RoR: Forum

That's correct, Heppard: Valliant, himself, did not win a CINDY. The two CINDYs were awarded in the "Video Production" category, totally unrelated to any merit as broadcast meterial, or TV journalism, or the like. The two videos, both of which won a Bronze (no gold or silver was awarded in that category), named Mr. Valliant as interviewer, Leonard Peikoff as interviewee, and the production company responsible for the creation of the tape. There is no indication as to who submitted the entry or who paid the entrance fee. However, the rules are that everything judged is a paid entry in a specified category.

So, I did not say that no CINDYs were won.

Now, even though I shouldn't dignify your other class-clownish questions, I will say this: In the Spring and Summer of 1969, Miss Rand gave a writing course to a small group of her long-time associates, plus a few new ones, in the living room of her apartment on East 34th in Manhattan. That is where I met her, formally, for the first time. Leonard Peikoff, to whom I no longer speak (and haven't for more than 20 years) got me into that course.

I suspect Brant knows exactly what I mean by "it would be obvious [to those who knew Ayn Rand] that Mr. Valliant never met her, nor saw her in person answering questions during a Q&A session. And it's to Brant I wish to direct my next post.

BTW, I never use any name other than my own, not even on the web.

Post 141

Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 5:12am

Brant,

If I misunderstood what you said in a post way back near the beginning of this thread, or if I have you confused with the person who was in NYC before, during, and after the demise of NBI, then I apologize and stand corrected.

However, I'd like to compare a few notes with whoever it was who stated that they were in New York in 1968.

And, now to Mr. Valliant, after which I have a few compliments for Alec and Lindsay.

-John Allen
Southern Colorado Rockies

Post 142

Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 11:30am

I propose you post a new drink recipe for one called The Magenta Hornet<tm>

rde
My humor is eunuch'

Post 143

Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 7:41am

I want "John Allen" to say who he really is or retract his slanderous by implication post. He is pretending to be Barbara Branden. Someone who knew Ayn Rand before the affair, during and after? Not anybody named "John Allen" unless he has a damn good story. The post was written somewhat in the style of writing of Barbara Branden, but the content seems hardly believable to me from her. I won't write Barbara and ask her if she did this for I am not allowed to paraphrase or quote her on this forum. So if you are reading this, Barbara, please don't send me a disavowal, for I can't use it here. But there has to be a way to track this guy down if he doesn't come clean.

--Brant

Post 144

Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 9:37am

C'mon, "John Allen." Who ARE you? Where did you go to school? How many children do you have? Where do you live? How did you know Ayn Rand all those years? Where else have you been posting on the Internet?

Why am I asking these questions? Because I have been reading Barbara Branden on the Internet for six years and she is the only one who could have written that letter that I know of unless someone carefully studied her writing style and is perpetuating a monstrous injustice against her, which would make you absolutely evil unless you can demonstrate you really are who you have so far said you are and write that way as a matter of course. I could have written that post of yours, but it would have taken me days of work to so well imitate BB. If you are Barbara Branden, a possibility, then it isn't evil, it's ....

--Brant

Post 145

Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 10:43am

"John Allen" is not saying he knew Ayn Rand before the affair, but the "Break." My bad.

--Brant

Post 146

Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 10:45am

Michael,

I posted four answers this morning. I guess your moderator just doesn't like hearing the truth.
Brant and I are almost exactly the same age. If he attended NBI functions in NYC in '67 and '68, then he and I would have been at some of the same lectures in the basement offices/lecture rooms of NBI's Empire State Building facility. I wonder if he attended the "social evening" when Branded danced with Patrecia, the O'Connors danced with each other, and Barbara Branden danced with her dance instructor boy friend??

As for Nathan denying the "ben Rand" -- what would you expect him to say? But tell me, Michael, does your understanding of the term "repression" include a person's being able to stop doing it at will? It's precisely that which Valliant claims that Rand urged Branden to do during the year of her acting as his therapist.

Surely not everyone on this board, except for Alec and Lindsay, is too lazy to do a little independent thinking and sleuthing? The info on the two CINDY awards is available and very easy to get to with a little Googling.

John Allen

Post 147

Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 10:57am

Because "John Allen" claims to have known Ayn Rand before, during and after the "Break," he is much more likely than I thought to actually be "John Allen," but that post of his that started this all is absolute trash.

--Brant

Post 148

Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 11:33am

Mr. Allen,

Are you mentioned in Nathaniel's My Years With Ayn Rand?

rde
This is starting to feel like one of those old game shows.

Post 149

Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 12:01pm

The info on the two CINDY awards is available and very easy to get to with a little Googling.

And your whole issue is significant why? Who cares? True or not, PR and promotion always has a fudge factor. That's why they call it the entertainment business.

Post 150

Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 12:12pm

"John Allen" has floated a very stinky red herring here. The book jacket claims that the show won two CINDY awards. It did, in point of fact. Why would someone a) be motivated to do such feverish research and b) announce his findings in such a grandiose way even though they prove nothing at all?

Why hasn't he spoken to Peikoff in 20 years? He's taking the Branden break very personally, it seems. Of course, they may have just drifted apart. So why mention it?

As for Branden assuming fictional personas or using bareknuckle tactics, there's plenty of evidence for both, starting with his representing to Rand that he was the epitome of the Objectivist hero while lying to her and his claiming to the world an insuperable age barrier for an affair without revealing that he had, in fact, had an affair with Rand for 14 years. That's a savagely bareknuckled tactic that wouldn't even be allowed in a boxing ring -- a low-blow against an old woman who had been his benefactor and lover for over a decade.

And how is listing awards associated with a show one has hosted the same thing as, oh say, Nathaniel Branden representing that Barbara Branden's alcoholism claim about Frank was "accurate" and that Frank's drinking problem was in fact "serious" during an interview even though he had no firsthand evidence of any such thing? That's just one of the incidental dishonesties of Branden, not even mentioned in PARC. And it's a whopper. Who on earth would consider an honest statement about the awards a show received morally equivalent to mendacity of such disgusting proportions? Who but a Branden? There's good reason to be suspicious here.

And what better way to smokescreen oneself than by throwing out a couple of self-deprecating though harmless details -- such as believing Branden's name was derived in a way that the real Nathaniel Branden would disavow or pointing out that Barbara was dancing with her latest secret paramour at a party. (Just had to throw the word "paramour" in there since early on James got an email that smacked of a Branden subterfuge signed "Perry Moore." Get it? Get it? So very clever.) However, what is this guy's agenda if to prove he's not a Branden he deprecates them while the entire thrust of his post his anti-Valliant? Even to the extent that he researches CINDY awards? It's a bit schizo.

Maybe John Allen can clarify this and lay to rest the questions about his authenticity and agenda. I, for one, will be fascinated by his continued postings. He might be a real person, but I'm curious as to what kind of personal history he has had that would lead him to such a conflicted portfolio of motivations. And it's a pity that he did NOT comment on any of the earlier posts about the content of PARC. Instead he skipped over it and went straight for a fabricated character assassination of the author. Hmmmm...

(Edited by Casey Fahy on 10/19, 12:24pm)

Post 151

Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 12:19pm

You wish, Casey.

I know that man's writing like the back of my hand.

Of course, there is a way to find out point of origin, you know. The time NB and his friend were actually fucking around, that worked nicely on Diana's site.

It's basic IT 101, from what I can see. I'm sure plenty of people will be more than eager to assist.

Admin? How about cracking it open for us?

rde
I love IP addresses

Post 152

Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 12:39pm

If Branden was writing under an assumed identity he would make some attempt to sound like someone else. He is capable of that. This is a guy who pretended to be celibate to Ayn Rand while Allan Blumenthal was accusing him of being obsessed with sex, remember. What an actor he must have been. Not good enough in the end, but pretty damn good, one must admit.

Of course, Branden was busted on the IP address thing once before when he posed as "Hellen Rearden" at Diana Hsieh's site. Doubtful he would make that error again, when it's easy enough to use a friend's computer.

None of this proves John Allan is not a real person, though. But he sure is a curious fellow -- even after a few posts he exhibits a strange mix of motivations and credentials. I'm looking forward to your next post, John. Did you notice that Valliant only used his middle initial? What about the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth!

Post 153

Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 12:47pm

John Allan:

"That's correct, Heppard: Valliant, himself, did not win a CINDY."

From the book flap:

"He and his wife, Holly, created the 1995 television interview show, "Ideas in Action," the winner of two prestigious Cinema in Industry (CINDY) awards."

Where's the beef, Allan? After reading through all the posts, you kept your powder dry for THIS? I suggest you bone up on grammar.

Post 154

Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 12:53pm

I guess you'll never get past your eternal hard-on, Casey. You went to the macro pretty quick on this one, and it comes out no different than what you'd see out of a paranoid, or at least a devoted conspiracy theorist. For your own sake, I hope that you go easier on yourself, when faced with it.

I certainly appreciate your loyalty to your friend, which is admirable. Loyalty is pretty much always admirable, isn't it? :)

The thing with it, though, is that sometimes you have to look at the ultimate purpose. This here is pretty thin. The whole thing is thin- thirty year old stuff from the remote viewing armchair. The Brandens moved past it, and went on to live good, meaningful lives. They were able to forgive themselves for whatever they thought they needed to forgive themselves for.

Imagine what it's like, to see the lynch mobs and packs of roving hyenas still running around decades later. And they weren't even there. And it didn't really concern them.

I don't know of any family, secular or religious community, or business organization that would let happen to them what the Objectivist community has experienced here. Dwelling on and delineating sin is big business around here, and that sickens me.

(Edited by Rich Engle on 10/19, 12:53pm)

Post 155

Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 1:04pm

John,

You sure got Casey in an uproar! LOLOLOLOL...

I am most intrigued by your posts, but especially Post 146.

It is no secret that I hold great love for Barbara Branden. Her bio of Ayn Rand came into my life at a very crucial moment and was instrumental in effecting a huge change for the better. Solo has become a hostile environment for her, so the appearance of someone on my side is most welcome.

What intrigues me is that you seem to be answering questions of some sort that I never made.

It would please me to no end if your identity as one of the old guard becomes corroborated by others. I personally want to hear first-hand impressions of what Ayn Rand was like from as many of the old guard as possible. Valliant's book seems so secondary in that context.

I have no idea where that repression comment of yours came from, but it sure is an interesting thing to mull over.

Anyway, pleased to meet you.

Michael

Post 156

Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 12:27pm

I now believe that John Allen is John Allen. Mr. Allen, why does your first post read differently in style from your subsequent posts? Did you write it originally or did Barbara Branden write it for you? Does she have anything to do with this? I don't think she did and will take your word for it, but there are stylistic elements generally unique to Barbara Branden. Barbara projects a clarity unique outside the pages of Atlas Shrugged.

--Brant

Post 157

Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 12:48pm

I'm 99.99% sure Nathaniel Branden couldn't have had anything to do with John Allen's first post. He has a lazy default in the name of time efficiency that precludes imitating Barbara Branden's style--i.e., he wouldn't be bothered. He works like hell when he works, but he's never worked on the Internet. Like I said, it would have taken me several days to come up with similar material stylistically.

--Brant

Post 158

Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 1:18pm

I'm waiting for Occam's Razor to hold true on this one, which will involve being underwhelmed. Possibilities include:

1. Could be real, just a little off-game and/or not that comfortable in a forum environment

2. Badly crafted fan plan involving pseudonym (Magenta Hornet disease... "ha ha, how can I deny my girlfriend, she's such a great wit")

Of course, Casey, it's as reasonable as what you said for me to give circumstantial evidence that it's YOU, dude... :)

I couldn't see James doing it, for one thing because he'd have to work it way harder than you would to hide his style. I will give him that, he has a very defined style.

He has a lazy default in the name of time efficiency that precludes imitating Barbara Branden's style--i.e., he wouldn't be bothered. He works like hell when he works, but he's never worked on the Internet.

That's pretty much it. With the exception of responding to certain questions on his forum, which he does sparingly, but very graciously. When he does, it usually looks like he ripped it out pretty quick. He rarely gets by without a typo, he gets in and out of it so fast.

Maybe it's ME!!!!!

I put some men on it, fear not.

rde
John, you got some 'SPLAININ' TO DO....~!

(Edited by Rich Engle on 10/19, 1:31pm)

Post 159

Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 1:35pm