Ayn Rand was one of the most innovative and brilliant thinkers of our age, but one whose ideas have been so controversial in our culture that even today she is either unquestioningly worshipped or unreasoningly vilified. Hardly anyone even vaguely familiar with Rand's works is "neutral" about her philosophy. Many critics have denounced her works without actually reading them, which to me is inexcusable, and many mediocre thinkers have managed to totally misunderstand the thrust of her message. This is nearly impossible, given the extreme clarity and force of her writing, but it's happened frequently nontheless.
Rand was a Russian emigre to the U.S., and her experiences under the oppression of Stalinism left an indelible mark on her worldview. Her individualism defied the group-think of the Communist collective she escaped and the conformist thinking of the America she chose as her home. As many of us do, she defined "the enemy" early on, based on completely accurate information at the time, and was unable or unwilling to call even a partial truce later in life when the circumstances may have changed. For example, in her homeland bourgeois capitalists and free-thinkers were persecuted, and socialists were in control. She never got over the feeling that the leftists were running the show here in America as well. While I think she was right about academia being largely left-leaning (which it still is today, and which IS the single greatest reason that Rand is not more widely given her due as the intellectual giant she is and was), a lot of midgets cast large shadows on Rand's mind. Leftists in America were never as powerful as they seemed to her. This let her play into the hands of the disgusting Senator Joe McCarthy, testifying against "communists" in Hollywood. This is one of the few espisodes of Rand's biography that truly embarrasses me. The champion of the rights of the individual allowed her own bias to lead her to trample the rights of other individuals, other artists, no less.
Rand was a passionate woman and this fueled her writing. When she arrived in America she had to learn English and worked as a seamstress in the movie studios. She had an affinity for Hollywood and unabashed awe of its glamour all her life. I actually believe that her Hollywood connections and the Objectivist friendships she nurtured while living in California helped to shape the "California-style" conservatism of modern day Orange County, etc., and her influence indirectly molded the likes of Ronald Reagan (who never could have finished Atlas Shrugged, even with Nancy reading it to him.)
While some critics complain that Objectivism is all calculated reason and no emotion, they are so far off base. Ayn Rand's writing has always been intensely emotional. In her writing, as in her philosophy, emotion is placed in the service of thought, not as the replacement for thought. But Rand could write a tearjerker with the best of them! Her early short stories in the English language include "The Husband I Bought," an uncharacteristically tragic tale of self-sacrifice. In her later works, the supposedly "merciless" writer sprinkled more tearjerking passages and characters (and very good ones--they really make you verclempt!!) Anyone who charges that Rand has no quality of compassion has never read the tales of dimestore clerk Cheryl Taggart or the shy and lonely Catherine Toohey.
Of course, emotion is not all pity. In writing of the intense emotions of pride in one's work, extremely powerful sexual desire, and achievement, she was unparalleled. Sometimes, she was a little over the top. But you know what? If I met someone who read "Atlas Shrugged," and they didn't feel glorious about the completion of the John Galt Line or absolutely euphoric about finding the existence of "Atlantis"---I don't think I'd have anything to say to that person ever again. Even when her dramatic passages are almost like a cartoon, they're good; it's a cartoon you want to be in. "Galt's Gulch" is the realm of possibility of the perfect, just world all of us were born believing in. And she taps into the very real longing within us for that world to be real--it must be hidden somewhere! The defiant individualism of her heroes and heroines is one reason she is so popular with teenagers. Another is that her novels take seriously the notion that the world should be perfect. Teenagers are surrounded by adults who tell them that because the world is not perfect, they should accept it and give up. Rand is the one adult voice reaching to kids telling them they don't have to accept anything and that they should fight for the world they want. I'm in my 30's, still an avid Objectivist, but I'd be the first to admit Rand really got me when I was 15. And that's when she gets the bulk of her admirers. A cynic can make light of that--and I can kick the cynic in the shin. There are a million worse uses for the unbridled passions of teenagers than Objectivism. And Objectivists don't have to "grow out of" it; they just "grow through" it.
In Hollywood, Rand met a handsome "extra" on a movie set and fell in love. She married Frank O'Connor, one of the two great loves of her life. Yep, two. That's another mess she made, 'cause of course they were simultaneous rather than serial relationships. Frank was strong enough to be attracted to and supportive of a powerful wife, though he was not thought to be her complete intellectual equal. In later life, he became a painter and artist in his own right. He also had to suffer quite a bit through the tumult of her relationship with Nathaniel Branden.
Rand didn't meet the second love of her life until she was in her early forties. Nathaniel Branden and his soon-to-be-wife, Barbara, were barely out of their teens and great admirers of her work. An intelligent fan letter to their idol impressed her enough to invite them to her home. This began a long, fruitful, but ultimately disastrous era in all their lives. Nathaniel and Barbara became good friends with the O'Connors and strong defenders of Ayn's Objectivist philosophy, as well as sounding-boards during the long writing process of Atlas Shrugged. Soon Ayn and Nathaniel were embroiled in a torrid affair. Both of them were persuasive enough to convince Frank and Barbara to accept this infidelity. The soaring language and noble phrases of Objectivism were used, in my opinion, to justify as "egoism" to the two spouses what was really ridiculous subservience. (That is just my "take" on the sad siutation.) During the throes of their affair, Ayn founded the Nathaniel Branden Institute and named him her intellectual heir and claimed he could speak for her on any subject as the public face of Objectivism. In the meantime, other Objectivists were active in their discussion groups and parties, people like Leonard Peikoff (he and Nathaniel were cousins and somewhat rivals,) and today's Fed Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan.
While Ayn & Nathaniel's intellectual and physical passions were paired at first, eventually Nathaniel needed out. The affair and other strains had been too much for him and Barbara in the mid to late sixties, though they remained on-and-off friends. Ayn cast a long shadow and was a demanding mistress, and Nathaniel later met a lovely girl named Patrecia. Hell hath no fury like Ayn Rand when she got dumped, and Nathaniel Branden was persona non grata in Objectivist circles from then on, even officially barred from Rand's funeral in 1982. This--again in my opinion--was the final incident that sealed Rand's bitterness. I will get to that a little later.
Leonard Peikoff stayed faithfully by her side, advocating agreement with her views on every subject as the only way an Objectivist could think. He was rewarded by being named her new intellectual heir. He runs the Ayn Rand Institute today, with her posthumous blessing, and can speak with authority on Rand's actual opinions if everything from A to Z. His "ABC's of Objectivism" is a well-written, concise summation of the fundamentals of the philosophy. On the one hand I kinda sound like I'm ridiculing him, but that is not fair. I do think what he's doing is important and that someone should faithfully record what the founder of Objectivism thought about various issues. It has historical importance and relevance.
More later!
Back to Reardenmetal's Homepage