X

  The closing of the ore line is announced: the riots, the general panic. The announced broadcast of Mr. Thompson.

  XI: This Is John Galt Speaking

  The broadcast (Mr. Thompson, Dagny, James Taggart, and others in the studio). John Galt’s speech.

  XII

  When Dagny returns to her office, Galt is waiting for her there. He offers her a last chance—she refuses. He tells her he will stand by and gives her his address. The panic—the country is falling apart. The government attempts to negotiate with Galt by radio—he refuses. The search for him. (“We do not recognize your right to negotiate”—or—desperate blind appeals into space, and no answer.)

  XIII

  Galt and the priest in the restaurant. The appeal through pity. Dagny comes to his garret. The appeal through love. He refuses. She warns him-he hands her the phone. When she comes back with officials, he is still there. [Later, the preceding two sentences were crossed out and replaced by the sentence:] The officials had followed Dagny—they come in. The search and destruction of his laboratory. His “polite” arrest.

  XIV

  Galt in a luxurious hotel room. The attempted bargaining by Mr. Thompson—he refuses. Dr. Stadler. Dagny and Rearden: she tells him that she loves Galt and that she betrayed him. The banquet: the appeal through flattery. “Get the hell out of my way.”

  XV

  Dr. Stadler and the explosion of Project X, collapse of the Taggart Bridge. The scene in a bare hotel room: Taggart, the mine parasite, Wesley Mouch, Cuffy Meigs, Dagny. The “quiet hysteria.” Dagny understands and walks out. She goes to her office, starts destroying papers. (Call from Eddie Willers; she tells him to give up, but he can’t.) A man rushes in with news about Taggart Bridge. Her moment of temptation—then: “We don’t know what to do!” and her answer: “I don’t either.” She leaves the office, calls Francisco d‘Anconia, meets him and Ragnar Danneskjöld on a street corner.

  XVI: The Generator

  The torture of Galt. The broken generator—the escape of the mechanic. A man rushes in [and announces that] the Taggart Bridge has collapsed. Galt’s single moment of temptation—but he keeps silent. They all escape, leaving him tied.

  XVII

  Taggart and the priest. The confession of total evil. “I have nothing to say, James. I’m on strike.” The rescue of Galt by Dagny, d‘Anconia, and Danneskjöld. (Brute force against mind and force.) “We never had to take any of it seriously, did we?” “No, we never had to.”

  XVIII: In the Name of the Best Within Us

  The flight to the valley—Galt, Dagny, d‘Anconia, Danneskjöld, New York City without electrical power. The sight of a world in ruins. Eddie Willers and the last ride of the Comet. The music of the Concerto filling the valley. The strikers talk of future plans—a new beginning. (Rearden says: “John will run the railroad from New York to Philadelphia.”) Galt and Dagny on the rocks above the valley, looking at the wrecked road and the stubborn fire of Wyatt’s torch in the distance. Galt says: “The road is cleared. We are going back.” The sign of the dollar.

  [The above outline contains AR’s last references to the priest. Years after completing the novel, she explained the meaning of the character and why she decided to eliminate him.

  I wanted to illustrate the evil of the morality of forgiveness. Also, I wanted to illustrate that the power of religion consists of the power of morality, the power of setting values and ideals, and that is what holds people to religion—and that this is what belongs to philosophy, not to religion. As a type, I wanted [the priest] to be my most glamorized projection of a Thomist philosopher, of a man who thought he could combine reason with religion. Through his relationship with James Taggart I wanted to show the way in which he realized that he was sanctioning evil. And the drama of him refusing to sanction Taggart at the end appealed to me very much.

  But it did not take me very long to realize that it would be an impossible confusion. Since all the other strikers in the story can be taken literally, [since] they are all representatives of rational, valuable professions, to include a priest among them would be to sanction religion.]

  August 26, 1946

  Questions

  Trouble for stalled locomotive, for Dagny to correct?

  Who would be in charge of the tunnel and the bridge?

  What would be the specific position of the young engineer who quits?

  What is the usual period of time before the placing of a new steel alloy on the market and the actual orders for it, particularly by railroads? Is there any special procedure about this?

  Specific troubles that would cripple ore mines?

  What would happen (to track and equipment) in a case such as Taggart taking over Colorado competitor?

  Problems of rebuilding new Colorado line?

  The wage rates (in connection with Colorado line issue)?

  Possible cause of freight snarl and loss of freight?

  Vital item which could have been lost?

  Who appoints division heads and similar regional executives?

  Ask details about automatic signal systems?

  If branch line is closed, how soon after decision do trains stop running?

  Would “pre-tunnel days” rails be rotted by time of the story? (What is the time element for such rails?)

  Are telephones on poles? Whom would Dagny call?

  Time element for [the order] of Rearden rails?

  Breakdown of N.Y. terminal signal system?

  The kind of generator for torture scene? And what goes wrong with it?

  What goes wrong with locomotive on the Comet’s last ride?

  What would be Dagny’s official title at TT? Also—Taggart’s title?

  Sizes and duties of division, districts, and regions?

  1946

  [AR prepared the following questions for an interview with Lee Lyles, assistant to the president of the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe Railway system. ]

  Who are the key men, the spark-plugs, of a railroad company?

  What are the actual, concrete, specific duties and problems of a railroad president?

  Who actually owns a railroad and appoints president?

  What would be specific duties and problems of “Vice-President in charge of Operations ”?

  What would be Galt’s job at TT? (Lowest job in terminal tunnels.)

  Who makes decision about building a new line or re-building an old one? How far in advance of starting?

  Who orders rails? How far in advance of need are orders placed?

  How long does it take to get them? In what quantity are they usually ordered? In the case of a new metal or experimental rail, who makes the decision to use it?

  How long does it take to get rolling stock and locomotives? (Passenger cars—6 months; freight cars—3 months.)

  Would saving the locomotives and rolling stock be of any financial consequence in the case of the nationalized Mexican line? Yes. What is the most important position for an engineer? (Superintendent of Transportation, Mechanical man.)

  Who appoints division heads and other regional executives? (If it’s Dagny, would Taggart interfere?)

  Who are the main shippers? Agriculture—etc., auto-parts for assembly line, oil, ore.

  If branch line is closed, how soon after decision do trains stop running? Any specific points about a railroad’s deterioration? What would crack first? When brains are gone, where would the result show first, and how?

  How much in advance would freight cars be promised to “soybean project”? When would they be sent there? When would they have been sent to Minnesota farmers?

  Details and chief causes of bridge deterioration and collapse? How many years at the least?

  Do railroads own their own electric power plant—such as for N.Y. terminal?

  August 28, 1946

  Extra Touches

  Possible lesser incident (for destruction of main transcontinental line): a big shipper, who is a parasite (inherited), goes bankrupt through parasites’ methods, and his failure is a bad blow to TT. His father was one of TT’s most important and reliable shippers, one of their mainstays. (This can be lumber, cotton, or some other basic commodity.)

  Possibility—the “crucial train run,” which fails for reasons of parasites’ technique, may precede and motivate either Wyatt’s quitting or the closing of the oil line.

  Don’t forget to stress (near the middle of Part I) that Dagny begins to suspect the existence of an enemy who is destroying TT. Dagny and the “feeling of Ergitandal.”

  Have brief, eloquent (“condensed”) flashbacks or references to Galt’s past, giving picture of his life and of his essential character. (Mainly in Part II—possibly some, without naming him, in Part I.)

  August 31, 1946

  Notes for Railroad Business

  James Taggart: President—head of Executive Department under alleged authority of Board of Directors (which is really concerned with corporate, not railroad matters).

  One of [Taggart‘s] chief-assistants, or vice-presidents, is the Public Relations man (extra-parasite) (“not to do, but to give the impression of doing”).

  Dagny Taggart: Vice-President in charge of Operating Department. (Traffic involves selling the service; operating involves producing the service.)

  Three main jobs of railroads: Maintenance of way, maintenance of equipment, transportation.

  Divisions, districts, and regions have the same three departments.

  Philosophical Points

  The people in the story are functioning, in their human moments, on old premises and principles, i.e., on the principles left over from the creators’ world, the principles of the strikers—to the extent to which they exist and function as human beings at all. They do not realize it, of course. Their avowed principles are those of collectivism and altruism. But whenever they have to act upon, or rely upon, or appeal to, decency or sense—they are implying the principles of the creators. This has a desperate quality—particularly when someone points it out to them; they are counting on the ideas they have denounced and discarded. (Example: any appeal to honesty, honor, integrity, rational sense—or personal profit. Along these lines: Francisco d‘Anconia pointing out the mistake of assuming that he wishes to make money.)

  Unions and trade-associations are not directed against employers or the public but against the best among their own members. (Stress this explicitly—in the railroad association’s vote against Taggart’s better competitor; in the steel association’s actions against Rearden and his patent; in the union’s policy regarding the new oil line and its speed.) This is one of the most obvious demonstrations of the fact that collectivism does not aim at any kind of “justice” or “fair play” or protection of the weak [man] against any actual infringement of his rights by the strong—but simply at stopping the strong for the sake of the weak—stopping ability for the sake of incompetence—not just robbing the production of the able, but stopping him from producing—not raising the weak in any way whatever, but simply forcing the strong down to the level of the moron. (Of course, if you do that, you destroy the world—weak and strong both. And the weak do not profit by this—not even for the moment.)

  Regarding controlled economies: Man will not produce if all the essential elements involved are not under his rational control, i.e., if they are not understandable to him, and, therefore, predictable, so that he can set his purpose and plan of action, his end and means, accordingly. Nature is under his control—“other men” are not. If his productive activity has to depend upon the arbitrary decision or whim of some human agency, against whom he has no recourse and no choice (such as the government)—he will not produce.

  This is why men can deal with a private utility company; they have an objective, mutual element to count upon—private profit, for both; both have something the other needs. But if electric power were nationalized, its best users, the biggest industrialists (and particularly new ventures that need electricity), would stop. A great industrialist is not going to venture into a huge undertaking when the ground can be cut from under him at any moment—when the sole source of electric power, which he needs, can be cut off arbitrarily by some punk bureaucrat. Never mind the fact that the bureaucrat won’t cut it off, in most likely practice; the fact that he can is enough; he knows it and the industrialist knows it—and the bureaucrat has the power of blackmail, the power to demand anything he wishes, without the necessity of making a threat. Yes, second-rate businessmen, of the second-hand kind, would accept such an arrangement and even love it; they’d get special advantages or rates for themselves, they’d be glad to pay off the bureaucrat, they’d consider him their tool. But a real industrialist will not do it. He knows who holds the power in such a set-up.

  Also: man will not produce if the essential motivation to consider is not his own profit. In a free economy, no one can ask him to work at a loss; this is only the economic aspect of a much more important fact—nobody can ask him to work for his own detriment or to struggle toward his own suffering or pain. In a collectivist economy, he must do just that; he must work without reward—and, when the collective wishes, toward his own destruction. The motivation is not profit—but self-sacrifice.

  Rearden realizes that his mistake (about himself and his view of life) was due to the “strike” of the philosopher.

  Scene of “common man” crying: “Why are they doing this to us? We thought our leaders knew what they were doing!”—and someone answering: “Those abstract, theoretical philosophers, whom you have always considered useless, are the only ones who can give men that knowledge.”

  The prevalence of “Oriental” philosophies in the parasites’ world: These are the kind of ideas the parasites would love (and even originate). Show the despair these ideas create in them and in their world. “Nothing is anything”—“We can’t be sure of anything”—“Why do you think you think? ”—“Obey, since you can’t think”—“Feel, don’t think”—“Act spontaneously, don’t think”—“ ‘Immediate’ perception, not thinking or reason”—“The present moment, not any long-range view”—“You are nothing anyway, so why worry about anything?” —“You are low and vile anyway, so why worry about virtue?”—“Sacrifice and suffering are a Universal Law”—“The individual is an illusion” —“Total annihilation (Nirvana) is the supreme ideal.”

  (Show the influence of this on: Taggart’s wife, Mrs. Rearden, Stacey, Rearden’s brother, the secretary, Eddie Willers, Taggart and his parasite friends. Also show how the professor comes to this [philosophy].)

  The arrogance of the “common man”: he expects “to be convinced,” with no mental effort on his own part. When confronted with the most lucid and explicit speech, idea, statement, or book—he simply declares that “he is not convinced,” and this saves him from the necessity of taking a stand, of pronouncing an independent rational judgment. It saves him even from recognizing that the argument is unanswerable, so he must do something about it; he tells himself that since he’s “not convinced,” there must be something wrong with the argument, it’s not absolute, he doesn’t have to do anything about it. (So, of course, he will never let himself be convinced. Actually, he simply does not think at all and does not give the argument any sort of rational consideration.)

  He wants mental food to be pre-digested and automatic. Also—he is firmly convinced that the main job of the thinkers (perhaps, the only job) is to convince him, to educate him. If asked how one could go about educating him (or making him understand anything), his answer would be: “I don’t know. That’s your job. You’ve got to educate me—both give me the right ideas and invent a way to convince me that they are the right ideas. I’m the aim of all society and all existence, ain’t I? You’re the strong, intellectually—I’ m the weak. Your moral duty and only goal in life is to help me. Well, help me.” (This is the “Adrian attitude.”)

  An extremely important point of the parasite’s philosophy: the desire to exploit the creators and also make them take the blame for the moral evil of such a situation.

  This is more prevalent and more vicious than I suspected. I have mentioned one aspect of it: the parasite’s demand that the creator, whom he exploits, must not admit that it’s exploitation; to protect the parasite’s feelings, the creator must fake reality. There are others. The parasite who accepts an unearned favor tries invariably to fake things so as to make it look as if it’s his benefactor who is accepting favors. This is always the case when a person moves into someone’s house, starts doing housework, then yells that the host exploits him (Monica). The parasite cannot accept a favor as a favor—simply and gratefully, as would happen between equals. The parasite resents the favor because he knows his own motive; it is not a plain favor, or a single incident, or a temporary condition—but his permanent way of living, which he knows to be exploitation. He does not help his host as a return courtesy; he does it to fool himself in his own mind, and to reverse the tables—to claim that the host is indebted to him.

  The desire here is not to return a courtesy, but to make the benefactor evil or guilty; the motive is not gratitude, but malice. And it is not even a desire to gain self-respect, except most indirectly and viciously: not through raising himself, but through debasing the host.