Monday, May 13, 2013

The Fountainhead Literary Essay on Architecture

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.

No comments:

Post a Comment