Howard Roark Individualism

1547 Words7 Pages
The court case found in the final chapters of The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand is based upon the rule of court of law versus the egotist. In dynamiting the Corlandt homes project, Howard Roark was not only challenging the people who would benefit from the project, he was also going against the secular law of the country. The book demonstrates the struggle between moral law and secular law. In his testimony, Roark not only shows his morals supersede the court of law, he also backs up his egotist nature with the philosophy of Objectivism, and his sense of individualism. Howard Roark is a creator. In his argument at the Corlandt Homes Trial, he makes it clear he is an egotist who believes his gift to the world was corrupted; much like the creator…show more content…
Objectivism is the philosophy of the individual. According to the official Ayn Rand Website, “The purpose of morality, she argues, is to teach us what is in our self-interest, what produces happiness (ARI NP).” This is essentially, what Roark does with architecture. Architecture is his source of self-happiness, as he uses it as an outlet to get his ideas out into the world and set in stone. When his personal happiness was taken away with each alteration of the apartment complex, he had to act. In his plan, he didn’t expect any injuries because of the explosion; the guard was clearly on his way to the nearest gas station to aid the stranded Dominique, who was in a trench out of harm’s way (Rand 613-617). Because Roark made sure everyone was safe, he proved he did not intend to hurt anyone. He only wanted the building to go away, and his personal morals were…show more content…
Along with the Howard Roark’s morals which shine throughout his argument, and the philosophical value of the speech, is a strong sense of persuasion to think how he thinks. In any good argument, there is always the factor of trying to get your opponent to think the way you think and in doing so you win the argument. This is accomplished by using persuasion, an aspect latent throughout Howard Roark’s testimony. Aristotle split the art of persuasion into three categories. The first is Ethos, the art of appealing to the ethical appeal of the author, creating credibility for the defendant. The second is Logos, the means of persuasion using logic, which appeals to the audience of the speaker. Lastly, is Pathos, the means of persuading using the emotions of the audience (Henning NP). In his testimony, Roark uses all three of the categories of persuasion to get the jury to deem him not guilty of the crime he committed. Roark uses Ethos when he says, “I recognize no obligations toward men except one: to respect their freedom and to take no part in a slave society (Rand 684-85).” He uses logic when he talks about the creator of fire, the wheel and anesthesia; and how they paid for their sinful acts of creation until they became useful, much like Roark is being ridiculed for

More about Howard Roark Individualism

Open Document