Commentary on The Fountainhead Essay

Fighting For His Life

Ordinarily, if one annihilates a multi-million dollar edifice, especially one built to house the downtrodden poor, the culprit will undoubtedly face severe penalties and jail time. However, Howard Roark, Ayn Rands embodiment of what man can, and ought, to be, dynamites a housing project that he himself designed, known as Cortlandt Homes, and receives no punishment, and rightly so. In the novel The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand, Howard Roark appears as the main character as well as what many objectivists would consider the perfect soul. Roark, a man who acts exclusively for himself and not for the approval of others, designs a government housing project for his acquaintance, Peter Keating. Keating, because he lacks the skill to do so on his own, asks Roark to design this project. Roark agrees to create this representation of everything he loathes. Although Howard strongly disapproves of welfare and government housing, he boasts great interest in working with inexpensive materials. Still, Roark complies on one key, incontestable condition; that Keating allow no one to interfere with the design or the building process. Peter, being the weak-hearted character that he is, fails to meet this requirement and Roark simply cannot let other architects meddle with his work. Ergo, Roark proceeds to dynamite Cortlandt Homes.

Many would find great fault in a man who destroys a dwelling built to assist the underprivileged poor. Instead, Roark feels completely justified, both morally and philosophically, in obliterating the altruist monstrosity. In fact, it appears as if Howard does not care that his actions may land him in jail because of his philosophical beliefs. He and Dominique Francon both know what needs to be done to the Cortlandt Housing Project after various architects destroyed one mans faultless design. Normally, when one is asked to partake in a crime so devious, one would refuse profusely. However, when Roark explains to Dominique his plan she replies with a solemn, understanding Yes (641) because knows that Roark is justified in his actions. Shortly thereafter, Roark destroys the atrocity. When Roark sets off the dynamite that razes the building, he does not run, for he is not a criminal. He merely stands there, waiting for someone to find him. When questioned by the first policeman on the scene, Roark remains calm and simply states Youd better arrest me, Ill talk at the trial (648). When he utters this sentence in such a calm manner, he truly reveals his confidence in his convictions. However, his convictions come into direct conflict with the majoritys morality. Most people feel that the good of the collective outweighs the good of the individual.

In his defense, Roark attempts to challenge this accepted morality, as he has by the method in which he has lived his entire life. The day starts off with the prosecutor directly attacking Roark, not so much for his act of demolishing the building, but for his motive. The prosecutor begins by stating The motive is beyond the realm of human emotions. To the majority of us it will appear monstrous and inconceivable (706). This motive, of course, is Roarks egoism and his desire to do things his way. The prosecutor goes on to declare We are dealing with the most vicious explosive on earth- the egotist! (706). This further proves the point that most people only think as a collective and find that selfishness is a sinister attribute. In fact, Rand describes the jury and audience as very accepting of the prosecutors accusations and judgments against Howard. They agreed with every sentence; they had heard it before, they had always heard it, this was what the world lived by (708). Following the prosecutor is a barrage of fact witnesses, testifying against Roark, describing how he committed the crime, but not why. When Keating testifies, he appears distraught, beaten by the world. He describes his contract with Roark and, surprisingly, the spectators do not react as one would think, or as Ellsworth Toohey would have hoped. The audience does not recognize that a world-renowned architect just admitted to using someone elses idea, as he did his entire life, to gain fame and recognition. Subsequent to Keatings testimony, the prosecution rests, allowing Roark an attempt to defend himself. At this point, any man would remain hopeless, accepting and acknowledging defeat, but not Roark.

Howard Roark calls no witness to the stand, but only reads his own testimony. With this testimony, Roark, communicating for Ayn Rand, endeavors to justify his morality of egoism and selfishness. He begins, Thousands of years ago, the first man discovered how to make fire. He was probably burned at the stake he had taught his brothers to light Centuries later, the first man invented the wheel. He was probably torn on the rack he had taught his brothers to build. He was considered a transgressor (710). Roark continues to describe the struggle between the creator and the user. He explains how some great men venture out beyond what is accepted to create something absolutely amazing, yet his peers force him to pay a high price for his individuality. The motive of the creator, Roark clarifies, is not to benefit his brothers, but to realize his own dream. He says, No creator was prompted by a desire to serve his brothers, for his brothers rejected the gift His truth was his only motive. His own truth, and his own work to achieve it in his own way (710). Roark informs the crowd attending the trial that there exists one choice in life: To create, or to feed off of others creations. Rand describes the latter, which a majority of the population would fall into, as second-handers, people who feed off of the acceptance and praise they receive from others. Roark correlates his argument to his destruction of the Cortlandt Housing Project by saying,

It is said that I have destroyed the home of the destitute. It is forgotten that but for me the destitute could not have had this particular home I came here to say that I do not recognize anyones right to one minute of my life. Nor to any part of my energy. Nor to any achievement of mine. No matter who makes the claim, how large their number or how great their need.

I wished to come here and say that I am a man who does not exist for others

I wished to come here and say that the integrity of a mans creative work is of greater importance than any charitable endeavor (716-717).

Shortly after Roark utters these words and closes his case, the jury arrives with their verdict. Howard Roark is not guilty.

In the end, Roark acknowledges that he committed a crime, but he does not go to court to defend his actions, but to defend his way of life and to convince people that selfishness is a virtue and the ego is the most important thing that an individual possesses. Roark relies on his moral and philosophical beliefs to get him out of almost certain conviction. He argues that throughout history there existed a battle between the collective and the individual and, although he had to face incredible difficulties, the individual always prevailed and society benefitted from his idea, only to return to their parasitic ways. During the trial, Roark not only defends his motive for dynamiting Cortlandt Homes, nor does he solely defend his egotistical lifestyle, but he defends every man who created something that went against the grain of society, and was therefore punished for his ingenuity and creativity.