I read 'The Passion of Ayn Rand' - I am suspicious as hell.

[Brant Gaede]

A fairly good speculative case can be made that Leonard Peikoff had a lot of anger toward Ayn Rand for two or three good reasons revealed in how he has dealt with and used her legacy. Peikoff no longer matters, however. He's done, finished--and so is his Objectivist-me-on-top POV. Even his "orthos" are breaking up and apart.

--Brant

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

btw - The attitude in my heart with this is not hostility. It's tough love.

Michael

[Neil Parille]

It will be interesting to see what happens when Peikoff passes away. Will the authorized bio finally be published?

NP

[Reidy]

Shoshana Knapp is at work on the authorized biography. We'll see what she produces.

I suspect that once Peikoff is dead the ARI people will do much what they're doing now. They've been phasing out of their sectarian hostilities for several years.

[Jerry Biggers]

To paraphrase a remark by Mark Twain, rumors of Peikoff's departure from this earthly plain are greatly exagerrated. Despite occasional comments here that Peikoff is old, half-blind, and frail, he did a rather lively sequence as the piano player in a jazz combo during evening festivities at OCON2014.

He just recently published his opus,The DIM Hypothesis, and even if one does not buy into his analysis and classification schemes of historical trends, it did not appear to be the product of a failing mind. (I did not find some of his views convincing, but that is another matter).

At any rate, Leonard's final departure will leave ARIans with a lot of explaining to do, and a lot of backtracking.They may try to sweep certain embarrassing events under the rug, but that is likely to fail. People are not going to just forget positions that ARI has taken on libertarianism, the Brandens and their role at NBI prior to the split, the purge of David Kelley, ARI's neo-Orwellian attempts to re-write the history of the Objectivist movement, including denying or minimizing intellectual contributions from the Brandens and others that were excommunicated by ARI for even the slightest "deviationism.".

There seems to be the implicit assumption that, at Leonard Peikoff's death, control of ARI (he owns the Rand archives), will be released to ARI's Board of Directors. It is possible that Amy Peikoff or other supporters of Leonard's policies, will continue ARI's Peikovian years.

I don't like to make parallels with other ideological movements which have nothing in common with Objectivist philosophy, but I'm going to anyway. When an ideological (or religious) movement, dominated and controlled by a single leader (that has used repressive policies to control dissent) finds itself no longer under the control of that leader; and they attempt to loosen-up and to liberalize and allow dissent,...what happens? The dam is breached and the new leaders find themselves drowning in dissent. And that is the end of that ideology, or religious cult or sect, as an effective movement.

In short, I do not see how the post-Peikovian ARI will be able to either continue with his policies; or to "liberalize" without facing the consequences that have happened to other ideological movements..

[anthony]

Jerry, perhaps it will be the era of individual "indie" scholars publishing in their own right, without 'fear of favor' (so to speak).. It is an attractive notion - taking nothing away, and all that.

[Reidy]

The monolithic movement you describe in #55 is NBI-era Objectivism (except that it had two leaders instead of one). That ended near enough to fifty years ago, and Objectivism is still here, still gaining influence.

(Curious as to what you would consider cases in point of your historical thesis. Christianity, Marxism, Psychoanalysis and the Montessori method all count against it.)

[Peter]

Peter Reidy wrote:

I suspect that once Peikoff is dead the ARI people will do much what they're doing now. They've been phasing out of their sectarian hostilities for several years.

end quote

I have not been on the ARI site for a while. On the site it has a list of experts and speakers with some names I have not seen before or just don't remember such as, Elan Journo, Onkar Ghate, Keith Lockitch, Steve Simpson, Don Watkins, Rituparna Basu, Jeff Britting, Amanda Maxham, etc., so that is interesting. I truly hope a steely eyed, vindictive ARI is morphing into a benevolent ARI. I see I just received something in the mail from The Atlas Society, and I will most likely donate to them but it has been a decade since I gave anything to ARI. That may change but we shall see.

[Peter]

Jerry wondered:

...what happens? The dam is breached and the new leaders find themselves drowning in dissent. And that is the end of that ideology, or religious cult or sect, as an effective movement . . .

In short, I do not see how the post-Peikovian ARI will be able to either continue with his policies; or to "liberalize" without facing the consequences that have happened to other ideological movements . . .

end quote

That is interesting from a societal perspective. But all it takes is one "fearless leader" to set things right. The floodgate that is released might bring some backlash from the old guard but there may be a lot of people who will want to be a part of a new, benevolent ARI. I am optimistic but guarded.

[Peter]

whYNOT replied to Jerry:

Jerry, perhaps it will be the era of individual "indie" scholars publishing in their own right, without 'fear of favor' (so to speak) . . . It is an attractive notion - taking nothing away, and all that.

end quote

Three cheers for Tony! For hes a jolly good fellow . . . which nobody can deny. Now I feel like a child who was given away by his mother but now she wants him back.

[Peter]

Peter Reidy wrote:
The monolithic movement you describe in #55 is NBI-era Objectivism (except that it had two leaders instead of one). That ended near enough to fifty years ago, and Objectivism is still here, still gaining influence . . . (Curious as to what you would consider cases in point of your historical thesis. Christianity, Marxism, Psychoanalysis and the Montessori method all count against it.)
end quote

Ah. The sixties at NBI and The Objectivist Newsletter. Those were the days. I wonder what everyones thoughts and feelings would have been if it were 1965, and you were in a conference room in the Empire State Building, and then Ayn Rand, Barbara and Nathaniel Branden walked in? If you had been on the *inside* what would you have thought at that sight? Had you lived and entered heaven or died and gone to North Korea? I think I would have been speechless.

[Brant Gaede]

Peter Reidy wrote:

The monolithic movement you describe in #55 is NBI-era Objectivism (except that it had two leaders instead of one). That ended near enough to fifty years ago, and Objectivism is still here, still gaining influence . . . (Curious as to what you would consider cases in point of your historical thesis. Christianity, Marxism, Psychoanalysis and the Montessori method all count against it.)

end quote

Ah. The sixties at NBI and The Objectivist Newsletter. Those were the days. I wonder what everyones thoughts and feelings would have been if it were 1965, and you were in a conference room in the Empire State Building, and then Ayn Rand, Barbara and Nathaniel Branden walked in? If you had been on the *inside* what would you have thought at that sight? Had you lived and entered heaven or died and gone to North Korea? I think I would have been speechless.

NBI moved into the Empire State Building in 1967. Saw all them there at once 1968 plus the others then and again.

--Brant

I visited NBI in the spring of 1966 at 120 E. 34th St. It was in an apartment. The lady who signed me up to The Objectivist must have been Elayne Kalberman, Nathaniel's sister. I was in my army khakis. I learned years later Barbara Branden was on a world cruise. Two years thence I was back in NYC after Vietnam (and the army). Yeah, them was the days - I thought they'd never end - much better than being shot at

[Backlighting]

Brant said "I visited NBI in the spring of 1966 at 120 E. 34th St. It was in an apartment. The lady who signed me up to The Objectivist must have been Elayne Kalberman, Nathaniel's sister. I was in my army khakis. I learned years later Barbara Branden was on a world cruise. Two years thence I was back in NYC after Vietnam (and the army). Yeah, them was the days - I thought they'd never end - much better than being shot at.

My experience was similar. Finished with the Army mid-'69. A few months later went to the office located on 34th (not the Empire State Bldg.) to purchase some back issues of The Objectivist Newsletter...I had been receiving some issues in Japan during '68.

Yeah Brant, those were memorable days.

[Neil Parille]

How long does it take to write a biography of someone?

Rand wasn't Napoleon. She stayed in her apartment for the most part in her later life.

Alister McGrath wrote a biography of CS Lewis in a couple years. He read everything he wrote (books, letters, etc.) in chronologal order.

Not hard, unless you are concerned about who butters your bread.

-Neil Parille

[Brant Gaede]

Napoleon wasn't Rand. He stayed on his horse most of his life. How long does it take to write his biography?

--Brant

[Neil Parille]

Brant,

He dictated a lot more letters than Rand wrote. He conquered multiple nations. A comprehensive biography is a big deal.

Rand's life was by comparison relatively simple. A few books and two or three locations (Russia, California, and NYC).

Maybe Milgram is a slow writer or maybe she knows who butters her bread . . . .

-Neil Parille

[Brant Gaede]

Brant,

He dictated a lot more letters than Rand wrote. He conquered multiple nations. A comprehensive biography is a big deal.

Rand's life was by comparison relatively simple. A few books and two or three locations (Russia, California, and NYC).

Maybe Milgram is a slow writer or maybe she knows who butters her bread . . . .

-Neil Parille

Oh, her. The never-ending story.

--Brant

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Neil,

Shoshana's bio certainly is taking a long time, but I have listened to several lectures by her. She's very thorough and highly intelligent. If one were ever to debate her, one better come prepared to avoid embarrassment.

I don't know how history becomes her. That might be the problem for the delay (in lieu of or addition to the one you mentioned).

She fares well with literary themes. I enjoyed what I heard, albeit there was a little too much groupie attitude toward Rand at times.

Michael

[Neil Parille]

For some reason I decided to listen to Amy Peikoff’s radio show and Valliant called in and basically took over for 1.5 hours. At the final ten minutes he talks about PARC and his future writing plans.

http://dontletitgo.com/2014/11/21/why-obamas-amnesty-is-worthless-to-immigrants-and-the-rest-of-us-tonight-at-8-p-m-pt-11-p-m-et/

NP

[Brant Gaede]

For some reason I decided to listen to Amy Peikoff’s radio show and Valliant called in and basically took over for 1.5 hours. At the final ten minutes he talks about PARC and his future writing plans.

http://dontletitgo.com/2014/11/21/why-obamas-amnesty-is-worthless-to-immigrants-and-the-rest-of-us-tonight-at-8-p-m-pt-11-p-m-et/

NP

I hope he pissed her off. It might help her have an independent life.

--Brant

I do not, will not, listen to podcasts

[Neil Parille]

Jim says he is working on updated PARC, but no date.

He should have a book out co-written with someone called Creating Christ. Jim plans to do for New Testament studies what he did for Rand studies with PARC, I guess.

NP

[Neil Parille]

The discussion begins starting around 7 minutes to the end.

Amy says how great The Passion of Ayn Rand's Critics is.

I sent Amy an email with my a link to my essay (http://www.scribd.com/doc/9421651/The-Passion-of-James-Valliant-s-Criticism). I don't imagine she'll write me back.

-Neil

[Guyau]

Neil,

Waiting for Leonard's death? Ha. I've given you the more plausible one before.*

[Brant Gaede]

Spammer--don't quote

spammer deleted by my master MKS

Edited November 26, 2014 by Brant Gaede

[Peter]

Okay, Brant. No quotes. When you consider the loss of trust, havoc and destruction wrought, nothing good came out of her irrational actions, beyond simple gratification (and I project feelings of triumph too.)