[Mormon Red Death]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Can we agree that overtly didactic literature invariably sucks whatever the viewpoint? I read a comment about Dostoevsky in a recent book review of Coetzee's latest book (comparing Coetzee favorably to Dostoevsky) that I liked. Doestoevky, whose novels, like Rand's, contain long monologues and philosophical discussions and digressions, mastered the technique of never allowing the reader to know for sure the author's own actual beliefs. (Adam does the same thing with his posts, which is one reason I like him.)

Doestoevsky's chapters in the Brothers Karamazov, Pro and Contra, and The Grand Inquisitor, represent perhaps the most powerful philosophical argument ever against Christianity and organized religion. Even more, we feel Ivan the atheist's agony in delivering the argument. For generations Christians have wept in empathy, and we know from Doestoevsky's biography that he was in fact a Christian. It seems Rand (though I've never read her as I have Dostoevsky) clubs you over the head with her one-sided personal perspective. Not good literature or storytelling.

The wild and violent sex scenes sound intriguing, however.

Just read it and tell us what you think. Its a unique story that is really good literature. There is a reason it was voted in the top books by readers in the modern library and random house critics voted it 92 (in the twentieth century) I suspect that you will like it and respect it for being good literature.