A few months ago I read Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged. At 1168 pages it’s a bit of a slog but wel worth it. The book focusees on the operations of Tagart Transcontiental Railroad. Has anybody else read the book? If so do you think the portrayal of railroad operations were realistic?
I think there were some areas that weren’t entirly realistic. For example, at one point in the book, crews simply abandon their trains. The “frozen trains” are undetected. On a real railroad, wouldn;t these show up on the CTC board?
Also, the steel tycoon Hank Reardren develops a new rail made out of “Rearden Metal” that’s stronger, lighter and cheaper than steel. It’s used to repair a line in the book. In real life would the FRA or the AAR (or in those day the ICC) have to approve the metal before it was used?
The book was written over 50 years ago so the railroad applications have changed. At the time I read it (late 70’s) the railroading was noted as not exactly accurate. She might have missed on the details, but some say she was accurate on the big picture.
My wife gave me a new edition last Christmas, perhaps it is time to visit it again.
She became the poster girl for extreme libertarian types. It was written as and still is a propaganda piece, pure and simple. I wonder how many of her admirers might have second thoughts if they were aware of her rather “immoral” lifestyle?
Ayn Rand was very much a libertarian (as was Robert Heinlein), which is very different viewpoint than the “Religious Right”. It’s somewhat similar to confusing a socialist with a communist (particularly in the Lenin/Stalin/Mao paradigm).
As for using “Rearden Metal” for rail, the process of testing the metal during development should have produced enough data to indicate whether it was suitable for use as rail. The problem with Rearden Metal is that there isn’t anything that would likely be stronger, lighter and cheaper than steel for rail - which shows more ignorance of metallurgy than rail operations on Rand’s part.
About 10 years ago I started it after some surgery that kept me basically in bed for a week or so. However, I only got about half-way through it, and don’t remember much about it - not sure if that was because of the book itself, the anti-pain meds I was on, or that I recovered well enough to get out of bed and do other things, etc. Anyway -
About 3 weeks ago I just stumbled across this -
‘‘Ayn Rand’s Research’’
It was on NYC’s 20th Century Limited’s Locomotives !
See the above section, which is about 1/3 to 1/2 of the way down the following webpage -
Basically, she arranged for a cab ride on the 20th Century Limited from New York City to Chicago - in the electrics and diesels, not a J3a, unfortunately. She was even allowed to run the train from a station stop up to 80 MPH, and was very impressed with the experience. She apparently at least attempted to do some serious research to get the ‘flavor’ of the industry if not all the details. She also visited a steel mill of Inland Steel for the same purpose.
You’ll note I put the “immoral” in quotes. However, many would suggest she was a hypocrite. She had an intimate relationship with the much-younger, married Nathanial Branden, but when he started an affair with another woman, she denounced him and kicked him out of the institute. A lot of scholars believe she rationalized selfishness by giving it some philosophical (Objectivism and egoism) fancy dress.
When I first read it 10 years or so ago, I thought that the basic premise, that the wealthy productive few would withdraw from the economy, was too fantastic to be real. I no longer think that.
I thought it was a great book although the ending in my opinion was a bit weak. As far as accuracy about rail operations goes…probably not…it didn’t get into the details anyway…nor were the details important to the theme of the book. I read it when I was a teenager, but as the years have gone by I have come to realize how accurate her portrayal of people really is. I have met people like Rearden, Dagny Taggart, her brother, etc…they really exist…and the basic setup is as described in the book is accurate. The book is purposely black and white so as to make a point. Accuracy in every minute detail…ie.e. railroad operations was never the objective…
There are probably a few Conspiracy Whackos out there who believe that “Rearden Metal” actually exists, but is being surpressed by Big Steel.
Back in the 1970s, even before gas went up, there were hippy types preaching that cheap alternatives to oil had been developed decades earlier, but Big Oil had bought up all the patents and they were NEVER going to be used as long as one drop of oil existed on the Earth.
I know of 2 Hollywood types who believe in this. One is Tom Berenger and the other is Steven Segal.
Berenger because he used this as a plotline in one episode of a short-lived Western series on USA Network call Peacemakers. Segal, because in one of his movies, Fire Down Below, after the movie is over and the credits are rolling, he starts preaching the old hippy 70s gibberish about the oil companies to us idiots in the audience.
Interesting coincidence - this thread. I went to a train meet a couple of weeks ago and one of the sellers had an odd assortment of old Trains magazines. I picked up a few - the choice driven by nothing more than condition and interesting cover. One of the issues is the February 1959 issue and in the review section “Of Books and Trains” by David P. Morgan is a review of this book. In the review Morgan says, " …What makes more than a thousand pages of this theme interesting to Trains’ audience is that Miss Rand’s heroine is Dagny Taggart, Operating Vice-President of Taggart Transcontinental…a railroad…Unfortunately, the railroading is seldom more faithful to prototype than its operating veep. One finds average freight-train speed arbitrarily jumped from 65 to 100 mph…Miami spoken of as a “branch” terminal…coal-burning steam locomotives still in use as a time when elderly diesels are falling apart for lack of maintenance and replacement. Dagny, when she isn’t in some fellow industrialist’s bedroom spends a substantial part of her time on the railroad, though, so the reading is, from a local viewpoint, interesting - if only for its compromise with realism."
OK, I looked there, and there is a lack of detail - understandably, though. But it left me wondering - Will the general public even really understand what the central plot device - a railroad - is and how essential it is to the economy, and so forth ? Since the book was written the passenger train has largely disappeared from the American consciousness, so most of the audience can’t relate to that. And aside from those few persons who work in heavy industry anymore or the intermodal side, not many will understand the importance of freight trains - other than blocking grade crossings, and the occasional haz-mat release.
In contrast, I suspect the plot device would resonate more if they used an airline, maybe with an overnight package delivery service tie-in as well for the freight aspect. The public can readily understand that - it’s how most of them travel for business and pleasure, and how they receive things from L.L. Bean or Amazon, etc. But a railroad just isn’t going to capture their attention or engender the understanding that’s needed to make the plot work, I think.
Paul North.
P.S. - mersenne6, thanks much for that excerpt. [tup] I’d have never thought of that - and it’s worthwhile because my understanding of DPM’s views is that they largely correlated with Ayn Rand’s, so his crit
I appreciate your point of view, Paul, but the operation and deterioration of the Taggart Transcontinental is more of a plot device that carries the story along.
As for the reading public today, yes, 53 years ago when Atlas Shurgged first came out the American public was a lot more railroad-aware than they are today. I grant you that. But when reading older literature, one must keep in mind the era in which it was written. With the plot lines and action sequences in the writings of Charles Dickens,
As I understand it (from going to the film’s website and watching the trailer), “Atlas Shrugged” is going to take place in the “not so far away future.” For the plot to work, they start out saying that in this future time the price of oil has gone to over $250 a barrel, everyone has stopped using private automobiles in the US, and people are using railroads for travel and to move freight. This allows the plotline to focus on Dagney Taggart and her Taggart Transcontinental Railroad, Rearden and his invention of a"super metal" for rail and structures, and Ellis Wyatt, the Colorado wildcatter who needs railroad transportation for his new oilfield. I, too, would have much rather seen the time period back in the 1950s (and done very noir), but the film had a small budget: this was NOT financed by the “I don’t want my name attached to something that’s this conservative” Hollywood left coast elites. Finally, as much as I will always love David P. Morgan, he was wrong about how Ayn Rand wrote about railroading in her book. She did a more than adequate job. Remember: prior to her book, her knowledge of railroads came from walking through Grand Central Station. So she rolled up her sleeves and did her research. I read a nice email story from a man whose railroad career father was interviewed by Rand about the real day to day and move by move routines of railroading. She wanted the things she wrote about it to be as believable as possible, and honest to the craft. In that she succeeded. Finally, her amazing “end of the world” vision of old rattle-trap main line steam locomotives being the fall-back motive power of an imaginary faltering national rail system (only being a handful of “new” diesels, held for the crack transcontinental passenger trains) makes for a facinating story for railroaders to read. Remember, guys, it’s a novel. But it’s also a really good story, a great railroad story, and I think the movie version of “Atlas Shrugged” will put our industry out there front
Or the guy who invented the intermittent windshield wiper switch device - that story was made into a movie a year or two ago - Flash of Genius (2008) - see: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1054588/ . After many years of litigation, he finally won huge monetary judgments - $10 Million from Ford and over $18 Million from Chrysler, per the “Plot Synopsis” page on that website.
Or simply that Preston Tucker was a bit of a flake like Malcom Bricklin. Somewhere in the 1938 to 1940 issues of Popular Science, there’s a short blurb about some armored car developed by Preston Tucker for Army use - didn’t look very useful.