Moved to a different place

[Guest]

I would like to make clear that my book, PARC, of course, never "accuses Ms. Branden of lying when she claimed Ayn Rand sometimes gave angry answers during question periods." The book says something quite different about this topic.

I have also heard a rumor that Ms. Branden is saying that she never claimed that O'Connor was an alcoholic. Does anyone have more information about this? Or is this just a rumor?

(Note from Administrator: James Valliant asked to be removed from the member list before the forum was transferred to a new program, thus his member name was lost.)

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

James,

I moved your post out of the Branden Corner and into the Library, as this is the place to discuss the works of other authors. Maybe you have not read the initial post in the Branden Corner, but that section is for honoring the Brandens, not debating your book. Also, the thread where you posted is reserved for statements by people who actually knew Ayn Rand in life. Since most of them are not OL members, I put them up. This forum software package does not give much control, so I have to do many things hands-on.

But frankly, this site is not even a place to debate your book. I don't know what you are doing over here. Your stated opinion is that I am an enemy of Objectivism. However, if you wish to discuss any matter with me at a neutral place, please find one and let me know. I am no longer welcome where we used to discuss your book, nor do I ever wish to return there.

I would even suggest you find such a neutral place for the future. I want to make it clear to you that I am preparing an article highly critical of your book and I will post it here in due time, merely so I can be assured of two things: (1) I will have a place to link to, and (2) the work will go up as I wrote it. I will not allow discussion, however, and the thread will be locked. This same procedure will hold for any other OL member who wishes to write a review of your book.

To be clear, this site is not a place to question the integrity of the character of the Brandens. Not even in any future review of your book or discussion to it. There are plenty of places on the Internet to do that and my policy was declared openly from Day 1. Since this is precisely the subject of your book and your stated approach, I don't see very much that you can discuss here.

As a matter of courtesy, though, I will answer you question. I am completely unaware of the rumor you mentioned.

I have a guess as to where it came from. I personally made a post on Nathaniel's Yahoo forum yesterday (my identity there is "dchild342" - long story). But as regards Frank O'Connor, I talked about how imprecise people are when they misrepresent what is in Barbara's biography of Ayn Rand. With the rumor mill being what it is, my post was probably misconstrued as some kind of statement from her as it went through the grapevine.

If you have any question for either of the Brandens, you have the option of approaching them off line. I believe that you have their email addresses. If not, they are easy enough to discover.

Michael

[Guest]

That's okay. Robert Hessen just wrote me back to say that his comments in that letter were in no way directed at PARC or me, that he has not yet read PARC, but will be doing so soon.

And I never imagined that you would permit any criticism of the Brandens here.

Thanks.

(Note from Administrator: James Valliant asked to be removed from the member list before the forum was transferred to a new program, thus his member name was lost.)

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

James,

I'm glad the confusion got resolved, albeit I don't really understand where it was in the first place. Our approach here is more positive - building up instead of attacking (not always, but mostly). More of a touchy-feely approach, you might say.

When something needs to be said about you or your book, it will mention you or your book.

Michael

[Guest]

Well, the "confusion" has to do with the assertion that someone has ever accused Ms. Branden of lying with regard to Rand's Q & A's, as so many on your "Rand memories" page seem to be asserting. To my knowledge NO ONE ever has, and there seems to be a bunch of argument over nothing -- implying that the recent controversies over the Branden books had anything to do with this.

Refuting air?

And, that's "positive" for all but Rand, then, right?

(Note from Administrator: James Valliant asked to be removed from the member list before the forum was transferred to a new program, thus his member name was lost.)

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

James,

Go away.

I did not making OL for bickering.

I would not like to delete this whole thread - but I will.

Michael