preview

Analysis Of Atlas Shrugged By Ayn Rand

Decent Essays
Open Document

Productivity is Essential Robin Hood is a cartoon figure in America that steals from the rich and gives to the poor. A good idea, right? Well, how about if the rich work for everything that they have and the poor rely on the rich and do not do anything to earn their keep? Robin Hood just became a very evil man. Atlas Shrugged written by Ayn Rand in 1957 expresses ideas that are becoming more and more true in today’s lazy society. If Rand were still alive today, she would most likely be upset. Rand passed away on March 6th 1982, so Rand had to have seen some of the things going on before she passed away. Rand believed strongly against non workers being paid or given a handout. Welfare began in 1932, and people misusing welfare is the epitome …show more content…

These characters are either on the side of good or the side of bad. Some characters are not portrayed on one side or the other until later in the story, like John Galt. John Galt is one of the people on the good side. So is Hank Rearden and Dagny Taggart, and a few select others. The “good” or the protagonists in this story are on strike against the government who want full control which helps reveal the moral meaning of Danneskjold’s assertion. Danneskjold is a protagonist in the story. Danneskjold states, “Robin Hood is the most immoral and the most contemptible, there will be no justice on earth and no way for mankind to survive”(Ayn Rand Atlas Shrugged, page 532 ).The surface meaning of the commentary by Danneskjold is that Robin Hood is evil and only gives to those who do not work for what they have. Helping the needy and taking from those who have plenty sounds right; that is why Robin Hood has been so popular over the years. Although Robin Hood is doing a good deed on the surface, he is still stealing from those who work for what they have. Sometimes when shooting a bow, if someone’s aim is good enough, he or she will actually put one arrow through an arrow already in the target, and that is called Robin Hooding an arrow. A good accomplishment; however, one arrow is ruined. Just as Robin Hood steals, but makes stealing seem like a good accomplishment. But something is …show more content…

This attitude shows Dannekjold’s feeling toward Robin Hood; Danneskjold is completely against the ideas behind Robin Hood’s character. Rand and Danneskjold are actually a lot alike. In the story, Dannekjold is a philosopher, and so is Rand. Danneskjold does not mind going against the crowd, just as Rand does not mind stepping on people’s toes. The two having so much in common suggests that Rand is somewhat bringing herself into her story, and what she would do in a situation when her world was taking everything that the productive had and giving the labor to those who just sat around and did nothing all day, just as many people do now. The protagonists in the story refuse to conform to the looters’ way of life just as Ayn Rand refused to conform to some of the ways of her

Get Access