|
Howard Roark's
Courtroom Speech
From The Fountainhead, by Ayn Rand
“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. He was considered an evildoer who had dealt
with a demon mankind dreaded. But thereafter men had fire to keep them warm,
to cook their food, to light their caves. He had left them a gift they had
not conceived and he had lifted dardness off the earth. 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 who ventured into
forbidden terrritory. But thereafter, men could travel past any horizon. He
had left them a gift they had not conceived and he had opened the roads of
the world.
“That man, the unsubmissive and first, stands
in the opening chapter of every legend mankind has recorded about its
beginning. Prometheus was chained to a rock and torn by vultures—because he
had stolen the fire of the gods. Adam was condemned to suffer—because he had
eaten the fruit of the tree of knowledge. Whatever the legend, somewhere in
the shadows of its memory mankind knew that its glory began with one and that
that one paid for his courage.
“Throughout the centuries there were men who
took first steps down new roads armed with nothing but their own vision.
Their goals differed, but they all had this in common: that the step was
first, the road new, the vision unborrowed, and the response they received—hatred.
The great creators—the thinkers, the artists, the scientists, the
inventors—stood alone against the men of their time. Every great new thought
was opposed. Every great new invention was denounced. The first motor was
considered foolish. The airplane was considered impossible. The power loom
was considered vicious. Anesthesia was considered sinful. But the men of
unborrowed vision went ahead. They fought, they suffered and they paid. But
they won.
“No creator was prompted by a desire to serve
his brothers, for his brothers rejected the gift he offered and that gift
destroyed the slothful routine of their lives. His truth was his only motive.
His own truth, and his own work to achieve it in his own way. A symphony, a
book, an engine, a philosophy, an airplane or a building—that was his goal
and his life. Not those who heard, read, operated, believed, flew or
inhabited the thing he had created. The creation, not its users. The
creation, not the benefits others derived from it. The creation which gave form
to his truth. He held his truth above all things and against all men.
“His vision, his strength, his courage came
from his own spirit. A man's spirit, however, is his self. That entity which
is his consciousness. To think, to feel, to judge, to act are functions of
the ego.
“The creators were not selfless. It is the
whole secret of their power—that it was self-sufficient, self-motivated,
self-generated. A first cause, a fount of energy, a life force, a Prime
Mover. The creator served nothing and no one. He lived for himself.
“And only by living for himself was he able to
achieve the things which are the glory of mankind. Such is the nature of
achievement.
“Man cannot survive except through his mind. He
comes on earth unarmed. His brain is his only weapon. Animals obtain food by
force. Man has no claws, no fangs, no horns, no great strength of muscle. He
must plant his food or hunt it. To plant, he needs a process of thought. To
hunt, he needs weapons, and to make weapons—a process of thought. From this
simplest necessity to the highest religious abstraction, from the wheel to
the skyscraper, everything we are and everything we have comes from a single
attribute of man—the function of his reasoning mind.
“But the mind is an attribute of the
individual. There is no such thing as a collective brain. There is no such
thing as a collective thought. An agreement reached by a group of men is only
a compromise or an average drawn upon many individual thoughts. It is a
secondary consequence. The primary act—the process of reason—must be
performed by each man alone. We can divide a meal among many men. We cannot
digest it in a collective stomach. No man can use his lungs to breathe for
another man. No man can use his brain to think for another. All the functions
of body and spirit are private. They cannot be shared or transferred.
“We inherit the products of the thought of
other men. We inherit the wheel. We make a cart. The cart becomes an
automobile. The automobile becomes an airplane. But all through the process
what we receive from others is only the end product of their thinking. The
moving force is the creative faculty which takes this product as material,
uses it and originates the next step. This creative faculty cannot be given or
received, shared or borrowed. It belongs to single, individual men. That
which it creates is the property of the creator. Men learn from one another.
But all learning is only the exchange of material. No man can give another
the capacity to think. Yet that capacity is our only means of survival.
“Nothing is given to man on earth. Everything
he needs has to be produced. And here man faces his basic alternative: he can
survive in only one of two ways—by the independent work of his own mind or as
a parasite fed by the minds of others. The creator originates. The parasite
borrows. The creator faces nature alone. The parasite faces nature through an
intermediary.
“The creator’s concern is the conquest of
nature. The parasite’s concern is the conquest of men.
“The creator lives for his work. He needs no
other men. His primary goal is within himself. The parasite lives
second-hand. He needs others. Others become his prime motive.
“The basic need of the creator is independence.
The reasoning mind cannot work under any form of compulsion. It cannot be
curbed, sacrificed or subordinated to any consideration whatsoever. It
demands total independence in function and in motive. To a creator, all
relations with men are secondary.
“The basic need of the second-hander is to
secure his ties with men in order to be fed. He places relations first. He
declares that man exists in order to serve others. He preaches altruism.
“Altruism is the doctrine which demands that
man live for others and place others above self.
“No man can live for another. He cannot share
his spirit just as he cannot share his body. But the second-hander has used
altruism as a weapon of expoloitation and reversed the base of mankind’s
moral principles. Men have been taught every precept that destroys the
creator. Men have been taught dependence as a virtue.
“The man who attemps to live for others is a
dependent. He is a parasite in motive and makes parasites of those he serves.
The relationship produces nothing but mutual corruption. It is impossible in
concept. The nearest approach to it in reality—the man who lives to serve
others—is the slave. If physical slavery is repulsive, how much more
repulsive is the concept of servility of the spirit? The conquered slave has a
vestige of honor. He has the merit of having resisted and of considering his
condition evil. But the man who enslaves himself voluntarily in the name of
love is the basest of creatures. He degrades the dignity of man and he
degrades the conception of love. But this is the essence of altruism.
“Men have been taught that the highest virtue
is not to achieve, but to give. Yet one cannot give that which has not been
created. Creation comes before distribution—or there will be nothing to
distribute. The need of the creator comes before the need of any possible
beneficiary. Yet we are taught to admire the second-hander who dispenses
gifts he has not produced above the man who made the gifts possible. We
praise an act of charity. We shrug at an act of achievement.
“Men have been taught that their first concern
is to relieve the sufferings of others. But suffering is a disease. Should
one come upon it, one tries to give relief and assistance. To make that the
highest test of virtue is to make suffering the most important part of life.
Then man must wish to see others suffer—in order that he may be virtuous.
Such is the nature of altruism. The creator is not concerned with disease,
but with life. Yet the work of the creators has eliminated one form of disease
after another, in man’s body and spirit, and brought more relief from
suffering than any altruist could ever conceive.
“Men have been taught that it is a virtue to
agree with others. But the creator is the man who disagrees. Men have been
taught that it is a virtue to swim with the current. But the creator is the
man who goes against the current. Men have been taught that it is a virtue to
stand together. But the creator is the man who stands alone.
“Men have been taught that the ego is the synonym
of evil, and selflessness the ideal of virtue. But the creator is the egotist
in the absolute sense, and the selfless man is the one who does not think,
feel, judge or act. These are functions of the self.
“Here the basic reversal is most deadly. The
issue has been perverted and man has been left no alternative—and no freedom.
As poles of good and evil, he was offered two conceptions: egotism and
altruism. Egotism was held to mean the sacrifice of others to self.
Altruism—the sacrifice of self to others. This tied man irrevocably to other
men and left him nothing but a choice of pain: his own pain borne for the
sake of others or pain inflicted upon others for the sake of self. When it
was added that man must find joy in self-immolation, the trap was closed. Man
was forced to accept masochism as his ideal—under the threat that sadism was
his only alternative. This was the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on
mankind.
“This was the device by which dependence and
suffering were perpetuated as fundamentals of life.
“The choice is not self-sacrifice or
domination. The choice is independence or dependence. The code of the creator
or the code of the second-hander. This is the basic issue. It rests upon the
alternative of life or death. The code of the creator is built on the needs
of the reasoning mind which allows man to survive. The code of the
second-hander is built on the needs of a mind incapable of survival. All that
which proceeds from man’s independent ego is good. All that which proceeds
from man’s dependence upon men is evil.
“The egotist is the absolute sense is not the
man who sacrifices others. He is the man who stands above the need of using
others in any manner. He does not function through them. He is not concerned
with them in any primary matter. Not in his aim, not in his motive, not in
his thinking, not in his desires, not in the source of his energy. He does
not exist for any other man—and he asks no other man to exist for him. This
is the only form of brotherhood and mutual respect possible between men.
“Degrees of ability vary, but the basic
principle remains the same: the degree of a man’s independence, initiative
and personal love for his work determines his talent as a worker and his
worth as a man. Independence is the only gauge of human virtue and value.
What a man is and makes of himself; not what he has or hasn’t done for
others. There is no substitute for personal dignity. There is no standard of
personal dignity except independence.
“In all proper relationships there is no
sacrifice of anyone to anyone. An architect needs clients, but he does not
subordinate his work to their wishes. They need him, but they do not order a
house just to give him a commission. Men exchange their work by free, mutual
consent to mutual advantage when their personal interests agree and they both
desire the exchange. If they do not desire it, they are not forced to deal
with each other. They seek further. This is the only possible form of
relationship between equals. Anything else is a relation of slave to master,
or victim to executioner.
“No work is ever done collectively, by a
majority decision. Every creative job is achieved under the guidance of a
single individual thought. An architect requires a great many men to erect
his building. But he does not ask them to vote on his design. They work
together by free agreement and each is free in his proper function. An
architect uses steel, glass, concrete, produced by others. But the materials
remain just so much steel, glass and concrete until he touches them. What he
does with them is his individual product and his individual property. This is
the only pattern for proper co-operation among men.
“The first right on earth is the right of the
ego. Man’s first duty is to himself. His moral law is never to place his
prime goal within the persons of others. His moral obligation is to do what
he wishes, provided his wish does not depend primarily upon
other men. This includes the whole sphere of his creative faculty, his
thinking, his work. But it does not include the sphere of the gangster, the
altruist and the dictator.
“A man thinks and works alone. A man cannot
rob, exploit or rule—alone. Robbery, exploitation and ruling presuppose
victims. They imply dependence. They are the province of the second-hander.
“Rulers of men are not egotists. They create
nothing. They exist entirely through the persons of others. Their goal is in
their subjects, in the activity of enslaving. They are as dependent as the
beggar, the social worker and the bandit. The form of dependence does not
matter.
“But men were taught to regard
second-handers—tyrants, emperors, dictators—as exponents of egotism. By this
fraud they were made to destroy the ego, themselves and others. The purpose
of the fraud was to destroy the creators. Or to harness them. Which is a
synonym.
“From the beginning of history, the two
antagonists have stood face to face: the creator and the second-hander. When
the first creator invented the wheel, the first second-hander responded. He
invented altruism.
“The creator—denied, opposed, persecuted,
exploited—went on, moved forward and carried all humanity along on his
energy. The second-hander contributed nothing to the process except the
impediments. The contest has another name: the individual against the
collective.
“The ‘common good’ of a collective—a race, a
class, a state—was the claim and justification of every tyranny ever
established over men. Every major horror of history was committed in the name
of an altruistic motive. Has any act of selfishness ever equaled the carnage
perpetrated by disciples of altruism? Does the fault lie in men’s hypocrisy
or in the nature of the principle? The most dreadful butchers were the most
sincere. They believed in the perfect society reached through the guillotine
and the firing squad. Nobody questioned their right to murder since they were
murdering for an altruistic purpose. It was accepted that man must be
sacrificed for other men. Actors change, but the course of the tragedy
remains the same. A humanitarian who starts with declarations of love for
mankind and ends with a sea of blood. It goes on and will go on so long as
men believe that an action is good if it is unselfish. That permits the
altruist to act and forces his victims to bear it. The leaders of
collectivist movements ask nothing for themselves. But observe the results.
“The only good which men can do to one another
and the only statement of their proper relationship is—Hands off!
“Now observe the results of a society built on
the principle of individualism. This, our country. The noblest country in the
history of men. The country of greatest achievement, greatest prosperity,
greatest freedom. This country was not based on selfless service, sacrifice,
renunciation or any precept of altruism. It was based on a man’s right to the
pursuit of happiness. His own happiness. Not anyone else’s. A private,
personal, selfish motive. Look at the results. Look into your own conscience.
“It is an ancient conflict. Men have come close
to the truth, but it was destroyed each time and one civilization fell after
another. Civilization is the progress toward a society of privacy. The
savage’s whole existence is public, ruled by the laws of his tribe.
Civilization is the process of setting man free from men.
“Now, in our age, collectivism, the rule of the
second-hander and second-rater, the ancient monster, has broken loose and is
running amuck. It has brought men to a level of intellectual indecency never
equaled on earth. It has reached a scale of horror without precedent. It has
poisoned every mind. It has swallowed most of Europe. It is engulfing our
country.
“I am an architect. I know what is to come by
the principle on which it is built. We are approaching a world in which I
cannot permit myself to live.
“Now you know why I dynamited Cortlandt.
“I designed Cortlandt. I gave it to you. I
destroyed it.
“I destroyed it because I did not choose to let
it exist. It was a double monster. In form and in implication. I had to blast
both. The form was mutilated by two second-handers who assumed the right to
improve upon that which they had not made and could not equal. They were
permitted to do it by the general implication that the altruistic purpose of
the building superseded all rights and that I had no claim to stand against
it.
“I agreed to design Cortlandt for the purpose
of seeing it erected as I dedigned it and for no other reason. That was the
price I set for my work. I was not paid.
“I do not blame Peter Keating. He was helpless.
He had a contract with his employers. It was ignored. He had a promise that
the structure he offered would be built as designed. The promise was broken.
The love of a man for the integrity of his work and his right to preserve it
are now considered a vague intangible and an inessential. You have heard the
prosecutor say that. Why was the building disfigured? For no reason. Such
acts never have any reason, unless it’s the vanity of some second-handers who
feel they have a right to anyone’s property, spiritual or material. Who
permitted them to do it? No particular man among the dozens in authority. No
one cared to permit it or to stop it. No one was responsible. No one can be
held to account. Such is the nature of all collective action.
“I did not receive the payment I asked. But the
owners of Cortlandt got what they needed from me. They wanted a scheme
devised to build a structure as cheaply as possible. They found no one else
who could do it to their satisfaction. I could and did. They took the benefit
of my work and made me contribute it as a gift. But I am not an altruist. I
do not contribute gifts of this nature.
“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. Those who were concerned with the poor had to come
to me, who have never been concerned, in order to help the poor. It is
believed that the poverty of the future tenants gave them the right to my work.
That their need constituted a claim on my life. That it was my duty to
contribute anything demanded of me. This is the second-hander’s credo now
swallowing the world.
“I came here to say that I do not recognize
anyone’s 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.
“It had to be said. The world is perishing from
an orgy of self-sacrificing.
“I wished to come here and say that the
integrity of a man’s creative work is of greater importance than any
charitable endeavor. Those of you who do not understand this are the men
who’re destroying the world.
“I wished to come here and state my terms. I do
not care to exist on any others.
“I recognize no obligations toward men except
one: to respect their freedom and to take no part in a slave society. To my
country, I wish to give the ten years which I will spend in jail if my
country exists no longer. I will spend them in memory and in gratitude for
what my country has been. It will be my act of loyalty, my refusal to live or
work in what has taken its place.
“My act of loyalty to every creator who ever
lived and was made to suffer by the force responsible for the Cortlandt I
dynamited. To every tortured hour of loneliness, denial, frustration, abuse
he was made to spend—and to the battles he won. To every creator whose name
is known—and to every creator who lived, struggled and perished unrecognized
before he could achieve. To every creator who was destroyed in body or in
spirit. To Henry Cameron. To Steven Mallory. To a man who doesn’t want to be
named, but who is sitting in this courtroom and knows that I am speaking of
him.”
|
