Howard Roark V.S. Peter Keating: An Essay by Karen A. Elizes

In Ayn Rand’s critically acclaimed novel, The Fountainhead, not only does Rand present the reader with two very interesting rival characters, but, with the likes of Howard Roark and Peter Keating, she analyzes both types: The man with integrity versus the man who cannot think for himself. Rand believes that the only way to live, the only possible way that man should ideally live, is for himself and never for others. The Howard Roarks of the world, who are individualistic and self-serving, are never at the mercy of others like the Peter Keatings of the world. Howard Roarks are never victims of their own mistakes, nor do they constantly seek the approval of others as Peter Keatings do. Instead, Howard Roarks present themselves with probity and never compromise their principles for the masses. Howard Roarks are everything that man can and should be.

For those not familiar with Ayn Rand and her unique philosophy of Objectivism, the author describes it best: “My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute.” Objectivism also can be considered an amalgamated complex that elucidates the theoretical concepts by which the individual man ought to think and act if he wants to live a proper life. Rand put her philosophy to fiction and created characters such as John Galt, from another lionized novel, titled Atlas Shrugged, an inspiration to young libertarian Republicans since Barack Obama took office in 2009. But Rand expounded most her philosophy on individualism by creating Howard Roark, the architect hero of The Fountainhead. Roark is Rand’s exemplary representation of Objectivism; his physical attributes also are literal delineations of that philosophy. Described as tall and slender with hard muscles, Roark’s only angular characteristic is his love for Dominique Francon, the woman whose objective purpose is to destroy Roark in order to possess him. Roark is described as handsome, but not the least attractive according to conventional standards, of which the novel’s era illustrates. Here, the reader already can discern that Roark is a pariah, of sorts. Early in the book, for example, it is learned that Roark was expelled from the Stanton Institute of Technology where he was studying architecture. The school expelled him because his designs did not fit its standards and were too abstract. But Roark is given a second chance by the dean and the school’s entire board, under the conditions that Roark “take a year off, to rest, to think it over – shall we say to grow up?” But Roark is not easily swayed, nor is he jovial or  dejected with the notion of being taken back by the school. Instead, Roark is amused and says, “I don’t think you understand me, what made you suppose that I want to come back?”

The character of Howard Roark believes in the eminence of his, what society would call, insurrectionist designs. Not only does he believe in them, but Roark has the courage to stand by his work in front of a ill-disposed civilization. Howard Roark is the complete opposite of his contemporaries in that society declares the ideal man should be altruistic and serve mankind.   The key disparity between Roark and society is that Roark is not a result of his family, economic class, religious beliefs or social background, Instead, Roark is a product of his own alternative. A straightforward way to understand the character of Howard Roark is to understand free will and its virtue. Ayn Rand describes Roark to be a man of his own standards and rational, not governed by God or the providence of society but ruled solely by his own choices. Roark does not submit to society or to any other individual because he is his own man. Though it is obvious that Roark learns and grows in certain aspects of the novel, the reader will noticeably regard how his convictions remain the same. The way this is illustrated is through the idea of Roark’s core integrity, which, stated by Rand, is the commitment of the individual’s thinking and mind. Without committal action of certain principles through the individual’s mind, man is a hypocrite.. Therefore, in order for a man to convey righteousness, man should be a thinker and execute his beliefs verbatim. Although it can be argued from a liberal stance or religious attitude, that Howard Roark’s selfishness is mere egoism, Objectivists like Ayn Rand, Yaron Brook and even John Stosell can argue that Roark’s self-serving is a positive. Since the character of Howard Roark stays unelaborated to his certitude, to his logic, and most importantly, to himself, we see Roark’s supposed selfishness become rectitude. In a momentous part of the novel, Roark is asked by the Manhattan Bank board to revamp his design of the proposed building, and, when he rejects this suggestion, his deportment is claimed to be utterly selfish. But on the contrary, an Objectivist will point out that, regardless of Roark’s impecunious financial state, he rebuffs any remunerative or media attention that would rake in commission. Roark unforgivably stands by his work, so wouldn’t that be selfless instead of selfish or egotistical? It is clear, by Roark’s actions, that the integrity of his design is far more important to him than any money or acknowledgment he can receive. It is important to recognize the moral or ethical question that Ayn Rand tries to answer through the character of Howard Roark, especially in relation to the characters like Gail Wynand or Dominique Francon. The majority of people today believe that, in order to succeed in life, in any profession, one must be practical and betray any distinctive virtuous principles. This is an example of conforming to society, even if giving up your moral individualism to something unethical, because, to characters like Ellsworth Toohey, this act is better than losing a job or career. Society claims to denounce man’s so-called selfishness, but, in reality, it is society that commits the crime upon man by forcing him to resign all rights to his individualism. It is society that is selfish and self-serving, by using the good will of the individual man and making it his servant. It is self-evident through the example of Howard Roark, that, to be realistic and practical in all aspects of life, one must be moral and true to himself. Without man’s individual right to think, he loses all ambition to do common good in the world.

But to better grasp the philosophy behind the character of Howard Roark, it is important to examine his contemporary, Peter Keating. Keating went to Stanton the same time as Howard Roark, but was a year ahead and graduated at the top of his class. As his character is introduced, we notice that a lot of what he has accomplished in school is through the importance of his mother. The reader will also discern that Keating is eager to please. For example, Roark rents a room in the Keating household, so, after graduation, Keating approaches Roark and asks what he should do: Take a job with Guy Francon or go to Europe to study abroad on a scholarship that Stanton has granted him? Roark boldly tells Keating that, whether he goes off and takes this job with Guy Francon or goes to Europe, he’ll learn nothing. Subconsciously, Keating has always sought the approval of Roark, even when he refuses to like him. Keating’s obvious eagerness to please people is an important character trait because it shows he is a conformist like many of the other people in The Fountainhead. Keating is an example of what some people are today: Conformists who capitulate their common sense and authorize others to influence their lives. Keating is everything that Howard Roark is not, and, through Keating’s actions, the reader will distinguish the evident differences between the two key characters.

Keating, like Roark, becomes an architect, but only through the preference of his mother. Though it wasn’t his choice, Keating runs with it, aggressively climbs the social ladder and is a great success within architecture circles. The one thing Keating yearns for is prestige, and by achieving this Keating uses every means to procure this. Which is why from an objectivist stand point he is conventionally selfish. But according to Rand’s philosophy, Keating can also be looked at as selfless from a negative view because Keating unceasingly sacrifices what he wants in order to please others. Keating even resorts to leaving his only love, Catherine Hulsey, and instead marries Dominique Francon in order to better his career, knowing very well that Dominique Francon only does it to destroy Howard Roark, whom she really loves. This is a good example of Keating being selfish, but at the same time being used: He renounces self-government and instead allows others to tread on him. Throughout the novel we see Keating both succeed and struggle due to factors of unhappiness and inebriation. As he gets older he becomes irritable and cannot coupe with the choices he made in his life. An average observer might say that Keating should be happy because of his success, but on the contrary Keating understands that ever since his career in architecture took route, he has been undeniably untrue to himself. Keating has lost all judgment and value in his life, and according to Rand, the individual man should live by his own perception and monetary value(literally speaking of course) in order to acquire happiness. Keating has not only surrendered his loves and his passions, his ideals and his principles, but he has also waived his individualism and therefore appears weak. Keatings main influence is the character of Ellsworth Toohey, who uses Keating just as much as Keating uses him, here it can be seen that Keating is a clear representation of society today and since he is a victim of Ellsworth Toohey, the reader can make the comparison that predominantly, people are a victim of society.

The characters of Howard Roark and Peter Keating cannot be compared in the slightest due to obvious key peculiarities: Roark sincerely loves humanity by being true to himself, where as Keating thinks that being altruistic is the key to loving humanity. A misconception that is often made with the philosophy behind Howard Roark is that his cynicism is overpowering, but antithetically, it is the entire meaning behind Objectivism. Society today still holds that altruism is the ideal way to live, but if we do not help ourselves first, then how can we help others? This is the concept behind Ayn Rands objectivist philosophy: Without our own principles and logic we will not be able to help others unless we are true to ourselves in the process. A small percentage of individuals today hold the same convictions as Howard Roark, and the Howard Roarks of the world stick with their principles, their integrity, and most importantly stay true to themselves without compromising their core values. Though fictional, Howard Roark is the epitome of the ideal man, and this personification is unyielding to the masses. We all can and should be like Howard Roark.