them. This is noticed by his teacher and he gets sent off to the junior naval academy, where he is trained as a navigator and an astronomer. The two went hand-in-hand since, in those days, ships were steered by the stars.

He is abused by the other boys because of his middle-class background and, presumably, because he is shy and intellectual. He trains himself to make eye-contact and carry on with his peers, but he is more comfortable on his own. In a sort of Newtonian metaphor, he comes to see languages — at which he is also good — and the cosmos as types of “machines.”

Daniel definitely grows over the course of the story and that growth is tied to the plot and the theme, which is reason and openness versus conformity and prejudice.

When he is grown, Daniel is made a lieutenant and is sent on the original prisoner-transport colonization of Sydney, Australia. Discipline is strict, not only for the prisoners, but for the officers. Once in his career already he has seen an officer hanged for merely discussing the possibility of disobeying an order.

Daniel is the expedition’s astronomer, and he is allowed to set up a small observatory with living quarters up on a cliff. Here he meets an aboriginal family and establishes a friendship with their ten-year-old daughter.

It is vitally important to the survival of the colony that the British learn to communicate with the aborigines, lest they starve from not knowing how to find food in a strange land. Daniel takes it upon himself to learn the aboriginal language from the sociable girl.

Daniel doesn’t, however, see her or the other aborigines as most of the British do — as little more than animals. He sees their humanity. The girl reminds him of his sister, the only person in the world he can be himself with.

This difference between himself and the British commanders will bring him to a terrible, possibly life-or-death, disagreement with his superiors, and how he handles it forms the climax of the novel.

I won’t lie and say this is a great novel. It’s quite good, but it is not driven enough by action and conflict. The climactic clash is worthy, but could have been given more weight and drama.

It is eerie how much Daniel echoes Rand’s description of the reason-versus-people dichotomy from her essay “The Comprachicos”

I won’t lie and say this is a great novel. It’s quite good, but it is not driven enough by action and conflict. The climactic clash is worthy, but could have been given more weight and drama.

The real joy of the novel, however, is the character of Daniel Rooke. It is eerie how much he echoes Rand’s description of the reason-versus-people dichotomy from her essay “The Comprachicos” in The Return of the Primitive: The Anti-Industrial Revolution, and it is very gratifying to see this type of person treated with respect and sympathy, and without an ounce of condescension.

Daniel definitely grows over the course of the story and that growth is tied to the plot and the theme, which is reason and openness versus conformity and prejudice. This would be a good novel for Objectivists and for math gods.

Kurt Keefner is a writer and teacher who has been published in The Journal of Ayn Rand Studies and Philosophy Now magazine. He is currently working on a book about mind-body wholism. He lives near Washington, D.C., with his wife, author Stephanie Allen.

INSIDE THE MIND OF AYN RAND

Posted on by TeamAtlas

BY JOSHUA ZADER

Award-winning producer Duncan Scott worked with Ayn Rand to restore the Italian screen adaptation of We The Living. Today he intends to capitalize on the wave of interest in her ideas — by creating a new film where those ideas take center stage.

The freshly released movie version of Atlas Shrugged is generating a ton of attention in the media, fueling new waves of curiosity about Ayn Rand’s ideas. How can supporters of Rand’s philosophy best capitalize on this momentum?

Producer-director Duncan Scott thinks he has the answer. Last week Scott revealed details about a new movie project his company has recently launched, titled Inside the Mind of Ayn Rand. Slated for release in theaters in early 2012, the ninety-minute feature film explores the relevance of Ayn Rand’s views to the fundamental issues facing society today.

“The film also weaves in the epic story of her life, but it’s not focused on the biographical details,” Scott says. “It’s really the first major film to examine in some depth the full range of her ideas.”

Scott thinks the Atlas movie release has created a short-lived opportunity that Objectivists shouldn’t squander. “The best way to spread Objectivist thinking into our culture is through media that creates excitement with the general public, primarily film and television. No other medium combines all these powerful elements — images, movement, words, music, pacing, storytelling — to fully engage the audience.

“We want the viewer to come away charged up by just how critically important her concepts of reason, limited government, and free markets are in today’s world — and in their own lives. These concepts are under assault right now. They need to be defended, and nobody did that better than Ayn Rand.”

These concepts are under assault right now. They need to be defended, and nobody did that better than Ayn Rand.

Many years ago, Scott worked with Ayn Rand on the restoration of the film classic We the Living. “From that point onward,” he says, “I was hooked on her ideas.”

He has been a filmmaker and television producer for over 26 years, including a nine-year stint with public television, and has won four Emmy Awards. In 2004 he created the Objectivist History Project, to document the founding period of Objectivism.

Scott’s new film is being produced independently by his Santa Monica based production company. Financing for the film comes from four sources: investors, institutional support, pre-sales to distributors, and a grassroots internet campaign.

“The internet provides a way for the thousands Ayn Rand fans around the world to help us bring this film to fruition,” Scott explains. To help kickstart grassroots support for the film, Scott has just launched the project at Kickstarter.com.

She foresaw, more than fifty years ago, what is happening today in our country.

“Our Kickstarter page lets anyone who wants to, show their support for Rand’s ideas. People can see a video about the film there. They can find out how to get free tickets to the film’s premiere, a DVD of the finished film, T-shirts, and more.”

He is convinced there couldn’t be a better time than today to showcase Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism. “Rand has been in ascendance for about two years, and the new Atlas film just puts it over the top,” Scott says.

“Of course the main reason is that she nailed it with that novel. She foresaw, more than fifty years ago, what is happening today in our country — and she understood the underlying causes, as well.”

Scott points out that, despite Rand’s popularity, many people have only a superficial grasp of her philosophy. ”They know she was a champion of free markets and individualism, but the underlying core of her philosophy — the moral superiority of capitalism and rational self-interest, in particular — is still misunderstood by many people, even some of her fans.

”We think Inside the Mind of Ayn Rand will be a real eye-opener, not only about her ideas, but also about the fascinating and complex woman behind those ideas.”

To learn more about the project and watch Duncan Scott’s video preview, visit the project’s Kickstarter page.

Joshua Zader is the founder of the Atlasphere and co-founder of Atlas Web Development. He is also a regular contributor at the Atlas Shrugged movie blog, which provides the latest news, discussion, and analysis of the movie.

New article in TIME magazine online about the Atlasphere and the Atlas Shrugged movie

Posted on by s1e2t3u4p5

Time.com just published an article about the Atlasphere as well as the Atlas Shrugged movie, penned by Claire Suddath, who spent this week talking with members of our dating service.
Her article is titled “Single Objectivist Seeks Same” and begins:

Let me get one thing out of the way: I have never read Ayn Rand. In fact, until recently I was one of those uneducated boors who thought the author’s first name was pronounced Ann. A few of her readers have corrected me over the years, but for some reason, I assumed they were joking â?? which is also what I assumed when they told me that they’d just read a great book about government intervention in the railroad industry. (That book is now a movie, Atlas Shrugged: Part I, opening Friday in the U.S.)
But then my editor asked me to look into the dating website the Atlasphere, on which Randians can search for their soul mate among fellow objectivists. I didn’t have time to read all 1,200 pages of Atlas Shrugged or even the 680-page The Fountainhead beforehand, so I did what any self-respecting journalist would do: I called up a friend. “Quick, can you explain Ayn Rand’s personal philosophy to me in one sentence?” I asked Fahad Siadat, a professional musician who just finished reading Atlas Shrugged. I know this because he’d cornered me at a dinner party and told me all about it. Which is what people tend to do when they’ve just discovered Ayn Rand.

See the full article for more.

USING THE ATLAS MOVIE TO MEET PEOPLE

Posted on by TeamAtlas

BY PHILIP COATES

Is the the new Atlas Shrugged movie coming to your area? It’s not just a chance to see Rand’s novel on the big screen; it’s also a rare opportunity to connect with people who share your love for Ayn Rand’s ideas.

If the Atlas Shrugged movie comes to your area, it could provide a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to meet and build community with people who share your values.

A recent example shows how enormously successful we can be, using events to meet people and build a sense of community: The Tea Party movement got an enormous boost by having a march-on-Washington type rally in the nation’s capital, followed by many other local rallies, opposing the massive growth of big government.

Tens of thousands of people came together who never would have met and might have been alone in their little towns. They met others. They started local clubs and movements, and I’m sure some romances blossomed and friendships were started.

By the time election day came, these little grass roots groups had helped massively alter the political balance of power in America. Today they are nationally influential and effective.

Most of us who love Ayn Rand feel at least somewhat isolated. Only a tiny fraction of the population are very interested. When the numbers are so thin, it can be hard to find people who share our values. Yes, you can do some things over the internet, but nothing beats face-to-face contact.

Some years ago, moving to a new city, I wanted to meet people like me. How could I find them? I waited nearly a year until a well-known speaker came to my area to talk about and advocate Ayn Rand’s philosophy. I got permission to distribute a signup sheet for a first meeting of a newly forming Ayn Rand club.

Without that jump start, my discussion group would have been three people in a coffee-shop.

Since they were already interested, well over half of the attendees gave me their contact information. Without that jump start, my discussion group would have been three people in a coffee-shop; instead, it gradually expanded to a mailing list of several hundred. Our get-togethers usually drew twenty or more, and soon I had built a small community.

This weekend the Atlas Shrugged movie is hitting theaters across the nation, presenting us with a rare opportunity that is very analogous to what the Tea Party crowd experienced. Having started many groups, I have suggestions about how to leverage the movie to meet like-minded people in your area.

First, advertise yourself and your values. Get a highly visible type of apparel, perhaps a cap, button, or a t-shirt. Bear in mind, people can’t see a button or t-shirt if others are in the way or if it’s covered up.

Whatever you choose should indicate at a single glance that you are an Ayn Rand fan, not just one of the multitude curious about a movie with an odd title. Few words. No long-winded quotes. Not obscure or too cutesy.

Decide in advance whether you are primarily trying to meet someone for personal or romantic reasons, or if you are trying to start a club or discussion or social or activist group.

If it’s the former — and especially if he or she is wearing similar “advertising” — your job is relatively easy. Walk over with your best big smile: “Have I found another Rand admirer?” Then let nature take its course.

If your goal, however, is to get names for a group or club, this warrants more preparation. Get your own ticket a half-hour early so that, later, you can walk quickly down the line more than once during the half-hour before the movie starts: “Hello… Do you like Ayn Rand’s novels or are you just looking for an interesting movie?”

The first week or so of Atlas Shrugged showings will attract the highest proportion of major fans.

I suggest handing out a business card or small piece of paper saying only, “Ayn Rand Discussion Club” or “Ayn Rand Dinner Group” or “Ayn Rand Campus Club” — whichever suits your purposes — with your name, email address, and phone number. Hand out them out before the movie; after a movie, people can be in a daze, lost in thought, or vanish quickly.

No theater is likely to allow you to tape up big signs, but some might let you place a discreet, tiny stack of cards or slips of paper in the lobby, or for handing out at the ticket desk. That way they could be seen at dozens of showings across a number of weeks. Never hurts to ask. Don’t wait until just before the showing you’re attending to call and ask to speak to the theater manager.

The first week or so of Atlas Shrugged showings will attract the highest proportion of major fans; they won’t be able to wait long. But if the movie spreads out across the nation, theaters will be filled by the general public and those merely attracted by the buzz.

Finally, you cold likely apply these same community-forming tactics at the Tea Party’s big tax day rallies on April 15th, the day the movie opens.

To give it a try, go to FreedomWorks.org, click the “Find Events Near You” button under Tax Day 2011, and enter your zip code to find the location of the nearest rally. In my area it is in a huge football parking lot and in some cases there could be up to a thousand people, many of them admirers of Ayn Rand.

I plan to go with a large placard about the “Tampa Bay Ayn Rand Club” and not only hand out flyers, but ask interested people if they want to join me in passing more of them out at the local movie theaters.

If you try any of these suggestions and have feedback about how they worked, send me your thoughts the letters-to-the-editor section below. I am also happy to answer questions from any of you who are serious about starting a group in your area.

Philip Coates is an educator who currently teaches history, literature, and thinking skills at the Challenger School, and in the past has been an instructor at the New School for Social Research and a departmental guest lecturer at UCLA. His articles have appeared in professional and academic journals and magazines, including The Independent Review, Reality, Objectivity, and the Proceedings of the Association for Computing Machinery. Also, he has been editor and publisher of Classics Review, a book review newsletter on timeless and classic books.

WSJ: Remembering the real Ayn Rand

Posted on by s1e2t3u4p5

Writing at the Wall Street Journal, Donald Luskin has an excellent article “Remembering the Real Ayn Rand” that begins by discussing the new movie:

Tomorrow’s release of the movie version of “Atlas Shrugged” is focusing attention on Ayn Rand’s 1957 opus and the free-market ideas it espouses. Book sales for “Atlas” have always been briskâ??and all the more so in the past few years, as actual events have mirrored Rand’s nightmare vision of economic collapse amid massive government expansion. Conservatives are now hailing Rand as a tea party Nostradamus, hence the timing of the movie’s premiere on tax day.
When Rand created the character of Wesley Mouch, it’s as though she was anticipating Barney Frank (D., Mass). Mouch is the economic czar in “Atlas Shrugged” whose every move weakens the economy, which in turn gives him the excuse to demand broader powers. Mr. Frank steered Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to disaster with mandates for more lending to low-income borrowers. After Fannie and Freddie collapsed under the weight of their subprime mortgage books, Mr. Frank proclaimed last year: “The way to cure that is to give us more authority.” Mouch couldn’t have said it better himself.

See his full article for much more, including a sensible discussion of the ways in which big businessmen are often no friends of capitalism and the ways in which Rand was neither a conservative nor a liberal.
Mr. Luskin is co-author with Andrew Greta of a new book, scheduled for publication next month, titled I Am John Galt: Today’s Heroic Innovators Building the World and the Villainous Parasites Destroying It. Judging from this article, I guessing it’s pretty good.

SCREENWRITER BRIAN PATRICK O’TOOLE

Posted on by TeamAtlas

BY MARK LEWIS

After decades of fruitless attempts to turn Atlas Shrugged into a movie, John Aglialoro remained adamant about creating a script that would be as faithful as possible to Ayn Rand’s novel. Meet the man he hired to write that script.

After forty years of unsuccessful attempts to turn Ayn Rand’s epic novel Atlas Shrugged into a movie, the first installment of a three-part trilogy will finally be released this Friday, April 15th, 2011. Though an independent release, and with independent distribution, the movie is scheduled to open on more than 300 screens across the country.

You can find the full list of theaters on the movie’s official website. Be sure to follow the movie’s updates on Facebook, as well.

Brought in during the final months before filming started, screenwriter Brian Patrick O’Toole worked closely with Producer John Aglioloro to create a full and faithful screenplay, which then received further edits by Director Paul Johansson before each scene was filmed.

In anticipation of this movie, serious fans of Atlas Shrugged often oscillate between a persistent fear and profound hope. For decades, we have all weighed the pros and cons of various approaches to making this movie: Should it be a mini-series? Should it use big name stars, or lesser-known actors?

My initial concern was, would I be able to deliver a screenplay that met everyone’s expectations?

Now that the movie is finally a reality, many of those questions have been resolved; but others have taken their place, which feel more pressing and intense than ever: How was this screenwriter chosen? How did he approach writing the script? What was it like working under such a tight time deadline?

To help get answers, Mark Michael Lewis arranged this exclusive interview for Atlasphere readers with the man whose job, more than anyone, was to turn Ayn Rand’s novel into a powerfully engaging script. With nine producer credits and four writing credits to his name, O’Toole has been around this block before and has valuable perspectives to offer.

The Atlasphere: How did you come to write the screenplay for Atlas Shrugged?

Brian Patrick O’Toole: Producer Harmon Kaslow had originally brought me on as a writer’s assistant because of my history of working on other film adaptations. After a month, the producers were not happy with what had been written so far, and asked me to take over the reigns.

My co-writer John Aglialoro was very clear that he wanted an adaptation that reflected the novel as closely as possible. Although our available time was short, I was able to re-breakdown the book and structure the screenplay appropriately.

John and I worked very well together. He had a specific vision for Atlas Shrugged that I was able to put to paper. John understood that film builds story through images and that a film can telegraph a lot of details — such as action, character heft, mood, and theme — in seconds, where those same things might take several pages to convey in a novel.

The original director began to talk about all the updates he wanted to make to Rand’s story. I spoke up and challenged the director about these changes. Why give a fish wings?

To give an example, in Gone with the Wind, the first thirty minutes of the film equaled one hundred and thirty pages in the book. We used Gone with the Wind as a reference often in our discussions on adapting Atlas Shrugged Part I.

TA: Producer John Aglialoro has been working for decades to get the movie made. What was it like to come in at the end of the process and join him?

O’Toole: I first met John with Harmon, and the first director attached to the project, at a restaurant in Hollywood. I didn’t know what to expect. I didn’t know anything about John or his history with the novel going in.

We sat down and the director began to talk about all the updates he wanted to make to Rand’s story. I spoke up and challenged the director about these changes. Why give a fish wings? I believe John and I clicked over that lunch meeting. I remember us spending a lot of time talking about Dagny saving John Galt in Part Three of the novel.

As time went by, I learned a lot more about John Aglialoro and his dream to bring Atlas Shrugged to life as a film. It was clear that Atlas Shrugged was not going to be business as usual. How often does someone get to be a part of another person’s dream? How often does someone get to work with a real-life hero? That is what John has become to me — a hero.

He could have made Atlas Shrugged many times but he has always stood by his vision. John knew exactly how the story should be told and what needed to be said. He held out for years until it could be done respectfully — done right.

There can be no creativity without an occasional disagreement and there were quite a few clashes during pre-production. Luckily we had Ayn Rand’s novel to fall back on, so when creativity hit the wall of opinion, John would always say: “What does it say in the book? Let’s trust what Ayn Rand said.”

Now, having said that, it is impossible to re-create every individual’s vision of Rand’s book, so I focused on introducing a new audience to this wonderful material in hope that they would leave the theater saying, “I have to read that book.”

TA: What were your initial concerns and hopes when taking on such an ambitious project?

O’Toole: My initial concern was, would I be able to deliver a screenplay that met everyone’s expectations?

My key word for every adaptation that I have done has been “respect” — respect for the original material and respect for its fans. If you’re going to adapt or remake one form of media to another, respect the original and consider the fan’s expectations. Don’t change the rules. Stay true to the spirit and concepts already established.

The secret of all good book-to-film adaptations lies in finding the heart of the novel. I do that by cutting away the layers, the details, of the story that do not lend themselves naturally to cinema.

The secret of all good book-to-film adaptations lies in finding the heart of the novel. I do that by cutting away the layers, the details, of the story that do not lend themselves naturally to cinema.

Atlas Shrugged is rich not only in characters but in themes and philosophies. Ayn Rand’s novel, as I would learn while we were in production, is the second most influential book next to the Holy Bible. Had I known that fact while I was writing the script, I would have probably come down with a severe case of writer’s block.

Also, I know what it feels like to have Hollywood take something I really liked in another form and completely miss the point with the adaptation. It happens more and more it seems with all these recent film remakes.

I was totally floored by the asinine remake of Godzilla. Fifty years and twenty-two previous films and what do they come up with? A giant fish-loving iguana that has a crush on Matthew Broderick. Ugh! I mean, I’m no zoologist, but I’m pretty sure a creature that size would have its heart explode while running at the speeds that monster did.

I will never apologize for my work in the horror genre. Horror films hold up a mirror to society and show us the darkness in us all.

TA: You have written and worked extensively in the horror film genre, with several films to your credit. What is it that attracts you about that medium?

O’Toole: When we announced that Atlas Shrugged Part I had begun production, some bloggers targeted me for having previously written and produced horror films. I was equally surprised to learn that members of the production team had pigeon-holed me as well. Their ignorance bothered me.

I will never apologize for my work in the horror genre. Horror films hold up a mirror to society and show us the darkness in us all.

I am a huge fan of horror. Horror films — good horror films — are not all about the visceral. The good ones are able to tap into our basic cores and stir up true terror. That’s an art. They make us think.

If I mention the film Alien, the first thing that probably comes to mind is the chest-busting scene. But Alien was really the story of a corporation that wanted to capture a beast to use as a weapon and deemed the crew expendable to do so.

Who didn’t run to their Bible after seeing The Omen to check out the Book of Revelations? George Romero’s Dawn of the Dead was an excellent allegory for the AIDS epidemic amongst the ultra-violence. Even giant mutant monster movies have a strong subtext: Don’t screw with mother nature. Jurassic Park strongly warned: “Just because we can doesn’t mean we should.”

Horror films are able to pass a message to the audience without beating them over the head with it. This is the magic of horror.

And in a way, Atlas Shrugged is a story of human evil. Rand warns us that good intentions can pave a way to hell. The government of Atlas Shrugged actually thinks it is providing good service. It helps without considering the far-reaching consequences. It’s insidious the way the evil creeps into all they do throughout the novel.

That’s why John Galt is so believable. We want to follow him. He is the guiding light. I hope to explore this angle more in Part Two.

Truth be told, my actual training is in comedy — and had I only done comedies before Atlas Shrugged Part I, some people would have said, “A comedy writer could never understand the seriousness of the material.”

I am a writer. True, I’ve only had my horror scripts produced so far — and I am grateful for that. But I can write other genres.

Unfortunately, in Hollywood, they tend to lock talent into categories: she’s only a TV actor, he’s only done theater, he’s only written low-budget horror. It’s rather sad to think how many great talents have been passed over because of someone else’s ignorant biases.

TA: What should fans of Atlas Shrugged the novel expect to find in Atlas Shrugged the movie?

O’Toole: At its core, I found Part One of Atlas Shrugged to be a classic underdog story. Dagny Taggart loves her family’s railroad business but she is watching it slowly die because of internal forces (her incompetent brother James’s bad business decisions) and external forces (a government whose socialist policies are bringing the economy toward the brink of disaster).

On top of all this, Dagny faces a third invisible threat: Good men of great mind are retiring — being spirited away — never to return until a time when the individual can regain the right to his own life. She decides that in order to save her railroad she’s going to have to take some risk, take matters into her own hands.

At its core, I found Part One of Atlas Shrugged to be a classic underdog story.

In order to keep Taggart Transcontinental’s most important customer, Ellis Wyatt, happy — and his oil flowing — Dagny decides to rebuild a broken main line using a new alloy, created by industrialist Henry Rearden, who claims his metal is stronger and lighter than steel. This agitates a group of shady businessmen who plot to use their government lapdogs to bring down the new line and discredit Rearden Metal.

Dagny, with Rearden’s help, has a temporary triumph with the successful run of the new railroad line on Rearden Metal. On a trip through Wisconsin, Dagny and Rearden search the remains of the abandoned 20th Century Motor Company and find a motor that could change the world — but it’s incomplete. They search for the designer across the country. While in Wyoming, Dagny is devastated by the news that oil baron Ellis Wyatt has set his wells on fire and disappeared.

This was the skeleton that I started building the screenplay around.

Once this skeleton was established, I had to decide what would stay, what would change, and what would need to be left out of the film. The first scenes that were dropped were the childhood flashbacks and Eddie Willers’s cafeteria scenes with the railroad worker John Galt. The childhood sequences were removed because we decided to keep a linear pacing to the film. Eddie Willers’s meetings with the worker were removed because they basically represented recaps for the readers — although I realized that I would lose the subplot of Eddie’s love for Dagny.

When it was decided that Atlas Shrugged Part I would be a 90–100 minute film in order to keep theaters happy, I had to make some more difficult cuts. One scene I was really sorry to see go was after Dagny is visited by the head of the railroad union, who lets her know that he will not allow his men to work on the John Galt Line. Right after that scene, the next day, Dagny finds a sea of union men volunteering to work on the line. That was an emotionally rich scene but, because of time and budget restraints, it was left out.

TA: Adopting the trilogy format gave you room to follow the book more closely. On the other hand, ending the first installment of the movie one-third of the way through the novel leaves many themes and questions unresolved. Did you see this as a problem? If so, how did you address it?

O’Toole: John and I designed our script for Atlas Shrugged Part I to stand on its own as a self-contained film. True, it ends on a cliff-hanger; but I think audiences will leave the theater satisfied — hopefully wanting to see Part Two to find out what happens next.

Or, better yet, they leave the theater and cross the mall to the bookstore and pick up the book.

A SALUTE TO THE ATLAS SHRUGGED MOVIE

Posted on by TeamAtlas

BY JUDD WEISS

Some of us weren’t just skeptical about the new Atlas Shrugged movie; we wanted it stopped. There’s no way a rushed, small-budget, independent production could do justice to Ayn Rand’s novel. Or could it?

A few weeks ago, at a private screening for Atlas Shrugged Part 1, I took my seat, closed my eyes, dropped my head, and for the first time in my life, I said a prayer. “Please don’t be cheese ball. Please don’t be cheese ball. Please don’t be cheese ball.”

A vision flashed in my mind of John Travolta, on the cover of a Battlefield Earth poster. Petrified, my fingers hardened into a grip around my arm rests. “No! Please don’t be cheese ball. Please don’t be cheese ball….”

No doubt, the excitement in the room was mixed with fear. The producers of this film had the balls to make a motion picture out of one of the most thought provoking and controversial novels of all time. We know about the Library of Congress reader’s poll ranking Atlas Shrugged as the second most influential book of all time next to the Bible, and other prominent reader polls ranking it as the best novel ever written — over one thousand pages packed with action, philosophy, adventure, politics, romance, mystery, and a whole lot of attitude.

Ayn Rand nailed these 1300 pages on the door of the world’s churches and state capital buildings, sparking what history might record as the beginning of the next Renaissance.

Back in the 1500s, Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses on the door of a prominent Catholic church, sparking The Reformation. Ayn Rand nailed these 1300 pages on the door of the world’s churches and state capital buildings, sparking what history might record as the beginning of the next Renaissance, the next cultural movement to bring back a focus on reality and reason and freedom and productivity.

The novel’s title refers to the Greek god Atlas, of course, who strains to hold the weight of the world on his shoulders. The load gets heavier and he struggles through blood and sweat to keep the world up. Until he changes his mind, shrugs, and drops the world. Let it fall. Let the world burn. Let all the ungrateful leeches and apes have it to themselves and enjoy it. Atlas is done.

The parallels to what is happening today are extraordinary. The achievers and producers are routinely blamed for the problems of the world. People have voted into office politicians intent on further regulating and controlling the producers in our country. More and more people are becoming “the needy” — and more mouths are opening. Amidst an economic crisis, the popular political solution is to demonize, and then to chain, the hands that feed us.

We can imagine what would happen to our quality of life if all the leaders of the vilified oil companies, pharmaceuticals, ISPs, and Zuckerberg, suddenly said “Screw you all — I’m out.”

Ayn Rand took a bold stand in support of those who produce and create. By taking this stand so firmly, she became one of the most widely revered and hated public figures of the last 100 years.

Everyone in the screening room with me knew the power of this book. And now, they’ve filmed this historical document. Actors and camera men and movie sets are going to bring it to life.

Terror strikes you harder when you know the circumstances surrounding its creation. For five decades, people have been struggling to make the movie. Over the years, many famous stars were attached to a wasteland of terrible scripts. Angelina Jolie made waves for being cast in the lead role a few years ago, but then she got pregnant, or something like that, and that production attempt died a bitter death.

The newest option on the film rights to Atlas Shrugged were set to expire in June of last year, 2010. In April, John Aglialoro, the producer who held the option on the film rights, begged for the rights to be extended, but was denied.

This meant he had two months to start production — or lose the millions he already invested in the project over the years. That meant two months to get a new script together, get the financing together, get the available cast together, choose a director, find film locations, and all that other stuff, while attempting to faithfully and successfully adapt a deep, complex, legendary novel for the screen.

Fans were pissed! And I was one of them. You know, I always push people to take on tough challenges, not to give up when things get more difficult. But even I can acknowledge reality.

 

Not only is this impossible, but the producers are about to ruin one of the most important novels of all time. This book, profound and packed with so much insight and story, is about to get discredited and humiliated before the public. I didn’t believe.

I wanted this movie stopped. Word on the streets was this was going to be a train wreck.

In fact, along with many fans, I wanted this movie stopped. Word on the streets was this was going to be a train wreck. We all want to see this film made, but let’s take our time and do it right.

If I could have spoken with the producer, I would have said, “John, don’t do this. I know you don’t want to lose your money, but please don’t drag this classic down with you. Please let go and give up on this. It’s too important. You are about to cause a lot of damage and harm. There is no way for you to pull this off as a rush job.”

 

 

I was wrong.

Now, does this movie carry the same power as the novel? No man, there’s no way. A movie is just a visual representation — a graphic novel, if you will. Pictures and dialogue truly can not carry the weight of all that writing, but can only allude to it. And that’s the point. It seems obvious that this movie was never meant to replace the book, but rather to serve as a phenomenal advertisement for it.

The highlight of the film is its script, co-written by Aglialoro and Brian O’Toole.

The highlight of the film is its script, co-written by Aglialoro and Brian O’Toole. Witty and full of attitude, it successfully and faithfully adapts the novel to the screen. Part of what keeps this film enjoyable throughout is that you can hear Ayn Rand’s attitude shine through in the dialogue. The theme was well preserved: This is a war between creators and blood suckers.

Let’s get a few things out of the way. This was made for $10 Million. That’s a lot of money, but tiny, tiny for movie production. You’re not going to see Avatar production quality.

Directed by a TV director and starring a cast of TV actors, this is actually TV movie production quality, but very good TV movie quality. We have all seen excellent TV programs that we’ve enjoyed, so this is not meant as an aspersion. The filmmakers did an incredible job squeezing production value out of a small budget.

 

The production quality was saved by excellent cinematography. The man behind the camera was obviously catching up on his Dr. Zhivago, going for epic sweeping landscape shots that mark legendary director David Lean’s claim to excellence.

The worst acting was unfortunately from John Galt’s few scenes.

The acting was OK. They won’t win any Oscars, but they pulled it off. The worst acting was unfortunately from John Galt’s few scenes. He’s not even supposed to appear until the third part of the novel. I don’t have a problem with briefly introducing him in part one; it’s just that it wasn’t done so well. Fortunately he always appears in the dark and you could never really see him, so any better actor can easily take over that part in the future sequels.

By far my favorite actor was Grant Bowler. Perfectly cast as Henry Rearden, he truly exemplifies the strong, accomplished businessman bewildered as he’s surrounded by all the ungrateful bloodsuckers supported by him. Perhaps the best cast role was Rebecca Wisocky as Hank’s wife, Lillian Rearden. She did a fantastic job of playing a cold bitch, putting genuine terror deep into the heart of any man who’s not yet married. Well, at least she accomplished that for me. Seriously, check out that leaked scene of Rearden giving his wife a gift and tell me if you honestly still feel like ever getting married.

The film was about 100 minutes. It should have been a little longer. Even though this film represents only the first third of the book, there is still too much material to cover, even after editing down the story, and it caused the pacing to become very fast. Some scenes don’t have a chance to set in and build the gravity of the situation.

The truth is, the film is intelligent, it is engaging, it is faithful, and it is entertaining.

Perhaps this is where art meets reality. Three hours would have allowed for a lot less compromise, but that much film time would have required a bigger budget and more production time, and surely would restrict the distribution considerably, as theaters would be unable to rent as many seats. Still, it could have used another 20 minutes of film time.

So, the movie is not perfect. Screw it, I don’t care. Hardcore fans like us could find a million ways to pick apart the film and complain over details; but the truth is, the film is intelligent, it is engaging, it is faithful, and it is entertaining.

The movie is excellent as it stands, and the fact that John Aglialoro pulled this off and achieved this feat — well, that’s a story worthy of being among the pages of the novel itself. And it also opens up some ideas for fun exercise challenges to give the producer next time for the sequel. Apparently some of us work better under extreme pressure. Ok dude, you’ve got only one month this time, make it better. Go!

I kid.

John Aglialoro, my deepest apologies for my previous misgivings. I salute you, sir.

Judd Weiss lives in Los Angeles and blogs at HustleBear.com.

Pay with Paypal
Sub Total:
Total:

Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.

Loading