The Fountainhead

This book is full of passion, including a flaming, complex romantic affair between individualist architect Howard Roarke and socialite Dominique Francon. Their relationship develops from one in which they each seek to assert power over the other while achieving sexual release to one of true love between genuine soul mates. Roarke also has a passion for his work and is uncompromising in his creativity in accomplishing his professional goals. He will not ever compromise these goals despite enormous pressures to do so. Rand believed that there is only black and white in moral issues; there is no gray. Therefore, giving in a little is not compromise but rather, selling out your values and giving in to evil. Roarke was not a man to sell out, he had the courage of his convictions.

While setting forth her philosophy, Rand has also given us a novel which has a well developed plot. I found the novel to be gripping and I couldn't put it down. Following the career of Howard Roarke and the machinations of his enemies was fascinating. The plot had enough twists to provide surprises and to hold the reader's interest. This book is both an enjoyable novel as well as a challenging philosophical statement. I like Rand's philosophy and I love this book.


Exemplifies the reason for reading any piece of literature   January 28, 2003
C.T. (New Jersey)
26 out of 29 found this review helpful

I feel the purpose of reading is to be challenged: ideologically, philosophically, politically, etc. Either those challenges will cause one to rethink one's beliefs or strengthen one's existing convictions. Either of these outcomes will produce, I believe, a better person - a thinker who is willing to encounter more than one argument, one side to any issue, and still retain opinions of one's own.

I would also like to counter some of the comments that the book is simply a thinly veiled treatise on Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism. If anyone read the introduction written by Rand she answers a fundamental question:

"Was The Fountainhead written for the purpose of presenting my philosophy? ... This is the motive and purpose of my writing; the projection of the ideal man ... My purpose, first cause and prime motive is the portrayal of Howard Roark as an end in himself."

What I understood from Rand's statement is that her ultimate goal is to present her characters - showing, through their actions and inactions, attitudes and convictions - and the good and bad points of their diverse perspectives on life. In interpreting the book, I feel one should focus on how one perceives the characters, not on what the afterward by Leonard Peikoff or any other outside source espouses.

Form your own opinion of the philosophical ideas expressed in the book - do not rely on Piekoff's interpretation or the interpretation of this review or others. Read the book and analyze the characters on your own - pull from them what grabs at you - what relates to any of your life experiences. To me, that is the most effective way to think and read. Think critically and scrutinize closely and you will not fail to learn from most every part of life.

This is how I approached the novel and I was not disappointed.


One small voice, mine.   October 4, 2001
Ruth Dubb (Alexandria, VA United States)
14 out of 14 found this review helpful

Read just about any four or five star customer review and you have a fine summary of this book. It is not necessary for me to repeat what has already been said. I myself would like to talk about the individual characters which keep me rereading this book as much as the philosophy does. Roark, Keating, Toohey (shudder), Dominique, etc., all represent facets of humanity, good and evil. But characters like Keating and Wynand are more complex than the characters in Atlas Shrugged. Yes, they are Randian archetypes but they have taught me much about human nature.

Keating, had he a little more backbone, might have actually been able to make something of himself. Unlike the villains of AS, he was somewhat sympathetic. He was in love with Catherine, a woman who may not have possessed the glamor and poise of Dominique but who was right for him simply because they were happy when they were together. Fool that he was, he instead opted for what he thought he was supposed to, just as he chose architecture over his true calling, painting. His story is a lesson for all of us. To detractors of the book who call it contemptuous of people I say you don't HAVE to be this way. Don't be a Peter Keating. It is up to you.

Ellsworth Toohey is a villain for the ages, somebody you just love to hate. I won't even describe him as a man. I relish the creepy, slimy feeling I get rereading the passages about him. Every patronizing, smarmy sentence that comes out of his mouth is designed to make one cringe. The fact that he DOESN'T seek out wealth, or even happiness, makes him all the worse.

It is through him and this book that I learned what is evil: holding society and "the greater good" over the individual. Now, whenever I read or watch the news, I am acutely aware of the malice in people who would say they are trying to protect society when their actions result in harm to an individual, or worse, equate society with an individual as I recently heard from a prominent proponent of the death penalty. Again, he is a lesson to all of us: beware the Ellsworth Tooheys of the world. They are out there.

Rand wrote Roark as the ideal man. He certainly is that. I could never expect to be as he is but I firmly believe that he is something to strive for. He had the courage of his convictions. He did not care what other people thought, except those whose opinions mattered to him, such as his mentor, Cameron. Such is the lesson I learned from him. If I find myself jealous or resentful of somebody, I asked myself what my weakness is because fear of one's own shortcomings is from whence hatred and jealousy arise.

If it is difficult to relate to a man who does not even see you, as he is frequently described, consider for a moment why it is important for him to see you and why you feel your own worth is based on how others see you. Then consider the friends that he makes in the book, competent and intelligent people who feel about the world as he does. And finally consider what true friendship is. It is not alms to be doled out in the name of compassion. It is respect and love for those whom we enjoy having around us.

Dominique Francon is a strange bird (Rand said that Dominique was her in a bad mood). Her motivations are complex but when I think about them, they make sense to me. I see her as somebody who has so much contempt for the world that she doesn't think it deserves a man like Roark (or a woman like her). Hence the reason she works against Roark, not to deprive Roark of a living but to deprive the world of Roark. Clarifying the reasons behind her actions also clarifies that controversial rape scene. It is the ideal man saying to the ideal but obstinate woman that the world cannot destroy him. They spar violently to show how strong they are.

Gail Wynand is less interesting to me but an intriguing character nonethless, the man who could have been. He had the drive and the intelligence but, like Dominique, too much contempt. His contempt for humanity at least was purer and cleaner than Toohey's love for humanity. I wonder if, had his childhood not been so brutal, he might have gone a different direction. But then I think that had Roark had a brutal childhood, he still would have come out the same. Such is Wynand's weakness. A sad waste, really.

Atlas Shrugged is THE definitive Rand book. I myself certainly feel this way. Nevertheless, The Fountainhead has virtues that one does not find in that mighty tome. As in AS the characters are largely archetypes but interesting in different ways. Even though Atlas Shrugged is several hundred pages longer than The Fountainhead, it also feels more streamlined. The characters are more complex in the latter (except, admittedly, for Roark), maybe because where Atlas Shrugged deals in the steel and railroad industries, The Fountainhead deals in the more aestetic field of architecture which, incidentally, Rand describes beautifully.


Compelling, Inspiring masterpiece - flawed philosophy   February 26, 2005
Aaishik (India)
14 out of 14 found this review helpful

The best value "The Fountainhead" offers is ENORMOUS courage in a man's struggle to achieve his values. There is hardly any other novel which so forcefully projects the beauty & glory of 2 great values: integrity, & independence.
"Fountainhead..." is a greater, more impacting novel than "Atlas...", though it does not share the epic & visionary elements, & the breath-taking scope of the latter.
The plus-point is characterization, more realistic situations, & more tenable ideas.
Though one may disagree with Rand's ideas regarding selfishness & selflessness - on her terms, from her specific, individual perspective - she is right.
For example, while people like Toohey DO exist - while people do exist, who try to destroy man's sense of self, his sense of his own magnificence, of self-reverence & thus kill his spirit, so that they can rule the mindless & spiritless - while such monsters have existed, & still do - I certainly don't accept Rand's idea that "altruism" or "humanitarianism" or "selflessness" have, by definition, or in history, anything to do with such men.
To kill people in the name of Yahweh, or Christ, or Allah, or "justice" or "love of mankind" certainly does not condemn the Bible or Koran, or have anything to do with justice & love.
What is more, Rand betrays her own philosophy of life in this novel. Those aspects of her vision that are truly sublime & exalting, which have an effect of expanding one's consciousness - which thrill a person with a sense of uplift - those very aspects which are NOT LOGICALLY a part of her philosophy of Objectivism - those very aspects make "Fountainhead..." an unparalled emotional-spiritual tour-de-force.
To read "The Fountainhead" is to be born again - to become something more than what one already is - to find something beautiful within.
It compels a man to a point where he yearns to realize within himself a certain grandeur, & make himself worthy of his own wonderment & joyous contemplation.

Characterization is Fountainhead's best aspect, - unlike the more consciously abstract, philosophical representations of "Atlas...", Henry Cameron, Dominique, Wyanand, Roark's friends etc. come across as POSSIBLE characters - through which Ayn Rand beautifully projects values, conflicts & errors in thinking which all of us share - sometime or the other - in life (often, throughout our lives).
The shattering of a half-known, half-realized dream; the torturous struggle of the mangled soul to retain its dignity & integrity; the sense of bewilderment & defeat when a pure soul confronts an apparently malevolent universe; the weakness of the fundamentally noble that cracks under strain...all these make Fountainhead's characters so full of life, vividness, poignancy & emotional power, that I'd readily uphold it as one of the most powerful novels I've ever read.
Though "Atlas..." too has forceful, passionate & inspiring, characters, they are more deliberate & unconvincing - they are more squeezed into carefully defined molds meant to convey a psychologically destructive & untenable philosophy.
On the other hand, the men & women who people "Fountainhead..." are more CONVINCING - they do not come across as contrived abstractions in a novel - they seem to be of flesh & blood.
And Rand has achieved this though they too are conceived as "philosophical abstractions".
They are essentialized, & yet startlingly REAL.
Here, as a writer who integrated philosophy & psychology in characterization, surpassingly, Rand stands as an equal of another awesome giant - Fyodor Dostoevsky.

Roark is, however, quite unconvincing - a little too artificial - but he is nevertheless GREAT.
Unfortunately, while I may view him as a good fictional, ideal hero (albeit somewhat dull & stiff) - I CANNOT accept him as an example to be achieved in "real life" - for, psychologically, I don't think such a man can be possible.
He is too colorless - too indifferent to the world around him - too self-absorbed to be true & credible - as if he cannot identify with anything in the universe beyond himself, & does not care to.
To see the ALL beyond oneself, as an integral part of one's identity is NOT to lose one's self, or self-sufficiency or self-reliance.
Though myself a complete recluse, I'll say that, to connect to people, to be a part of the tears & joys, the chaos & turbulence of the life that teems around us, is NOT to lose one's individuality, independence & integrity.
THIS, Roark lacks seriously.
But, his indestructible self-respect, integrity & sense of independence, - his serenity & immeasurable moral strength - make him immortal - unforgettable - worthy of a salute from the best in us.

In conclusion, Fountainhead is a MUST READ. The poetry & passion of the novel swept me away. Rand's sense of hero-worship is ecstatic, religious.
Unfortunately, Rand makes a mess of philosophy - she simply isn't profound enough, or true, or interesting, when it comes to philosophizing.
I'd caution the reader not to accept every definition or idea of Rand, but grasp the broader abstraction, which is often true.
Don't equate Toohey with "altruism" or something like that - but grasp that Toohey IS HATEFUL, with all his altruistic masquerading.
Rand seems to be unconsciously biased, & hasty, when it comes to a philosophic appraisal of history, or the world as such - and this makes extraction of the truly valuable from the erroneous in Fountainhead quite difficult.
But rare are those titans who have equalled her in her projection of overwhelming pain & overwhelming joy - in her celebration of genius, of the grandeur of the human spirit, & of the ultimate benevolence of the universe.



A book worthy of honest consideration   June 20, 2005
Lesley Freitas (Chicago, IL USA)
12 out of 12 found this review helpful

Ayn Rand's "The Fountainhead" is now more than sixty years old, yet it retains its relevance and urgency, Judging both from fellow reviewers, and from personal experience, every reader of "The Fountainhead" emerges either loving or hating the book. I personally find Rand's ideas uplifting, and though her philosophy is not entirely of her own creation, Rand's presentation is compelling and her formulation is clear and striking. Furthermore, for all the controversy Rand's philosophy may inspire, "The Fountainhead" is undeniably an entertaining and well-written book. That Rand is able to demonstrate her fascinating philosophical views in such a well-written and well-told story should be recognized as a tremendous feat.

"The Fountainhead" tells the story of Howard Roark, a young architect who is, as Rand describes in an early manuscript, "a man who is what he should be." Roark is a self-contained human being, who lives entirely for himself-by his own definition of himself. Roark's buildings are considered both radical and offensive by many observers because he fails to pay homage to the styles of the past or to collaborate with anyone on any part of his designs. As Roark states at one point, he believes that buildings, like people, have one central theme or idea, and that idea cannot be compromised.

The leading figure in opposition to Roark is Ellsworth Toohey, an "intellectual" with a particular specialty in architecture. Rand, in the same early manuscript, describes Toohey as "a man who never could be-and knows it." I take delicious delight in every word Toohey speaks; he is one of the most evil characters every created, and there is no doubt he is extraordinarily good at what he does. What Toohey does is attempt to destroy the heroic, self-sufficient men by setting forth as the moral ideal those men who live by everyone else's standards but their own, who are mediocre and could never achieve greatness, and who submit themselves to the collective will.

The conflict between what Roark stands for and what Toohey stands for demonstrates quite clearly Rand's philosophy: in short, she upholds Roark as the ideal. This contrast can also help explain why some readers feel uplifted by Rand's philosophy while others are horrified by it. The heroic in Roark can be inspiring, but also somewhat menacing; Rand is very clear that it is not possible for everyone to achieve the ideal demonstrated by Roark. This runs counter to ideas most Americans have been instilled with since youth: egalitarianism and the accessibility of the American Dream. On this basis, it is easy-as several characters in "The Fountainhead" do-to dismiss Roark as an egotist and to hold up Toohey's intentions as benevolent and charitable.

As this is a book review, it is not my intention to argue for Rand's positions-though I realize that my admiration for those positions is plainly evident. I mention these conflicting views simply in hopes that readers will approach "The Fountainhead" more willing to allow their own values and expectations to be challenged, and honestly assess Rand's ideas. This book is able both to entertain and to inspire thought, and any reader should remain open to both.