About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Forward one pageLast Page


Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 20

Monday, September 26, 2005 - 4:23pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
It's important to remember that much of PAR was written and published in "Who Is Ayn Rand?" well before the break with Rand. I think it's also important to remember that Barbara Branden's good opinion of Rand extended all the way to the morning of the day she broke with Rand, when she was presenting her with a business proposal to take over running NBI. Rand rejected the offer, and later that day Ms. Branden's smearing began.



Sanction: 17, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 17, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 17, No Sanction: 0
Post 21

Monday, September 26, 2005 - 5:12pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
"It's important to remember that much of PAR was written and published in "Who Is Ayn Rand?" well before the break with Rand."

"Who Is Ayn Rand?" is 90 pages long. The Passion of Ayn Rand is 422 pages long. Judge for yourself whether 90 is "much" of 422.

JR



Post 22

Monday, September 26, 2005 - 5:38pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Jeff-
Brilliant!  I hope you realize how hard it was for me to sanction you, but I did. ;)




Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Post 23

Monday, September 26, 2005 - 5:59pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Sorry, I should have specified that most of the good stuff about Rand that appears in The Passion of Ayn Rand came from Who Is Ayn Rand? Obviously, all of the stuff about the affair, the break, Rand's insane jealousy, her incapacity for human compassion, her repressed pain from enduring Anti-Semitism, her repressed emotions about her parents, her authoritarian nature, her humorlessness, her unkempt appearance, etc., etc. came from The Passion of Ayn Rand.

I stand corrected.




Sanction: 17, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 17, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 17, No Sanction: 0
Post 24

Monday, September 26, 2005 - 6:00pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Casey,

I think You need to re-read PAR.

Ethan




Post 25

Monday, September 26, 2005 - 6:00pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Thanks for the sanction, Jody. I do realize, I think, how much it cost you.

BTW, it may interest you to know that I did reply to your request for more information on another thread on psychology, where I had questioned the validity of the concept of "double-blind" studies in that field. But my reply was never posted, having been deleted in advance by an overgrown schoolyard bully who now mongers war worldwide and who specializes in intemperate diatribes. I believe when he censors my contributions to this forum he calls himself a "moderator." Apparently my reply to you contained some clever-dick smart-ass anarcho-Saddamism from which it was vitally necessary to protect the delicate sensibilities of my fellow SOLOists. After all, someone like myself, who specializes in snide one-liners and has a problem with anything fundamentally decent, poses a major menace to the continuation of the SOLO way of life.

JR



Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 26

Monday, September 26, 2005 - 6:38pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ethan,

I only point out that parts of it were written in the pre-break period and other parts were written after the break. That is all. I think it is an important thing to consider when evaluating what her post-break attitude toward Rand was while she was putting together The Passion of Ayn Rand. Nathaniel Branden claims that her bitterness toward Rand had not abated by the time she was writing PAR.

Casey




Post 27

Monday, September 26, 2005 - 6:55pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
But Casey,

If NB is a liar?

Hell, nevermind. I have to read PARC in any case.

Ethan




Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 28

Monday, September 26, 2005 - 7:10pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Yeah, Ethan, I know that trope, and I'm chuckling at it now. But it cuts both ways, in this case, doesn't it? The Brandens both corroborate things that help their joint case against Rand, and undercut each other in their claims against each other. 

However, admissions against interest are admissable hearsay in a court of law, precisely because when someone admits something against their interest it's more likely to be true. And the point is, who then is lying here? Barbara or Nathaniel?




Sanction: 8, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 8, No Sanction: 0
Post 29

Monday, September 26, 2005 - 7:18pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ethan,

Casey and some others hate the Brandens sight unseen. There will be no objectivity in their view - the most will be pre-break Brandens and post-break Brandens, with pre-break not being so bad (after all, Ayn Rand herself was sanctioning them, but if not for that...). However, the post-break Brandens are lousy dirty rotten scum to them and no rational argument will ever penetrate such blind prejudice. It reminds me of the racism I grew up with that I never could understand, even as a child.

The Passion of Ayn Rand is a magnificent romantic biography/autobiography, presenting all issues - good and bad - as larger-than-life. Read in that light, it is a thrilling read and Ayn Rand comes out as a first-rate heroine from so many aspects that it is hard to count them.

I urge any person who reads Valliant's book to read or reread Barbara's bio immediately thereafter and see if it portrays only Rotten Rand in all her glory, as is claimed. Fierce love and admiration for Ayn Rand are there in spades. All you have to do is look and see.

Michael

(Edited by Michael Stuart Kelly on 9/26, 7:19pm)




Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Post 30

Monday, September 26, 2005 - 7:18pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
TROLL ALERT

I'm now raising the National Troll Alert Level to : IGNORE

for the following troll:

Jeff Riggenbach

That is All




Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Post 31

Monday, September 26, 2005 - 7:32pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
MSK,

We don't hate anyone sight unseen. For heavens sake, I'm sure that in hindsight neither James nor I ever wanted to see so much of the Brandens' handiwork on display in their books as he was researching the bases for their claims. I daresay, few else should WANT to see it. But it's true, and it really has to be seen to be believed. Telling people we hate the Brandens sight unseen is telling people to reject Mr. Valliant's book sight unseen. It's beneath you, Michael. Knock it off. There is a very serious and honest and non-conspiratorial effort in Valliant's book to get to the truth, or at least knock away the unsubstantiated claims, about a thinker we all admire here. That should be, I certainly hope, a common goal, here of all places.




Post 32

Monday, September 26, 2005 - 7:32pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Casey: "... and latter that day Ms. Branden's smearing [of Ayn Rand] began."

That's a smear.

--Brant




Post 33

Monday, September 26, 2005 - 7:35pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Jeff: Did you ask why your post didn't go up?

--Brant




Post 34

Monday, September 26, 2005 - 7:51pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Casey,

I wouldn't say hate sight unseen unconditionally. After all, as you state, there are the pre-book and post-book personalities. Such historical divisions seem to be sort of a trend...

My beef is that both you and James saw a distortion and decided to fight a perceived distortion with another distortion.

You fight distortions with the truth if truth is your goal. Period.

Michael



Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 35

Monday, September 26, 2005 - 8:07pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Understanding is a three-edged sword: Your side, Their side, and The Truth
-Ambassador Kosh on Babylon 5




Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Post 36

Monday, September 26, 2005 - 8:31pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ethan,

I think Kosh stopped at "Understanding is a three-edged sword." Sheridan figured the rest out later.

Sarah



Post 37

Monday, September 26, 2005 - 9:14pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Brant,

It's a claim based on the evidence that is presented in PARC -- Barbara Branden started saying bad things about Rand later in the same day that she had presented her business proposal to Rand to run NBI and it was rejected .




Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 38

Monday, September 26, 2005 - 10:35pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I was the one who deleted Jeff's previous post.  And I just deleted another of his.

Jeff, you can't seem to post without insulting people.  You usually don't even bother trying.  I put you on moderation awhile ago, but the moderators (including myself) have been lenient about letting your stuff go through.  You've reached my limit.  No more.  If you can be mature and post with civility, your posts will go through.  If not, we'll just ban you. 




Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 39

Monday, September 26, 2005 - 11:01pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Casey, saying "bad things" doesn't necessarily equate with "smearing." I suggest you check your rhetoric at the door.

--Brant




Post to this threadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Forward one pageLast Page
User ID Password reminder or create a free account.