ginny

Cathy, you're already doing a good job of distinguishing the answers here. The next time you say something about not being smart enough, I'll find a way to smack you. And I'll bring Neil just for backup. Anyway, you're right when you say sometimes people can have two sides. I remember the first lecture I attended. I didn't even know that Atlas Shrugged was laying out was a philosophy. I didn't even know that Rand was a real person, alive, and about to speak in the next hour. That first evening, I saw one of the sweetest, kindest woman ever to grace to planet. Forty-five minutes later, she swept the floor with me (she didn't know it was me). So, yes, two personalities. Hey, a lot of people don't even have one.

Frank's Niece! Yeah. You and the terror from Russia may have more in common than you think. I hope you stick around. It's interesting, if not always flattering, to see how Objectivists may appear to outsiders. Anyway, all of us nasty atheists hope you keep hanging out.

So great that you actually found Marna! You'll probably find out more stuff from her. Sorry to hear about Connie, but you need to do what is right for you. (That's one of Ayn's big rules!!) Are your kids interested in your search. Do they have any feelings about having a crazy and famous relative?

Cathy, I'm not sure which books you're reading. This is just a suggestion, but have you considered her first fiction book, We The Living. I recommend that for several reasons. It was written without the dogma that's in her other books. It's bitter and angry, sure, but it's a breathtaking story of a young girl, the girl she herself was. The writing is so beautiful, and the story is wonderful. And what the hell, it's got two great hunky guys. What else do you what? The book might give you an idea of what she was like younger. (No, she was no Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm even then.) Anyway, just an idea. I think it's great you're trying to get some understanding. BTW, how's Connie handlinng this.

Cathy, I haven't hear the expression 'sucked the life out of' in relation to Rand, but I can't totally argue. Yeah, she was a force. Yeah, she could suck the life out of a few - Peikoff? The man's a shell. But that was her. She was brilliant and gave people some great books and a philosophy, if you can separate it from her personal views, that is fantantic. You don't need to agree, but a lot of people do. Now, your questions: A person giving food to husband and not neightbor's husband. That was actually one of her best stuff and covers a lot. What she's saying is values (people) are hierarchical. You don't love your neighbor the way you do your sister, and you may not love sis the way you love your kids. When it come to food, if you are rational (she would call it selfish) you give what food you have to the kids first. If any is left, it goes to Connie. Any more, your neightbor gets it. The neighbor doesn't get it beore the kids. That actually makes perfect sense. The reason it's an important part of her philosophy is that in many philosophies, such as some religions, you put god before anything. (Like the muslims who give up their own lives for some belief.) I know some catholic perishes insist that you tithe, even if you can't afford it. I'm not that keen on spelling things out, so I hope it makes sense. Wouldn't you give food to the kids before you gave to the neighbors. I forgot you have a husband. Feed him at some point, too, okay? Rand, being borne in Russian, where the state took first place, obviously felt strongly that the state and anyone else could kiss her patootee. As far as she was concerned, you don't owe anyone anything unless you feel like it. I happen to agree. (Understand that taking care of a sick relative is something you would want to do. Her view was, if you don't, don't do it.) Now, as to when Rand dies, the world ends, put that down to a bit of a silly remark. She meant that when a person dies, the world is dead for that person. If you feel like it, continue reading. She really does have good ideas, but sometimes she confuses them with words. Like to her, selfish is a good thing. It is the way she means it, but a lot of people use the word differently. Don't let her confuse. Out of curiousity (you don't need to answer), how would you handle the food scenario.

Thanks all - and Michael, too.

Christian? More like Torquenada. I suggest if Cathy doesn't came up with the required answers, she gets burned at the stake. Make sure the kindle is moist so as to prolong the event. I'd personally appreciate nice picnic chair for a good view. Christian? Whatever happened to Christian charity?

Picky, aren't we?

You knew the youghtful me. Knowing you can age a person.

Oh, wow, Ellen, would you make a value-judgment if I sent you a metaphysical bow of appreciation?

Aunt Agnes, she was kicked out for mooning the nun. OMG - I'm in love with Aunt Agnes. Man, I'll bet even Ayn didn't push her around too much.

Thanks, you two. D. - it wasn't violation; it was full-blown abuse. Brant - I like your style. D, you have the right take on forgiveness. It involves you and creating physical and emotional distance. Yeah, did that. There are occasional lapses (normal), but the trick is to look out for yourself. Haven't seen the abusers in 30 years; still some effects, but made it through. That's what forgiving is all about. Looking out for yourself. Do I hear the word selfish?

Jonathan, I'm going to just a tad nasty here where Rand is concerned, mainly because she does piss me off frequently. First, she liked to shock. Used the word 'selfish' in a way few people did. Praised Charlie's Angels and Marilyn Monroe instead of something meatier. (I mean no offense, byw, against the Angels and Marilyn. Like them myself.) With shock value, however, I think came confusion, as in, so what the hell in art are we supposed to like, anyway? When you enter confusion as an equasion, it makes it harder for anyone to argue against you. Ayn Rand didn't like being argued with. Does that make sense? I have to think not all of it was subconscious. Her self-made reputation as a lone wolf fighting against society would benefit by her being unconventional. So, the Thinker, a really wonderful statue, becomes a symbol of all of today's ills. I think the older she got, the less she found to like. I think she had trouble finding something good in just about anything. So praising the Angels and Marilyn would almost be a cover for that. Hey, I like stuff! I'm not sure if this psychobable makes sense, but it's been nagging at me for years.

Sad, ain't it?

Understood. My life's ambition has been to become bitch. Not the kind of goal they teach you about in The Seven Habits of Effective People. But I'm close. One more boring post from you, and I'm tracking you down. ,

SB, I admit I usually find you long-winded and boring, but the above articles describes my family to such a T, I'm shaking. Does this mean there are others out there?

Cathy, you don't need to justify your beliefs. You're here to get information, not to debate philosophy. Obviously, everyone here respects that. Atheists try to be nice every other Tuesday and during full moon. Althought I don't know why. It's not like we're going straight to hell.

Sorry to be so sarcastic. I just can't stand him, but that's me.

Cathy, be aware most, or a lot, of people here are abortion-supporting atheits who tolerate adultery (the last one is a long story). Most peoplef here aren't that bad, are we? Okay, that being said, Peikoff doesnt HAvE to know your views (although if he did, he wouldnt be pleasant about it. Anyone who doesn't have his point of view is immoral - yes, that would be you). Look, he's damned the Branden to hell, yet he admits to never reading any of their biographies. He couldn't deal with Rand's lack of perfection. He'd fall apart, I'm pretty sure. I mean, you've mentioned how disappointed you are in aunt Agnes because she didn't tell you everthing. Well, multiply that disappointment 10,000 times, and that's how peikoff would feel. He most definitely doesn't post here or anywhere. Hes king now (the queen is dead, long live the king) and wouldn't stoop to communicating on a site. Someone might disagree with him!!!!! Most objectivist think's he's nuts, anyway. There's a chance someone has informed him of your presence. He would simply dismiss it - another crazy person trying to defile Rand's memory. He wouldn't give it any more thought. You and your problems aren't real to him - only the memory of Rand. Anyway, as to the legal rights, I have no idea, but it might not hurt to ask an attorney. I suspect probably not. Peikoff is sole heir and possessor of the holy grail. But, it never hurts to ask.

Cathy, don't try to understand Peikoff. They aren't hiding anything (to my knowledge) but they are deathly afraid of anything that might be revealed that makes Ayn less than godlike. You blew it when you referred to her as kooky aunt alice. Ayn Rand cannot be kooky, and anyone who dares to say it is pure evil. It would be the same if I called god an a**. (I'm not insulting your beliefs, but you get my meaning, right?) Peikoff has worshipped at the knees of the goddess since he was 17. He's like a cultist, and he gives Objectivist a lousy reputation. I'm not sure how far your googling has taken you, but there are 2 major existing factions of obj. - closedand open. Peikoff leads the closed group, who insist that anything that does not agree with what Rand said cannot be called Obj. Anything good and correct said following her dead cannot be called Obj. It's plain weird. You'll notice that about the only ones who haven't acknowledged your presence are Peikoff's little gang, Everyone else is more than happy to help you, but to the close gang, you don't exist. If you did, you might besmirch the great name of Rand. Cathy, Peikoff will never respond to you, and yes, he has all of the information.

Cathy, you could try emailing Barbara Branden at BBranden1@aol.com. I'm not sure if it's just a drop for her webmaster, but you have nothing to lose by trying. She'd have answers to some of your questions.

Thanks, Jonathan. When I'm sure, I'm bound to be wrong.

“My interest in his project began when I learned about Ayn Rand and Frank O’Connor,” Smith said. “That interest would have been short lived if I had not read Ellen Donohue Warwick’s (niece of Frank O’Connor) memoir, ‘M.O.M.’ and read a recent biography of Ayn Rand.” Cathy, the quote is from a long article from your paper, the Morning Journal, from '79. Is Ellen your cousin? Sounds like she has lots of info.

I didn't think that Frank painted any of the Atlas Shrugged covers, but one of The Fountainhead covers. Here's a link to a few small black and white versions of some of Frank's paintings: http://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=1545 There are more images of Frank's work here at OL, and I'll post more links as I fing them. J Am I wrong, Jonathan? I'm 99.99% sure he did that one. If I'm wrong, sorry. I don't want to confuse Cathy any more. I'm sure I'm right. Someone here will know.

Have you seen any of Frank's pictures? He did a cover for Atlas Shrugged. Really a talented artist. You need to scroll down a bit It. It's right next to a picture of Frank. Y http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_ayn_rand_aynrand_timeline's