This is a paradoxical comment that makes it nearly impossible to believe you read the book. The entire theme of The Fountainhead is the rejection of conformity and collectivism. If you didn't like "being told what to think" then you felt what Howard Roark felt. If you were "berated and told I was wrong" for "offering different perspectives" then you experienced what Howard Roark experienced. Are you claiming to be a skeptic or independent thinker and also agreeing with Toohey and admiring Keating?

The Fountainhead is far from a perfect novel and certainly the "great man" theory is flawed. But the exposition of the inherent failure of collectivism to improve society is probably its greatest strength, and rings more true today than ever.

Sorry, missed this as HN doesn't have notifications about comment replies.

My comment about rejecting authority was more about my relationship with my teacher, not internal relationships within the book. Perhaps the paradox was my teacher then, no? Personally, I don't believe in Rand's philosophy. I think Roark is an unbelieveable archetype. If my teacher idolizes Rand and says she agrees with the philosophy, it's _her_ paradox for telling me "no, that's wrong" if I, for example, say that I agree that Roark is Rand's ideal man, but that I believe Gail Wynand is the antithesis of Rand's ideal man because he _has the power_ (and money) to reject the status quo but still refuses to do so (whereas Keating, whom most of the class and the teacher selected as the antithesis, is just a social climber and is working for that power).

That's an unbelievably long book to assign at the secondary or even undergrad level.

It was summer reading and we were made to email the teacher weekly about the assigned section.

I've read these. My first Rand exposure was Anthem, which I thought was interesting if a bit contrived (I read it as the same age as The Giver, felt The Giver was more relatable).