Abstract

For several decades, this novel has remained on the world's bestseller list and has become a classic for millions of readers. Main character novel, Howard Roark, is fighting with society for his personal right to creativity. The fanatical inertness of those around him forces him to take extraordinary actions. And Roark's connection with a woman in love with him, who later becomes the wife of his worst enemy, is quite unusual. Through the vicissitudes of the fate of the heroes and the fascinating plot, the author guides main idea books - EGO is the source of human progress. The idea is unusual for Russia; the more interesting it will be for a wide range of readers to get acquainted with the heroes who affirm it with their lives.

Parts 1 - 2.

Ayn Rand
Source

FOREWORD

So, dear reader, in your hands is the second volume of the collected works of Ayn Rand.

The first novel - "We are the living" - tells about the Bolshevization of Russia in the 20s. It is attractive to us, Russian readers, primarily by its objective description of events known to us from numerous other sources. With this novel, Rand fulfilled her duty to the people who remained in Russia and told the world about the “big cemetery” that her homeland had become.

The novel "The Source" (in 2 books) is a work of a different order. It more clearly defines life position the author, showing the foundations of her philosophy.

However, a lover of fascinating reading may not be afraid - there are no boring philosophical arguments in the novel. Despite the impressive volume, the plot captures from the first pages and it is very difficult to stop reading without knowing how this or that turn will end. And yet, The Fountainhead is largely a philosophical novel.

Rand said: “If all philosophers were required to present their ideas in the form of novels and dramatize the exact, vague, meaning and consequences of their philosophy in human life, there would be far fewer philosophers, but they would be much better.” It is not surprising, therefore, that philosophical ideas interested her only in the sense in which they affect the real existence of man. By the way, Rand added to this that people themselves are of interest to her only in the sense in which they refract philosophical ideas in themselves.

As a philosopher, A. Rand introduced a new moral theory, as a novelist, she skillfully wove it into an exciting piece of art. What is the essence of this new morality?

A Russian person was taught from childhood (both under the Bolsheviks and long before their revolution) that the well-being of the community, fatherland, state, people, and something else like that is immeasurably more important<то личного благополучия, что добиваться личного счастья, не считаясь с интересами некоего коллектива, значит быть эгоистом. А это, конечно же, аморально, то есть очень-очень плохо.

Ayn Rand categorically and without any reservations rejects the priority of anyone's interests over the interests of the individual. "I swear by my life and by the love of this life," she wrote, "that I will never live for another person's name, nor force another person to live for my name."

Editors M. Korneev, S. Limanskaya, E. Pautova

Technical editor N. Lisitsyna

Correctors O. Ilyinskaya, E. Chudinova

Computer layout M. Potashkin

All rights reserved. No part of the electronic copy of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any means, including posting on the Internet and corporate networks, for private and public use, without the written permission of the copyright owner.

Editor "s choice - choice of editor-in-chief

In my opinion, it is best to start acquaintance with the work of Ayn Rand with the novel "The Fountainhead". Its plot is fascinating and unpredictable, and philosophical ideas are presented clearly and simply.

Reading the "Source" will help in the future to truly understand the ideas of the novel "Atlas Shrugged", as well as the philosophical and nonfiction books of Ayn Rand.

Alexey Ilyin,

CEO of Alpina Publishers

Frank O'Connor

Foreword

Dear reader, in your hands is the first volume of the famous work of Ayn Rand.

In the novel "The Source" the author's life position is clearly defined, the foundations of her philosophy are shown.

However, a lover of fascinating reading may not be afraid - there are no boring philosophical arguments in the novel. Despite the impressive volume, the plot captures from the first pages and it is very difficult to stop reading without knowing how this or that turn will end. And yet The Fountainhead is largely a philosophical novel.

As a philosopher, A. Rand introduced a new moral theory, as a novelist, she skillfully wove it into a fascinating work of art. What is the essence of this new morality?

A Russian person was taught from childhood (both under the Bolsheviks and long before their revolution) that the well-being of the community, fatherland, state, people, and something else like it is immeasurably more important than his personal well-being, that to achieve personal happiness, regardless of the interests of a certain collective, means to be selfish. And this, of course, is immoral, that is, very, very bad.

Ayn Rand categorically and without any reservations rejects the priority of anyone's interests over the interests of the individual. “I swear by my life and by the love of this life,” she wrote, “that I will never live for the sake of another person and I will not force another person to live for my name.”

Apparently, it is no coincidence that the leaders of totalitarian neo-fascist regimes are popular. And the point is not at all in them as leaders, but in millions of lazy minds and thirsty for the strongest power over themselves, since only it, strong power, is able to solve all their personal problems without delay and make it possible to satisfy all their base instincts.

Howard Roark, the protagonist of the novel, sees his personal well-being in the work he loves and in doing it the way he sees fit. He is an architect. He proposes plans for houses, but society does not accept them. Society requires traditional solutions. However, Roark does not succumb to the general flow and, complicating his personal life, fights for his right to be creative. So, maybe he cares about the people who will live in his houses, and suffers and suffers for them?

Howard Roark is an egoist of the highest order. People in his life play a secondary role. He finds personal happiness and well-being in the very process of creation. Not in the name of someone or something, but only in the name of yourself! He, like any true creator, does not expect praise and recognition from others. He does not work for them and not for their gratitude. He has already received the highest satisfaction from work in the process of work itself and can endlessly enjoy contemplating the creation of his mind.

“The main purpose of this book,” A. Rand wrote, “is the defense of selfishness in its true sense.” But the author not only defends egoism, she argues that the ego of the individual is the source of human progress.

Ayn Rand's ideas will seem new and controversial to many. We are ready to enter into a discussion with everyone. By the way, already after the first advertising publication in the newspaper "Book Review" (November 1993), the publishing department of the Association of Businessmen of St. Petersburg received many letters from Russian citizens with applications for A. Rand's books. Russians hope to gain with the help of these books the ability to withstand life's difficulties and fortitude, leading to personal happiness and well-being.

We firmly believe that the ideas of Ayn Rand will help everyone who accepts them with his mind.

D. Kostygin

Part one

Peter Keating

Howard Roark laughed.

He stood naked on the edge of a cliff. At its foot was a lake. A splash of granite shot up to the sky and froze over the serene water. The water seemed motionless, the cliff seemed to float. It felt the numbness of the moment when one stream merges with another - oncoming one and both freeze for a moment, more dynamic than the movement itself. The surface of the stone sparkled, generously licked by the sun's rays.

The lake seemed to be only a thin steel disk, delicately cutting the cliff into two parts. The cliff went into the depths, not changing at all. It started and ended in the sky. The whole world seemed to hang in space, like an island swaying in the void, anchored to the feet of a man standing on a rock.

He stood against the sky, his shoulders squared. The long straight lines of his strong body were connected by the angles of the joints; even the relief curves of the muscles seemed broken into tangents. Hands with outstretched palms hung down. He stood, feeling his flattened shoulder blades, tense neck and the heaviness of blood rushing to his palms. The wind blew from behind—he felt it as a groove in his back—and ruffled his hair, not blond or chestnut, but exactly the color of a ripe orange peel.

He laughed at what had happened to him this morning and what was yet to come.

He knew that the days ahead would be difficult. There were unresolved issues, it was necessary to develop a plan of action for the near future. He knew that he had to take care of this, but he also knew that now he would not think about anything, because on the whole everything was already clear to him, the general plan of action had long been determined, and, finally, because here he wanted to laugh.

He had just tried to think through all these questions, but was distracted by looking at the granite.

“In an absolute sense, an egoist is by no means a person who sacrifices others. This is a person who is above the need to use others. He manages without them. He has no relation to them either in his goals, or in the motives of actions, or in thinking, or in desires, or in the sources of his energy. He is not for other people, and he does not ask others to be for him. This is the only possible form of brotherhood and mutual respect between people.”

Howard Roark

What is the book “The Source (in 2 volumes)” about?

The main characters of the novel - the architect Howard Roark and the journalist Dominique Francon - defend the freedom of the creative person in the struggle against a society that values "equal opportunities" for everyone. Together and one by one, with each other and against each other, but always - against the foundations of the crowd. They are individualists, their mission is to create and transform the world. Through the vicissitudes of the fate of the heroes and the fascinating plot, the author carries out the main idea of the book - the EGO is the source of human progress.

Why The Source Book Is Worth Reading

For several decades, this philosophical novel has remained on the world's bestseller lists and has become a classic for millions of readers.
The plot is fascinating and unpredictable, and the philosophical ideas are presented clearly and simply.
Reading the "Source" will help in the future to truly understand the ideas of the novel, as well as the philosophical and journalistic books of Ayn Rand.

Who is this book for?

For anyone who wants to get acquainted with the philosophical ideas of Ayn Rand or just read an interesting book.

Who is the author

Ayn Rand (1905–1982) - our former compatriot turned iconic American writer. Author of four bestselling novels and numerous articles. The creator of the philosophical concept, which is based on the principle of free will, the primacy of rationality and the "morality of rational egoism."

It is curious that Ayn Rand's books are published by the publishing house of business literature (and not fiction) Alpina Publisher. In my opinion, the work of Ayn Rand could well be of interest to fiction publishers. Although, perhaps, the circulation is at the level of 5-10 thousand copies. nevertheless, they make these works more scientific or business.

I liked "The Source" (as well as "Atlant ..."). However, the relationship is still not entirely clear. On the one hand, the plot captures, and you want to quickly find out how it all ends. On the other hand, Ayn Rand torments her heroes very much ... I even have a small but revealing story connected with this.

I read a book while on vacation with my family. My 17-year-old son and I took a pile of books with us. The son dealt with his long before the end of the holiday, and asked if I had something available for him (mostly I took business publications with me). I recommended The Source to him. As I thought, the book captured him, and he "swallowed" two volumes in 4 days. And somewhere in the middle of reading, he asks me: “Was Hollywood already there when Ayn Rand was writing her book?” Indeed, in Hollywood plots you can’t find that the main characters were so bad ... I constantly had the feeling that this novel would not end with a happy ending.

Download a summary in format

A few quotes from the book and the translator's preface.

If all philosophers were required to present their ideas in the form of novels and dramatize the exact, vague meaning and consequences of their philosophy in human life, there would be far fewer philosophers, but much better ones.

Philosophical ideas were of interest to Ayn Rand only in the sense in which they affect the real existence of man. As a philosopher, A. Rand presented a new moral theory, as a novelist, she skillfully wove it into a fascinating work of art.

A Russian person was taught from childhood (both under the Bolsheviks and long before their revolution) that the well-being of the community, the fatherland, the state, the people, and something else like that is immeasurably more important than his personal well-being, that to achieve personal happiness, regardless of the interests of a certain collective, means to be selfish. And this, of course, is immoral, that is, very, very bad.

Ayn Rand categorically and without any reservations reject the priority of anyone's interests over the interests of the individual. “I swear by my life and by the love of this life,” she wrote, “that I will never live for the sake of another person and I will not force another person to live for my name.”

Why is the simple fact of imitation sanctified? Why is anyone right, but not yourself? Why is the truth replaced by the opinion of the majority?

He will not allow anyone to achieve what he himself cannot achieve ...

– How is it that you can always make a decision yourself?

How is it that you let others decide for you?

“But you see, I’m not sure, Howard, I’m never sure of myself…

Why did you decide to become an architect?
Because I love this land. And I don't like anything else. I don't like the shape of things on this earth. I want to change this form.

Keating didn't care about anything, just to impress his clients; customers didn't give a damn about anything, just to impress the guests; and the guests simply did not care at all.

Keating was right—right in proportion to the number of people who believed he was right.

“Mr Roarke, I agree with you. What you say cannot be objected to. But, unfortunately, in real life, it is not always possible to be so flawlessly consistent. There is always an incalculable emotional, human factor. And we cannot fight it with cold logic.

If something can be achieved, then it is not high; if something can be discussed, it is not great; if you can see the whole thing, it is not deep

The mind is nothing but a dangerous evidence of weakness. They say that men begin to develop their mind when they fail at everything else. …

…there was a time when everyone thought the earth was flat. It would be very amusing to speculate about the nature and causes of human error. Someday I will write a book about it. She won't be popular. It will have a chapter on governments and councils. The problem is that they do not exist in nature.

The one who is most engaged in business, who really works and promotes the cause like no one else, has nothing to say to society. They will not listen to him anyway, taking it for granted that he does not have the right to vote, and his arguments should be automatically dismissed, since he is a person of interest. It doesn't matter what they say, it matters who says it. It is much easier to judge a person than an idea... The shortest distance between two points is not a straight line, but an intermediary. And the more intermediaries, the shorter the path. Such is the psychology of cotton souls ... Decency means the ability to stand up for an idea. And that presupposes the ability to think.

It's nonsense that works. You can try to refute reasonable arguments, but how to refute nonsense? You, my dear, like many, underestimate the nonsense.

…can it even make sense for a person to sincerely, wholeheartedly strive to do good, despite the fact that good is not given to him in any way? It can't be that I'm a completely unfit person. After all, I rejected everything, left nothing for myself, I have nothing - and yet, I am unhappy. And other women next to me are unhappy. And I don't know a single selfless person in the world who would be happy... except you, uncle.

It is precisely here that the boundary passes, which those who receive life second-hand never cross. They don't care about facts, ideas, work. They only care about people. They don't ask: is it true? They ask: Is this what others think is true? Not for judgment, but for repetition. Not to do - to give the impression that something is being done. Do not create - show. Not abilities - connections. Not merit - services. What will become of the world without those who do: think, work, produce? They are all selfish. They do not think with someone else's head and do not work with someone else's hands. When people don't use their ability to reason independently, they don't use their reason. To stop using the mind is to stop life. Those who receive life second hand have no sense of reality. Their reality is not in them, but somewhere in the space that separates human bodies. They exist not as a real something, but as a relationship between nothing and nothing. I can't understand this emptiness in people. It always stops me when I get on some committee. People without their I. Opinions without any understanding. Movement without brakes and engine. Power without responsibility. He who receives life second hand functions, but the source of his actions is in other individuals. Nothing can be discussed with him. It is closed for the exchange of opinions. You can't talk to him, he can't hear. It's like trying to talk to a chair. The blind, enraged mass rushes forward, crushing everything without any feeling or purpose. Steve Mallory couldn't identify this monster, but he knew it, and he was afraid of this drooling monster - a man who gets his life secondhand.

FOREWORD

So, dear reader, in your hands is the second volume of the collected works of Ayn Rand.

The novel "The Source" (in 2 books) is a work of a different order. It more clearly defines the author's life position, shows the foundations of her philosophy.

As a philosopher, A. Rand presented a new moral theory, as a novelist, she skillfully wove it into a fascinating work of art. What is the essence of this new morality?

It would seem that everything is simple: live for your own pleasure, achieve well-being for yourself. But what is it, this well-being? Good food and good sleep? But the fact of the matter is that freedom is not at all necessary for such well-being. Moreover, it prevents you from getting primitive pleasures from life, forcing you to think, make decisions, take risks and be responsible for your actions - at least to yourself. Apparently, it is no coincidence that the leaders of totalitarian neo-fascist regimes are popular. And the point is not at all in them as leaders, but in millions of lazy minds and thirsty for the strongest power over themselves, since only it, strong power, is able to solve all their personal problems without delay and make it possible to satisfy all their base instincts.

Abstract

Ayn Rand Source

FOREWORD

What is the book “The Source (in 2 volumes)” about?

Why The Source Book Is Worth Reading

Who is this book for?

Who is the author

Ayn Rand
Source