About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unread


Post 0

Wednesday, April 5, 2006 - 6:32amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Hello all,

I just joined this community after reading many of the articles and posts in the Forums.  I read one particular thread dealing with a disturbing passage in The Fountainhead.  If you've read the book, that sentence alone is probably enough of a clue as to what passage I am referring to.  The "rape" scene in The Fountainhead is definitely one that stands out from the book.  In the previous thread on this topic (which I had a hard time finding and, besides, had not been replied to in quite some time, hence a fresh look at the issue), many people put forth their own ideas on why this passage was written as it was, and the motivations of both the characters and the author. 

When I read the book for the first time, I was aware of the scene before getting to it.  I was still somewhat taken aback by the scene, but I reserved judgement on it until I had finished the book.  I am glad that I did, for, lo and behold, later on in the novel, Ms. Rand puts forth a good explanation for why Dominique would allow such a defilement of herself to occur without much of a struggle.  (You will remember in this scene, that Dominique is described as hitting Howard, but she does not utter a word of protest.  Her physical protests are, according to the narrator, only symbolic in nature)  A clue into Dominique's character comes with a discussion on what people search for.  Ms. Rand says that a person searches for that which is missing in their lives.  As far as personal characteristics are concerned, a shy person will search for confidence in themselves.  A person who does not value themselves will search for self-respect.  And, in the case of Dominique, a person who has nothing but complete self-respect will search for a lack of self-respect. 

This idea can seem as paradoxical and disturbing as the inclusion of the rape, but it does make sense if you use your "little grey cells" (I've been watching to many Poirot mysteries lately).  If Dominique has complete respect for herself and her ideals, then she has nothing to search for within herself but a lack of self-respect.  She puts herself through intolerable situations to see if she can find a shred of disrespect for herself.  Oddly enough, marrying a man she does not truly love, and allowing herself to be assaulted by a dominating man, are tests to see if she can hate herself.  Alas, she cannot.

Now, I grant you that searching for a negative aspect of oneself is a bit odd, and the extremes that Dominique goes to proving her absence of self-loathing are very grand, but I believe that the ultimate purpose for her actions as a character in the novel are to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that her self-respect is so all-encompassing that she can edure the harshest of treatments from the world and still maintain her own self-love.

I'd like to hear other people's opinions on this.      


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 1

Wednesday, April 5, 2006 - 10:32amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
The problem with your understanding of that scene is it's not unwilling "defilement" at all. She wanted her chastity to be "spoiled" by Howard because she wanted him. She wouldn't have chosen sex with just anyone. She's not diminishing her self-respect, she's demonstrating her highest values through her choices.

I'll try to go with your theory of lacking something in life: What Dominique wants in her life is proof that a great person can achieve his/her goals given the dismal state of the world Rand puts these characters in. She doesn't want to watch as the cruel world slowly destroys this guy she loves, and she believes that's what will happen to him. It tears her up. That's her wound. It's not that she lacks self-hate, but that she recognizes the lack of great thinkers.

I'm re-reading The Fountainhead right now and I find myself paying extra attention to her character. The first time she's mentioned, she's leaving her father's office and the doorman behaves as if she's the queen. I don't think we even know her name at that point. I guess I'll always be defending Dominique.

Post 2

Wednesday, April 5, 2006 - 11:16amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Becky Said:

 The problem with your understanding of that scene is it's not unwilling "defilement" at all. She wanted her chastity to be "spoiled" by Howard because she wanted him. She wouldn't have chosen sex with just anyone. She's not diminishing her self-respect, she's demonstrating her highest values through her choices.



Although I refrained from further posting on the other thread since I wanted to think about it some more I will reply on this thread with one other thing that keeps bugging me and that is along the lines of what you are saying Becky. If Dominique truly wanted and encouraged the encounter consciously or some other way how could it be considered rape since rape by definition is ..


 NOUN:  the crime of forcing a woman to submit to sexual intercourse against her will


With this in mind how can it be rape if it is consensual brought about not only by a desire for the act to occur but according to William Nevin in the other thread, she is the first initiator of violence and compounds it even more by manipulation to get him into her bedroom.

Joseph in the other thread also adds this


  • So again we have Dominique seeking a value, while trying to pretend it's a sacrifice.  She wants it to be degrading and humiliating.  Roark of course recognizes  


    which states "she wants it", further making a case against it being an act of rape since it goes totally contrary to the established view of the act.

    I am quite sure this is not the first time these things have been hashed over, but it nonetheless still is a grating problem when reading and contemplating the book for more people than just myself I would feel certain.

    L W


  • (Edited by Mr. L W Hall on 4/05, 11:52am)


    Post 3

    Wednesday, April 5, 2006 - 11:58amSanction this postReply
    Bookmark
    Link
    Edit
    I hope I didn't hear a hint of an apology in defending Dominique there at the end ;)  No need to feel bad at all for defending her.

    As far as the use of the word "defilement", in retrospect I think that is too harsh a word for what I was trying to say.  Your comment of her wanting to be "spoiled" by Howard is more to the point of what I originally meant.  And, yes, I agree that she is showing her self-respect by choosing to "give herself" to Roark.  But if she was giving herself to Roark with complete willingness, why the faux rebuffing of his advances?  Why isn't this scene nothing more than a beautiful love scene with two people coming together as if it were meant to be (other than being pretty darn sappy ;)?  Howard understands that she "needs" to be treated in this way; that any less "violence" on his part and Dominique would not accept him.  Why is this so?  Perhaps Dominique is such a strong-willed woman that to be subserviant sexually to a more dominant male is not possible unless she is treated the way Howard treats her, and that she allows this treatment.  This may be the largest reason as to why the first physical interaction between these two is so intense.  I still think that at least part of the answer, though, can be found later in the novel with the discussion on the fact that we search for that which is missing in our lives.  (I wish I could remember if it were the narrator speaking or the characters.  I'll have to pull out my copy and re-read it to find out.)  I think this also would help explain why Dominique marries Keating instead of Roark.  Why is she choosing to marry someone she doesn't love (or respect from what I can remember) except to test herself.  And what is she testing?  Her level of self-respect.

    Another interesting point to ponder.  Why, if the fact that the world is hell-bent on destroying Roark, is she also wanting to destroy him?  Is it because she would rather be the one to bring him down instead of seeing the world do it?  Or does she want to destroy him at his beginning so that he doesn't reach his potential only to be brought down by the world?

    Thanks for your reply, Becky.  And defend away! ;)p


    Post 4

    Wednesday, April 5, 2006 - 2:01pmSanction this postReply
    Bookmark
    Link
    Edit
    Does she not state in the book that she is afraid to love or value anything because she knows the world destroys everything good - that is why she tries to destroy Roark - to either prove she is right (he is destroyed) and therefore she must protect herself by not loving anything, or - she scarcely can believe it might be true - is it possible there are men who exist who cannot be destroyed in such a way?  To an extent this applies to her, only it requires Roark for her to realize this, because she believes she may be the only one absent the absolute proof that Roark cannot succumb.


    Post 5

    Wednesday, April 5, 2006 - 2:01pmSanction this postReply
    Bookmark
    Link
    Edit
    Perhaps the difficulty you are having, Mr. Hall, stems from the fact that we continue to refer to this scene as "The Rape Scene".  Yes, it has probably been talked about since the publishing of the book (especially considering the time period it was written in).  An interesting question comes up for me.  When, and who, exactly first called this a "rape"?  I agree, as does Ms. Becky from what she writes, that it is not rape.  Dominique obviously chose to have sex with Roark, even if she played "hard to get" in somewhat of an extreme.  How about we start a trend of not calling this scene "The Rape Scene".  Any suggestions on a different reference name? 

    Also, what are your thoughts on the fact that she wants it to be "degrading" and "humiliating"?  This aspect has always puzzled me, even though I try to give some explanation in my first post.  Why the two different thoughts of her wanting to go to bed with Roark but her wanting to be humiliated?  Do you (the collective "you") think that it is because she wants to have disrespectful things done to her in an attempt to find some lack of respect within herself (which she cannot find)?


    Post 6

    Thursday, April 6, 2006 - 2:04pmSanction this postReply
    Bookmark
    Link
    Edit
    This has been discussed before also;
    http://rebirthofreason.com/Forum/ObjectivismQ&A/A Fountainhead Dillema Revisited

    I was observing lately though the sick dependency of dominated individuals and culture, moreover the dependency and pathos cultivated by our nanny-state. The subjugated, unable to directly retaliate, resorts to passive aggression, becoming more dependent and inept.

    As I pointed out later in the thread, the negative-aspect of women who desire rape (play the "game" of "rapo") is to coerce and control the men they seduce and extort.

    Scott

    Post to this thread


    User ID Password or create a free account.