One advertisement for the L.A. Times states, "People who know what's important, and write it that way." Well, will someone please tell Carolyn See that before she tries to write about anything important, she had better learn first how to write what is. Did she just lose her glasses while reading Barbara Branden's biography, "The Passion of Ayn Rand," or is she just a pitiful thinker? In her review of the book, she skewers the facts, and gets right down to plain irrationality.
First, the facts. See says that Rand had a "strong attachment for certain kinds of trashy fiction," idolized Gary Cooper while she was in Russia, led an emotionally unstable life with her closest friends for nearly 20 years, had no sense of humor, "demanded" time to have an affair, tried to psychologize Nathaniel Branden into sleeping with her again, and had the "incessant American urge to form any kind of utopia."
Anyone using half his brain and having read and understood the book knows that 1) See's "trashy fiction" was Mickey Spillane and Ian Fleming; 2) Rand knew nothing of Cooper while in Russia and later only idealized, not idolized, his cinematic presence, not the man himself; 3) it was 14 years from the start of her affair to the breakup of NBI (Nathaniel Branden Institute); 4) she had a definite sense of humor that hid itself only when she was in a bad mood, just like anyone else; 5) she asked , not demanded , to have an affair, 6) she tried only to get Branden to think clearly while he was lying to her; and 7) did not form just any utopia; a truly objective person thinks about what he or she does, unlike See.