The Metaphor of Architecture in The Fountainhead
At the outset of her novel The
Fountainhead, Ayn Rand delivers an unorthodox artistic theme. Unlike other
conventional art forms like poetry, painting, or music that dwell upon human
emotion, the unique theme bears its roots within the realm of reason and
rational thought. The art of architecture is observed as the medium for which
the implied values of selfishness, individuality, and independence are revealed.
In formalizing the essential framework of architecture in a metaphorical context,
these values come to form the central tenets of the Objectivist philosophy. For
introducing the theme of architecture, the conceptual framework is delineated
by a powerful form of imagery. Such imagery is exemplified through the
discourse of conversational dialogue and speeches decreed by the major
characters of the novel. As a method of expressing her philosophy, Ayn Rand
metaphorically conveys the ambiguous theme of architecture through a figurative
style of language.
In presenting the imagery of architecture, Ayn
Rand relies deeply upon the observations of the lone egotistical architect
Howard Roark, the protagonist of the novel. The vivacious imagery originates
from the start through Roark’s first hand experiences that describe the dismal
condition of the town of Stanton as being plagued “with a dump. A gray mound of
refuse rose in the grass. The road led past the first houses to a church…The
church was a gothic movement of shingles painted pigeon blue” (p.16). The
scenario was nevertheless incapable of deluging Roark’s impenetrable spirit as
he “saw no one” and that “the streets were empty” and devoid of any meaning to
him (p. 17). The concept of architecture
as a modernistic phenomenon based solely on an individual’s own mind and
volition is personified in the impregnable force that Roark embodies in the
sense that “nothing can be reasonable or beautiful unless it’s made by one
central idea. A building is alive like a man. Its integrity is to follow its
own truth, its one single theme, and to serve its own single purpose” (p.24). Roark is later understood as a lonely voice in
the wilderness for the principles of the modern image of architecture against a
world that feels resentment towards his ideals.
However while captivating as a civilizing and
driving force, the prevailing opinion of the art’s imagery is envisioned to be
on a par with that of classical Greek, Roman, and Renaissance era style. This
societal banality is passionately endorsed by many including the dean of the
Stanton Institute of Technology who insisted to Howard Roark that modern
architecture shall “adapt the beauty of the past to the needs of the present” and
that “the voice of the past” is the standard that all must collectively
subordinate to (p.24). In contrast to the heroism elevated by Howard Roark,
architecture has been alternatively revered as a phenomenon that invigorates
collectivism as foretold by the antagonist Ellsworth M. Toohey. Penning an
article entitled “Sermons in Stone” Toohey downgrades the ideal of architecture
as the utmost decadence of the human spirit. Dismissing modernistic
perspectives of the art, he perceives architecture in that “A great building is
not the private invention of some genius or other. It is merely a condensation
of the spirit of a people” (p.78). As the diabolical force that typifies
affrontation to Howard Roark’s progressive ideology of heroic man-worship,
Toohey is displayed by Ayn Rand as a by-product of the darkest side of the
imagery of architecture. Victimized by the collectivist vision of
architecture’s image as an unalterable reality, Toohey sincerely believes
architecture to be deriving primarily amongst the “great historical styles” in
that “all men would be brothers and their buildings would become harmonious and
all alike, in the great tradition of Greece” (p. 78). These two conflicting
forms of thought embodied in the heart of Howard Roark and Ellsworth M. Toohey
diverge the imagery of architecture as a dichotomous entity. Through this
divergence, a metaphorical tense of figurative language is construed as a means
for developing a philosophy.
Intuitively the narrative
account of architecture characterizes a literary metaphor of novelty. The art
of Howard Roark’s architecture uninfluenced and original implicates a metaphor
for values of selfishness, independence, and the inner ego. Roark is the one
personified by a strong eccentric sense of ego. The virtue of such egotism is
repleted in his relentless refusal to openly compromise his principles in that
he “responded only to the essence of a man: to his creative capacity” (p.309).
His demeanor merges with the notion of following one’s destiny as he knew that
“there were no alternatives, no mitigating considerations” to his own
achievements (p.309). Consequently Roark’s personal sense of individuality
through architecture would isolate him to great lengths from others and cost
him several prestigious career positions. Ayn Rand stresses this figuration for
the intentions of narrating a moral journey. In her perspective, Roark is the
practical “moral” individual. The articulation of selfishness is what she
praises as moral in relying on one’s mind for guidance. The figurative concept
would mean committing oneself to a long term goal regardless of what everyone
else thinks and feel. From the egotist’s experiences the rest of society would
have a selfless feel for an idea or concept.
The societal consensus is that the role of the architect “is a metaphysical
priest dealing in basic essentials, who has the courage to face the primal
conception of reality as nonreality…since there is nothing and he creates
nothingness” (p.292). Ayn Rand expands on this figurative tense of architecture
and presents it as the “dialectics of all life and art” (p.292). She
encompasses the metaphor of the neo-classical side of architecture in the
characterization of Peter Keating who is essentially a quintessential character
foil of Howard Roark. Keating unlike Roark is filled with a sense of
nebulousness for he possesses no direction or purpose as he willingly consumes
on the achievements of others in order to suit his noble desires. For this
reason, Keating ends up as an underachiever and an eventual failure.
The philosophy of Ayn Rand
stems from the metaphorical analogies of the literary theme of architecture. Her
philosophical principles are described from the words lectured by Roark in the
courtroom during his trial: “The egotist in the absolute sense is not the man
who sacrifices others. He is the man who stands above the need of using others
in any manner” (p. 681). The philosophy known as Objectivism methodically
stresses the ethics of valuing oneself and therefore acting out as a moral and
practical agent in the direction of one’s own self-interest. As Roark puts it
forth: “A truly selfish man cannot be affected by the approval of others” (p.
606). While valuing individualism and
independence as the most important ideals one should strive to live in
accordance with, Rand simultaneously presents the idea of a second-hander in a
condemning manner. From her definition, “the basic need of a second-hander is
to secure his ties with men in order to be fed…He preaches altruism” (p. 680).
The second-hander in the end has no sense of worth since all that the
individual relies upon are the existence of others for survival as well as
their accomplishments. Altruism would be truly incompatible with the
Objectivist philosophy for it presumes living life for the sake of others by
acting out in a self-less manner which in return devalues the inner essence of
the self and ego. In all, the philosophy of Objectivism carries onward a
reputable praise and honor for man’s inherent nature, potential, and revolutionary
achievements for the advancement and progression of humanity.
Amongst several themes
that relate to architecture is the concept of man’s mind as the foundational
source of ingenuity. The importance of reason as a means to an end is weighed
upon in the penultimate moment as the ideal hero assesses: “Man cannot survive
except through his mind. He comes on earth unarmed. His brain is his only
weapon” (p. 679). All of man’s noblest achievements are therefore the results
of “the function of his reasoning mind.” Rather than submitting oneself to an
appeal on emotion, one’s thinking and feeling shall be the product of reason,
logic, and rationality for the purpose of functioning to one’s fullest
endeavor. Reason is therefore exalted as man’s highest valuable ability. With
this special capacity for great potential, man has a responsibility to realize
the importance of oneself and to bring about the inspirational source for a
radical achievement or the titular designation of “The Fountainhead” of
civilization.
In presenting her
philosophy, Ayn Rand communicates with the reader, the metaphorical language
that is intertwined with the theme of architecture. Staunchly opposing human
emotion and sentimentality as a mere justification for purpose, Rand believed
that the integrity of man’s achievement lied in the capability of his mind to
reason and think in a rational manner. In creating the metaphor of
architecture, the concepts of individualism, selfishness, and independence are
effaced. These philosophical abstract ideals are valued by Ayn Rand and come to
represent the meaning and purpose of one’s life. With the introduction of her
novel, the philosophy of Objectivism serves as a new perspective of objectively
knowing reality as it exists on the basis of the senses without the need to
adhere to a mere sentimental or emotional thought process.
Works Cited
Rand, Ayn. The Fountainhead. New
York: Signet Classics, 1952. 16, 17, 24, 78, 209, 309, 606, 679, 680, 681.
