What do you think?
Rate this book
My Years with Ayn Rand
Previous Praise for Nathaniel Branden"Relentlessly revealing. . . the myth of Ayn Rand gives way to a full-sized portrait in contrasting colors, appealing and appalling, potent and paradoxical. . . . it takes a special kind of nerve to write such a book."--Norman Cousins, author of Head First and The Healing Heart
Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged is one of the most influential books of the twentieth century-its popular impact ranked second only to the Bible in a major poll. Millions know Rand as one of this century's great thinkers, writers, and philosophers, yet much about the private Ayn Rand remains shrouded in mystery.
Who was Ayn Rand?
My Years with Ayn Rand charts the course of the clandestine, tempestuous relationship between the enigmatic author of Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead and Nathaniel Branden-her young disciple and future pioneer of the self-esteem movement. In this book, discover the real Ayn Rand through the eyes of the man who became her soul mate and shared her passions and philosophical ideals.
Their tragic and tumultuous love story began with a letter written by Branden as an admiring teenage fan and Anded, more than twenty years later, with accusations of betrayal and bitter recriminations. My Years with Ayn Rand paints an unforgettable portrait of Ayn Rand-whose ideas, even today, can generate a maelstrom of controversy.
432 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1989
11 people are currently reading
890 people want to read
About the author
Nathaniel Branden
187 books571 followersNathaniel Branden was a Canadian–American psychotherapist and writer known for his work in the psychology of self-esteem. A former associate and romantic partner of Ayn Rand, Branden also played a prominent role in the 1960s in promoting Rand's philosophy, Objectivism. Rand and Branden split acrimoniously in 1968, after which Branden focused on developing his own psychological theories and modes of therapy.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews
November 28, 2007
For anyone who's wondered about Ayn Rand, this has all the dirt - from a MUCH younger man who was her lover for many years and to whom she originally dedicated Atlas Shrugged. He later became a psychiatrist (a profession which Ayn Rand always loathed, considering the subconscious the "sewer" of the mind).
Ayn Rand used to make her husband take "walks" so that she could have sex with Brandon on her desk. My friend once wrote a paper about how she liked sex rough and certainly the rape scenes in her stories show a love of sadomaschism. Well, well, well, Ayn...are we in the "sewer" now?
Ayn Rand used to make her husband take "walks" so that she could have sex with Brandon on her desk. My friend once wrote a paper about how she liked sex rough and certainly the rape scenes in her stories show a love of sadomaschism. Well, well, well, Ayn...are we in the "sewer" now?
November 10, 2010
Some background...soon after leaving the safe haven of college and beginning what would be a slow progression toward an actual "profession," I discovered Ayn Rand. My father had recommended _Atlas Shrugged_ years before, which I read with some degree of tedium...but that´s another Goodreads review.
Suffice it to say that, being a young, naive, somewhat disoriented, reasonably intelligent person who was trying to make sense of the Real World, I glommed onto Ayn Rand's militant flavor of individualism like a starving cat at a tuna buffet. I wanted, desparately, somewhere in my eclectically idealistic psyche, to believe that the Randian universe of steely-eyed heroes and unwavering devotion to Something was something possible beyond the abundant pages of her books.
Enter "Judgement Day: My Years With Ayn Rand." I enjoyed it, which is to say, I think that Branden described these tumultuous years with what seemed an admirable mixture of clear-headed retrospect and self-awareness, and with that, I felt comforted to see that Ayn Rand's novelized fantasy world was in fact just that -- something that simply did not match the reality of her life or of that of those close to her. "Close," that is, as much as a pedestal will allow one to be. That said, this was my one and only purportedly "factual" account of any part of Ayn Rand's life, so how accurate it is I can't say.
A particularly telling thread of the book was the cult-like quality that the first band of Objectivists, of which Branden was more or less a founding member, supposedly developed, and Branden's preception that Rand's idealized fierce individualism, in the context of her immediate circle, devolved into what was actually a rigid ideological hierarchy, where Rand stood at the center and brooked little or no discord. It helped put her work into perspective, at least for me.
By "perspective," I mean essentially blowing my illusions about her philosophy straight to hell. Whatever inspiration I naively found in her one-dimensional portrayal of Reason and Ambition became much harder to sustain or take seriously after reading -- granted, through hardly unbiased eyes -- a portrayal of a desparately insecure, paranoid control freak with a near pathological disregard for the welfare or rights of even those closest to her.
All that said, the book is essentially in the "Tell-All" category -- written by a man whom Rand ultimately grew to despise. How accurate it therefore is, I suppose, is for others who actually knew her to judge.
Suffice it to say that, being a young, naive, somewhat disoriented, reasonably intelligent person who was trying to make sense of the Real World, I glommed onto Ayn Rand's militant flavor of individualism like a starving cat at a tuna buffet. I wanted, desparately, somewhere in my eclectically idealistic psyche, to believe that the Randian universe of steely-eyed heroes and unwavering devotion to Something was something possible beyond the abundant pages of her books.
Enter "Judgement Day: My Years With Ayn Rand." I enjoyed it, which is to say, I think that Branden described these tumultuous years with what seemed an admirable mixture of clear-headed retrospect and self-awareness, and with that, I felt comforted to see that Ayn Rand's novelized fantasy world was in fact just that -- something that simply did not match the reality of her life or of that of those close to her. "Close," that is, as much as a pedestal will allow one to be. That said, this was my one and only purportedly "factual" account of any part of Ayn Rand's life, so how accurate it is I can't say.
A particularly telling thread of the book was the cult-like quality that the first band of Objectivists, of which Branden was more or less a founding member, supposedly developed, and Branden's preception that Rand's idealized fierce individualism, in the context of her immediate circle, devolved into what was actually a rigid ideological hierarchy, where Rand stood at the center and brooked little or no discord. It helped put her work into perspective, at least for me.
By "perspective," I mean essentially blowing my illusions about her philosophy straight to hell. Whatever inspiration I naively found in her one-dimensional portrayal of Reason and Ambition became much harder to sustain or take seriously after reading -- granted, through hardly unbiased eyes -- a portrayal of a desparately insecure, paranoid control freak with a near pathological disregard for the welfare or rights of even those closest to her.
All that said, the book is essentially in the "Tell-All" category -- written by a man whom Rand ultimately grew to despise. How accurate it therefore is, I suppose, is for others who actually knew her to judge.
August 22, 2009
Having read and reviewed Barbara Branden’s biography of Ayn Rand and several of Rand’s books, I thought it might be very useful to get the perspective of someone Ayn rejected, Nathaniel Branden. One does get a different sense of Rand from this rather self-absorbed, but very interesting, memoir. Clearly Rand delighted in having young acolytes falling on her every word and interpretation, and she was not particularly tolerant toward ideas that sprang from other brains.
This book provides a detailed insight into how she wrote, why, and a further explication of many of her fascinating ideas. For example, several people expressed concern over Rand’s ideas of altruism and selfishness. Ayn considered altruism, “the tradition that equates morality with self-sacrifice, . . . [that:] man has no right to exist for his own sake,” incompatible with capitalism, which rests on the recognition of individual rights. “When I,” Ayn said to Nathaniel, “tell people I’m opposed to altruism, they go crazy. They think it means I’m opposed to kindness, charity, benevolence, and respect for the rights of others — and yet altruism means none of those things — and people miss what it actually does mean. . . : selfsacrifice to others as the highest good. . . .I wonder what people would think if someone told them that imprinted on Nazi coins was the slogan, ‘The common good above the individual good.’ No one spoke more passionately than Hitler about the nobility of the individual sacrificing himself for the tribe — only he called it the ‘race.’ ” The critical reaction to Atlas Shrugged was often vicious, yet by word of mouth the book took off. Branden accuses the critics of not just "getting it wrong," but also misrepresenting the ideas in her work. "To me her opponents were debating with straw men. They equated her philosophy with that of Spencer or Nietzsche or Spinoza or Hobbes, thereby exposing themselves to the charge of philosophic illiteracy. What they did not do was identify accurately and then challenge the ideas for which Ayn in fact stood. No one wrote, 'Ayn Rand holds that man must choose his values and actions by reason; that the individual has a right to exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing self to others nor others to self; that no one has the right to seek values from others by physical force, or impose ideas on others by physical force — and I consider such ideas wrong, evil, socially dangerous.' "
Rand was equally contemptuous of both liberals and conservatives, noting that each wanted to apply social controls. “In my philosophy,” Branden quotes her as saying, “ the government’s only proper job is to protect individual rights against violence by force or fraud — to provide courts for the protection of property and the peaceful settling of contractual disputes — and a military for protection against foreign invaders. . . .The greatness of the Founding Fathers was how well they understood this issue and how close some of them came to understanding it perfectly.”
The Brandens — not married yet, but dating in a somewhat peculiar manner — were in school in southern California during the McCarthy period, when there was concern expressed by the left wing that their views were being suppressed, and when professors were afraid to speak their minds. The Brandens observed otherwise, noting that their views supporting laissez-faire capitalism were anathema to their teachers, who virtually uniformly promoted Marxist and socialist ideology. Eventually, the Brandens fell under the intellectual sway of Ayn Rand and became part of a group that quite ironically called themselves “the Collective.” This group would gather regularly “at the feet of the master” to discuss issues. Among the more prominent members were Alan Greenspan and Allan Blumenthal. Branden later suggests that the group’s often unquestioning allegiance to Rand and her rejection of those who failed to accept her wisdom without question had cultist implications. The relationship between Nathaniel and Ayn was to become quite weird. Rand insisted that women should ideally subsume themselves to men, yet she seems to have totally dominated her husband, Frank.
One day she announced that she and Nathaniel were to have a love affair. This was presented calmly in the presence of Frank and Barbara in a “rational” manner. The idea was that Nathaniel and she were in love and would therefore meet often to indulge their sexual desires for each other (she was quite a bit older than Nathaniel, who by this time was training to become a psychotherapist, but people have a tendency to specialize in their deficiencies). Obviously, this was stressful for the other partners; then the inevitable break came, and Ayn’s reaction when Nathaniel finally rejected her over was vicious. Nathan’s relationship with Barbara, always a bit odd, had soured and he had been smitten with a nubile young model, Patrecia who just admired him immensely. BY this time, he was the de facto spokesman for Objectivism as the creator of the Nathaniel Branden Institute — a rather narcissistic name for it — that was spreading the “gospel” throughout the U.S. Ayn was still urging Nathan to return to her romantically, but when he wrote her a long letter explaining his love for Patrecia, she exploded and cut him off from her and the Collective.
I suspect her participation in the Objectivist movement and the Institute was an unintentional way of trying to keep him attached to her. It appears she desperately needed “adoring followers” although she had been taking large doses of amphetamines for many years by prescription to control her weight and it now appears that long-term use can make one paranoid. As he was forced out of the movement, Nathan later came to see some of the pitfalls of a movement dominated by a charismatic figure: “fanaticism, dogmatism, [and:] oppressive moralism.” It’s a fascinating story, well-told. I find Rand’s ideas appealing, particularly her emphasis on individualism and selfishness (as she defines it) and rejection of coercion of any kind. All movements eventually suffer from hardening of arterial thought that prevents growth.
This book provides a detailed insight into how she wrote, why, and a further explication of many of her fascinating ideas. For example, several people expressed concern over Rand’s ideas of altruism and selfishness. Ayn considered altruism, “the tradition that equates morality with self-sacrifice, . . . [that:] man has no right to exist for his own sake,” incompatible with capitalism, which rests on the recognition of individual rights. “When I,” Ayn said to Nathaniel, “tell people I’m opposed to altruism, they go crazy. They think it means I’m opposed to kindness, charity, benevolence, and respect for the rights of others — and yet altruism means none of those things — and people miss what it actually does mean. . . : selfsacrifice to others as the highest good. . . .I wonder what people would think if someone told them that imprinted on Nazi coins was the slogan, ‘The common good above the individual good.’ No one spoke more passionately than Hitler about the nobility of the individual sacrificing himself for the tribe — only he called it the ‘race.’ ” The critical reaction to Atlas Shrugged was often vicious, yet by word of mouth the book took off. Branden accuses the critics of not just "getting it wrong," but also misrepresenting the ideas in her work. "To me her opponents were debating with straw men. They equated her philosophy with that of Spencer or Nietzsche or Spinoza or Hobbes, thereby exposing themselves to the charge of philosophic illiteracy. What they did not do was identify accurately and then challenge the ideas for which Ayn in fact stood. No one wrote, 'Ayn Rand holds that man must choose his values and actions by reason; that the individual has a right to exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing self to others nor others to self; that no one has the right to seek values from others by physical force, or impose ideas on others by physical force — and I consider such ideas wrong, evil, socially dangerous.' "
Rand was equally contemptuous of both liberals and conservatives, noting that each wanted to apply social controls. “In my philosophy,” Branden quotes her as saying, “ the government’s only proper job is to protect individual rights against violence by force or fraud — to provide courts for the protection of property and the peaceful settling of contractual disputes — and a military for protection against foreign invaders. . . .The greatness of the Founding Fathers was how well they understood this issue and how close some of them came to understanding it perfectly.”
The Brandens — not married yet, but dating in a somewhat peculiar manner — were in school in southern California during the McCarthy period, when there was concern expressed by the left wing that their views were being suppressed, and when professors were afraid to speak their minds. The Brandens observed otherwise, noting that their views supporting laissez-faire capitalism were anathema to their teachers, who virtually uniformly promoted Marxist and socialist ideology. Eventually, the Brandens fell under the intellectual sway of Ayn Rand and became part of a group that quite ironically called themselves “the Collective.” This group would gather regularly “at the feet of the master” to discuss issues. Among the more prominent members were Alan Greenspan and Allan Blumenthal. Branden later suggests that the group’s often unquestioning allegiance to Rand and her rejection of those who failed to accept her wisdom without question had cultist implications. The relationship between Nathaniel and Ayn was to become quite weird. Rand insisted that women should ideally subsume themselves to men, yet she seems to have totally dominated her husband, Frank.
One day she announced that she and Nathaniel were to have a love affair. This was presented calmly in the presence of Frank and Barbara in a “rational” manner. The idea was that Nathaniel and she were in love and would therefore meet often to indulge their sexual desires for each other (she was quite a bit older than Nathaniel, who by this time was training to become a psychotherapist, but people have a tendency to specialize in their deficiencies). Obviously, this was stressful for the other partners; then the inevitable break came, and Ayn’s reaction when Nathaniel finally rejected her over was vicious. Nathan’s relationship with Barbara, always a bit odd, had soured and he had been smitten with a nubile young model, Patrecia who just admired him immensely. BY this time, he was the de facto spokesman for Objectivism as the creator of the Nathaniel Branden Institute — a rather narcissistic name for it — that was spreading the “gospel” throughout the U.S. Ayn was still urging Nathan to return to her romantically, but when he wrote her a long letter explaining his love for Patrecia, she exploded and cut him off from her and the Collective.
I suspect her participation in the Objectivist movement and the Institute was an unintentional way of trying to keep him attached to her. It appears she desperately needed “adoring followers” although she had been taking large doses of amphetamines for many years by prescription to control her weight and it now appears that long-term use can make one paranoid. As he was forced out of the movement, Nathan later came to see some of the pitfalls of a movement dominated by a charismatic figure: “fanaticism, dogmatism, [and:] oppressive moralism.” It’s a fascinating story, well-told. I find Rand’s ideas appealing, particularly her emphasis on individualism and selfishness (as she defines it) and rejection of coercion of any kind. All movements eventually suffer from hardening of arterial thought that prevents growth.
April 30, 2014
Awful writing. I mean, awful. Branden writes like a third-rate romantic novelist. And there is literally no one to like in this story, at least as he portrays them. However, as a key to understanding Rand I regret to say that this is probably indispensable. And bear in mind that Branden still largely agrees with his personal Mrs. Robinson's "philosophy".
Look, the fact that she had an affair with someone half her age doesn't make Ayn Rand a bad person. She took care of that in many other ways. But her "reasoning" to rationalize what she was doing highlights the fact that she was second-rate as a thinker. On a good day. Branden portrays a woman who demanded unquestioning obedience at a level that would make a medieval pope think twice. Those with the temerity to disagree with Rand were subjected to inquisitions (and at least in his own case, Rand slapped him around a bit, which is regrettable but understandable --- the reader may find himself with itchy palms before the end of this opus). However, there is no serious dispute of the grillings members of the Collective were subjected to by Rand's directive. The most damning fact revealed about Rand is not her treatment of her husband or the series of "friends" and family members she shed without a qualm (and without giving them any credit for assisting her, either through financial or mental aid). It is the fact that Rand didn't read. I have always wondered why she got the essential message of Christianity so wrong. She didn't know anything about it. This extends to history as well. Her instincts were for conspiracy theories. Branden is particularly insightful when he talks about the glum depression Rand entered (along with her Tonto) when Atlas Shrugged failed to stop the engine of the world. Why weren't there first-rate minds willing to engage on behalf of her philosophy? The obvious answer never seems to have occured to either of them. No first-rate minds took her seriously. It is also telling that her most intimate followers --- and she didn't have friends, you were either a follower or nothing --- were people at the very beginnings of their careers. Branden started crushing on her when he was fourteen, which seems about right.
Branden's chief failure? Yes, Rand was intolerable. She was a spoiled brat who managed to get people to buy her novels. I have read them (as well as her defence of selfishness), and I get it. Rand favored plot, and both Fountainhead and Atlas drive right along in between the crushingly boring "philosophy". You can get the same thing from any Danielle Steele or Judith Krantz without having to wade through long passages about how lonely it is to be a misunderstood free market capitalist.
No, Branden's failure lies in the inability to realize what a total dope he has been all of his life. If anything, he emerges from this thing as even worse a character than Rand.
There is also a bit at the end wherein Devers Branden, his third wife, purports to relate a visit she pulled on the elderly Ayn Rand. Aside from the inherent improbablility of what Mrs. B recounts and Branden relays to you, Gentle Reader, there is at least this comfort for the man. He has once again succeeded in marrying someone who sounds just like him.
Look, the fact that she had an affair with someone half her age doesn't make Ayn Rand a bad person. She took care of that in many other ways. But her "reasoning" to rationalize what she was doing highlights the fact that she was second-rate as a thinker. On a good day. Branden portrays a woman who demanded unquestioning obedience at a level that would make a medieval pope think twice. Those with the temerity to disagree with Rand were subjected to inquisitions (and at least in his own case, Rand slapped him around a bit, which is regrettable but understandable --- the reader may find himself with itchy palms before the end of this opus). However, there is no serious dispute of the grillings members of the Collective were subjected to by Rand's directive. The most damning fact revealed about Rand is not her treatment of her husband or the series of "friends" and family members she shed without a qualm (and without giving them any credit for assisting her, either through financial or mental aid). It is the fact that Rand didn't read. I have always wondered why she got the essential message of Christianity so wrong. She didn't know anything about it. This extends to history as well. Her instincts were for conspiracy theories. Branden is particularly insightful when he talks about the glum depression Rand entered (along with her Tonto) when Atlas Shrugged failed to stop the engine of the world. Why weren't there first-rate minds willing to engage on behalf of her philosophy? The obvious answer never seems to have occured to either of them. No first-rate minds took her seriously. It is also telling that her most intimate followers --- and she didn't have friends, you were either a follower or nothing --- were people at the very beginnings of their careers. Branden started crushing on her when he was fourteen, which seems about right.
Branden's chief failure? Yes, Rand was intolerable. She was a spoiled brat who managed to get people to buy her novels. I have read them (as well as her defence of selfishness), and I get it. Rand favored plot, and both Fountainhead and Atlas drive right along in between the crushingly boring "philosophy". You can get the same thing from any Danielle Steele or Judith Krantz without having to wade through long passages about how lonely it is to be a misunderstood free market capitalist.
No, Branden's failure lies in the inability to realize what a total dope he has been all of his life. If anything, he emerges from this thing as even worse a character than Rand.
There is also a bit at the end wherein Devers Branden, his third wife, purports to relate a visit she pulled on the elderly Ayn Rand. Aside from the inherent improbablility of what Mrs. B recounts and Branden relays to you, Gentle Reader, there is at least this comfort for the man. He has once again succeeded in marrying someone who sounds just like him.
April 27, 2010
Just when I had discovered Ayn Rand and she had created a revolution in my thinking, Barbara Branden's biography, The Passion of Ayn Rand came out. I think if there had been any danger I'd become a "Randroid" as I've heard some describe it, this book did put paid to that, because goodness the book did do a good job of idol smashing--and I think that's healthy actually if we're going to judge Rand by her ideas--and not worship her (or condemn her) unthinkingly.
Mind you, Barbara Branden did have good reason to be bitter towards Ayn Rand. She was Nathaniel Branden's wife. Rand informed both her own husband and Barbara she was going to pursue an affair with Nathaniel. And when Nathaniel fell for yet another women and decided to break things off, Barbara supported him and both were relegated to the outer darkness by Ayn. Judgment Day, published after The Passion of Ayn Rand, told the story from Nathaniel's perspective--although like The Passion of Ayn Rand it's about more than that. It gives us his observations of Ayn Rand and her circle over the decades of their association. And the observations of a trained psychologist and psychotherapist. It should be noted that some time after this book's release, Leonard Peikoff, Rand's designated "intellectual heir" admitted that having gone through Rand's papers, the affair did happen much in the way the Brandens described. This book is readable and gives a fascinating perspective on Ayn Rand--at least if your neither a doctrinaire devotee outraged by a critical perspective nor someone who can't repeat Ayn Rand's name without a sneer and a jibe. That's why I'm giving it five stars as amazing, despite that it is true--Nathaniel Branden did have a vested interest in making Ayn Rand look bad and defending his own actions--and at times it shows, so this should be taken with many a grain of salt.
What I thought was remarkable about Barbara Branden biography was that despite having reason to be bitter towards Rand she displayed both empathy and admiration for her subject. I think the tone in Nathaniel's memoir is much more bitter and self-serving. And certainly if you find Ayn Rand's ideas and life of interest, there are two recent books from outside, I dare say more "objective," perspectives that are well thought of and from what I've read not hatchet jobs-- Anne C. Heller's Ayn Rand and the World She Made and Jennifer Burns Goddess of the Market. I haven't read either yet, but I already picked up Heller's as an ebook.
Mind you, Barbara Branden did have good reason to be bitter towards Ayn Rand. She was Nathaniel Branden's wife. Rand informed both her own husband and Barbara she was going to pursue an affair with Nathaniel. And when Nathaniel fell for yet another women and decided to break things off, Barbara supported him and both were relegated to the outer darkness by Ayn. Judgment Day, published after The Passion of Ayn Rand, told the story from Nathaniel's perspective--although like The Passion of Ayn Rand it's about more than that. It gives us his observations of Ayn Rand and her circle over the decades of their association. And the observations of a trained psychologist and psychotherapist. It should be noted that some time after this book's release, Leonard Peikoff, Rand's designated "intellectual heir" admitted that having gone through Rand's papers, the affair did happen much in the way the Brandens described. This book is readable and gives a fascinating perspective on Ayn Rand--at least if your neither a doctrinaire devotee outraged by a critical perspective nor someone who can't repeat Ayn Rand's name without a sneer and a jibe. That's why I'm giving it five stars as amazing, despite that it is true--Nathaniel Branden did have a vested interest in making Ayn Rand look bad and defending his own actions--and at times it shows, so this should be taken with many a grain of salt.
What I thought was remarkable about Barbara Branden biography was that despite having reason to be bitter towards Rand she displayed both empathy and admiration for her subject. I think the tone in Nathaniel's memoir is much more bitter and self-serving. And certainly if you find Ayn Rand's ideas and life of interest, there are two recent books from outside, I dare say more "objective," perspectives that are well thought of and from what I've read not hatchet jobs-- Anne C. Heller's Ayn Rand and the World She Made and Jennifer Burns Goddess of the Market. I haven't read either yet, but I already picked up Heller's as an ebook.
November 17, 2008
A coming of age story, with all the drama worthy of Ayn Rand. Those who have ever been heavily involved in cult-like groups and then broken away will relate to this story.
September 13, 2012
What a bunch of wackos.
November 27, 2012
As one who both hates the "philosophy" of Ayn Rand and is fascinated by her as a person, I found this biography to be an addictive read. It's a no-holds-barred, invasive expose by her former lover, a much younger man. Need I say more?
Read
August 17, 2021Прочетох книгата с чисто опознавателна цел, защото ми се искаше да опозная повече човешката същина на личността Айн Ранд. Нейният личен живот е неприкосновена територия, и колкото и да изглежда скандален за някои, това не отменя факта за гениалния ум на Айн Ранд и нейната разтърсваща философия.
Тук също открих тази толкова ярка индивидуалност и автентичност на Ранд, която струеше и от редовете на нейните книги. Просто тя влага частица от себе си в своите творения и усещането за нейната същина е подобно на това, което е уловил и предал Натаниел Брандън.
Говори се за нейните емблематични произведения " Изворът" и " Атлас изправи рамене". Именно тук научих, че Айн Ранд е писала речта на Голт от Атлас цели две години, неспособна да се съсредоточи, заради емоционалните си преживявания с Брандън.
Самият Натаниел Брандън е бил психотерапевт и е бил физическо проявление на идеалите на Ранд. Просто, любовта се е случила по съвсем естествен начин, като единствения възможен изход, след толкова години на душевен и платонически възторг, и въпреки разликата във възрастта.
Наблюдавайки своите лични взаимоотношения, както и проявленията при свои пациенти, Натаниел Брандън стига до много интересно прозрение за взаимовръзката между себеуважението и неврозите, което толкова ми допадна, че бих искала да го споделя:
" — При самоуважението трудното е, че то се състои от две различни, но тясно преплетени идеи: ефикасност и стойност.
Айн нетърпеливо се наведе напред. Защо се усмихваше така широко?
— Нито една от двете сама по себе си не представлява самоуважение. Ако се чувстваш ефикасен, но безполезен, самочувствието ти не е добро, също както и ако се чувстваш ценен, но неефикасен.
Айн беше започнала да кима и направо грееше, сякаш предвкусваше следващите ми думи.
— Под „ефикасност“ имам предвид интелектуална самоувереност, а под „стойност“ — правото да отстояваш собствените си интереси и нужди. Нещо такова. И ако самоуважението наистина е нещо такова, то играе основна роля за оцеляването. То е могъща нужда, може би основната ни нужда. И когато по някаква причина тази нужда остане незадоволена, тогава резултатът е онова, което наричаме „невроза“! " ( стр. 195)
Паралелно с прозрението на Брандън за самоуважението, Ранд набляга на него и в речта на Джон Голт от " Атлас изправи рамене".
„За да живее, човекът трябва да смята три неща за върховни и ръководни ценности в живота си: разум — цел — самоуважение. Разумът е единственият му инструмент за познание, целта е изборът му на щастие, което този инструмент трябва да постигне, самоуважението е нерушимата му увереност, че умът му е компетентен да мисли, а личността му е достойна за щастие, което ще рече, че е достойна да живее“. ( стр. 206)
Самата Ранд посвещава " Атлас изправи рамене" на Натаниел Брандън.
Книгата е написана много увлекателно, откровено и естествено, и за мен беше голямо удоволствие да я прочета.
=====
"На следващия ден, когато Барбара ме попита що за човек е Айн Ранд, аз се поколебах за миг, после отвърнах:
— Госпожа Логика — след което се опитах да пресъздам пред нея възможно най-пълно невероятната нощ и да опиша как виждам тази необикновена личност. — Тя е много повече от онова, което някога съм си представял." ( стр. 61)
" — Можеш да я питаш за всичко — възкликна тя. Тя беше замаяна от чувствителността, яснотата, ослепителния интелект и добронамереността на Айн. — Наистина ли е възможно? Това наистина ли се случва?" ( стр. 66)
" Тя беше неугасваща светлина, която заливаше всички наоколо и оставяше остатъка от света в сянка." ( стр. 77)
" — Не разбираш ли, че една наистина силна жена иска да вижда мъжа по-силен? Поне своя мъж.
А когато я запитах защо, тя отговори:
— Заради удоволствието да се отдаде." ( стр. 81)
" Единственото нещо, по-лошо от това да се усещаш в плен на кошмар, е да не си позволяваш да знаеш, че си в такова положение." ( стр. 191)
Тук също открих тази толкова ярка индивидуалност и автентичност на Ранд, която струеше и от редовете на нейните книги. Просто тя влага частица от себе си в своите творения и усещането за нейната същина е подобно на това, което е уловил и предал Натаниел Брандън.
Говори се за нейните емблематични произведения " Изворът" и " Атлас изправи рамене". Именно тук научих, че Айн Ранд е писала речта на Голт от Атлас цели две години, неспособна да се съсредоточи, заради емоционалните си преживявания с Брандън.
Самият Натаниел Брандън е бил психотерапевт и е бил физическо проявление на идеалите на Ранд. Просто, любовта се е случила по съвсем естествен начин, като единствения възможен изход, след толкова години на душевен и платонически възторг, и въпреки разликата във възрастта.
Наблюдавайки своите лични взаимоотношения, както и проявленията при свои пациенти, Натаниел Брандън стига до много интересно прозрение за взаимовръзката между себеуважението и неврозите, което толкова ми допадна, че бих искала да го споделя:
" — При самоуважението трудното е, че то се състои от две различни, но тясно преплетени идеи: ефикасност и стойност.
Айн нетърпеливо се наведе напред. Защо се усмихваше така широко?
— Нито една от двете сама по себе си не представлява самоуважение. Ако се чувстваш ефикасен, но безполезен, самочувствието ти не е добро, също както и ако се чувстваш ценен, но неефикасен.
Айн беше започнала да кима и направо грееше, сякаш предвкусваше следващите ми думи.
— Под „ефикасност“ имам предвид интелектуална самоувереност, а под „стойност“ — правото да отстояваш собствените си интереси и нужди. Нещо такова. И ако самоуважението наистина е нещо такова, то играе основна роля за оцеляването. То е могъща нужда, може би основната ни нужда. И когато по някаква причина тази нужда остане незадоволена, тогава резултатът е онова, което наричаме „невроза“! " ( стр. 195)
Паралелно с прозрението на Брандън за самоуважението, Ранд набляга на него и в речта на Джон Голт от " Атлас изправи рамене".
„За да живее, човекът трябва да смята три неща за върховни и ръководни ценности в живота си: разум — цел — самоуважение. Разумът е единственият му инструмент за познание, целта е изборът му на щастие, което този инструмент трябва да постигне, самоуважението е нерушимата му увереност, че умът му е компетентен да мисли, а личността му е достойна за щастие, което ще рече, че е достойна да живее“. ( стр. 206)
Самата Ранд посвещава " Атлас изправи рамене" на Натаниел Брандън.
Книгата е написана много увлекателно, откровено и естествено, и за мен беше голямо удоволствие да я прочета.
=====
"На следващия ден, когато Барбара ме попита що за човек е Айн Ранд, аз се поколебах за миг, после отвърнах:
— Госпожа Логика — след което се опитах да пресъздам пред нея възможно най-пълно невероятната нощ и да опиша как виждам тази необикновена личност. — Тя е много повече от онова, което някога съм си представял." ( стр. 61)
" — Можеш да я питаш за всичко — възкликна тя. Тя беше замаяна от чувствителността, яснотата, ослепителния интелект и добронамереността на Айн. — Наистина ли е възможно? Това наистина ли се случва?" ( стр. 66)
" Тя беше неугасваща светлина, която заливаше всички наоколо и оставяше остатъка от света в сянка." ( стр. 77)
" — Не разбираш ли, че една наистина силна жена иска да вижда мъжа по-силен? Поне своя мъж.
А когато я запитах защо, тя отговори:
— Заради удоволствието да се отдаде." ( стр. 81)
" Единственото нещо, по-лошо от това да се усещаш в плен на кошмар, е да не си позволяваш да знаеш, че си в такова положение." ( стр. 191)
March 29, 2020
It's odd how people assume you are a Rand fan when you read her work and other books about her. Rand was guilty of this herself. I find her and Objectivism interesting but flawed, in its one dimensional and limiting emphasis on individualism and selfishness. Reading her work brings your values into focus.
I've heard various politicians, pundits and educators employ Objectivist principles to justify their positions, without acknowledging the source. Some, like the writers for the TV show, "Mad Men"and politician Paul Ryan have admitted Objectivism, Rand and Branden are their inspiration. I'm not certain, though, to what extent Rand and Branden are still the primary source, or whether it makes any difference, but, to our detriment, the beliefs of Objectivism still influence business practices and the Republican party in particular.
I've heard various politicians, pundits and educators employ Objectivist principles to justify their positions, without acknowledging the source. Some, like the writers for the TV show, "Mad Men"and politician Paul Ryan have admitted Objectivism, Rand and Branden are their inspiration. I'm not certain, though, to what extent Rand and Branden are still the primary source, or whether it makes any difference, but, to our detriment, the beliefs of Objectivism still influence business practices and the Republican party in particular.
July 10, 2025
There was an anxiety within me for well over a hundred pages, because I didn't know how this book would unfold or if Nathaniel would come to understand reality, emotions, and psychology as they truly are, and if he'd reject the fantasies of a manipulative woman with undiagnosed Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
Seeing Ayn Rand--from the throne in which she sat, perfectly chiseled in marble and draped in chiton and jewels--behind the longing 19-year-old eyes of a desperate, excellence-hungry Nathan Blumenthal was intriguing. Winding the path of Nathan's psychology discoveries, and the liberation from his groomer, was vindication. The tragedy of loss that ensued compelled me, and I sobbed.
I savored every page, and I relished psychoanalyzing all of them: a mindfuck fiction can only dream of touching.
I believe every word written. There could be some misrememberings or omitted information, but because of accidental human error, or because it was unnecessary info, or insulting, and not to paint a biased picture--but a meticulous, accurate one.
For example, it's safe to assume part of the reason Nathan started to lose attraction to Ayn from the pedestal he placed her on, was because, without it, her unappealing appearance and postmenopausal atrophic vaginal walls weren't enough without the fantasy of her idealized greatness. If you are neither physically nor mentally attracted to the object of your affection, sex is not desirable. At least one must exist to enjoy the fruit. Nathan would never write about that, but I could infer it when he claimed her age was a deterrent to his attraction after conquering his idol sexually at 49.
Nathan is extremely forthcoming, he knew what he was doing--embellishing the juiciest parts to entrance readers. I didn't need or want all the Ayn Rand sex detail, though. Her eerie mug is already off-putting.
Nathaniel Branden is far more interesting than Ayn Rand, and smarter, more exploratory, and truth-seeking. He made real breakthrough discoveries. While Ayn was repetitive, and made rigid, unrealistic, unattainable fantastical stories that produced negative consequences that persist in the political system even now. She brainwashed the lower classes to accept their oppression with the delusions they could be rich and powerful as long as they were stoic, but it's not that simple. Success comes with a lot of luck and a lot of help, and Ayn had extreme amounts of both. She enabled the heartless to exploit the lower classes, and designed a vernacular to word-salad the pitchforks in the other direction.
Nathan is not without his own flaws.
As most neglected children who search--not just for purpose and meaning, but a purpose and meaning of grandeur--so did he. When you are love, acceptance, and meaning-deficient, there is no understanding of balance or stability. There is only an extreme desire for the strongest, most potent drug to desperately fill the void. These children develop a craving for adulation and to be seen as special in the most novel and unique ways that feel superior and above others, unbeknownst to them. Everyone wants to feel special, but not everyone wants to feel special to a radical degree.
Ayn created such an attractant in her philosophy: the belief of an attainable specialdom that surpassed all others. Thus an influx of people who didn't know how to find a healthy version of their alignment. Children's minds are delicate.
Enter Nathan's idealization: of a flawed woman who knew how to tailor a sentence in her favor during an age where mainstream information was school curriculum, news stations, and hearsay. Obtaining nuanced information meant reading countless, thick books or directly living in an experience. When the majority of people don't have the time or have access to information that can oppose Ayn, it means Ayn wins by default. Had there been social media and computers to search evidence of foreign lifestyles, anecdotes, and specific questions with specific answers back then, it's possible Ayn's legacy wouldn't have been much more than a Candace Owens or a Steven Crowder. Ayn had a lot of logistical advantages for her philosophy to thrive, because of the time period. She wouldn't have gotten away with her rhetoric as easily today. Luck. But Nathan didn't know that. No one did.
Ayn's books and her philosophies taught people to suppress their emotions, that it's okay to suppress emotions, and to essentially selfishly live within illusions. There is some validity in her philosophy, but I'll save that for another review.
Ayn had a monopoly on knowledge that wasn't easy to obtain or refute. Thus a control of minds who worshipped her. Thus an obedient cult and a molded hero.
Nathan understood how age-gaps psychologically affect people, but they suddenly didn't matter to him so much when he met a beautiful woman ten years younger. The psychology differences still applied, but like Ayn's entire personality and philosophy: you can justify anything abhorrent and morally questionable with the right mental gymnastics.
Aside from Nathan's idol-worship, age-gap double-standard hypocrisy, and suppression of emotions, which attributed to him disrespecting and hurting people, he also heavily relied on the use of women to feel better. It wasn't even a year before he was remarried after his second wife tragically died. He's a great example how men remarry quickly after divorce or death. Men cannot be alone with themselves. They need a mommy, maid, and counselor they can have sex with. There is never the "one" to a man. There's only the "one right now." He could not respect his dead wife for even a year.
What really peeved me most of all, however, is that well after Nathan's brain was fully developed, well after he was aware he was no longer interested in Ayn, and well after he knew what he was doing was wrong and that he needed to stop, he still persisted in lying, deceiving, and gaslighting Ayn for years, and placed his burden of deceit onto Barbara. Then he proceeded to imply that Ayn's meds were the cause of her paranoia because it's a potential symptom. She was taking those meds for 30+ years. She became paranoid after Nathaniel gave her something to be paranoid about. Women can sense when men are not providing transparency. Their words do not match their actions. Our natural instinct, to protect ourselves, is to ruminate until one of us, us or them, gives us clarity.
There is no one who will ever remain sane and emotionally composed while being emotionally abused and deceived. It cannot happen. Not unless the victim is born without the ability to feel or completely emotionally detaches. When a woman is "crazy," that's incognito for "a man drove this woman to insanity with his psychological abuse."
Nathaniel Branden was a coward who used women so he didn't have to repair his own deficiencies directly.
However, Ayn received the exact product she groomed. Her shamings, her scrutiny, her anger, her meticulously-crafted insults, deflections, misdirections, and arguments to achieve obedience she awarded with praise--like training a puppy--created a fearful little boy. Nathan's options were: 1. Obey Ayn Rand. 2. Face the wrath of Ayn Rand and Excommunication. He essentially was choosing between his life as he knew it, and all the comfort and hard work he put into it, or lose it all.
I can understand why he couldn't be honest, but the woman in me still feels a sympathy for Ayn. I feel a sympathy for both of them. They were kids of their environment who became abusive adults. But childhood deficiency is only a reason to explain behavior, it's not an excuse.
These personality traits and actions made me lose some respect for Nathan, and I ponder his credibility as a person applied to his psychologist profession, but I'm still very interested in reading his other books. His writing and thought patterns have impressed me.
I really came to adore every minute mention of Frank. I was once told he was a himbo; Frank was not a himbo.
My favorite quote, which I cannot seem to find, is when Nathan made a revelation about his observation of people and Frank corrected him that everyone is more than they appear. BRAVO.
I wish there was more about his musings, but I understand he was mute because Ayn conditioned his obedience and silence. Of the few things he said and did, it was clear he was brilliant, and truly cared to nurture people and animals. He's the real rare gem. He had a natural talent for art, thrived in nature, and I feel incredibly sad that he felt he wasn't sufficient enough to sever himself from Ayn's hip. I get emotional thinking about it, but Frank was a grown man who still had responsibility for his own actions. He chose to be unhappy. He chose not to live in his alignment, as did Ayn. She did not choose to learn from her past mistakes and live in her fullest alignment. She scapegoated her wrongdoings onto everyone else--never deeply, inwardly reflecting--as she did her entire life. Ayn advocated self-awareness and responsibility, but in practice, she did neither. She deflected and rationalized outwardly, allocating fault anywhere but herself. She never evolved, and so died bitter and without the meaningful connections that her soul yearned for.
You reap what you sow.
One experiment I'd like to conduct after I become a psychology researcher: determine how much damage Objectivism has caused people individually and collectively overall, how much Ayn's philosophies realistically helped, and how much people have manipulated and deceived themselves and others just to maintain a belief in something that induced temporary motivational dopamine.
Seeing Ayn Rand--from the throne in which she sat, perfectly chiseled in marble and draped in chiton and jewels--behind the longing 19-year-old eyes of a desperate, excellence-hungry Nathan Blumenthal was intriguing. Winding the path of Nathan's psychology discoveries, and the liberation from his groomer, was vindication. The tragedy of loss that ensued compelled me, and I sobbed.
I savored every page, and I relished psychoanalyzing all of them: a mindfuck fiction can only dream of touching.
I believe every word written. There could be some misrememberings or omitted information, but because of accidental human error, or because it was unnecessary info, or insulting, and not to paint a biased picture--but a meticulous, accurate one.
For example, it's safe to assume part of the reason Nathan started to lose attraction to Ayn from the pedestal he placed her on, was because, without it, her unappealing appearance and postmenopausal atrophic vaginal walls weren't enough without the fantasy of her idealized greatness. If you are neither physically nor mentally attracted to the object of your affection, sex is not desirable. At least one must exist to enjoy the fruit. Nathan would never write about that, but I could infer it when he claimed her age was a deterrent to his attraction after conquering his idol sexually at 49.
Nathan is extremely forthcoming, he knew what he was doing--embellishing the juiciest parts to entrance readers. I didn't need or want all the Ayn Rand sex detail, though. Her eerie mug is already off-putting.
Nathaniel Branden is far more interesting than Ayn Rand, and smarter, more exploratory, and truth-seeking. He made real breakthrough discoveries. While Ayn was repetitive, and made rigid, unrealistic, unattainable fantastical stories that produced negative consequences that persist in the political system even now. She brainwashed the lower classes to accept their oppression with the delusions they could be rich and powerful as long as they were stoic, but it's not that simple. Success comes with a lot of luck and a lot of help, and Ayn had extreme amounts of both. She enabled the heartless to exploit the lower classes, and designed a vernacular to word-salad the pitchforks in the other direction.
Nathan is not without his own flaws.
As most neglected children who search--not just for purpose and meaning, but a purpose and meaning of grandeur--so did he. When you are love, acceptance, and meaning-deficient, there is no understanding of balance or stability. There is only an extreme desire for the strongest, most potent drug to desperately fill the void. These children develop a craving for adulation and to be seen as special in the most novel and unique ways that feel superior and above others, unbeknownst to them. Everyone wants to feel special, but not everyone wants to feel special to a radical degree.
Ayn created such an attractant in her philosophy: the belief of an attainable specialdom that surpassed all others. Thus an influx of people who didn't know how to find a healthy version of their alignment. Children's minds are delicate.
Enter Nathan's idealization: of a flawed woman who knew how to tailor a sentence in her favor during an age where mainstream information was school curriculum, news stations, and hearsay. Obtaining nuanced information meant reading countless, thick books or directly living in an experience. When the majority of people don't have the time or have access to information that can oppose Ayn, it means Ayn wins by default. Had there been social media and computers to search evidence of foreign lifestyles, anecdotes, and specific questions with specific answers back then, it's possible Ayn's legacy wouldn't have been much more than a Candace Owens or a Steven Crowder. Ayn had a lot of logistical advantages for her philosophy to thrive, because of the time period. She wouldn't have gotten away with her rhetoric as easily today. Luck. But Nathan didn't know that. No one did.
Ayn's books and her philosophies taught people to suppress their emotions, that it's okay to suppress emotions, and to essentially selfishly live within illusions. There is some validity in her philosophy, but I'll save that for another review.
Ayn had a monopoly on knowledge that wasn't easy to obtain or refute. Thus a control of minds who worshipped her. Thus an obedient cult and a molded hero.
Nathan understood how age-gaps psychologically affect people, but they suddenly didn't matter to him so much when he met a beautiful woman ten years younger. The psychology differences still applied, but like Ayn's entire personality and philosophy: you can justify anything abhorrent and morally questionable with the right mental gymnastics.
Aside from Nathan's idol-worship, age-gap double-standard hypocrisy, and suppression of emotions, which attributed to him disrespecting and hurting people, he also heavily relied on the use of women to feel better. It wasn't even a year before he was remarried after his second wife tragically died. He's a great example how men remarry quickly after divorce or death. Men cannot be alone with themselves. They need a mommy, maid, and counselor they can have sex with. There is never the "one" to a man. There's only the "one right now." He could not respect his dead wife for even a year.
What really peeved me most of all, however, is that well after Nathan's brain was fully developed, well after he was aware he was no longer interested in Ayn, and well after he knew what he was doing was wrong and that he needed to stop, he still persisted in lying, deceiving, and gaslighting Ayn for years, and placed his burden of deceit onto Barbara. Then he proceeded to imply that Ayn's meds were the cause of her paranoia because it's a potential symptom. She was taking those meds for 30+ years. She became paranoid after Nathaniel gave her something to be paranoid about. Women can sense when men are not providing transparency. Their words do not match their actions. Our natural instinct, to protect ourselves, is to ruminate until one of us, us or them, gives us clarity.
There is no one who will ever remain sane and emotionally composed while being emotionally abused and deceived. It cannot happen. Not unless the victim is born without the ability to feel or completely emotionally detaches. When a woman is "crazy," that's incognito for "a man drove this woman to insanity with his psychological abuse."
Nathaniel Branden was a coward who used women so he didn't have to repair his own deficiencies directly.
However, Ayn received the exact product she groomed. Her shamings, her scrutiny, her anger, her meticulously-crafted insults, deflections, misdirections, and arguments to achieve obedience she awarded with praise--like training a puppy--created a fearful little boy. Nathan's options were: 1. Obey Ayn Rand. 2. Face the wrath of Ayn Rand and Excommunication. He essentially was choosing between his life as he knew it, and all the comfort and hard work he put into it, or lose it all.
I can understand why he couldn't be honest, but the woman in me still feels a sympathy for Ayn. I feel a sympathy for both of them. They were kids of their environment who became abusive adults. But childhood deficiency is only a reason to explain behavior, it's not an excuse.
These personality traits and actions made me lose some respect for Nathan, and I ponder his credibility as a person applied to his psychologist profession, but I'm still very interested in reading his other books. His writing and thought patterns have impressed me.
I really came to adore every minute mention of Frank. I was once told he was a himbo; Frank was not a himbo.
My favorite quote, which I cannot seem to find, is when Nathan made a revelation about his observation of people and Frank corrected him that everyone is more than they appear. BRAVO.
I wish there was more about his musings, but I understand he was mute because Ayn conditioned his obedience and silence. Of the few things he said and did, it was clear he was brilliant, and truly cared to nurture people and animals. He's the real rare gem. He had a natural talent for art, thrived in nature, and I feel incredibly sad that he felt he wasn't sufficient enough to sever himself from Ayn's hip. I get emotional thinking about it, but Frank was a grown man who still had responsibility for his own actions. He chose to be unhappy. He chose not to live in his alignment, as did Ayn. She did not choose to learn from her past mistakes and live in her fullest alignment. She scapegoated her wrongdoings onto everyone else--never deeply, inwardly reflecting--as she did her entire life. Ayn advocated self-awareness and responsibility, but in practice, she did neither. She deflected and rationalized outwardly, allocating fault anywhere but herself. She never evolved, and so died bitter and without the meaningful connections that her soul yearned for.
You reap what you sow.
One experiment I'd like to conduct after I become a psychology researcher: determine how much damage Objectivism has caused people individually and collectively overall, how much Ayn's philosophies realistically helped, and how much people have manipulated and deceived themselves and others just to maintain a belief in something that induced temporary motivational dopamine.
July 5, 2008
If you can get past how full of himself Branden is, it's tolerable. At least he's unashamed of it. Fluid writer. Of course he imagines himself constructing a "stylized universe" like Rand in his set-ups and portrayals. This truly comes to light in the conclusion. Difficult to tolerate his dialogue at times (too transparent and plot-driven)... however still an interesting (and difficult to digest) view of Rand. Amusing insight into the mind of a psychotherapist.
December 29, 2008
This not-so-flattering portral was my introduction to Rand. As a result, I didn't go ga-ga over her like so many people do in their 20s when they discover her. I was already suspiscious of her motives and skeptical about her theories before ever reading Atlas or Fountainhead.
September 26, 2012
This is the most fascinating book I have ever read.
May 27, 2018
Fascintaing insight into psychologist Branden and philosopher Rand as well as a perfect guide in how NOT to have an open relationship
March 23, 2011
Is it possible to have a worthy hero?
January 5, 2026
Summary with Spoilers (Detailed)
Meeting Ayn Rand and Becoming Her Heir Apparent
Nathaniel Branden recounts meeting Ayn Rand in the early 1950s as a young admirer of The Fountainhead.
Rand quickly recognizes Branden’s intelligence and devotion. He becomes her closest intellectual ally, collaborator, and public interpreter of Objectivism.
Branden and his wife Barbara Branden help build Rand’s public movement: lectures, newsletters, institutes, and ideological outreach.
Rand positions Branden as her intellectual successor, giving him immense authority within the Objectivist circle.
The Secret Affair
Branden reveals that he and Rand began a long-term romantic and sexual relationship, fully known to and approved (under pressure) by both spouses.
Rand frames the affair as a philosophical necessity — a union of “the highest values.”
Branden increasingly experiences emotional strain, guilt, and fear, but remains outwardly loyal.
Over time, the relationship becomes controlling, with Rand demanding emotional exclusivity and ideological conformity.
Power, Control, and Psychological Pressure
Rand exerts intense influence over Branden’s personal life, professional choices, and emotional world.
Dissent within the Objectivist circle is discouraged or punished; critics are ostracized.
Branden begins to see contradictions between Rand’s philosophy of rational independence and her personal authoritarianism.
His internal conflict grows as he secretly falls in love with another woman, creating a crisis he cannot reconcile.
The Break and Public Destruction
When Rand discovers Branden’s deception, she responds with public fury.
She denounces him in The Objectivist, accusing him of moral corruption and intellectual betrayal.
Branden is excommunicated from the movement overnight; his reputation is destroyed.
Former allies cut ties immediately, demonstrating the movement’s cult-like dynamics.
Aftermath and Reckoning
Branden falls into depression and professional ruin but eventually rebuilds his life as a psychologist.
He re-evaluates Objectivism, distinguishing Rand’s ideas from her behavior.
The memoir ends with Branden reclaiming his autonomy, acknowledging both his admiration for Rand’s intellect and the damage caused by her domination — and by his own compliance.
Additional Stories & Context Behind
1. Two Competing Memoirs
This book is one side of a famous literary duel:
Nathaniel Branden’s My Years with Ayn Rand
Barbara Branden’s The Passion of Ayn Rand
Rand herself never publicly acknowledged the affair, but her journals (published posthumously) confirmed many of Branden’s claims.
2. Objectivism as Movement
Branden helped transform Objectivism from philosophy into a structured ideology with leadership, hierarchy, and enforcement.
The movement displayed traits later associated with high-control groups, despite its rhetoric of independence.
3. Psychological Irony
Branden later became a leading authority on self-esteem, a bitter irony given his earlier emotional subjugation.
His later work directly addresses the damage caused by authoritarian belief systems.
4. Rand’s Fear of Dependency
Branden argues that Rand’s controlling behavior stemmed from terror of emotional vulnerability — a flaw unacknowledged within her own philosophy.
5. Historical Importance
The memoir reshaped Rand’s legacy, complicating her image as a champion of reason and autonomy.
It remains essential reading for understanding how ideas function in real human systems.
🗒️ Interesting Stories Behind the Book
Rand personally edited Branden’s early lectures and demanded script-level approval.
Followers were expected to sever relationships deemed “irrational” by Rand.
Branden describes rehearsing emotional reactions before conversations with Rand.
After his exile, former friends crossed the street to avoid him.
Rand’s later loneliness is implied as the cost of absolute control.
Meeting Ayn Rand and Becoming Her Heir Apparent
Nathaniel Branden recounts meeting Ayn Rand in the early 1950s as a young admirer of The Fountainhead.
Rand quickly recognizes Branden’s intelligence and devotion. He becomes her closest intellectual ally, collaborator, and public interpreter of Objectivism.
Branden and his wife Barbara Branden help build Rand’s public movement: lectures, newsletters, institutes, and ideological outreach.
Rand positions Branden as her intellectual successor, giving him immense authority within the Objectivist circle.
The Secret Affair
Branden reveals that he and Rand began a long-term romantic and sexual relationship, fully known to and approved (under pressure) by both spouses.
Rand frames the affair as a philosophical necessity — a union of “the highest values.”
Branden increasingly experiences emotional strain, guilt, and fear, but remains outwardly loyal.
Over time, the relationship becomes controlling, with Rand demanding emotional exclusivity and ideological conformity.
Power, Control, and Psychological Pressure
Rand exerts intense influence over Branden’s personal life, professional choices, and emotional world.
Dissent within the Objectivist circle is discouraged or punished; critics are ostracized.
Branden begins to see contradictions between Rand’s philosophy of rational independence and her personal authoritarianism.
His internal conflict grows as he secretly falls in love with another woman, creating a crisis he cannot reconcile.
The Break and Public Destruction
When Rand discovers Branden’s deception, she responds with public fury.
She denounces him in The Objectivist, accusing him of moral corruption and intellectual betrayal.
Branden is excommunicated from the movement overnight; his reputation is destroyed.
Former allies cut ties immediately, demonstrating the movement’s cult-like dynamics.
Aftermath and Reckoning
Branden falls into depression and professional ruin but eventually rebuilds his life as a psychologist.
He re-evaluates Objectivism, distinguishing Rand’s ideas from her behavior.
The memoir ends with Branden reclaiming his autonomy, acknowledging both his admiration for Rand’s intellect and the damage caused by her domination — and by his own compliance.
Additional Stories & Context Behind
1. Two Competing Memoirs
This book is one side of a famous literary duel:
Nathaniel Branden’s My Years with Ayn Rand
Barbara Branden’s The Passion of Ayn Rand
Rand herself never publicly acknowledged the affair, but her journals (published posthumously) confirmed many of Branden’s claims.
2. Objectivism as Movement
Branden helped transform Objectivism from philosophy into a structured ideology with leadership, hierarchy, and enforcement.
The movement displayed traits later associated with high-control groups, despite its rhetoric of independence.
3. Psychological Irony
Branden later became a leading authority on self-esteem, a bitter irony given his earlier emotional subjugation.
His later work directly addresses the damage caused by authoritarian belief systems.
4. Rand’s Fear of Dependency
Branden argues that Rand’s controlling behavior stemmed from terror of emotional vulnerability — a flaw unacknowledged within her own philosophy.
5. Historical Importance
The memoir reshaped Rand’s legacy, complicating her image as a champion of reason and autonomy.
It remains essential reading for understanding how ideas function in real human systems.
🗒️ Interesting Stories Behind the Book
Rand personally edited Branden’s early lectures and demanded script-level approval.
Followers were expected to sever relationships deemed “irrational” by Rand.
Branden describes rehearsing emotional reactions before conversations with Rand.
After his exile, former friends crossed the street to avoid him.
Rand’s later loneliness is implied as the cost of absolute control.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 28, 2024
A REVISISION (AND MODERATION) OF HIS EARLIER MEMOIR, "JUDGMENT DAY"
Nathaniel Branden (born 1930) is a Canadian psychotherapist and writer who was Rand's chief spokesman, until their break in 1968. He has written many other books (an earlier and less moderate version of this book is 'Judgment Day'), such as 'The Psychology of Self-Esteem: A Revolutionary Approach to Self-Understanding that Launched a New Era in Modern Psychology.'
In the "Author's Note" to this 1999 book, he states, "This new publication has offered me the opportunity ... to add some new material that adds... to the story's richness... (and) present a more balanced portrait of certain people with whom my relationships were at times adversarial." Later, he adds, "I wanted to write as accurate a portrait of my relationship with Ayn Rand as I could... I wanted to capture the essence of a brilliant, innovative thinker and artist, an exalted and tortured woman... I wanted to examine anew the choices I made and the actions I took during those years; some of those decisions were disastrous..." (Pg. 2)
He recounts how after a fateful car trip with Barbara and Ayn Rand, his/Rand's feelings for each other surfaced: "I looked at the woman who had been my idol since I was fourteen years old... Suddenly, I had the sense that everything I had ever done, every choice I ever made, had led me to this moment. Part of me wanted to escape... But the more dominant part said, 'Leap!' [He said] 'Ayn, you misunderstood nothing. Of course I am in love with you.'" (Pg. 123-125) He details how he and Rand obtained the "consent" of their respective spouses to an affair (Pg. 131-136; they originally proposed the relationship would be "non-sexual," but this soon changed).
He records his reaction to Rand's telling a journalist that he was her "intellectual heir... the most consistent embodiment ... he understands my philosophy better than anyone"; he says, "I felt foolish. And yet, I wanted desperately to be worthy of Ayn's confidence." (Pg. 197) But he later admits, "In the two years following the publication of Atlas Shrugged... The joy and excitement between us had vanished... Our affair died not by conscious decision but by default, as a casualty of Ayn's depression." (Pg. 219) He suggests that "I was never the passionate moralist---or moralizer---that Ayn was... there was a streak of Objectivist puritanism in all the Collective members that at times drove out normal human warmth." (Pg. 259)
And he records in detail the violently emotional breakup with Rand (Branden was in an affair with a younger woman, at this point); "When Allan finally told Ayn of my love for Patrecia, she immediately announced that under no circumstances would she ever speak to me again" (pg. 339); "I had heard Barbara's comment that my goal was to precipitate a crisis and... some part of me had known precisely what I was doing and how all this was meant to end. I had engineered it." (Pg. 341).
Perhaps the most interesting addition to this book is the relatively cordial meeting between Branden's third wife Devers and Ayn Rand in 1980 (Pg. 391-402), in which Rand said about their relationship, "A gentleman would have carried it to his grave." (Pg. 399)
For anyone interested in Ayn Rand, this book (combined with 'The Passion of Ayn Rand' and 'The Passion of Ayn Rand's Critics;) is essential reading... sometimes with a grain of salt, however.
Nathaniel Branden (born 1930) is a Canadian psychotherapist and writer who was Rand's chief spokesman, until their break in 1968. He has written many other books (an earlier and less moderate version of this book is 'Judgment Day'), such as 'The Psychology of Self-Esteem: A Revolutionary Approach to Self-Understanding that Launched a New Era in Modern Psychology.'
In the "Author's Note" to this 1999 book, he states, "This new publication has offered me the opportunity ... to add some new material that adds... to the story's richness... (and) present a more balanced portrait of certain people with whom my relationships were at times adversarial." Later, he adds, "I wanted to write as accurate a portrait of my relationship with Ayn Rand as I could... I wanted to capture the essence of a brilliant, innovative thinker and artist, an exalted and tortured woman... I wanted to examine anew the choices I made and the actions I took during those years; some of those decisions were disastrous..." (Pg. 2)
He recounts how after a fateful car trip with Barbara and Ayn Rand, his/Rand's feelings for each other surfaced: "I looked at the woman who had been my idol since I was fourteen years old... Suddenly, I had the sense that everything I had ever done, every choice I ever made, had led me to this moment. Part of me wanted to escape... But the more dominant part said, 'Leap!' [He said] 'Ayn, you misunderstood nothing. Of course I am in love with you.'" (Pg. 123-125) He details how he and Rand obtained the "consent" of their respective spouses to an affair (Pg. 131-136; they originally proposed the relationship would be "non-sexual," but this soon changed).
He records his reaction to Rand's telling a journalist that he was her "intellectual heir... the most consistent embodiment ... he understands my philosophy better than anyone"; he says, "I felt foolish. And yet, I wanted desperately to be worthy of Ayn's confidence." (Pg. 197) But he later admits, "In the two years following the publication of Atlas Shrugged... The joy and excitement between us had vanished... Our affair died not by conscious decision but by default, as a casualty of Ayn's depression." (Pg. 219) He suggests that "I was never the passionate moralist---or moralizer---that Ayn was... there was a streak of Objectivist puritanism in all the Collective members that at times drove out normal human warmth." (Pg. 259)
And he records in detail the violently emotional breakup with Rand (Branden was in an affair with a younger woman, at this point); "When Allan finally told Ayn of my love for Patrecia, she immediately announced that under no circumstances would she ever speak to me again" (pg. 339); "I had heard Barbara's comment that my goal was to precipitate a crisis and... some part of me had known precisely what I was doing and how all this was meant to end. I had engineered it." (Pg. 341).
Perhaps the most interesting addition to this book is the relatively cordial meeting between Branden's third wife Devers and Ayn Rand in 1980 (Pg. 391-402), in which Rand said about their relationship, "A gentleman would have carried it to his grave." (Pg. 399)
For anyone interested in Ayn Rand, this book (combined with 'The Passion of Ayn Rand' and 'The Passion of Ayn Rand's Critics;) is essential reading... sometimes with a grain of salt, however.
June 18, 2023
This is my second, and not last, reading of this book. Nathaniel Branden was an extraordinary lucid thinker and his memoir of engaging writing and precise language is a testament to that. He describes how his relationships with Rand progressed from friends when he met her at 19 to lovers and colleagues to adversaries. Throughout the book you get a look at the birth of the philosophy of Objectivism based on ideas in Rand's The Fountainhead and Atlas shrugged and its main principles.
Branden describes his feelings with great clarity and honesty; it's almost like the aforementioned events happened a year or two ago and not thirty. It is a psychological exposition of a man deeply in love with life and his work as well as a philosophical introduction to Rand's ideas and Objectivism. His book on self-esteem Six Pillars of Self-Esteem influenced my life profoundly and I recommended and gifted it to many clients since.
If you are interested in psychology, biographies or like Ayn Rand's books I would highly recommend to give it a try. You will likely discover a wealth of enjoyment from reading it.
Branden describes his feelings with great clarity and honesty; it's almost like the aforementioned events happened a year or two ago and not thirty. It is a psychological exposition of a man deeply in love with life and his work as well as a philosophical introduction to Rand's ideas and Objectivism. His book on self-esteem Six Pillars of Self-Esteem influenced my life profoundly and I recommended and gifted it to many clients since.
If you are interested in psychology, biographies or like Ayn Rand's books I would highly recommend to give it a try. You will likely discover a wealth of enjoyment from reading it.
December 17, 2020
The author offers a good insight into Rand’s philosophy and life, with some important lessons, but I found the work a little bit self-serving. It provides a sober look at the worship of objectivism and reason.
June 26, 2022
Amazing book - a must-read no matter if you are intersted in objectivism or not.
December 16, 2023
Reading this book was the catalyst to getting back together with my ex. Take that how you will.
September 30, 2018
This book changed my life. Nathaniel Branden is a great writer. I especially liked how this book told what it was like being in Ayn's group. I was worried that this book would change the way I think about Ayn and her philosophy, but Nathaniel did a great job making sure to express the validity of Objectivism, the fact that he still agreed with it, and how life enriching it is. This memoir is written with truth and clear judgment.
June 29, 2016
If you've been around here since I started reading this book, you know I was expecting something kinda trashy, kinda campy, like the movie The Passion of Ayn Rand (starring Helen Mirren!). Y'know, lurid sex, some frothing at the mouth, some mink, some diamonds, some trains, all that. Alas, My Years With Ayn Rand is slow and thoughtful—sober and sympathetic rather than exploitative, relatively mature and introspective rather than angry.
Written by Nathaniel Branden, who for many years was Rand's partner in philosophy, business, and the bedroom, My Years tells of his long relationship with the author, from meeting her while he was in college, to founding the Objectivist movement with her, to beginning an affair (while both were married to other people), and then the inevitable downfall and disaster. While roughly half the book is a chilling account of a cult's interior workings, the other half is meandering, embarrassing, and self-congratulatory. Branden himself is one of only two people who comes off well, the other being his adoring second wife.
His sex life is dwelt upon, since it is of great interest to him, but I for one do not need to know as much as he's willing to tell. (It would be one thing if he went the whole way into salacious detail; at least that would be shocking, voyeuristic fun, but for the most part he maintains the illusion of good taste, so he gets to talk as much as he wants about it while feeling respectable.) He also spends a great deal of time psychoanalyzing everyone around him in long, minutely written passages that contribute very little to our understanding of the narrative, but make him look smart.
The central character, Ayn Rand herself, is such a forceful presence that when she isn't before us, the book slows down and falls apart. A small, angry woman, Rand was one of the most prominent thinkers of the twentieth century, and while I despise her philosophy and her books, I appreciate her as a fascinating character, and Branden draws her very well. Her selfish passions, her rationality, her rationalization—she's so complex and contradictory and strange that, even though this is Branden's autobiography, I wish he talked about himself less and her more.
The best parts of the book center on Ayn Rand and the rise of Objectivism. Under Rand's autocratic rule, Objectivism was less a political movement and more a paranoid cult, with members willing to excommunicate each other for the smallest offenses (such as failing to agree with Rand on everything). But of course it didn't start that way, and Branden's account of the movement's slow turn from reason and philosophy into control and manipulation is quietly horrifying, then loudly horrifying, then almost farcical, as Rand turns against Branden and everything falls apart.
In the end, though, My Years With Ayn Rand is too rambling and psychobabblish to be recommended. I never thought I'd say this about anything, but it might have benefited from hearing more about Ayn Rand's sex life.
Written by Nathaniel Branden, who for many years was Rand's partner in philosophy, business, and the bedroom, My Years tells of his long relationship with the author, from meeting her while he was in college, to founding the Objectivist movement with her, to beginning an affair (while both were married to other people), and then the inevitable downfall and disaster. While roughly half the book is a chilling account of a cult's interior workings, the other half is meandering, embarrassing, and self-congratulatory. Branden himself is one of only two people who comes off well, the other being his adoring second wife.
His sex life is dwelt upon, since it is of great interest to him, but I for one do not need to know as much as he's willing to tell. (It would be one thing if he went the whole way into salacious detail; at least that would be shocking, voyeuristic fun, but for the most part he maintains the illusion of good taste, so he gets to talk as much as he wants about it while feeling respectable.) He also spends a great deal of time psychoanalyzing everyone around him in long, minutely written passages that contribute very little to our understanding of the narrative, but make him look smart.
The central character, Ayn Rand herself, is such a forceful presence that when she isn't before us, the book slows down and falls apart. A small, angry woman, Rand was one of the most prominent thinkers of the twentieth century, and while I despise her philosophy and her books, I appreciate her as a fascinating character, and Branden draws her very well. Her selfish passions, her rationality, her rationalization—she's so complex and contradictory and strange that, even though this is Branden's autobiography, I wish he talked about himself less and her more.
The best parts of the book center on Ayn Rand and the rise of Objectivism. Under Rand's autocratic rule, Objectivism was less a political movement and more a paranoid cult, with members willing to excommunicate each other for the smallest offenses (such as failing to agree with Rand on everything). But of course it didn't start that way, and Branden's account of the movement's slow turn from reason and philosophy into control and manipulation is quietly horrifying, then loudly horrifying, then almost farcical, as Rand turns against Branden and everything falls apart.
In the end, though, My Years With Ayn Rand is too rambling and psychobabblish to be recommended. I never thought I'd say this about anything, but it might have benefited from hearing more about Ayn Rand's sex life.
December 24, 2014
The rating is based primarily on its entertainment value, which is fantastic: sex! Lies! Objectivism! Good stuff, good, good stuff. I did find the conclusion to be quite profound: "I'm thinking about what Ayn's and my world was really about....There's a...need...to experience an ecstatic state of consciousness. An experience that shatters the ordinary walls of reality and lifts a person to another plane and another level of feeling entirely. Some people seek that experience in religion and in the promise of union with God. Others seek it in sex or in passionate love affairs. Some seek it in drugs; or in military battle; or in music; or in creative work; or in an athletic performance that seems to break the bounds of the possible. Ayn heard the most ecstatic music inside her own head....That's what [she] transmitted through her novels, and that's what we fell in love with and fought against leaving, because it was through her that we first entered that other plane."
Some other random thoughts:
This makes an excellent (albeit highly improbable) companion read alongside Dodie Bellamy's The T.V. Sutras, as both could be said to be meditations of former cult members.
I notice that the only Goodreads list this book appears on has sociopathy as its focal point, which is interesting (to me), because I found myself more than once speculating that Mr. Branden would probably have scored pretty high on the sociopathy meter.
He died while I was reading this. On December 3rd, which is my (also deceased) mother's birthday. This is all meaningless, I'm sure, but still—whoa. Oh yeah, and the reason I ended up reading this is that it was part of my (deceased, for the trifecta!) father's library.
I couldn't stop thinking as I read this that Branden was such a stereotypical Aries (an observation for which he would have no small measure of regard, har).
I read this book while living on Rand Street—no joke!
Some other random thoughts:
This makes an excellent (albeit highly improbable) companion read alongside Dodie Bellamy's The T.V. Sutras, as both could be said to be meditations of former cult members.
I notice that the only Goodreads list this book appears on has sociopathy as its focal point, which is interesting (to me), because I found myself more than once speculating that Mr. Branden would probably have scored pretty high on the sociopathy meter.
He died while I was reading this. On December 3rd, which is my (also deceased) mother's birthday. This is all meaningless, I'm sure, but still—whoa. Oh yeah, and the reason I ended up reading this is that it was part of my (deceased, for the trifecta!) father's library.
I couldn't stop thinking as I read this that Branden was such a stereotypical Aries (an observation for which he would have no small measure of regard, har).
I read this book while living on Rand Street—no joke!
April 25, 2012
This is a fascinating account of the disturbing life of Ayn Rand, by her equally disturbed protégé and much younger married lover, Nathaniel Braden. The copy I have is the original account, I believe, which was redacted rather quickly to become "My Years with Ayn Rand," and sold under the later title after that. I don't personally know what the differences between the two editions are and I'm probably not ever going to find out because I don't want to wade through it all again. But that's okay with me. ;)
Although I'm not sure I believe everything the author says in precisely the way he recounts it, as he seems approximately as likely to fantasize as his subject, this book did give me an idea what the two of them must really have been like, and therefore what the movement they founded, libertarianism, is like.
It was a pot-boiler - fun to read and strange to contemplate. I already surmised that I wasn't much of a libertarian and now I know I'm not.
BTW, this author has refashioned himself as a specialist in the field of "self-esteem" which I find simultaneously terrifying and hilarious after reading this book.
Although I'm not sure I believe everything the author says in precisely the way he recounts it, as he seems approximately as likely to fantasize as his subject, this book did give me an idea what the two of them must really have been like, and therefore what the movement they founded, libertarianism, is like.
It was a pot-boiler - fun to read and strange to contemplate. I already surmised that I wasn't much of a libertarian and now I know I'm not.
BTW, this author has refashioned himself as a specialist in the field of "self-esteem" which I find simultaneously terrifying and hilarious after reading this book.
August 14, 2008
Branden's tell all, of what his life was like with AR, her behavior, dishonesty, harm done to others. Depressed, angry, raging, self/other destructive, (not your girl next door), or your lofty intellectual. Branden does well with this, and I believe there is more to come.
July 29, 2014
Anyone who has read Ayn Rand's books absolutely needs to read this autobiography by Rand's former partner. It gives a context to her stories, as well as presenting a balance to her incomplete philosophy.
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews