Interview with David Harriman

[Mark]

The interview starting at the point where David Harriman talks about ARI:

youtube.com/watch?v=omYY29FtASE&t=1784s

I don't know anything about The Savvy Street or who runs it.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Mark,

The Savvy Street is run by a guy named Vinay Kolhatkar. I think he's from India, but don't quote me on that. I recall reading that somewhere, though. And Rand is big in India right now.

Vinay is on my radar because he writes fiction and seems to have generated his own audience from it. I admire that. I intend to look into his work more seriously later. My story-hacking project is in the way, though. I need to finish it, first. And that is a whole discussion in itself.

There are some other authors like him who are also on my radar--I want to dig into their works later. Walter Donway, Richard Gleaves, Erika Holzer, Alexandra York, Gen LaGreca, Kira Peikoff, Ed Cline, Andrew Bernstein, Kay Nolte Smith and I know I forgot some, maybe don't even know about others out there. They are all in the Randian orbit, they have all written novels, but none of them have broken into the big-time as mainstream novelists. Erika Holzer got close with Eye for an Eye being used for a movie starring Sally Fields, Kiefer Sutherland, Ed Harris and other first rate talent, but mainstream-wise, she is basically a one hit wonder (and I mean that technically, not derogatorily).

(I'm not including fiction authors like Terry Goodkind, Steve Ditko, etc., in this group because they know the storytelling secrets and techniques to get to the bigtime.)

I have some theories about why these authors don't go mainstream. In my theory, the reasons are rooted in the way fiction is taught in O-Land and even Rand's peculiar notion that evil has no power. But like with the story-hacking thing, that is for a different discussion.

 

I see that Harriman, from where I sit just from that video alone, pleases both you and me. He bashed the shit out of ARI (justly so, in my opinion) and he's obviously a Trump supporter.  

I remember when his book on induction--The Logical Leap--came out, there was quite a stir in O-Land because Peikoff promoted it and an ARI donor from Silicon Valley named McCaskey contested it. Peikoff managed to get McCaskey thrown out of ARI. And Harriman didn't last long at ARI after that affair, either. I didn't get involved much in that discussion back then, but in light of how corrupt the science community has recently shown to be, I think I am going to look into it again. I remember a now-deceased member of OL, Ted Keer, was slightly irritated with me because I did not go deeper into Harriman's book.

Once time permits, Harriman is someone I will probably seek out. He looks like a real person--not just a gob of premises--and a nice guy. But, hell, I should read his book, first. I mean, come on...

 

 

Speaking of seeking people out, I have only interacted with Vinay once before. He has studied a lot of the same storytelling techniques I have and he has written about them, but I've been trying to get the neuroscience and evolutionary psychology part nailed before I go out and start discussing this stuff with people like him.

On Facebook, he was strongly promoting the writing and writing advice of Chuck Palahniuk (the author of Fight Club). Actually, much of Palahniuk's writing advice I have read is good, although it can get goofy at times. But as a writer himself, Palahniuk gets way too weird for me. I mentioned this on Vinay's Facebook post and gave Palahniuk's short story, "Guts," as an example of what I mean. I don't resonate with that kind of story and don't ever want to read anything like it again. I linked to it in my comment and after a day or two, Vinay liked my comment. I think he saw what I meant.  

btw - You (the reader) can read "Guts" for free online here and here. And if those links stop working, just search for it. You will find it. But beware. Don't eat anything before you read it. And be prepared for the gross-out of all gross-outs. Palahniuk himself brags that some people faint when he reads it out loud to groups.

That was the only contact I have had with Vinay up to now. In the future, I have a feeling we will become cordial colleagues if not friends.

At least from this video, I now know what he looks like in motion and what he sounds like.

Seems like good people to me.

 

Thanks for posting this video.

Michael

[Neil Parille]

Is Harriman asked about his dishonest editing of The Journals of Ayn Rand?

[Neil Parille]

I'm skimming it.  Harriman says that young earth creationists believe all the fossils are fakes or plants.  I've never heard a YEC say that.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

2 minutes ago, Neil Parille said:

Is Harriman asked about his dishonest editing of The Journals of Ayn Rand?

Neil,

Nah. He just bashed ARI as corrupt and as something Ayn Rand, if she were able to come back, would blast to smithereens. He also set Leonard Peikoff aside as a goodness not touched by ARI's darkness. He seemed very protective of Peikoff, much in the same manner I have been protective of Barbara Branden. (Needless to say, I resonate with that.)

I have a feeling his worldview was shaken to the core when he was essentially cast out from the fold after being an insider. And now he looks out at the world, can't help seeing what he sees which is far different than the orthodoxy (now and before), but also can't help pegging some of it to his older ways of thinking. I felt his confidence wobbling even as he was holding onto it for all he's worth.

As you know, I have outlined a fiction work I hope to complete some century or other called The Apostate inspired by some of the things Barbara went through. I see some of the patterns I have been working on in Harriman's demeanor.

There is a lot he and I probably disagree on, but I have a lot of empathy for him, too. I wish him well and hope he gets his serenity back.

Michael