The two instances are completely different,
that wasn't real thought...it was merely a witty quotation used to veil one man's dislike of the work
he makes a statement saying that a serious work of literature is "a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world"
without anything to back it up.
And the problem with criticisms which don't have supporting evidence is that they are hard to refute...
there are many valid criticisms of Rand's work--this is not one of them.
And lastly, I provided a very valid reason for not taking John Roger's literary criticism seriously.
