What does "Who is John Galt?" mean? - Galt's Gulch What does "Who is John Galt?" mean? In Atlas Shrugged, the movie Part 2, Dagney said it stood for giving up and despair. I didn't take that it means that. I'm interested in what you all think. Add Comment 2 Posted by LionelHutz 3 years, 9 months ago In the P1 movie, Eddy explain this to Dagny. As I recall, he said it stood for something like "don't ask questions nobody can answer." Dagny did see it differently. She thought people were giving up too easily with that attitude. "Not going to think about it...thinking about it won't change anything...who is John Galt..." The 20th century engineer that started the expression had a different meaning for it too - I think in the sense of "who does this guy think he is?" Galt was on a mission he considered preposterous for an individual to undertake. Not that he was critical of Galt - he almost considered the guy to be super-human as the plan began succeeding. The antagonists in the movie - almost the same sense as the 20th century engineer.

But with contempt. Who does this pile of garbage think he is...? 2 Posted by iroseland 3 years, 9 months ago I think the meaning of the phrase has a life of its own in the book. To Dagney it started out meaning giving up and despair. This was because she had not yet discovered who even she really was. I think subplot surrounding the meaning of the phrase is actually quite excellent. It seems that everyone had a different idea of who John Galt is, and that idea was rooted in their view of what was missing/wrong with the world. I think that helped make meeting Jeff Allen an even more gripping scene. She had heard explanations of "Who is John Galt" a few times, and from people who did not know what the full meaning was. Then there was Jeff Allen, he knew, he also knew how it happened and he knew that he had been a part of the problem and understood the value of what was being lost. As for me, I am not John Galt. I am more like the Truck Driver on the mine ledge who wanted to be more than that.

1 Posted by $ rockymountainpirate 3 years, 9 months ago When Dagny asked Fransisco if he was even a man and Fransisco answered "or an idea". 2 Posted by ogr8bearded1 3 years, 9 months ago I think you could consider it an identifying phrase also. Remember when the man in the diner in Part 1 ordered some food. He was dressed like a hobo almost and the waitress asked if he was able to pay and he replied "Who is John Galt?" She was satisfied with the answer and went to turn in his order. So to me it is a way for people from the Gulch to know others from there when they are out in the world. 1 Posted by BlueNova 3 years, 9 months ago Because I'm driving around with the bumper sticker, someday someone's going to ask; and, I was trying to come up with something simple or catchy answer before I explain the premise of Atlas Shrugged" if they're open to it.

I am now at a point that I would say "Who knows John Galt, knows the answer to the question?" or, "Ask John Galt for the answer!" But it doesn't do it for me yet. It may be that it's up to the interpreter to interpret and leave it at that. But I'm afraid that I'll look stupid when I'm asked if it isn't an effective reply. Maybe it's the same as when a artist such as a painter, leaves it up to the viewer to interpret. For the man in the diner, it's a simple situation to analyze the meaning of the question but I cannot think of what he really means. Maybe, John Galt knows why I can't pay is his meaning. The why being, I can't make the money to pay. Anyway, If I'm right on the interpretation angle, I'm right; and, you're all right. ‘Atlas Shrugged: Who Is John Galt?’ Review: Rand Trilogy Comes to an End | Variety September 16, 2014 | 01:33AM PT The weak cinematic trilogy derived from Ayn Rand's 1957 screed-cum-novel limps to its merciful end.

The spirit is willing but the filmmaking is oh so weak in “Atlas Shrugged: Who Is John Galt?,” the last installment of a cinematic trilogy based on Ayn Rand’s 1957 screed in epic novel form. Pic represents a certain leap of faith, as 2011’s “Part I” bombed in expansion after a promising limited opening, while 2012’s “Part II: The Strike” flopped outright. This finale to the free-market goddess’ pulpy ultimate tract answers not only the titular question, but also the matter of “What box set to get my favorite libertarian this Christmas?” (S)he probably won’t have seen this chapter already, as the shoddy pic took a B.O. swan dive in its opening U.S. weekend, grossing a reported $355,000 on 242 screens. That must be the fault of those damn freedom-hating socialists, or perhaps it’s due to the fact that so few of the Tea Party types the series’ producers once hoped would queue up are, er, the literate sort.

Or maybe it’s just that the prior installments weren’t very good movies, and it should surprise few that this last one is the worst of the lot. You can’t really blame the filmmakers: Stuck with a budget that again halves its immediate predecessor’s (now down to $5 million), they’re hapless to convey the grand scale of events Rand intended. Also, cast and crew have been almost entirely overhauled yet again. Now it’s Laura Regan playing railroad heiress Dagny Taggart, last seen crashing her plane in pursuit of the mysterious John Galt (Kristoffer Polaha), whose name has become a byword for truly free enterprise in a “People’s State of America” turned corrupt, collectivist, self-destructive and dysfunctional under the thumb of government toadies like Head of State Thompson (Peter MacKenzie). Turns out engineering genius Galt opted out of a society that now disgusts him, luring other titans of industry and innovation to his secret, self-sufficient Atlantis community in the mountains. Having barely survived her landing there, Dagny is duly impressed by this group of rugged rich individualists who, feeling unappreciated, took their toys and talents out of circulation.

(They’ve also helped the outside world’s infrastructural collapse along by sabotaging their old businesses.) They say tsk-tsking things like “You’ve been told people have a right to a living, just because they’re human.” Perish the thought. Though she’s found her utopia — and her sexy capitalist superman — Dagny returns to the outer world, unwilling to see her family’s hard-built business flushed down the toilet by government “takers.” The latter, facing various crises and rising citizen unrest, are furious when John commandeers the airwaves to deliver a big speech of vague libertarian philosophy. (Well, bigness is relative, as what took Rand nearly 60 pages is here reduced to under four minutes.) Shadowing Dagny, he’s captured by the evildoers, then tortured and rescued in a ridiculous action climax. Helmer J. James Manera sports the thinnest resume among the trilogy’s directors, but it would have been hard for anyone to pull this enterprise off. Crowd scenes that should be vast boast a cast of dozens. Stock footage, still photos and an omnipresent narrator awkwardly patch large gaps where the grandiose story goes beyond this movie’s ability to realize.

Though under the circumstances tech contributions are OK, “Who Is John Galt?” has the feel of a low-grade TV soap opera, with acting to match. (The biggest name here, Rob Morrow in the hitherto major role of steel baron Hank Rearden, makes just an eyeblink appearance.) Rand would have been embarrassed by its tacky reductionism, even if the literary “Atlas” is pretty sudsy itself. Then there’s the problem all three movies suffered from, namely their choosing to avoid a costly period setting, but failing to compensate by adequately updating a narrative very much rooted in the American economical logistics of more than a half-century ago. A more abstract, even sci-fi approach might have made the story still work as parable. But the dully literal-minded execution that producers John Aglialoro and Harmony Kaslow have carried through each installment only makes Rand’s creaky plotting seem more archaic and illogical. “Atlas Shrugged” may be a terrible novel, but its still-controversial philosophies will always attract avid followers.

(Prominent conservative pundit types including Grover Norquist and Sean Hannity duly make cameo appearances as themselves here to further the cause.) It’s hard to imagine anyone, however, having a “Eureka!” experience watching these lame movies, this latest least of all. Though publicized without the numeral, the pic’s onscreen title is “Atlas Shrugged III: Who Is John Galt?” Film Review: 'Atlas Shrugged: Who Is John Galt?' Reviewed at AMC Metreon 16, San Francisco, Sept. 15, 2014. MPAA Rating: PG-13. Running time: 99 MIN. Production An Atlas Distribution Co. release of an Atlas Prods. production. Produced by John Aglialoro, Harmony Kaslow. Executive producers, William A. Dunn, Ronald G. Smith. Co-producer, Bernie Laramie. Crew Directed by J. James Manera. Screenplay, Manera, Harmony Kaslow, John Aglialoro, based on the novel by Ayn Rand. Camera (color, HD), Gale Tattersall; editor, Tony Ciccone; music, Ella Cmiral; production designer, Jack G.

Taylor; costume designer, Eric Edell Phillips; set decorator, Donald W. Krafft; sound mixer, David M. Kelson; re-recording mixer, Michael Perricone; supervising sound editor/sound designer, James Gallivan; assistant directors, Andrew M. Ward, Daniel Katzman; casting, Lisa Beach, Sarah Katzman. With Kristoffer Polaha, Laura Regan, Joaquim de Almeida, Rob Morrow, Eric Allen Kramer, Stephen Toblowski, Mark Moses, Lew Temple, Jen Nikolaisen, Dominic Daniel, Greg Germann, Peter MacKenzie, Neal McDonough, Louis Herthum, Tony Denison, Claude Knowlton, Ned Vaugh, Grover Norquist, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Ron Paul. Atlas Shrugged Movie (Official Site) Celebrate another year in Galt's Gulch Online. 12.07.16 Another chance to snag an Atlas Shrugged Mystery Box! 11.25.16 The 6th annual Midas Mulligan's Black Friday Gulch Sale is happening now! 11.18.16 Introducing the Atlas Shrugged Mystery Box.

10.21.16 Voting fo the Atlas Art Contest is happening now. 10.06.16 WATCH: Matt Kibbe shows that the zombie apocalypse is real. 09.15.16 Weigh in on the new Atlas Shrugged movie. 09.01.16 Celebrate Atlas Shrugged Day with a NEW limited edition collector's item. 08.11.16 The Atlas Society announces an art contest; enter and you could win $5,000. 07.28.16 Hot in the Gulch; Gulch Producers Marketplace Listing 07.14.16 John Aglialoro makes a big announcement: We're doing another movie! 06.30.16 NEW Gulch Marketplace "Basic" listing - free to Galt's Gulch Producers. 06.09.16 The Hangar, a new section of Galt's Gulch, is coming soon. 05.19.16 Gulch members save $100 on Atlas Summit registration. 04.28.16 Why you should attend the 2016 Atlas Summit.

04.14.16 John Galt John Galt Bookmark this page Manage My Reading List Galt is the hero and main character of Atlas Shrugged, because his principles drive the action and the conflict of the story. The book explores what occurs when the thinkers go on strike. Galt conceives of the strike, initiates it, sustains it, and carries it to a successful resolution. Part of the fascination of Atlas Shrugged is that its dominant character works behind the scenes, his existence unknown to the reader, for the first two-thirds of the novel. The question invoking his name lends a legendary quality to his character, as if he were, in part, a mythological being. In a universe populated with giants, his is the character of greatest stature. The mystery shrouding the story's unfolding conflict results from the choices he makes. The strike is necessarily secretive, so the disappearance of the world's great thinkers must be a mystery to everyone outside of Galt's circle. Galt realizes, during the implementation of communist principles at the Twentieth Century Motor Company, that the only hope of ending the mind's exploitation is by means of a strike.

His insight has the potential to usher in a new historical period — to be "epoch-making." Ayn Rand presents Galt as a man of epic proportions. She stated that the goal of her writing was the presentation of an ideal man, and that goal is reached with the figure of John Galt. He is a man of prodigious intellectual gifts — a physicist who brings about a revolution in man's understanding of energy, a philosopher who defines a rational view of existence, and a statesman who leads a strike that transfigures the social systems of the world. Two characteristics make possible the enormity of his intellectual achievements. One is his unique genius. The other is a trait that men can replicate: his unswerving rationality. Galt describes himself as "the man who loves his life," which is accurate. But above all, he is the man who perceives reality — the man who allows nothing to interfere with his cognitive apprehension of the facts. He is characterized by reference to his "ruthlessly perceptive eyes" — the eyes that honor facts and see reality for what it is, regardless of Galt's feelings about that reality.

In a signature scene, Galt tells Dagny — the woman he has loved and watched for years — what he did and felt upon learning that she was Hank Rearden's mistress. He went to observe Rearden at an industrialists' conference. Rearden had everything that Galt wanted and could have had if he hadn't chosen to strike. Rearden had his mills, his invention, his wealth, his fame, and his love relationship with Dagny. For one moment, Galt felt a tearing sense of loss. He saw what would have been his if he hadn't abandoned his motor. But Galt felt that loss for only a moment, because he then recognized the full set of facts defining the situation. He saw the burdens that Rearden carried, the impossible demands, and the forces stifling and enslaving him. He saw Rearden struggling in silent agony, striving to understand what Galt alone had understood. He saw Rearden for what he was — the symbol of the strike, the great unrewarded hero whom Galt was to liberate and validate. The scene that he describes to Dagny provides the key to understanding Galt's character.

He feels intense emotion and suffers when he experiences loss, but he doesn't permit his emotions to interfere with his cognitive grasp of reality or with his actions based on that cognition. He knows that the strike is right, and no pain resulting from its consequences can defile the purity of his cognition. What makes Galt unique is his method of using his mind — his unflinching commitment to facts, even if they are unpleasant, painful, or frightening. He functions rationally, holding an undeviating allegiance to reality that his most honest judgment grasps. Galt's life embodies a proactive eagerness to seek out truth and an inviolable willingness to accept it, no matter its content. He recognizes that man can only achieve success and happiness by revering reality. He doesn't consider facing reality a duty or something that requires tight-lipped stoicism. Instead, he celebrates reality, joyously recognizing that consistent adherence to reality is at the core of self-interest. He knows that a willful departure from reality is the essence of self-destruction. John Galt is a hero representing the best of modern civilization — its science, its medical research, its technological progress, and its application of intellect in service to human life.

He embodies the novel's essential theme: Only by means of the mind can human beings achieve prosperity on earth. Because of the towering achievements of his intellect, it's easy to overlook the other aspects of Galt's life: his light, effortless way of moving; his passionate love for Dagny; the tenderness and concern he shows for his lifelong friends, Francisco d'Anconia and Ragnar Danneskjöld; and his respect for his teacher/spiritual father, Hugh Akston. The special bond that Galt shares with these four people shows Rand's rejection of the conventional split between reason and emotion, which holds that an individual can be either rational or emotional — he cannot be both. The poignant, understated intensity of Galt's relief on seeing Ragnar after a year of ceaseless dangers is a simple but eloquent example of a rational man's emotional life. Because Galt values the mind and its achievements, he must give his love to exalted individuals. A man of reason cannot look unmoved upon such noble souls as Francisco, Ragnar, and Dagny. A true man of the mind experiences the most intense emotional bond to such individuals because he is a man of the mind.

In the character of John Galt, Ayn Rand shows that reason and emotion can and should be integrated in the human being's life. Articles: Where is John Galt? Where is John Galt? By Gene Schwimmer "Who is John Galt?" That question, of course, is the opening sentence of Ayn Rand's 1957 novel Atlas Shrugged, arguably the first major novel written with a sledgehammer and the first (but, thankfully, not last) to drive generations of liberals crazy and in the most delicious and poetically justified way: by simply depicting a society in which liberals get everything they want. After 55 years and total sales of well over half a billion, I hope I can be forgiven if I "give away the shock ending" by explaining to those who have not read the book who John Galt, in fact, is. John Galt is the prime mover behind the major events in Atlas Shrugged. Specifically, he is an engineer who invents a miraculous new type of motor for his employer, the fictional Twentieth Century (I suppose one could read "General") Motors.

Forced by his employer, for the "social good," to share his royalties with his fellow workers, none of whom contributed a thing to the motor's development, Galt walks out of his job, determined to "stop the motor of the world." This he does by convincing the world's major industrialists -- the "top one percent," if you will -- to destroy their businesses, stop inventing, stop creating, and withdraw from society, denying society the benefits of their genius, creativity, and productivity. Interestingly (but not surprisingly), one of the most effective ways to destroy a business is to turn it over to liberals. Anyway, deprived of the "top one percent's" talent and genius -- and with liberals firmly in control -- more and more technology and infrastructure break down until modern civilization collapses entirely. Then, as now, reviews from the liberal intelligentsia were, how you say, unfavorable .

Gore Vidal described Atlas Shrugged as "nearly perfect in its immorality." The New York Times opined that the book was "written out of hate." But one thing none of Atlas Shrugged's critics has ever said is that what happens to civilization in Atlas Shrugs -- i.e., the total collapse of modern civilization -- would not, in fact, happen in the real world were the businessmen, the innovators, the creators actually to destroy or simply abandon their businesses, withdraw from society, and withhold from society their genius, talent, and creativity. The reason why no one challenges the basic premise underlying Atlas Shrugged is because no one can. The impact on the modern life if the computer-makers stopped making computers, if every car-manufacturer stopped building cars, if doctors and nurses stopped caring for the sick , and so on is so obvious that it is hard to see how any person seriously could dispute it. So instead of refuting Atlas Shrug's premise, liberals mollify themselves with the comforting delusion that events like the ones depicted in Atlas Shrugged remain, and will always remain, within the realm of fiction: it can't happen here. Well, I say it can.

More than that, I believe that if we don't change course, and soon -- if we continue to allow liberals to enact their agenda -- it will. Take, for example, health care. The New York Times article I linked to above mentions that more and more doctors are declining to treat Medicare recipients. Well, I can go that one better: my own internist takes no insurance at all. So perhaps now, three years after Democrats drank the Obama-Reid-Pelosi Kool-Aid and "passed the bill so that we can learn what's in it," someone can tell me where in the Affordable Care Act's 2,700 pages it tells me how "universal health insurance" will make it easier for me to get treated by doctors who don't accept insurance. Nor does it stop there. Medical device-makers, fed up with the FDA's bureaucracy and red tape, are starting to move their operations, and jobs, overseas . No doubt, the medical device manufactures can hardly wait for the ObamaCare medical device tax to kick in next year. After all, what better way to offset the regulations prompting businesses to leave the country than by piling on a tax? At least, that is what one would think if one is a liberal Democrat.

But for the rest of us, such as the majority of small businesses, who are not hiring , it would seem that we have passed the point where we would need to ask, "Who is John Galt?" Now, in these times, under this administration, with the Democrats controlling the White House and Senate, the right question to ask is, "Who needs John Galt?" What did John Galt convince Atlas Shrugged's fictional businessmen and industrialists to do that their real-life counterparts are not slowly, but inexorably, beginning to do voluntarily, without the need of a John Galt to talk them into it? But would it not be wonderful, would it not be to society's great benefit if there were a real John Galt? Not the one in Atlas Shrugged, mind you. Not the John Galt who abandons society, works surreptitiously to destroy it, and then delivers an ultimatum when that destruction is nearly complete. My John Galt would "recruit" the movers and shakers, the innovators and creators, and, authorized by them to speak for them, would give us fair warning today, before the damage is done, while there is still time to change course.

My John Galt would tell us not what he and his ilk would do to us, but what we are doing to ourselves with the ever-increasing burden of regulations and taxes that we impose on the most creative and productive among us, making it increasingly difficult and ultimately impossible for them to create and produce the goods and services -- and above all, jobs -- on which our modern civilization depends. That's my question. Not who is John Galt, but where is John Galt? "Who is John Galt?" That question, of course, is the opening sentence of Ayn Rand's 1957 novel Atlas Shrugged, arguably the first major novel written with a sledgehammer and the first (but, thankfully, not last) to drive generations of liberals crazy and in the most delicious and poetically justified way: by simply depicting a society in which liberals get everything they want. After 55 years and total sales of well over half a billion, I hope I can be forgiven if I "give away the shock ending" by explaining to those who have not read the book who John Galt, in fact, is. John Galt is the prime mover behind the major events in Atlas Shrugged.

Specifically, he is an engineer who invents a miraculous new type of motor for his employer, the fictional Twentieth Century (I suppose one could read "General") Motors. Forced by his employer, for the "social good," to share his royalties with his fellow workers, none of whom contributed a thing to the motor's development, Galt walks out of his job, determined to "stop the motor of the world." This he does by convincing the world's major industrialists -- the "top one percent," if you will -- to destroy their businesses, stop inventing, stop creating, and withdraw from society, denying society the benefits of their genius, creativity, and productivity. Interestingly (but not surprisingly), one of the most effective ways to destroy a business is to turn it over to liberals. Anyway, deprived of the "top one percent's" talent and genius -- and with liberals firmly in control -- more and more technology and infrastructure break down until modern civilization collapses entirely. Then, as now, reviews from the liberal intelligentsia were, how you say, unfavorable .

Gore Vidal described Atlas Shrugged as "nearly perfect in its immorality." The New York Times opined that the book was "written out of hate." But one thing none of Atlas Shrugged's critics has ever said is that what happens to civilization in Atlas Shrugs -- i.e., the total collapse of modern civilization -- would not, in fact, happen in the real world were the businessmen, the innovators, the creators actually to destroy or simply abandon their businesses, withdraw from society, and withhold from society their genius, talent, and creativity. The reason why no one challenges the basic premise underlying Atlas Shrugged is because no one can. The impact on the modern life if the computer-makers stopped making computers, if every car-manufacturer stopped building cars, if doctors and nurses stopped caring for the sick , and so on is so obvious that it is hard to see how any person seriously could dispute it. So instead of refuting Atlas Shrug's premise, liberals mollify themselves with the comforting delusion that events like the ones depicted in Atlas Shrugged remain, and will always remain, within the realm of fiction: it can't happen here. Well, I say it can.

More than that, I believe that if we don't change course, and soon -- if we continue to allow liberals to enact their agenda -- it will. Take, for example, health care. The New York Times article I linked to above mentions that more and more doctors are declining to treat Medicare recipients. Well, I can go that one better: my own internist takes no insurance at all. So perhaps now, three years after Democrats drank the Obama-Reid-Pelosi Kool-Aid and "passed the bill so that we can learn what's in it," someone can tell me where in the Affordable Care Act's 2,700 pages it tells me how "universal health insurance" will make it easier for me to get treated by doctors who don't accept insurance. Nor does it stop there. Medical device-makers, fed up with the FDA's bureaucracy and red tape, are starting to move their operations, and jobs, overseas . No doubt, the medical device manufactures can hardly wait for the ObamaCare medical device tax to kick in next year. After all, what better way to offset the regulations prompting businesses to leave the country than by piling on a tax? At least, that is what one would think if one is a liberal Democrat.

But for the rest of us, such as the majority of small businesses, who are not hiring , it would seem that we have passed the point where we would need to ask, "Who is John Galt?" Now, in these times, under this administration, with the Democrats controlling the White House and Senate, the right question to ask is, "Who needs John Galt?" What did John Galt convince Atlas Shrugged's fictional businessmen and industrialists to do that their real-life counterparts are not slowly, but inexorably, beginning to do voluntarily, without the need of a John Galt to talk them into it? But would it not be wonderful, would it not be to society's great benefit if there were a real John Galt? Not the one in Atlas Shrugged, mind you. Not the John Galt who abandons society, works surreptitiously to destroy it, and then delivers an ultimatum when that destruction is nearly complete. My John Galt would "recruit" the movers and shakers, the innovators and creators, and, authorized by them to speak for them, would give us fair warning today, before the damage is done, while there is still time to change course.

My John Galt would tell us not what he and his ilk would do to us, but what we are doing to ourselves with the ever-increasing burden of regulations and taxes that we impose on the most creative and productive among us, making it increasingly difficult and ultimately impossible for them to create and produce the goods and services -- and above all, jobs -- on which our modern civilization depends. That's my question. Not who is John Galt, but where is John Galt? Literary Analysis and Criticism: What does the question 'Who is John Galt?' itself represent or signify? - Quora Quora Literary Analysis and Criticism: What does the question "Who is John Galt?" itself represent or signify? Throughout Atlas Shrugged and common outside usage. Written Nov 10, 2015 Many, if not most people, live their lives delusional that the world, and others around, owe them something. Rand portrays "Who is John Galt?" as a rhetorical question people ask in a desperate yet totally unjustified "call to action" for the world to stand up and cooperate with their faulty assumption that it should.

Spoiler alert In a way, the right person is being called out for: John Galt does indeed have the capacity to answer those calls. At the same time, he appears exactly what a rationally thinking person would expect from the role of the character: someone intellectually superior, who refuses to dedicate his life to follow what is "expected" from him, and instead consciously chooses to develop and follow his own system of values, without giving a single f*ck about what others think he should do for them. It strikes me to realize how many people living today see him as a coward or as a lazy person. John Galt is carefully described by the author both as someone who works hard to deliver observable, measurable, meaningful results, and who is not shy to take incredibly significant risks for the sake of rigorously following his highly moral, carefully designed for sustainability, and well-postulated set of beliefs, which we now call objectivism . Updated Nov 12, 2012 Spoiler Alert Throughout the novel the author uses this " Who is john Galt " to signify despair , helplessness and dejection among the runners of the capitalist regime of the world. The capitalists are shown as fighting against the one's for whom they are working .

As the story progresses the capitalists eventually start to give in against the government ( "parasites "). John Galt is a master inventor and a fabled capitalist who is rumoured to have descended into an imaginary abode to teach the parasites a lesson. Hence the capitalists use this phrase to express despair for a world that even dispensed a stalwart like John Galt . Written Feb 14, 2013 Spoiler Alert Aside from the connotative meaning of the phrase within the world of the book, it is also a very effective literary device used by Rand to form a very ironic situation. For instance, one of the first scenes of the book is Eddie Willers talking to a railroad worker in the cafeteria of the Taggart building. Willers is discussing the economic problems of the world with this other worker, as he often does, but cannot remember his name and simply remarks, "Who is John Galt?" The irony occurs when, later in the novel, it is revealed that the worker who Willers was talking to was actually Galt himself. 1.6k Views John Galt in Atlas Shrugged Character Analysis Who Is John Galt? Seriously, we really want to know who this guy is.

We get lots of wacky theories about his identity (he's living in an undersea city! he discovered the fountain of youth!) before finally meeting the mystery man in Volume 3. But this is an almost absurdly long time to delay introducing the hero of the novel. Which leads us to a few questions: why is Galt's introduction delayed so long, why is he so mysterious, and can he really even be classed as the book's hero, since he's MIA most of the time? Well, we can tackle that last one right now. Galt may be MIA, but his presence is strongly felt throughout the novel. He's actually driving most of the action, albeit mysteriously and behind the scenes like a Phantom of the Opera. And that's actually an apt comparison, given his relationship with Dagny. But more on that later. At any rate, Galt is a hero in this novel, but not in a traditional sense. There's still a lot to try to figure out here, so we'll start by at least getting a handle on who this guy is, and then move on to the hows and whys of the character. National Man of Mystery We get very little in terms of backstory for Galt.

He has a tendency to disappear and then pop back up like a whack-a-mole. We know that he went to Patrick Henry University and was a bit of a superstar. Then he disappeared into the recesses of the Twentieth Century Motor Factory, invented some things of the world-saving variety, and then burst back up at a company meeting with his melodramatic declaration about stopping the world's motor – literally. And then he was gone again. For a book that makes such a big deal about childhood and other formative past experiences, it's kind of odd that the book's supposed hero gets practically no backstory at all. We do get a very small tidbit from Hugh Akston, Galt's professor/father-figure, however: "John, the self-made man, self-made in every sense, out of nowhere, penniless, parentless, tie-less.

Actually, he was the son of a gas-station mechanic at some forsaken crossroads in Ohio, and he had left home at the age of twelve to make his own way – but I've always thought of him as if he had come into the world like Minerva, the goddess of wisdom, who sprang forth from Jupiter's head, fully grown and fully armed." (3.2.4.26) That might not seem like a lot of information, but it raises some interesting points about Galt. First off, his childhood in a "forsaken crossroads" is linked to the running theme of "Starnesville," or dead-end, declining communities. Having escaped one of those, it's not surprising that Galt wanted to fight against ending up in another. Secondly, Akston links Galt to the "Minerva myth." Minerva is the Roman name for the Greek goddess Athena, and Jupiter is the Roman name for Zeus. In mythology, Minerva sprang out of her dad's (Jupiter's) head as an adult. This isn't the first time that Galt has been tied to mythology. Two strangers tell Dagny that he discovered the lost city of Atlantis and the fountain of youth.

And Francisco ties Galt to the Prometheus myth: John Galt is Prometheus who changed his mind. After centuries of being torn by vultures in payment for having brought to men the fire of the gods, he broke his chains – and withdrew his fire – until the day when men withdrew their vultures. (2.5.1.266) What's really interesting about this is that Francisco gets the Prometheus myth wrong. Prometheus stole fire and knowledge from the gods and gave it to people on earth. Zeus, the head-honcho god, punished Prometheus for his theft by chaining him to a rock and letting vultures come and pick out his liver every day. Yuck. Francisco makes it sound like "men" sent the vultures, though. So what gives? Well, over time the Prometheus myth had come to represent rebellious, anti-establishment ideas, with Zeus standing in for things like government, organized religion, parents, etc. So Francisco seems to be substituting powerful, oppressive humans for "Zeus" here. So what's the deal with Galt's mythological connections? Well, this could be a way to emphasize his status as a living legend.

In fact, for over half the book, characters like Dagny don't even think Galt is a real person. He's a totally mysterious figure, possibly a legend, possibly an actual person with legendary abilities. The Inventor of the Motor The heroic John Galt is linked with the theme of motors and the power of motion throughout the book. He invents fancy motors and he stops both metaphorical and literal ones with his strike, which effectively causes the whole country to fall apart – or at least helps the process along. Yet we don't get tons of information about Galt's actions; we tend to get more about his ideas and views. This is a crucial point, and it's linked to Galt's lack of childhood backstory and his legendary status. See, Galt is all about the mind – people in this novel are defined by their views and their values. More than anyone else in the novel, Galt is defined by a philosophy, his own philosophy. So it seems that the narrative is reinforcing Galt's status as a heroic philosopher by characterizing him mainly by his philosophical ideas. It's no coincidence that Galt's major chapter is a super-long radio address where he outlines all his ideas about society. Galt basically is his philosophy.

This isn't to say that he just sits around writing long speeches and being philosophical, though. Galt's philosophy is about working hard and making decisions, so he behaves accordingly, practicing what he preaches. Galt is also largely defined by his strike and his motor, which are epic quests that are bigger than one person. His actions seem to transcend his own person at times. In that radio address, Galt defines himself by referring to themes of motors, minds, and strikes: "I have stopped your motor. I have deprived your world of man's mind. Men do not live by the mind, you say? I have withdrawn those who do....While you were dragging to your sacrificial altars the men of justice, of independence, of reason, of wealth, of self-esteem – I beat you to it. I reached them first....I showed them the way to live by another morality – mine. It is mine that they chose to follow." (3.7.1.113-114) Since thought without action is useless in Galt's mind, he created Atlantis, powered by his miracle motor, as a way to express his social vision and values.

The denizens of Atlantis, Galt's fellow strikers, seem to have a massive case of hero-worship and some serious man-crushes on Galt. Dagny also sees Galt in very heroic, legendary terms. He was her ideal before she even had a name and a face to put with him: She thought: to find a feeling that would hold, as their sum, as their final expression, the purpose of all the things she loved on earth....To find a consciousness like her own, who would be the meaning of her world, as she would be of his....A man who existed only in her knowledge of her capacity for an emotion she had never felt, but would have given her life to experience. (1.8.2.14) But, as with most things in this book, terms don't always mean what we think they do. Throughout the book, people like Galt, Hank, and Dagny insist that what seems heroic, joyful, and seemingly rare should be normal. The heroic should be commonplace, because everyone should be heroic. So in that sense, Dagny sees Galt as a normal (in her sense) dude. Which brings us to John Galt the everyday person.

The Second Assistant Bookkeeper This is a reference to Dr. Stadler's low assessment of his former student's achievements. Galt worked a dead-end job at Taggart Transcontinental for years as a way to express his beliefs and "strike" against society. (The man never does anything without some sort of philosophy to back it up. He probably has a philosophy of how to make an omelet.) It would seem that there is very little about Galt that is not heroic or legendary. Even the discovery that he's the Mystery Worker to whom Eddie dished in the cafeteria does little to humanize or normalize him. We never get any of Galt's side of the conversation with Eddie. We have no idea what exactly he says to Eddie or how he speaks to him. Practically all the dialogue we get from Galt involves him speechifying about his values or professing his epic love for Dagny. The man just doesn't do small talk. But all those ellipses (gaps) reveal something to us, though: Galt has a crush on Dagny. What could be more "normal" than that? Eddie is forever answering questions that Galt (his mystery friend) poses about Dagny.

Galt basically spends ten years nursing a seriously bad case of lovesickness for her, bordering on creepy stalker behavior. Of course, he casts his love for Dagny in epic terms. But when you peel all the philosophy away, you're left with a guy with a really intense crush. It's almost pathetic, really. Galt spends years watching Dagny and waiting for her to notice he exists: "Ten years of nights spent waiting to catch a glimpse of you, here, on the platforms, when you boarded a train....Whenever the order came down to couple your car, I'd know of it and wait, and see you come down the ramp, and wish you didn't walk so fast." (3.5.3.103) He's like Ducky in Pretty in Pink here. Pathetic as this may be, Galt is still heroic, even with his super-bad crush. But he isn't perfect, and there's one last role he plays that is crucial to the narrative. The Destroyer Before meeting Galt, Dagny swears to kill him. She calls him the destroyer and says he's ruining the whole world, taking all the brains (including her friends) away from her.

It takes a crash course in Galt's philosophy for her to understand that the destroyer and her ideal true love are the same person. But Galt is definitely a destructive force, and his strike has a lot of nasty consequences that can't be totally ignored. People die as a result of industrial accidents that might have been avoided if competent people were still on the job. People are also desperate, poor, driven to criminal activity, and starving. The terrible government obviously has a lot of do with it, but it's important to note that Galt holds some responsibility. Ultimately, you could argue that Galt is good, bad, or a combination of both.

Question: What book does the phrase "Who is John Galt" come from?
Answer: Atlas Shrugged