Stefan Molyneuxs strengths as a broadcast philosopher are his challenges as a novelist. His Freedomain Radio podcast is an invigorating mix of life-changing sermon, gut-wrenching discussion and side-splitting comedy. But how does his gifts for long lectures and moral certitude in the volume business of podcasts play within medium known for careful selection of ideas, moral ambiguity and understatement?

Show, dont tell, is an often repeated simplification of an important literary principle. When we read a novel we want to discover the nature of characters through their words and actions, rather than the thoughts of the narrator. The God of Atheists does not give us enough of an opportunity.

Theirs was a brisk courtship of efficient sex and scant small talk.

Throughout the first three chapters we are told what we need to know about the main characters. We are asked to accept the authors judgment. While we find his opinions of characters sound, we feel somewhat cheated. We are lectured more than entertained.

Background information (or exposition) is an ordeal for all storytellers. Most choose either to give it quickly and briefly in the beginning, or provide it throughout in small doses. The God of Atheists gives us too much, too soon.

In his broadcasts, Molyneux is famous for wild streams of consciousness. The turns of phrases are sometimes inspired and elevated and other times hackneyed and vulgar. Lines like She would not have been surprised if his bowel movements produced the smell of fresh cut grass, might add flavor and personality to a podcast, but seem out of place in a work of literature.

Still, The God of Atheists is a much welcome read for anyone who wants to see important philosophical principles take life. It is the closest thing to another Ayn Rand novel I have found. It is the novel Rand would have written if she gave up on the idea of minimal government, embraced psychotherapy and drastically cut her time commitment. (Atlas Shrugged took twelve years to write. Molyneux completed The God of Atheists in just one.)

The influence of Ayn Rand and objectivism is unmistakable. But like Nathaniel Brandon before him, Molyneux has subtracted and added to her philosophy in some very important ways. Most importantly, by giving special consideration to the question of children. He retains Rands dualism, however, and this is where most of the criticism of him, as with her, takes aim.

While black and white thinking can give strength and clarity to non-fiction philosophy, it can diminish a fictional work. Like Jack London, an advocate of socialism who created a work so true to life, in The Call of the Wild, that it seems to promote social Darwinism, the best novelists accommodate a variety of views and interpretations. And when a story leads us to one unmistakable conclusion, the master storyteller will serve up a reversal to remind us that we should never be too certain.

The God of Atheists does a good job of demonstrating what I see as a much needed, anti-egalitarian brand of voluntaryism, but does not trust its readers enough. It is an important work from perhaps the most influential philosopher since Ayn Rand.

Aided by todays Internet technology, Moyneux may well eclipse Rand. But 100 million plus podcast downloads and 300 thousand plus Youtube subscribers may not be enough. For me at least, it will take another, more exceptional work of fiction.

Read the original post:

Amazon.com: Customer reviews: The God of Atheists