Snarky Fountainhead Comments That Anyone Can Use

The following are all phrases I’ve come up with to describe this terrible terrible book to friends and family who probably wish I would just shut up about it.


“I’m reasonably sure at this point that Rand is playing a practical joke. If she wanted to convert people to this philosophy, there would be a bit more convincing and a bit less berating.”

“I think it’s fair to compare it with the Iron Warriors omnibus. I mean, one is about a sociopath who despises everything worthwhile about humanity, and the other is about a Chaos Marine.”

“Howard Roark’s problem is that he’s too inhuman to be a good hero, too annoying to be a good villain, and too boring to be a good either of the above.”

“Dull and pathetic villains only really work when contrasted with awesome heroes. Sadly, neither of those words applies to Roark.”

“This sort of across-the-board boring isn’t what ‘banality of evil’ actually means, but it should be.”

“It could have been a great book. If the hero was more likeable than an ingrown toenail. Or the villains were a bit more dramatic and a bit less pathetic. Or if the plot was about something more interesting than architectural infighting from several decades before I was born. So basically it could have been great if it had nothing in common with The Fountainhead at all. Seems to fit.”

“I keep expecting a hard cut to some cops examining the scene of Roark’s latest murder, and then one of them can be the protagonist. Sadly, that seems a remote possibility by this point.”

“When Eridan Ampora from Homestuck is a more sympathetic character than the hero, something has gone badly wrong.”

“After the first 100 pages, Rand’s main achievement is to make me want to install Doric columns on every house in my street just to spite her.”

“And then Roark defeats the strawman in a spray of dried, um, straw and scales his echeladder to the dizzying heights of Smug Sociopath.”

“While I loathe Erebus of the Word Bearers and every aspect of his personal philosophy to a depth unplumbable by any line, I’ll credit him at least with not being Howard Roark.”

“To paraphrase Roger Ebert, you can’t have heroes and villains when neither side makes any sense. It’s like having Elan’s lawful and chaotic consciences discuss the results of a sport I don’t follow, only that would involve Rich Burlew and therefore be more interesting than this drivel.”

– OSM out


Leave a comment

Filed under An Awful Awful Book

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s