Introduction
Write your intro or of this blog, OR JUST DELETE THE WHOLE THING. Write your intro or of this blog, OR JUST DELETE THE WHOLE THING. Write your intro or of this blog, OR JUST DELETE THE WHOLE THING.
Blogging
Howard Roarks Motives
(Page 604)
"But first, I want you to think and tell me what made me give years to this work. Money? Fame? Charity? Altruism?" Keating shook his head slowly. "All right. You're beginning to understand. So whatever we do, don't let's talk about the poor people in the slums. They have nothing to do with it, though I wouldn't envy anyone the job of trying to explain that to fools. You see, I'm never concerned with my clients, only with their architectural requirements. I consider these as a part of my building's theme and problem, as my building's material-just as I consider bricks and steel. Bricks and steel are not my motive. Neither are the clients. Bot hare only the means of my work. Peter, before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the secondary consequences. The work, not the people. Your own action, not any possible object of your charity. I"ll be glad if people who need it find a better manner of living in a house I designed. But that's not the motive of my work. Nor my reason. Nor my reward"
(Page 604-605)
"You said yesterday: 'What architect isn't interested in hosing?' I hate the whole blasted idea of it. I think it's a worthy undertaking-to provide a decent apartment for a man who earns fifteen dollars a week. But not at the expense of other men. Not if it raises the taxes, raises all the others rents and makes the man who earns forty live in a rate hole. That's what's happening in New York. Nobody can afford a modern apartment-except the very rich and the paupers. Have seen the converted brownstones in which the average self-supporting couple has to live? Have you see their closet kitchens and their plumbing? They're forced to live like that-because they're not incompetent enough. They make forty dollars a week and wouldn't be allowed into a housing project. But they're the ones who provide the money for the damn project. They pay the taxes. And the taxes raise their own rent. And they have to move from a converted brownstone into an unconverted one and from that into a railroad flat. I'd have no desire to penalize a man because he's worth only fifteen dollars a week. But I'll be damned if I can see why a man worth forty must be penalized-and penalized in favor of one who's less competent. Sure, there are a lot of theories on the subject and volumes of discussion. But just look at the results. Still, architects are all for government housing. And have ever seen an architect who wasn't screaming for planned cities? I'd like to ask him what right has he to impose it on the others? And if it isn't, what happens to his work? I suppose he'll say he wants neither. He wants a council, a conference, co-operation and collaboration. And the result will be 'The March of the Centuries.' Peter, every single one of you on that committee had done better work than the eight of you produced collectively. Ask yourself why, sometime."