{"id":69200,"date":"2016-07-08T07:56:23","date_gmt":"2016-07-08T11:56:23","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/the-fountainhead-wikipedia-the-free-encyclopedia\/"},"modified":"2016-07-08T07:56:23","modified_gmt":"2016-07-08T11:56:23","slug":"the-fountainhead-wikipedia-the-free-encyclopedia","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/ayn-rand\/the-fountainhead-wikipedia-the-free-encyclopedia\/","title":{"rendered":"The Fountainhead &#8211; Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    The Fountainhead is a 1943 novel by Ayn Rand, and her first    major literary success. More than 6.5million copies of    the book have been sold worldwide.  <\/p>\n<p>    The Fountainhead's    protagonist, Howard Roark, is an individualistic young architect who    refuses to compromise his artistic and personal vision for    worldly recognition and success. The book follows his battle to    practice what the public sees as modern architecture, which he    believes to be superior, despite an establishment centered on    tradition-worship. How others in the novel relate to Roark    demonstrates Rand's various archetypes of human character, all    of which are variants between Roark, the author's ideal man of    independence and integrity, and what she described as the    \"second-handers\". The complex relationships between Roark and    the various kinds of individuals who assist or hinder his    progress, or both, allow the novel to be at once a romantic    drama and a philosophical work. Roark is Rand's embodiment of    what she believes to be the ideal man, and his struggle    reflects Rand's personal belief that individualism    trumps collectivism.  <\/p>\n<p>    The manuscript was rejected by twelve publishers before editor    Archibald Ogden at the Bobbs-Merrill Company risked    his job to get it published. Despite mixed reviews from the    contemporary media, the book gained a following by word of    mouth and became a bestseller. The novel was made into a Hollywood film in 1949. Rand    wrote the screenplay, and Gary Cooper played Roark.  <\/p>\n<p>    In the spring of 1922, Howard Roark is expelled from    architecture school for refusing to adhere to the school's    conventionalism. He believes buildings should be sculpted to    fit their location, material, and purpose, while his critics    insist that adherence to historical convention is essential. He    goes to New York City to work for Henry Cameron, a disgraced    architect whom Roark admires. Peter Keating, a popular but    vacuous fellow student who Roark sometimes helped with    projects, has graduated with high honors. He also moves to New    York to take a job at the prestigious architectural firm of    Francon & Heyer, where he ingratiates himself with senior    partner Guy Francon. Roark and Cameron create inspired work,    but rarely receive recognition, whereas Keating's ability to    flatter brings him quick success. Keating works to remove    rivals within his firm, and eventually he is made a partner.  <\/p>\n<p>    After Cameron retires, Keating hires Roark, who is soon fired    for insubordination by Francon. Roark works briefly at another    firm, then opens his own office. He has trouble finding clients    and eventually closes it down. He takes a job at a granite    quarry owned by Francon. There he meets Francon's daughter    Dominique, a columnist for The New York Banner, while    she is staying at her family's estate nearby. There is an    immediate attraction between them, leading to a rough sexual    encounter that Dominique later describes as a rape. Shortly    after, Roark is notified that a client is ready to start a new    building, and he returns to New York.  <\/p>\n<p>    Ellsworth M. Toohey, author of a popular architecture column in    the Banner, is an outspoken socialist who shapes public    opinion through his column and his circle of influential    associates. Toohey sets out to destroy Roark through a smear    campaign. Toohey manipulates one of Roark's clients into suing    Roark. At the trial, prominent architects (including Keating)    testify that Roark's style is unorthodox and illegitimate.    Dominique speaks in Roark's defense, but he loses the case.    Dominique decides that since she cannot have the world she    wants, in which men like Roark are recognized for their    greatness, she will live completely and entirely in the world    she has, which shuns Roark and praises Keating. She offers    Keating her hand in marriage. Dominique turns her entire spirit    over to Keating, doing and saying whatever he wants, including    persuading potential clients to hire him instead of Roark.  <\/p>\n<p>    To win Keating a prestigious commission offered by Gail Wynand,    the owner and editor-in-chief of the Banner, Dominique    agrees to sleep with Wynand. When they meet, Wynand is so    strongly attracted to Dominique that he buys Keating's divorce    from her, after which Wynand and Dominique are married. Wanting    to build a home for himself and his new wife, Wynand discovers    that every building he likes was designed by Roark, so he    enlists Roark to build the new house. Roark and Wynand become    close friends, although Wynand does not know about Roark's past    relationship with Dominique.  <\/p>\n<p>    Washed up and out of the public eye, Keating pleads with Toohey    for his influence to get the commission for the    much-sought-after Cortlandt housing project. Keating knows his    most successful projects were aided by Roark, so he asks for    Roark's help in designing Cortlandt. Roark agrees to design it    in exchange for complete anonymity and Keating's promise that    it will be built exactly as designed. When Roark returns from a    long trip with Wynand, he finds that the Cortlandt design has    been changed despite his agreement with Keating. Roark    dynamites the building to prevent the subversion of his vision.  <\/p>\n<p>    Roark is arrested and his action is widely condemned, but    Wynand orders his newspapers to defend him. The Banner's    circulation drops and the workers go on strike. Faced with the    choice of closing the paper or reversing his stance, Wynand    gives in; the newspaper publishes a denunciation of Roark. At    his trial for the dynamiting, Roark makes a speech about the    value of ego and the need to remain true to oneself. The jury    finds him not guilty. Roark also wins over Dominique, who    leaves Wynand for Roark. Wynand, who has finally grasped the    nature of the \"power\" he thought he held, shuts down the    Banner and asks Roark to design one last building for    him, a skyscraper that will testify to the supremacy of man.    Eighteen months later, the Wynand Building is under    construction and Dominique, now Roark's wife, enters the site    to meet him atop its steel framework.  <\/p>\n<p>    In 1928, Cecil B. DeMille charged Rand with    writing a script for what would become the film Skyscraper. The original    story, by Dudley Murphy, was about two construction    workers involved in building a New York skyscraper who are    rivals for a woman's love. Rand rewrote the story, transforming    the rivals into architects. One of them, Howard Kane, was an    idealist dedicated to his mission and erecting the skyscraper    despite enormous obstacles. The film would have ended with    Kane's throwing back his head in victory, standing atop the    completed skyscraper. DeMille rejected Rand's script, and the    actual film followed Murphy's original idea, but Rand's version    contained elements she would later use in The    Fountainhead.[1]  <\/p>\n<p>    David Harriman, who edited the posthumous Journals of Ayn Rand, found some    elements of The Fountainhead in the notes for an earlier    novel that Rand worked on but never completed. Its protagonist    is shown as goaded beyond endurance by a pastor, finally    killing him and getting executed. The pastorconsidered a    paragon of virtue by society but actually a monsteris similar    to Ellsworth Toohey, and the pastor's assassination is    reminiscent of Steven Mallory's attempt to kill Toohey.[2]  <\/p>\n<p>    Rand began The Fountainhead (originally titled    Second-Hand Lives) following the completion in 1934 of    her first novel, We the Living. While that earlier novel    had been based partly on people and events from Rand's    experiences, the new novel was to focus on the less-familiar    world of architecture. Therefore, she did extensive research to    develop plot and character ideas. This included reading    numerous biographies and books about architecture,[3] and working as an unpaid typist in    the office of architect Ely Jacques Kahn.[4]  <\/p>\n<p>    Rand wanted to write a novel that was less overtly political    than We the Living, to avoid being \"considered a    'one-theme' author\".[5] As she    developed the story, she began to see more political meaning in    the novel's ideas about individualism.[6] Rand also    initially planned to introduce each of the four sections with a    quote from philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, whose    ideas had influenced her own intellectual development. However,    she eventually decided that Nietzsche's ideas were too    different from her own. She did not place the quotes in the    published novel, and she edited the final manuscript to remove    other allusions to him.[7]  <\/p>\n<p>    Rand's work on The Fountainhead was repeatedly    interrupted. In 1937, she took a break from it to write a    novella called Anthem. She also completed a stage    adaptation of We the Living that ran briefly in early    1940.[8] That same year, she became    actively involved in politics, first working as a volunteer in    Wendell    Willkie's presidential campaign, then attempting to form a    group for conservative intellectuals.[9] As her    royalties from earlier projects ran out, she began doing    freelance work as a script reader for movie    studios. When Rand finally found a publisher, the novel was    only one-third complete.[10]  <\/p>\n<p>    Although she was a previously published novelist and had a    successful Broadway play, Rand had    difficulty finding a publisher for The Fountainhead.    Macmillan Publishing, which had    published We the Living, rejected the book after Rand    insisted that they must provide more publicity for her new    novel than they did for the first one.[11] Rand's    agent began submitting the book to other publishers. In 1938,    Knopf signed a contract to publish the    book, but when Rand was only a quarter done with manuscript by    October 1940, Knopf canceled her contract.[12]    Several other publishers rejected the book, and Rand's agent    began to criticize the novel. Rand fired her agent and decided    to handle submissions herself.[13]  <\/p>\n<p>    While Rand was working as a script reader for Paramount    Pictures, her boss there, Richard Mealand, offered to    introduce her to his publishing contacts. He put her in touch    with the Bobbs-Merrill Company. A recently    hired editor, Archibald Ogden, liked the book, but two internal    reviewers gave conflicting opinions about it. One said it was a    great book that would never sell; the other said it was trash    but would sell well. Ogden's boss, Bobbs-Merrill president D.L.    Chambers, decided to reject the book. Ogden responded by    wiring to the    head office, \"If this is not the book for you, then I am not    the editor for you.\" His strong stand got a contract for Rand    in December 1941. Twelve other publishers had rejected the    book.[14]  <\/p>\n<p>    Rand's working title for the book was Second Hand Lives,    but Ogden pointed out that this emphasized the story's    villains. Rand offered The Mainspring as an alternative,    but this title had been recently used for another book, so she    used a thesaurus and found 'fountainhead' as a    synonym.[15]  <\/p>\n<p>    The Fountainhead was published in May 1943. Initial    sales were slow, but as Mimi Reisel Gladstein    described it, sales \"grew by word-of-mouth, developing a    popularity that asserted itself slowly on the best-seller    lists.\"[16] It reached number six on The    New York Times bestseller list in    August 1945, over two years after its initial    publication.[17]  <\/p>\n<p>    A 25th anniversary edition was issued by New    American Library in 1971, including a new introduction by    Rand. In 1993, a 50th anniversary edition from Bobbs-Merrill    added an afterword by Rand's heir, Leonard    Peikoff. By 2008 the novel had sold over 6.5million    copies in English, and it had been translated into several    languages.[18]  <\/p>\n<p>    As the protagonist of the book, Roark is an aspiring architect    who firmly believes that a person must be a \"prime mover\" to    achieve pure art, not mitigated by others, as opposed to    councils or committees of individuals which lead to compromise    and mediocrity and a \"watering down\" of a prime mover's    completed vision. He represents the triumph of individualism    over the slow stagnation of collectivism. He is eventually    arrested for dynamiting a building he designed, the design of    which was compromised by other architects brought in to negate    his vision of the project. During his trial, Roark delivers a    speech condemning \"second-handers\" and declaring the    superiority of prime movers; he prevails and is vindicated by    the jury.  <\/p>\n<p>    The character of Roark was at least partly inspired by American    architect Frank Lloyd Wright. Rand described the    inspiration as limited to \"some of his architectural    ideas [and] the pattern of his career\".[19] She    denied that Wright had anything to do with the philosophy    expressed by Roark or the events of the plot.[20][21]    Rand's denials have not stopped other commentators from    claiming stronger connections between Wright and Roark.[21][22] Wright    himself equivocated about whether he thought Roark was based on    him, sometimes implying that he was, at other times denying    it.[23] Wright biographer Ada    Louise Huxtable described the \"yawning gap\" between    Wright's philosophy and Rand's, and quoted him declaring, \"I    deny the paternity and refuse to marry the mother.\"[24]  <\/p>\n<p>    Peter Keating is also an aspiring architect, but is everything    that Roark is not. His original inclination was to become an    artist, but his opportunistic mother pushes him toward    architecture where he might have greater material success. Even    by Roark's own admission, Keating does possess some creative    and intellectual abilities, but is stifled by his sycophantic    pursuit of wealth over morals. His willingness to build what    others wish leads him to temporary success. He attends    architecture school with Roark, who helps him with some of his    less inspired projects. He is subservient to the wills of    others: Dominique Francon's father, the architectural    establishment, his mother, even Roark himself. Keating is \"a    man who never could be, but doesn't know it\". The one sincere    thing in Keating's life is his love for Catherine Halsey,    Ellsworth Toohey's niece. Though she offers to introduce    Keating to Toohey, he initially refuses despite the fact that    such an introduction would help his career. It is the only    exception to his otherwise relentless and ruthless ambition,    which includes bullying and threatening to blackmail a sick old    man and unintentionally causing his death. Although Keating    does have a conscience, and often does genuinely feel bad after    doing certain things he knows are immoral, he only feels this    way in hindsight, and doesn't allow his morals to influence    current decision making. Keating's offer to elope with    Catherine is his one chance to act on what he believes is his    own desire. But, Dominique arrives at that precise moment and    offers to marry him for her own reasons, and his acceptance of    the offer and betrayal of Catherine ends the potential of    romance between them. His acceptance of Dominique's offer of    marriage, which would help his career far more than a marriage    with Catherine, is a quintessential example of his failure to    stand up for his own convictions.  <\/p>\n<p>    Dominique Francon is the heroine of The Fountainhead,    described by Rand as \"the woman for a man like Howard    Roark.\"[25] For most of the novel, the    character operates from what Rand later described as \"a very    mistaken idea about life.\"[26] Dominique is    the daughter of Guy Francon, a highly successful but creatively    inhibited architect. She is a thorn in the flesh of her father    and causes him much distress for her works criticizing the    architectural profession's mediocrity. Peter Keating is    employed by her father, and her intelligence, insight and    observations are above his. It is only through Roark that her    love of adversity and autonomy meets a worthy equal. These    strengths are also what she initially lets stifle her growth    and make her life miserable. She begins thinking that the world    did not deserve her sincerity and intellect, because the people    around her did not measure up to her standards. She starts out    punishing the world and herself for all the things about man    which she despises, through self-defeating behavior. She    initially believes that greatness, such as Roark's, is doomed    to fail and will be destroyed by the 'collectivist' masses    around them. She eventually joins Roark romantically, but    before she can do this, she must learn to join him in his    perspective and purpose.  <\/p>\n<p>    The character has provoked varied reactions from commentators.    Chris Matthew Sciabarra called    her \"one of the more bizarre characters in the novel.\"[27]Mimi Reisel Gladstein called her    \"an interesting case study in perverseness\"[28] Tore Boeckmann described her as    a character with \"mixed premises\", some of which were mistaken,    and saw her actions as a logical representation of how her    conflicting ideas might play out.[29]  <\/p>\n<p>    Gail Wynand is a wealthy newspaper mogul who rose from a    destitute childhood in the ghettoes of New York City to control much of the    city's print media. While Wynand shares many of the character    qualities of Roark, his success is dependent upon his ability    to pander to public opinion, a flaw which eventually leads to    his downfall. In her journals Rand described Wynand as \"the man    who could have been\" a heroic individualist, contrasting him to    Roark, \"the man who can be and is\".[30] Some    elements of Wynand's character were inspired by real-life    newspaper tycoon William Randolph Hearst,[31] including Hearst's mixed success    in attempts to gain political influence.[32] Wynand    is a tragic figure who ultimately fails in his attempts to    wield power, losing his newspaper, his wife, and his friendship    with Roark.[33] The character has been    interpreted as a representation of Nietzsche's \"master morality\",[34] and    his tragic nature illustrates Rand's rejection of Nietzsche's    philosophy.[35] In Rand's view, a person like    Wynand, who seeks power over others, is just as much a    \"second-hander\" as a conformist like Keating.[36]  <\/p>\n<p>    Ellsworth Monkton Toohey, who writes a popular art criticism    column, is Roark's antagonist. Toohey is Rand's personification    of evil, the most active and self-aware villain in any of her    novels.[37] Toohey is a socialist, and    represents the spirit of collectivism more generally. He styles    himself as representative of the will of the masses, but his    actual desire is for power over others.[38] He    controls individual victims by destroying their sense of    self-worth, and seeks broader power (over \"the world\", as he    declares to Keating in a moment of candor) by promoting the    ideals of ethical altruism and a rigorous    egalitarianism that treats all people and    achievements as equally valuable, regardless of their true    value.[39] As one reviewer described his    approach:  <\/p>\n<p>      Aiming at a society that shall be \"an average drawn upon      zeroes,\" he knows exactly why he corrupts Peter Keating, and      explains his methods to the ruined young man in a passage      that is a pyrotechnical display of the fascist mind at its      best and its worst; the use of the ideal of altruism to      destroy personal integrity, the use of humor and tolerance to      destroy all standards, the use of sacrifice to      enslave.[40]    <\/p>\n<p>    His biggest threat is the strength of the individual spirit    embodied by Roark.[41]  <\/p>\n<p>    Rand used her memory of the British democratic socialist Harold Laski to    help her imagine what Toohey would do in a given situation. New    York intellectuals Lewis Mumford and Clifton    Fadiman also contributed inspirations for the    character.[42]  <\/p>\n<p>    Rand indicated that the primary theme of The    Fountainhead was \"individualism versus collectivism, not in    politics but within a man's soul.\"[43] Apart from    scenes such as Roark's courtroom defense of the American    concept of individual rights, she avoided direct    discussion of political issues. As historian James Baker    described it, \"The Fountainhead hardly mentions politics    or economics, despite the fact that it was born in the 1930s.    Nor does it deal with world affairs, although it was written    during World War II. It is about one man against the system,    and it does not permit other matters to intrude.\"[44]  <\/p>\n<p>    Rand dedicated The Fountainhead to her husband, Frank    O'Connor, and to architecture. She chose architecture for the    analogy it offered    to her ideas, especially in the context of the ascent of    modern architecture. It provided an    appropriate vehicle to solidify her beliefs that the individual is    of supreme value, the \"fountainhead\" of creativity, and that    selfishness, properly understood as ethical    egoism, is a virtue.  <\/p>\n<p>    Peter Keating and Howard Roark are character foils. Keating practices in the    historical    eclectic and neo-classic mold, even when the building's    typology is a skyscraper. He    follows and pays respect to old traditions. He accommodates the    changes suggested by others, mirroring the eclectic directions,    and willingness to adapt, current at the turn of the twentieth    century. Roark searches for truth and honesty and expresses    them in his work. He is uncompromising when changes are    suggested, mirroring modern architecture's trajectory from    dissatisfaction with earlier design trends to emphasizing    individual creativity. Roark's individuality eulogizes modern    architects as uncompromising and heroic.  <\/p>\n<p>    The Fountainhead has been cited by numerous architects    as an inspiration for their work. Architect Fred Stitt, founder    of the San Francisco    Institute of Architecture, dedicated a book to his \"first    architectural mentor, Howard Roark\".[45] Nader    Vossoughian has written that \"The Fountainhead... has    shaped the public's perception of the architectural profession    more than perhaps any other text over this last    half-century.\"[46] According to renowned    architectural photographer Julius Shulman, it was Rand's work    that \"brought architecture into the public's focus for the    first time,\" and he believes that The Fountainhead was    not only influential among 20th century architects, it \"was    one, first, front and center in the life of every architect who    was a modern architect.\"[47]  <\/p>\n<p>    The Fountainhead polarized critics and received mixed    reviews upon its release.[48]The New    York Times' review of the novel named Rand    \"a writer of great power\" who writes \"brilliantly, beautifully    and bitterly,\" and it stated that she had \"written a hymn in    praise of the individual... you will not be able to read this    masterful book without thinking through some of the basic    concepts of our time.\"[40] Benjamin    DeCasseres, a columnist for the New York Journal-American,    wrote of Roark as \"an uncompromising individualist\" and \"one of    the most inspiring characters in modern American literature.\"    Rand sent DeCasseres a letter thanking him for explaining the    book's individualistic themes when many other reviewers did    not.[49] There were other positive    reviews, but Rand dismissed many of them as either not    understanding her message or as being from unimportant    publications.[48] A    number of negative reviews focused on the length of the    novel,[50] such as one that called it \"a    whale of a book\" and another that said \"anyone who is taken in    by it deserves a stern lecture on paper-rationing.\" Other    negative reviews called the characters unsympathetic and Rand's    style \"offensively pedestrian.\"[48]  <\/p>\n<p>    The year 1943 also saw the publication of The God of the Machine by    Isabel    Paterson and The Discovery of Freedom by Rose Wilder    Lane. Rand, Lane and Paterson have been referred to as the    founding mothers of the American libertarian movement with the    publication of these works.[51] Journalist    John Chamberlain, for    example, credits these works with his final \"conversion\" from    socialism to what he called \"an older American philosophy\" of    libertarian and conservative ideas.[52]  <\/p>\n<p>    One of the most controversial elements of the book is the rape    scene between Roark and Dominique.[53]Feminist critics have    attacked the scene as representative of an anti-feminist viewpoint in Rand's works    that makes women subservient to men.[54]Susan Brownmiller, in her 1975    work Against Our Will, denounced what she    called \"Rand's philosophy of rape\", for portraying women as    wanting \"humiliation at the hands of a superior man\". She    called Rand \"a traitor to her own sex\".[55] Susan    Love Brown said the scene presents Rand's view of sex as \"an    act of sadomasochism and of feminine subordination    and passivity\".[56]Barbara Grizzuti Harrison    suggested women who enjoy such \"masochistic fantasies\" are    \"damaged\" and have low self-esteem.[57] While Rand    scholar Mimi Reisel Gladstein found    elements to admire in Rand's female protagonists, she said that    readers who have \"a raised consciousness about the nature of    rape\" would disapprove of Rand's \"romanticized rapes\".[58]  <\/p>\n<p>    Rand denied that what happened in the scene was actually rape,    referring to it as \"rape by engraved invitation\"[53] because Dominique wanted    and \"all but invited\" the act, citing among other things the    conversation after Dominique scratches the marble slab in her    bedroom in order to invite Roark to repair it.[59] A true rape, Rand said, would be    \"a dreadful crime\".[60] Defenders of    the novel have agreed with this interpretation. In an essay    specifically explaining this scene, Andrew    Bernstein wrote that although there is much \"confusion\"    about it, the descriptions in the novel provide \"conclusive\"    evidence that \"Dominique feels an overwhelming attraction to    Roark\" and \"desires desperately to sleep with\" him.[61]Individualist feminist Wendy McElroy    said that while Dominique is \"thoroughly taken,\" there is    nonetheless \"clear indication that Dominique not only    consented,\" but also enjoyed the experience.[62] Both Bernstein and McElroy saw    the interpretations of feminists such as Brownmiller as being    based in a false understanding of sexuality.[63]  <\/p>\n<p>    Rand's posthumously published working notes for the novel,    which were not known at the time of her debate with feminists, indicate that when she started    working on the book in 1936 she conceived of Roark's character    that \"were it necessary, he could rape her and feel    justified.\"[64]  <\/p>\n<p>    The Fountainhead has continued to have strong sales    throughout the last century into the current one, and has been    referenced in a variety of popular entertainment, including    movies, television series and other novels.[66] Despite its popularity, it has    received relatively little ongoing critical attention.[67][68]    Assessing the novel's legacy, philosopher Douglas Den Uyl    described The Fountainhead as relatively neglected    compared to her later novel, Atlas Shrugged, and said, \"our    problem is to find those topics that arise clearly with The    Fountainhead and yet do not force us to read it simply    through the eyes of Atlas Shrugged.\"[67]  <\/p>\n<p>    Among critics who have addressed it, some consider The    Fountainhead to be Rand's best novel,[69][70][71] such    as philosopher Mark Kingwell, who described The    Fountainhead as \"Rand's best workwhich is not to say it is    good.\"[72] A Village Voice columnist has called it    \"blatantly tendentious\" and described it as containing    \"heavy-breathing hero worship.\"[73] Fountainhead    has also received some positive reviews such as one from    Bill Wasik    who said Ayn Rand \"...has an uncanny ability to weave words    into a beautiful mosaic; her characters come alive on the pages    and dance before the readers eyes. One character in    particular, Howard Roark, is what all men should seek to    become.\"[74]  <\/p>\n<p>    The book has a particular appeal to young people, an appeal    that led historian James Baker to describe it as \"more    important than its detractors think, although not as important    as Rand fans imagine.\"[70]Allan Bloom has    referred to the novel as being \"hardly literature,\" one having    a \"sub-Nietzschean assertiveness [that] excites somewhat    eccentric youngsters to a new way of life.\" However, he also    writes that when he asks his students which books matter to    them, there is always someone influenced by The    Fountainhead.[75]    Journalist Nora    Ephron wrote that she had loved the novel when she was 18    but admitted that she \"missed the point,\" which she suggested    is largely subliminal sexual metaphor. Ephron wrote that she    decided upon re-reading that \"it is better read when one is    young enough to miss the point. Otherwise, one cannot help    thinking it is a very silly book.\"[76] Architect    David    Rockwell said that the film adaptation    influenced his interest in architecture and design, and that    many architecture students at his university named their dogs    Roark as a tribute to the protagonist of the novel and    film.[77]  <\/p>\n<p>    In 1945, Rand was approached by King Features Syndicate about    having a condensed, illustrated version of the novel published    for syndication in newspapers. Rand agreed,    provided that she could oversee the editing and approve the    proposed illustrations of her characters, which were provided    by Frank    Godwin. The 30-part series began on December 24, 1945, and    ran in over 35 newspapers.[78]  <\/p>\n<p>    In 1949, Warner Brothers released a film    based on the book, starring Gary Cooper as Howard Roark, Patricia Neal    as Dominique Francon, Raymond Massey as Gail Wynand, and    Kent Smith as    Peter Keating. The film was directed by King Vidor. The    Fountainhead grossed $2.1million, $400,000 less than    its production budget.[79] However, sales of    the novel increased as a result of interest spurred by the    film.[80] In letters written at the time,    the author's reaction to the film was positive, saying \"The    picture is more faithful to the novel than any other adaptation    of a novel that Hollywood has ever produced\"[81] and \"It was a real    triumph.\"[82] However, she displayed a more    negative attitude towards it later, saying that she \"disliked    the movie from beginning to end\", and complaining about its    editing, acting and other elements.[83] As a result    of this film, Rand said that she would never sell any of her    novels to a film company that did not allow her the right to    pick the director and screenwriter as well as edit the film, as    she did not want to encounter the same production problems that    occurred on this film.[84]  <\/p>\n<p>    A 2016 industry article reported    that director Zack Snyder is looking to adapt    Fountainhead for the big screen, possibly based on    Rand's original script for Warner Brothers.[85]  <\/p>\n<p>    In June 2014, an adaptation for the stage (in Dutch) was    presented at the Holland Festival, directed by Ivo van Hove,    with Ramsey    Nasr as Howard Roark.[86] The    production subsequently went on tour, appearing in Barcelona in early July    2014,[87] and then at the Festival d'Avignon later that    month.[88]  <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>See original here: <\/p>\n<p><a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow\" href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/The_Fountainhead\" title=\"The Fountainhead - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia\">The Fountainhead - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> The Fountainhead is a 1943 novel by Ayn Rand, and her first major literary success. More than 6.5million copies of the book have been sold worldwide. The Fountainhead's protagonist, Howard Roark, is an individualistic young architect who refuses to compromise his artistic and personal vision for worldly recognition and success.  <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/ayn-rand\/the-fountainhead-wikipedia-the-free-encyclopedia\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[187828],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-69200","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ayn-rand"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69200"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=69200"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69200\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=69200"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=69200"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=69200"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}