Reading DeLillo's Cosmopolis Through Ayn Rand

[Selene]

What does a Jewish woman make for dinner?

Reservations.

[seymourblogger]

Subject: Biographical Writing

> I can only say that if you think BB bio was "full of deep insight and very well written" that you need to read some great bio. [sB]

What would be some examples you've read that you would consider better than BB's? What are the greatest ones** you've read?

I'm not asking this skeptically. I would be very interested and especially if you*** could mention what are your standards for what makes a -great- biography. (Bios are one area or genre where I haven't read as much as I should so I'm looking for information*.)

**I hope they are not all political.

***If others are big bio enough readers as well (not all political) to have some basis for comparison....

* My tentative view is that biography is one of the more difficult writing forms.

Elsewhere I said try Thomas Mallon's A Book of One's Own http://www.amazon.co...27966557&sr=1-9 NOt exactly what you were asking for but it will do.

Do not talk about your own sex life in a bio about someone else. Save that for your own. Or call it your own not The Passion of Ayn Rand. Glug. What an unfortunate choice of a title. And she was my teacher so I feel free saying what I want about her. Has anyone else here watched her and listened to her for two years straight. Hello.......bio

Your rules (or Mallone's, haven't read him) are interesting. In part, technically, you are right in that Barbara's bio did incorporate part memoir, and she presented this honestly.

Xray's evaluation was right, and yours was wrong. The book was insightful, it was beautifully written. Furthermore, it was as objective as she could make it, I think, and as well researched as it could have been, given the constraints the "heir to the Estate" put on materials and even people who could give information.

I have read hundreds of biographies. Have you? I am fully qualified, although not by the Sorbonne, to read them and judge them as a reader. Are you?

Right and wrong, here we go, back into the dialectic.

Here's my answer.

Recently I ate at a restaurant and at the check out she pasted on a smile and said, "How was your mean today?"

I said, "It was awful. Thank you for asking." (She was a woman of color.)

A guy behind me said, "I thought it was really good. I'll come back again."

I said, "Well I guess it was really good if you are used to eating at McDonald's."

It's all relative said Einstein.

Don't feel bad about not teaching at the Sorbonne. Foucault couldn't even come close to getting an appointment there. Neither could Baudrillard, so you are in excellent company. And they kicked out Lacan.

Good, instructive answer. Did you paste on the smile because your server was a woman of colour?

Did the other customer praise the food in reaction to your rudeness?

Does the idea of "someone used to eating at McDonald's" influence one's taste buds?

Read please: I said SHE pasted on a smile, not me.

Yes I think McDonald's effects your taste buds. They do it deliberately with salt and sugar. Any macrobiotic eater knows that.

Remember Barbaraq Streisand in Prince of Tides:

She orders a dinner for them at a French restaurant, in French.

Nolte says to her, "I thought you didn't cook."

She says, "I don't. But I know how to eat."

And why the hell is it rude to say a dinner was lousy when they've just charged you $15 for it? She wasn't a friend that I would be willing to deny reality for and lie. Are you telling me I should deny reality and not tell her the truth. Shame on you.

[seymourblogger]

What does a Jewish woman make for dinner?

Reservations.

I love it. You are so funny.

[seymourblogger]

I have read hundreds of biographies. Have you? I am fully qualified, although not by the Sorbonne, to read them and judge them as a reader. Are you?

Fully qualified. Wow! Do you have a certificate? Who issued it? Was it a presidential proclamation? Hundreds? Thousands? Oh my! I am duly chastised and absolutely impressed.

[seymourblogger]

What exactly do you criticize about B. Branden's book on Rand? Imo the book is full of deep insight and very well written.

I can only say that if you think BB bio was "full of deep insight and very well written" that you need to read some great bio.

This statement of yours voices a mere personal opinion without replying to what I had asked you: " What exaclty do you criticize about B. Branden's book on Rand?"

So if you would please be more specific.

This is exactly the message Toohey gave in Fountainhead; Ignore and render obsolete the excellent, reduce the aesthetic taste of the masses to mediocrity and you have destroyed excellence. <b>This is what evil is. This is why Rand brands Toohey as evil. Not because he is a hatchet murderer. </b>

See above. Copying 'Toohey's message' and suggesting that this constitues evidence to support your claim is a thinking error. Its fallacy lies in presenting a mere personal opinion as alleged evidence.

I already said it quite a few times now. In three different ways.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Does that soften it?

Yes.

That's why I asked and did not "accuse" as you said in an earlier post.

Did you read the posting guidelines?

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Xray's evaluation was right, and yours was wrong. The book was insightful, it was beautifully written. Furthermore, it was as objective as she could make it, I think, and as well researched as it could have been, given the constraints the "heir to the Estate" put on materials and even people who could give information.

Carol,

I share your opinion.

Also, Semourblogger is very sloppy on details (outright wrong on a few), but I don't feel like correcting them all.

Michael

[seymourblogger]

Does that soften it?

Yes.

That's why I asked and did not "accuse" as you said in an earlier post.

Did you read the posting guidelines?

Michael

I have the right to remain silent. Anything I say can and will be used against me. Too bad Martha Stewart didn't remember that when she was being set up.

[seymourblogger]

Seymourblogger,

You think Barbara Branden's intention in writing Passion was Ellsworth Toohey kind of evil?

(If you bothered to read the posting guidelines, you will see that this actually does start cutting into your so-called "dominating discourse.")

I want to be sure before I say more.

Michael

No of course not. How did you read that in my words. BB had nothing to do with what I said. I was referring to x-ray saying he thought it was deeply insightful and well written. It was neither BTW, but it is one of the only 2 accounts written by the 2 people who knew her best. If there had been more who knew her and wrote about her, BB would not have been so likely to get published or would have had certain things highly edited out of it. I cannot even imagine how so much got through an editor.

My criticism was of the person who showed a lack of discrimination. IMO. Does that soften it?

Were you baiting me? Knowingly or not?

[seymourblogger]

Subject: Biographical Writing

> I can only say that if you think BB bio was "full of deep insight and very well written" that you need to read some great bio. [sB]

What would be some examples you've read that you would consider better than BB's? What are the greatest ones** you've read?

I'm not asking this skeptically. I would be very interested and especially if you*** could mention what are your standards for what makes a -great- biography. (Bios are one area or genre where I haven't read as much as I should so I'm looking for information*.)

**I hope they are not all political.

***If others are big bio enough readers as well (not all political) to have some basis for comparison....

* My tentative view is that biography is one of the more difficult writing forms.

Elsewhere I said try Thomas Mallon's A Book of One's Own http://www.amazon.co...27966557&sr=1-9 NOt exactly what you were asking for but it will do.

Do not talk about your own sex life in a bio about someone else. Save that for your own. Or call it your own not The Passion of Ayn Rand. Glug. What an unfortunate choice of a title. And she was my teacher so I feel free saying what I want about her. Has anyone else here watched her and listened to her for two years straight. Hello.......bio

Your rules (or Mallone's, haven't read him) are interesting. In part, technically, you are right in that Barbara's bio did incorporate part memoir, and she presented this honestly.

Xray's evaluation was right, and yours was wrong. The book was insightful, it was beautifully written. Furthermore, it was as objective as she could make it, I think, and as well researched as it could have been, given the constraints the "heir to the Estate" put on materials and even people who could give information.

I have read hundreds of biographies. Have you? I am fully qualified, although not by the Sorbonne, to read them and judge them as a reader. Are you?

I don't agree she presented it honestly. The title was The Passion of Ayn Rand, so why did her agoraphobia and sex neuroses have to be included. For titilation?

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Were you baiting me? Knowingly or not?

Seymourblogger,

No.

I was asking.

I use the epistemological method of identify correctly in order to evaluate correctly. I go from the idea that how can you evaluate something when you don't know what it is? As I don't like to evaluate things I am in doubt about, I ask.

There is a story behind why I have restrictions against gratuitous Branden-bashing on OL (a quite explicit "dominant discourse" to use your jargon--and it is one I will enforce).

Michael

[caroljane]

Subject: Biographical Writing

> I can only say that if you think BB bio was "full of deep insight and very well written" that you need to read some great bio. [sB]

What would be some examples you've read that you would consider better than BB's? What are the greatest ones** you've read?

I'm not asking this skeptically. I would be very interested and especially if you*** could mention what are your standards for what makes a -great- biography. (Bios are one area or genre where I haven't read as much as I should so I'm looking for information*.)

**I hope they are not all political.

***If others are big bio enough readers as well (not all political) to have some basis for comparison....

* My tentative view is that biography is one of the more difficult writing forms.

Elsewhere I said try Thomas Mallon's A Book of One's Own http://www.amazon.co...27966557&sr=1-9 NOt exactly what you were asking for but it will do.

Do not talk about your own sex life in a bio about someone else. Save that for your own. Or call it your own not The Passion of Ayn Rand. Glug. What an unfortunate choice of a title. And she was my teacher so I feel free saying what I want about her. Has anyone else here watched her and listened to her for two years straight. Hello.......bio

Your rules (or Mallone's, haven't read him) are interesting. In part, technically, you are right in that Barbara's bio did incorporate part memoir, and she presented this honestly.

Xray's evaluation was right, and yours was wrong. The book was insightful, it was beautifully written. Furthermore, it was as objective as she could make it, I think, and as well researched as it could have been, given the constraints the "heir to the Estate" put on materials and even people who could give information.

I have read hundreds of biographies. Have you? I am fully qualified, although not by the Sorbonne, to read them and judge them as a reader. Are you?

I don't agree she presented it honestly. The title was The Passion of Ayn Rand, so why did her agoraphobia and sex neuroses have to be included. For titilation?

As I said, she incorporated memoir elements and presented them honestly. As a friend as well as a biographer she disclosed her own premises, which included her own circumstances. Her title was accurate.

[seymourblogger]

Were you baiting me? Knowingly or not?

Seymourblogger,

No.

I was asking.

I use the epistemological method of identify correctly in order to evaluate correctly. I go from the idea that how can you evaluate something when you don't know what it is? As I don't like to evaluate things I am in doubt about, I ask.

There is a story behind why I have restrictions against gratuitous Branden-bashing on OL (a quite explicit "dominant discourse" to use your jargon--and it is one I will enforce).

Michael

Well then I really don't see how you could have even thought I was saying that BB did it on purpose. That would just be sloppy reading, and I don't want to think that either. So again, what part of it made you think that?

[caroljane]

I have read hundreds of biographies. Have you? I am fully qualified, although not by the Sorbonne, to read them and judge them as a reader. Are you?

Fully qualified. Wow! Do you have a certificate? Who issued it? Was it a presidential proclamation? Hundreds? Thousands? Oh my! I am duly chastised and absolutely impressed.

So you should be. And I acknowledge no presidents.

[seymourblogger]

Subject: Biographical Writing

> I can only say that if you think BB bio was "full of deep insight and very well written" that you need to read some great bio. [sB]

What would be some examples you've read that you would consider better than BB's? What are the greatest ones** you've read?

I'm not asking this skeptically. I would be very interested and especially if you*** could mention what are your standards for what makes a -great- biography. (Bios are one area or genre where I haven't read as much as I should so I'm looking for information*.)

**I hope they are not all political.

***If others are big bio enough readers as well (not all political) to have some basis for comparison....

* My tentative view is that biography is one of the more difficult writing forms.

Elsewhere I said try Thomas Mallon's A Book of One's Own http://www.amazon.co...27966557&sr=1-9 NOt exactly what you were asking for but it will do.

Do not talk about your own sex life in a bio about someone else. Save that for your own. Or call it your own not The Passion of Ayn Rand. Glug. What an unfortunate choice of a title. And she was my teacher so I feel free saying what I want about her. Has anyone else here watched her and listened to her for two years straight. Hello.......bio

Your rules (or Mallone's, haven't read him) are interesting. In part, technically, you are right in that Barbara's bio did incorporate part memoir, and she presented this honestly.

Xray's evaluation was right, and yours was wrong. The book was insightful, it was beautifully written. Furthermore, it was as objective as she could make it, I think, and as well researched as it could have been, given the constraints the "heir to the Estate" put on materials and even people who could give information.

I have read hundreds of biographies. Have you? I am fully qualified, although not by the Sorbonne, to read them and judge them as a reader. Are you?

I don't agree she presented it honestly. The title was The Passion of Ayn Rand, so why did her agoraphobia and sex neuroses have to be included. For titilation?

As I said, she incorporated memoir elements and presented them honestly. As a friend as well as a biographer she disclosed her own premises, which included her own circumstances. Her title was accurate.

Well it was accurate for the book sales department for sure. Buy a book about Rand and get BB's psychic disorders. Hope that's not too far out of hand. I can take it back.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Well then I really don't see how you could have even thought I was saying that BB did it on purpose.

I didn't think that.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Buy a book about Rand and get BB's psychic disorders. Hope that's not too far out of hand. I can take it back.

Seymourblogger,

It's a good idea to start toning it down.

Michael

[seymourblogger]

Well then I really don't see how you could have even thought I was saying that BB did it on purpose.

I didn't think that.

Michael

Then what did you think? Jes askin.

[seymourblogger]

Buy a book about Rand and get BB's psychic disorders. Hope that's not too far out of hand. I can take it back.

Seymourblogger,

It's a good idea to start toning it down.

Michael

Well then I really don't see how you could have even thought I was saying that BB did it on purpose.

I didn't think that.

Michael

Then what did you think? Jes askin.

Well then I really don't see how you could have even thought I was saying that BB did it on purpose.

I didn't think that.

Michael

Then what did you think? Jes askin.

Well then I really don't see how you could have even thought I was saying that BB did it on purpose.

I didn't think that.

Michael

Then what did you think? Jes askin.

[Ellen Stuttle]

Re post #66:

Is there any indication if "Janet Abbey" is "Seymourblogger"s real name?

I'm being reminded of a person who for awhile posted extensively on ATL, and the age given matches. But there could be two such, I suppose, both of whom claim to have been students of Barbara's in 60-61.

Ellen

EDIT, 4:14 p.m.: Scratch the suspicion that "Seymourblogger" is the former ATL-poster, too different in subject matter, and in style, on closer examining.

I sure would like to know that link. I remember some people there, but not all. Her name?

You remember some people on ATL?

I'm not sure what you mean by "that link" -- the link of my briefly being reminded, due to volume, dates, and age, of an ATL poster? Or do you mean a link to ATL posts? If the latter, there isn't one. Those posts are only available, unfortunately, in the personal archives of folks who saved them. (I'm speaking here of the original ATL, not ATL-2.)

The first name of the person I meant I think was Sharon, and the last name I think was something like -- this is just phonetic -- Ragmouli. Although I saved most of the ATL posts, I threw out hers. They were taking up too much disk space. The computer I was using then was "primitive" by current standards.

Ellen

[Ellen Stuttle]

And here's the most readable book on diaries and biographies by Thomas Mallon: http://www.amazon.com/Book-Ones-Own-People-Diaries/dp/1886913021/ref=sr_1_9?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1327966557&sr=1-9

So if you cannot tell the difference between well written and BB bio on Rand, this book will show you.

May I add that a good bio does not write about a person and then spend pages describing her panic attacks, inability to achieve orgasm with her husband, etc. That stuff belongs on the couch not in a bio about Rand.

Someone said, forget, that the person who should have written Rand's bio was Iris Murdoch. Yes and yes and yes. A Cambridge (Oxford?) Don in philosophy who wrote marvelous novels was the perfect choice.

I love the thought of Iris Murdoch doing a bio of Rand (though would she have wanted to, and besides she became ill in the 90s?), but I don't agree that BB's book isn't well written or that the stuff in it belonged on the couch. I think the great virtue of BB's book is the personal stuff, the story of which needed to be told as personal.

Incidentally, re:

Rothbard said that Rand was furious when Barbara Branden was criticized in her writing group.

Where did you get that? In conversation the afternoon you mentioned (here) visiting his apartment? Sounds to me like either he or you got it backward. Barbara tells the story of Rand becoming furious with her, Barbara, when Barbara criticized an early story of Rand's which hadn't been identified as such.

Ellen

[Ellen Stuttle]

It's all relative said Einstein.

No, Einstein did not say it's all relative. That's an egregious, though widespread, misrepresentation of Einstein.

The dialectic trudges on........

Ellen

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

No, Einstein did not say it's all relative.

Ellen,

That phrase is a quip. I believe it comes from an old joke. I heard the following version during an orchestra rehearsal in São Paulo.

A young German guest conductor (I no longer remember his name) was introduced to us and started the rehearsal. (He was doing the Overture to Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg by Wagner.) He came off as really arrogant and snotty. He stopped and started with no rhyme or reason in order to pontificate. This leads an orchestra to become undisciplined in no time flat.

So the first trumpet player who sat next to me (an Amercian named Ted) gave me a nod that he was going to have some fun. When a cue for an important trumpet passage came around, Ted let 'er rip really loud. He practically drowned out the rest of the orchestra.

The conductor stopped again, but, after a turmpet blast like that, some people kept playing. Gradually they started playing different things. Some started going over difficult passages, others did a riff or two they normally did, and so on. It got to the point where it sounded like an orchestra warming up but it gradually got softer. As soon as he could be heard, the conductor asked, "Who was the most important man in human history?"

Then it started getting quiet real quick as the musicians thought, "Huh?" Even though the conductor was speaking in English (with a German accent) and not Portuguese, many orchestra members could understand a little English.

He asked again, "Who was the most important man in human history?"

Silence. Long pause.

He pointed to his head. "Some people say it was Socrates because he said this is important."

He pointed to his heart. "Some people say it was Jesus Christ because he said this is important."

He pointed to his genitals. "Some people say it was Sigmund Freud because he said this is important."

Then he stared straight at the trumpet player, held the glance for a few seconds without moving, and said, "But Einstein was the most important. He said it's all relative. A little softer, please?"

People cracked up and some members translated for the others who did not understand English, then they cracked up. With that he won over the orchestra. The discipline problems became a lot less, the conductor himself became less eratic (for whatever reason) and we ended up having a pretty good concert.

I'm almost sure this joke has been used in other situations.

Hmmmm... I'm glad I remembered that. If it hasn't been used in other places, it soon will be. (I'm thinking of some markeing things I'm making elsewhere...)

Michael

[Ellen Stuttle]

No, Einstein did not say it's all relative.

Ellen,

That phrase is a quip. I believe it comes from an old joke.

I'm glad it was a joke in the story you tell (funny story), but I've known lots of people to say it thinking it's true (in both respects, both that Einstein said it and that everything is relative).

Ellen

[seymourblogger]

Re post #66:

Is there any indication if "Janet Abbey" is "Seymourblogger"s real name?

I'm being reminded of a person who for awhile posted extensively on ATL, and the age given matches. But there could be two such, I suppose, both of whom claim to have been students of Barbara's in 60-61.

Ellen

EDIT, 4:14 p.m.: Scratch the suspicion that "Seymourblogger" is the former ATL-poster, too different in subject matter, and in style, on closer examining.

I sure would like to know that link. I remember some people there, but not all. Her name?

You remember some people on ATL?

I'm not sure what you mean by "that link" -- the link of my briefly being reminded, due to volume, dates, and age, of an ATL poster? Or do you mean a link to ATL posts? If the latter, there isn't one. Those posts are only available, unfortunately, in the personal archives of folks who saved them. (I'm speaking here of the original ATL, not ATL-2.)

The first name of the person I meant I think was Sharon, and the last name I think was something like -- this is just phonetic -- Ragmouli. Although I saved most of the ATL posts, I threw out hers. They were taking up too much disk space. The computer I was using then was "primitive" by current standards.

Ellen

Thanks. I don't remember her or anyone named Sharon.