see, i actually agree that it was nobody's business whether they had an affiar or not (except obviously their spouses). my problem is that Rand did not continue to keep it private once she had been hurt. I feel that if a relationship, for whatever reason, is kept secret, then it ought to stay that way even when one person gets screwed over by the other. it's tough, of course, becuase when it's all going well then it's easy to keep the secret becuase the other person is your best friend and you can talkw to him/her so it's not "really" secret to you. but once things go south then you no longer have that best friend to talk to and it's so, so hard to keep it to yourself. but i really don't think that, considering rand's public position, she should have told everyone all that garbage. especially because now it's SUCH a huge part of the rand aura. when realy, it has nothing to do with objectivism. nothing at all.

(Reply) (Thread)

I agree it was nobody's business. I don't think I have a "right to know". I'm just curious. She definitely did not want the affair to come out. But she wanted to remove her seal of approval from her former lover and warn people away from him. So she issued a condemnation that raised a lot of questions, and then mostly kept her lips zipped, which had to be hard on her.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Very interesting. Wasn't it "Nathan" who spilled the beans? Or was it Barbara?
Arena

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

The major spillage of beans came with Barbara's bio, The Passion of Ayn Rand. That's what convinced me the affair had happened. Rumors had swirled for years, however. Valliant, in his book, mentions that someone who had house-sat for Nathan had looked through Nathan's papers and found evidence of the affair - and passed the information along to friends. So - beware of nosy house-sitters!

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)