
Books gone bad
Emily Bruzzo
Editor-in-Chief
I read more than I interact with other human beings. Even when I step out of my cave, matted hair, bloodshot eyes, pungent breath, villagers screaming at the sight of my wolfgirl ghastliness, I feel like I’m still reading. People can be such characters sometimes that life often seems more like a novel than what it really is, which is the farting about of homo sapiens whilst they breath air and wage wars.
Presently, sitting on my bedside table are more books than there are favorites in my cellphone’s contact list. One of those favorites is my mother, which doesn’t count because cellphones might as well come pre-programmed with out mother’s contacts. We are a helpless generation; I called my mother not too long ago to ask her if one should eat expired eggs.
Don’t pity me. The incessant reading and my deteriorating social skills will make me a champion writer — a Pulitzer winner, probably. See, I want to write for a living. To be a professional writer, one must also be a professional reader — and a professional eater of non-expired eggs.
You know, I’ll never forget the first time I read a John Irving book. It was The World According to Garp. I stumbled upon it in a used bookstore I had entered while grumbling under my breath about how my jacket was missing a button and the widening wage gap in America seems senseless. The book had lived life. It seemed wise, and it turned out it was wise. It cost one dollar and fifty cents. I paid with only quarters. Brittany, the cashier, didn’t appreciate that. I could care less, though. I had just discovered my religion. I read the book in a day, sitting on a bench outside the building that housed the class I was skipping in order to learn T.S. Garp’s fate.
Irving is a special writer to me. He’s the reason I decided to write in the first place. His books opened up a world that had more to offer than just Hemingway.
It was because of Irving (and also Kurt Vonnegut, by the way) that I learned what a novel can be. It can be a statement, an anthem, an explanation, an apology. It is because of books, in fact, that I’ve reconnected with lost friends and taken chances and adopted certain views.

The reader lives in another world for 400-some-odd pages, and you come out on the other end a bit changed. You leave fragments of yourself on each page, between each word.
If a book doesn’t change you, you’re not reading it correctly.
It is books, after all, that have formed societies and constructed economies and toppled governments and created the self-help industry. The written word is this unparalleled, daunting thing. No revolution has started without the pages of a book leading the charge.
But what happens when a book goes bad — when the reading leads you down a slippery slope, not a highway to enlightenment?
There are several people in my life who are reading Atlas Shrugged at present. Ayn Rand, the novel’s author, was a well-known hack of a writer and better-known hack of a philosopher. She wrote four novels, her last — her magnum opus — called Atlas Shrugged. It is the novel that most clearly lays out the tenets of her philosophy, which is blandly titled Objectivism. When first published, Atlas Shrugged was a flop, with one Time Magazine critic asking, “Is it a novel? Is it a nightmare? Is it Superman — in the comic strip or the Nietzschean version?”
Regardless, a cult following soon formed. And it wasn’t long before Rand’s ideas about the falsity of altruism and the merits of unadulterated laissez-faire capitalism and the exaltation of the individual and the purpose of life being to pursue only our own happiness and the advantages of adopting unsightly bob hairstyles began to take root.
If you ask me, Ayn Rand was a hypocrite and a sociopath. She sure was unhappy as she purused all that happiness of hers. However, I bring up Rand not to scrutinize her theories, but instead to mock her (only marginally) and to discuss the power of books and the ideas for which they are conduits.
I think my uncle, a man far wittier and smarter than I, put it best when he said not too long ago in a cheeky text: “Ayn Rand captured many of the problems with the world, just not how to fix them or their ultimate cause.” As usual, my Uncle John was able to put into words what I am not; in fact, the old kook offered up the exact formula for what I feel happens when books go bad.
Marx thought great thoughts, but he didn’t know his ideas could contribute to failed governments. Nietzsche thought great thoughts, but he didn’t know his ideas could contribute to God’s murder. Hobbes thought great thoughts, but he didn’t know his ideas could contribute to state militarism. The egotist Rand probably knew her ideas would lead to something.
The point is, each thinker painted thoughtful portraits of our world’s issues, but the paint they used leaked into our water supply and poisoned us with lead. Now, us homo sapiens fart about, breath air, wage wars — and feel pain, numbness or tingling of the extremities because we’re dying from lead.
It is a curious feature of human nature that we often need just an ounce of truth to make the whole body of water fact. We take this ounce and run, particularly when it validates our own ideas.
This is a phenomenon often encountered in book reading; there’s nothing more reaffirming than seeing a personal thought printed on the pages of another thinker’s book. This is something we should approach with care, however. Just because an idea is tenacious does not make it right, truth.
Books are the human condition unraveled. That’s why I want to write them. But the written word is a responsibility. You may be able to burn the pages of a book, but you cannot destroy its ideas. No, those ideas drift off into the ether, these fantastical abstractions given verisimilitude through the powers of the social conscience.
I will never claim to know whether or not the outcomes of a book are good or bad; I subscribe to a worldview that embraces gray areas over black and white lines, after all. However, I would caution that we have just as much responsibility as readers as we do when we are writers. Let us not take ideas at face value simply because they make us feel the tingling warmth of validation.
I like when a book comes along and opens my eyes; I don’t like when one closes them — it makes it very difficult to continue reading.
At the end of the day, though, we take everything much too seriously. As John Irving once wrote, “In the world according to Garp, we are all terminal cases” — especially when we eat expired eggs.

Dear Editor-in-Chief,
You ask “but what happens when a book goes bad — when the reading leads you down a slippery slope, not a highway to enlightenment?”
Of Atlas Shrugged’s author, Ayn Rand, you opine: “hack of a writer and better-known hack of a philosopher”. Such an unjustified ad hominum attack!
So a book and its author are bad. So Atlas Shrugged and Ayn Rand are bad. Really?
A scary thesis. I believe Hitler took that approach to certain books. He burned them. (Yet if ever there was a bad book, Mein Kampf is it.) Shall we pass a law to burn all copies of Atlas Shrugged?
Look around you, much of the societal cancer she talked about sixty years ago has come to full blossom in American society, and American government at all levels is following the essence of the plot of her book to the letter.
Your uncle was mostly right: “Ayn Rand captured many of the problems with the world, just not how to fix them or their ultimate cause.” She did identify cause, however.
As for the Time Magazine critic asking, “Is it a novel? Is it a nightmare? Is it Superman — in the comic strip”. Clearly an idiot.
As for “Her philosophy, which is blandly titled Objectivism” and “Rand’s ideas about the falsity of altruism “: With altruism, like salt, too much of a thing can be bad. Better said:
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims (can you say altruistic?) may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do
so with the approval of their own conscience.”
-C.S. Lewis
As for calling any author’s opinion/philosophy bad:
“But the peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it.If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth; if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error.”
–JS Mill
I say “the challenge is, how to read a ?bad book by a ?bad author with discernment and discretion, and NOT go down a slippery slope and TO go on a highway to enlightenment.”
Perhaps, my dear Editor-in-Chief, you really have eaten too many expired eggs.
Publius Julius Brutus
LikeLike
Ms. Bruzzo,
Thank you for the accolades. Allow me to bestow still further avuncular sagacity regarding your own premises. I too do not share Ayn’s rebuke of altruism, but I don’t espouse fascism either. While I am glad to know what you are actually doing in your bedroom when I visit your home (I assumed sleeping too much), I am just as concerned now that you are in there percolating some potentially new fascist brew. Perhaps you took me too literally when I suggested English majors are baristas in training, but if you are going to brew any roast, let it be one that includes Solomon’s admonition to avoid extremes.
I saw a paradox in your supposition and it made me want to check your premises. You said that if a book doesn’t change me then I’m not reading it correctly, but then you questioned what happens when a book goes bad. See the problem? According to your own logic a book can only go bad if I read it incorrectly. I’m assuming reading Garp didn’t go badly for you but reading Atlas did. I can only reconcile this cloying paradox by assuming you just didn’t like the way Atlas changed you. Or maybe you didn’t think it was well written. Well, Uncle Tom’s Cabin wasn’t very well written and I’m sure plenty of Carolinians didn’t like the way it changed them back in the day, but it sure did change the world. Melville wanted to write the great American novel but the public was more interested in his earlier pulp fiction and he died in obscurity (something I learned from my barista training). So where does Moby Dick land in your moral account book? Here we are talking about Atlas not Moby! As for Ayn, when Dan Rather first interviewed her on television and asked her about reviews like the one you referenced, she conceded that she was indeed trying to change the world; such goals (whether they be from beloved altruists like King and Francis or from frightening lightening rods like X and Brown) make people uncomfortable. So, I guess the question of a book’s global influence gets complicated. I can only reconcile your paradox by assuming that you did not read Atlas correctly.
As for the response from Pubertus Maximus, I just make a small point. Pubertus, according to Ayn I can’t be “mostly right.” Like John Gault said, I can’t have my cake and eat it too. See the problem with extremely polarized thought? It smacks of the black-and-white thinking of a personality disorder (the kind my hunch thought I saw in Ayn’s eyes during that Rather interview). So by seemingly refuting Ms. Bruzzo and Pubertus am I being paradoxical? Check my premise; I am not actually refuting either. I am agreeing with both. Atlas Shrugged affected me greatly, as Ms. Bruzzo said it ought. At the same time, I am worried about tyranny, as Pubertus said I ought. For me Ayn’s philosophy could only be delivered using flat characters, tricly plot and predictable denouement. But her depiction of the world I live in was remarkably perceptive and cogent, and it frankly scares the hell out of me because her novels seems to have foreshadowed all of the ills befalling my world of public education. I don’t know if I read it correctly. Who determines correct reading? Derrida? Bloom? Adler? Rosenblatt? Bruzzo? What a bunch of looters!
LikeLike