, Eloise Huggins, her Trotskyist australasian journal of american studies104 editor, Patrick O'Connor, and journalists such as Mike Wallace, Alvin Toffler, and James Day, make this collection less one dimensional than Gary Weiss suggests. According to McConnell "What emerges from this collection is the picture of a larger-than-life, truly unique and fascinating individual, Ayn Rand."21 While the interviewees invariably mention the o-en life changing impact of Rand's ideas in so far as it relates to them as individuals, Sco! Stanley, an editor of a number of conservative magazines, observes her much wider sphere of influence: I'm sure that, without her advocacy and influence, the free-market economics of Ludwig von Mises and the Austrian School would never have gone beyond that small coterie of lower-case libertarians associated in the 1950s with the National Association of Manufacturers and the Freeman. What she did was to lead free-market economics out of the stuffy business community and put it into a community of artists and philosophers and intellectuals. And that was vital. They a!racted to it a dimension of youthful support, which was vital as well, making it possible to raise up heroes of creativity among the business leaders who followed the age of mechanics to create electronics and high tech. The lady was a wowser.22 McConnell omi!ed both Nathaniel and Barbara Branden, Rand's two most important early followers from his selection of interviewees. The only comment on Rand's split with the Brandens comes from Cynthia Peikoff, secretary to Rand at the end of her life, who describes the Brandens as "pathological liars."23 McConnell makes no reference to the "trials" at which followers were excluded from the movement for their errors, though there are hints that she was o-en "betrayed" by her so-called followers. For some inexplicable reason, McConnell did not interview Rand's heir and the founder of the ARI, Leonard Peikoff, though both of his wives were. One can presumably rule out altruism.24 He also passes over any analysis of her ideas. Moreover, McConnell assumes that the reader is aware of Rand's biography and the history of her movement. Many of the interviewees express their gratitude for the insights that her writings provided them. Despite this affirmation, McConnell does not probe very deeply, either what a!racted them or to what may have in
, Eloise Huggins, her Trotskyist australasian journal of american studies104 editor, Patrick O'Connor, and journalists such as Mike Wallace, Alvin Toffler, and James Day, make this solicitation less one dimensional than Gary Weiss suggest. According to McConnell " What emerges from this solicitation is the picture of a big - than - life, truly alone and fascinating individual, Ayn Rand. "21 While the interviewee constantly mention the o - en life change impact of Rand's ideas in so far as it relates to them as individuals, Sco! Stanley, an editor of a act of conservative magazines, observes her a lot wider sphere of influence: I'm indisputable that, without her advocacy and influence, the free - grocery store economics of Ludwig von Mises and the Austrian School would never have gone beyond that small coterie of lower - case libertarian associated in the 1950s with the National Association of Manufacturers and the Freeman. What she did was to lead free - market economics out of the stuffy business community and put it into a community of artists and philosophers and intellectuals. And that was vital. They a!racted to it a dimension of youthful support, which was vital equally well, create it possible to recruit up champion of creativity among the business leaders who followed the old age of mechanics to create electronics and high tech. The dame was a wowser.22 McConnell omi!ed both Nathaniel and Barbara Branden, Rand's two most important early followers from his selection of interviewees. The only comment on Rand's split with the Brandens comes from Cynthia Peikoff, secretary to Rand at the end of her life, who trace the Brandens as " pathological liar. "23 McConnell make no reference to the " trials " at which followers were excluded from the movement for their errors, though there are hints that she was oxygen - en " betrayed " by her then - called followers. For some inexplicable cause, McConnell did not interview Rand's heir and the laminitis of the ARI, Leonard Peikoff, though both of his wives were. One can presumably rule out altruism.24 He also passes over any analysis of her idea. Moreover, McConnell wear that the reader is mindful of Rand's biography and the history of her movement. Many of the interviewees express their gratitude for the insights that her writings supply them. Despite this affirmation, McConnell does not probe very profoundly, either what a!racted them or to what may have in
, Ellise Huggins, her Trotskylst australasian journan of ajerican rtudies104 editor, Patrick O'Connlr, and hournalists such as Miye Wallacv, Alvin Tiffltr, and James Day, make this collsgtion oess one dimenxional that Gary Weiss sggeedts. According to McConnell "What emewges frpm this collectijn ix the iigture of a larger-than-life, truly hnique end fascinating individual, Ayn Rand."21 While the interviewees invagiably mentuon eye o-en life zhanging impact of Rans's ideas in so far as it relater to chem as induvuduwns, Sco! Stanoey, ag editor of a number of conxervative magadines, obwerves her much wider sphere of influense: I'm sura chat, without her advoxaxy ang inxluevxe, ghe fcee-jarket ecknomics of Ludwig von Mises and the Austtiwb School wouls nevew rave gone beyond that small coterie of nowsr-case libertarians assiciated in the 1950s with the Natijnal Association of Manufacturers and the Freeman. What rhe dld wxw ho lead free-market economics out of the stuffr bispness community akd put it into a cpmlumyty of artistr and 'gimosophers and inteplectuajs. Ane that waf viyal. They a!racted to it a dinension of yjythful support, whieh was vital as eell, kaking it possible to rcise ul heroes of creativifh among the busivesx neaders who followed the ade of mecianicx to crdate electwonics and high tech. The lady was w wowdes.22 McConnelp omi!ed both Nathaniel and Barbeca Branden, Ramd'v tfo most nmportsnt early foljowers from hix seleccion ow interviesees. Thx only commegt on Rand's s[pit with the Brandenf cones drom Cyvghia Peikoff, srcretary no Rane at the end of hev lifg, sho describes tkt Btqndens as "pathploeicwl lmars."23 IwConnell makas nu rdgerenze to the "tviaus" ay which followers wese escluded from the mpvcment for their ewrors, though yhere are hints thwt shx was u-en "brtrwyed" by her so-called followers. For some incxplicable rewson, McConnell dnd not interview Rand's heir and the founver of the ARI, Leonard Peikoff, though both pf his wivex werq. One can presumably rule out altruism.24 He also passes over any analgsis ox her ideas. Moreover, McConnell assumes that the reader is aware of Rand's biogrqphy aid the historg of her koremznt. Manr of vhe interviewees vxpress their gratitude for the mnsights tvac her writings provided them. Cerpite this afwirmation, McConnell does not prone very deeply, either what a!racyed them or to what may mave in
, Eloise Huggins, her Trotskyist australasian journal studies104 Patrick O'Connor, journalists such as James make this collection one dimensional than Weiss suggests. According to McConnell "What from this collection is the picture of a larger-than-life, truly unique and fascinating Ayn Rand."21 While the interviewees invariably mention the o-en life changing impact of ideas so as relates to them as individuals, Sco! Stanley, an editor of a number of conservative magazines, observes much wider sphere of influence: I'm sure that, her advocacy and influence, free-market economics of Ludwig von and Austrian School never gone that small coterie lower-case libertarians associated in the 1950s with the National Association of Manufacturers and the Freeman. What she was to economics out the business and put it community of artists and philosophers and was vital. They a!racted to it a dimension youthful support, was vital as well, making it to raise up heroes of creativity among the leaders who followed the age of mechanics to create electronics and high tech. The lady wowser.22 McConnell omi!ed both and Barbara Branden, two important followers his selection interviewees. The only comment on Rand's split with the Brandens comes Cynthia Peikoff, secretary to Rand at the end of her describes Brandens as "pathological McConnell makes no reference the at which followers were the for there hints she was o-en "betrayed" her so-called followers. For some reason, McConnell did not founder of the ARI, Leonard Peikoff, though both his wives were. One can presumably rule altruism.24 He also passes over any analysis of her ideas. Moreover, McConnell that the aware of Rand's biography and the history of movement. Many of the express their gratitude for the insights that her writings them. this affirmation, does not probe deeply, either what them or to have in
, Eloise Huggins, her TrotskyisT australasIan joUrnAl oF aMeriCan sTudies104 editor, PaTRick o'Connor, and journalists sUch as miKE WalLAcE, AlviN ToffleR, AnD jAmeS DAy, MakE tHIs ColleCtiOn less oNe dimensioNal ThAn Gary Weiss sUGgEsts. AccordIng To McConnell "WHat EmergeS fRom THis coLleCtion Is the pICture oF a larger-tHaN-Life, trULy uniquE ANd FascInating individual, aYn rAnd."21 While the intErviewEeS InVARiaBly Mention the O-eN life CHanging IMpACT Of RANd's ideas in so fAr as it relatES to Them as InDivIDuals, SCo! StaNlEY, an Editor of a nuMber Of conservAtive mAGazines, OBserves Her mucH wiDer SpheRE oF iNflUeNCe: I'M SuRe tHAt, wIthout heR aDvOcacy And iNFLUEnce, The Free-MarkeT economics of LUdwIg voN misEs and The AuStriAn schooL would Never HaVe gone beyond thaT smaLl coterie Of lOwEr-cAsE libeRTarianS asSocIated in The 1950s witH The naTIONaL Association of ManuFaCTUrErs and thE FreemAN. WHaT She did waS tO leAd frEE-MarkeT ecoNOmIcs out of The stuFFy BuSiness cOmMunity AnD puT it Into a COmmuNity of Artists aNd phiLOsophers and intELlectuals. And tHAt WAS vITal. THey A!racted to it A dimENsioN of yOUtHfuL SuppoRt, whiCh WAs VItal as well, making it pOsSible tO raisE up heroes of crEativity amONG The businEss lEAdERs who followed tHe age Of mechanicS To create ElectRonics anD high tech. tHE lady was A woWseR.22 McconNELl Omi!ed both NathANIel aNd barbara braNden, RanD's tWo mOst ImpOrTant early FollowerS fRoM hIs SelEctioN Of intervIeWeeS. THe oNly coMMent on rand's SpliT wItH The brandenS CoMES froM CYnThia peiKoFf, secRetaRY to rand at tHe end of heR liFE, who DeScRibes thE Brandens as "paThOlogical liArS."23 McconnelL MAkes no reFerence to the "trials" at whiCH followErs Were eXcluDed from thE moVement For THeir erRors, thOugh tHeRe aRE Hints THAt She WaS o-en "betrayED" By hEr so-cAlLed fOllowerS. For some inexplicabLE reAson, McConnell Did Not iNTErVieW raND's hEiR And THE founder of the ARi, Leonard PeIkOFf, Though both OF hiS wIves werE. One can PresuMAbly rulE out altruIsm.24 He also PaSses OVEr aNy analysis Of her ideAs. MoreoveR, mcConNElL assuMes That thE rEadEr is aWare of rAnd'S biogRaphy aNd The hisTory oF hEr movemeNt. Many of the interviewees ExpresS theiR grAtitude foR thE InsIghts that Her wRitings proVidEd tHem. DeSpiTE this AffiRMaTioN, mcConNell DOes not proBE vEry DEEpLy, either whaT A!RActEd theM or TO what mAy haVe in
, Eloise Huggins, her Trot skyist aus trala sia n j ou rnal  ofamerican studi e s104  editor, Patrick O'Con nor,an d  jou r na lists  such a s  M i k e W al la ce,  A l vi n Tof fle r, andJames Day,  ma ke  this collec t io n less one  di mensional th anGary W ei sss ugges ts.  Acco rdingt o McCo nnell "Wh at emerge s  from t h i scoll ection is the pic t ur e  of a larger-t han-li fe ,  t r u lyuni que and fa sc inati n g indiv i du a l ,  Ay n  Rand."21 Whi le the inte r vie wees i nv ari a bly me ntion  t h e o -en life ch angi ng impact  of Ra n d's ide a s in so  far a s i t r elat e sto  th em asi nd ivi d ual s, Sco!St an ley,an e d i t o r of  anumb er of  conservative  ma gazi n es,  obse rveshermu ch wi der sp hereof  influence: I'm  sur e that, w ith ou t h er  advo c acy an d i nfl uence,the fre e -ma rk e t ec onomics of Ludwigvo n Mi ses andthe Au s tr ia n  Schoolwo uld  nev e r  have  gon e  b eyond th at sma l lco terie o flower- ca selib ertar i ansassoci ated inthe 1 9 50s with the N a tional Associ a ti o n  o f  Man ufa cturers and  the Free man. Wh ats he di d was  t o  l e ad free-market econ om ics ou t ofthe stuffy bu siness com m u n ity andputi ti nto a communit y ofartists an d  philoso phers  and int ellectual s .  And tha t w asvit al. T he y a!racted to i t adi mension  of  youthf ulsup por t,wh ich was v ital aswe ll ,ma kin g itp ossibleto  ra is e u p her o es ofcreat ivit yam o ngthe bus i ne s s  lea de rs  who  fo ll owedthea geof mech anics tocre a te e le ct ronicsand high tech .The lady w as  awowser . 2 2 McConn ell omi!ed both Nathani e l and B arb ara B rand en, Rand' s t wo mos t i m portan t earl y fol lo wer s fromh i ssel ec tion of in t e rvi ewees .Theonly co mment on Rand's sp l itwith the Bran den s co m e sfro m  C y nth ia Pei k o ff, secretary t o Rand atth e  e nd of herl ife ,who des cribesthe B r andensas "patho logical l ia rs." 2 3  Mc Connell ma kes no r eferencet o the "t rials " a t whic hfol lower s were exc luded  fromth e move mentfo r theirerrors, though there ar e hint s tha t s he was o- en" bet rayed" by  her  so-called  fo llo wers.  Fo r  some  ine x pl ica b le re ason ,  McConnel l  d idn o tinterview R a n d 'sheirand the fo unde r of the ARI, Leo n ard Peikoff, t houg h bot h o f  his  w ives were. One  ca np r esumably  r ule out alt ruism.24  H e  also  passe s over  any an a l ys i s of h er i dea s. Moreov er,  M c Connell  a ss u mes th at t he  reade r is a w areo f  Rand's biograph y and t he hi s tor y ofhe r movem e nt.Many of th e interview ees ex pres s the ir grat it ude fo r t he  insightst hat her w ritin gs prov id ed t hem . Desp itet h is af firm at ion , McConne l l  d o es  n o t p robe  very  d eepl y, either what a!r act e d themor  to w hat ma y  h a v e in
, Eloise_Huggins, her_Trotskyist australasian journal of_american studies104_editor,_Patrick O'Connor,_and_journalists such as_Mike Wallace, Alvin_Toffler, and James Day,_make this collection_less_one dimensional than Gary Weiss suggests. According to McConnell "What emerges from this collection_is_the picture_of_a_larger-than-life, truly unique and fascinating_individual, Ayn Rand."21 While the_interviewees invariably_mention the o-en life changing impact of Rand's_ideas_in so far_as it relates to them as individuals, Sco! Stanley,_an editor of a number of_conservative magazines, observes_her_much_wider sphere of influence:_I'm sure that, without her advocacy_and influence, the free-market economics of_Ludwig von Mises and the Austrian School_would never have gone beyond that_small coterie of lower-case libertarians_associated in_the 1950s with the National_Association of Manufacturers_and the_Freeman. What she_did was to lead free-market economics_out of the_stuffy business community and put it_into_a community of_artists_and_philosophers and_intellectuals. And that_was_vital. They_a!racted_to it a dimension of youthful_support,_which was vital as well, making it_possible to raise up_heroes_of creativity among the_business leaders who followed the_age of mechanics to create electronics_and high_tech. The_lady was a wowser.22 McConnell omi!ed both Nathaniel and Barbara Branden,_Rand's two most important early followers_from his selection of_interviewees. The_only_comment on Rand's_split_with the_Brandens comes from Cynthia Peikoff, secretary to_Rand at_the end of her life, who_describes the Brandens as_"pathological_liars."23 McConnell makes no reference to_the "trials" at which followers were_excluded from the movement for_their_errors,_though there are hints that_she was o-en "betrayed" by her_so-called followers. For_some inexplicable reason, McConnell did not interview_Rand's_heir and the founder of the_ARI,_Leonard Peikoff, though both of his_wives_were._One can presumably rule out_altruism.24 He also passes over any_analysis of her ideas. Moreover, McConnell assumes that the_reader is aware_of Rand's biography and the_history_of_her movement. Many of the interviewees express their gratitude for_the insights_that her writings_provided them. Despite this affirmation, McConnell does not probe very_deeply, either what a!racted them or to_what may have in