How Ayn Rand Planned Her Classic Novel
Since its publication in 1943, The Fountainhead has captivated millions of readers. It’s the story of Howard Roark, a fiercely independent architect who refuses to sacrifice the integrity of his innovative designs, despite intense social and economic pressure to conform. Rand’s passionate tribute to individualism brought her international fame and has now sold more than eight million copies in thirty-plus languages. Decades later, it’s a mainstay in high school literature classes.
May 7, 1943
Bobbs-Merrill
The original cover of The Fountainhead, published by Bobbs-Merrill on May 7, 1943.
Contrary to the myth that she wrote didactic fiction, Rand held that plot is crucial to a good novel. “The simple truth,” she said, “is that I approach literature as a child does: I write—and read—for the sake of the story.” From her youth in Soviet Russia through her struggles in America to learn English and develop her craft, Rand clung to a single goal: to portray her ideal man in fiction. With The Fountainhead and Howard Roark, she achieved that goal for the first time.
Now, with the help of manuscripts housed in the Ayn Rand Archives, you can go behind the scenes and observe the years-long process by which Rand conceived, plotted, wrote, and edited her first bestseller. This online exhibit, featuring commentary from the Institute’s archivists, will allow you to explore the intellectual scaffolding—the handwritten notes and outlines—that Rand used to erect the edifice called The Fountainhead.
Before you dive in, a couple of important things to keep in mind: these documents were Rand’s notes to herself; she never intended them for publication. And they shouldn’t be taken as additions or alterations to the novel or her philosophy. Finally, if you’re here, you’ve likely read The Fountainhead already, but if you haven’t, be aware that there are plot spoilers ahead.
With that, we invite you to begin this guided introduction, followed by more than 200 manuscript pages to explore in more detail. We hope you come away with a new appreciation for The Fountainhead and its creator.
More to explore: For more on the myth that Rand was an author of didactic fiction, we encourage you to read this article by Onkar Ghate.
At the age of nine, Alisa Rosenbaum—the future Ayn Rand—decided to become a writer of fiction. Growing up in czarist Russia, Alisa had been entranced by adventure stories written for young people. One story in particular, The Mysterious Valley, featured a hero named Cyrus Paltons who became her first fictional love. “I decided to become a writer—not in order to save the world, nor to serve my fellow men—but for the simple, personal, selfish, egotistical happiness of creating the kind of men and events I could like, respect and admire.”
1915 (1994)
Maurice Champagne
A drawing of Cyrus Paltons, hero of the children’s adventure story The Mysterious Valley, and an early inspiration for Ayn Rand. Magazine illustrated by René Giffey. Story reprinted in paperback by Paper Tiger Books, 1994; on the page, this image is surrounded by the text of the story.
But after the communists seized power in Russia, Alisa knew she could never make a career there writing stories about individualistic heroes. Escaping to America in 1926 at the age of twenty-one, she mastered English and established herself professionally as a screenwriter and playwright before breaking into print with her first novel in 1936, We the Living, set in Soviet Russia. The novel’s theme is the supreme value of an individual’s life—against a state that claims the power to sacrifice that life. Fearing that her family back home would be persecuted for her anti-Soviet views, Alisa published the novel using a pen name: Ayn Rand.
Rand thought carefully about the practical demands of writing fiction. “One rule that you need both as a human being and as a fiction writer is: Concretize your abstractions,” she later said. “Not to carry floating abstractions in your mind is the first requisite for inventing a plot—because action is concrete and physical. Abstractions do not act.” (Art of Fiction, pp. 52–53) In these early years, one object Rand chose to concretize the abstraction of human achievement was the skyline of New York City, the skyscrapers that had thrilled her from an early age. In 1927, while working for filmmaker Cecil B. DeMille, Rand wrote a story treatment titled “The Skyscraper,” adapted from a story by Dudley Murphy about two construction workers. Rand’s version focused instead on a young architect named Howard Kane, who is commissioned by a newspaper to construct a building—described as “one of the highest and most unusual in the city.” Similar to Howard Roark, Kane faces criminal charges and intense public scrutiny while his love interest is engaged to a jealous rival. The story ends with Kane victorious, standing on top of his completed building, “his head thrown far back—just a man looking at the sky.”
No date
Ayn Rand
ARP 166_03A_001_006
Handwritten draft of a story treatment (c. 1927) that Ayn Rand wrote while working for Cecil B. DeMille.
July 22, 1927
Ayn Rand
ARP 166-03B-001-010
In a notebook that Ayn Rand kept during her years with Cecil B. DeMille, Rand imagined her story treatment brought to life on film, with a poster declaring: “Cecil B. DeMille presents The SKYSCRAPER by Ayn Rand: An Epic of Construction.” The hero of her story, Howard Kane, was originally named Francis Gonda, whose name appears on this page of her notes.
July 22, 1927
Ayn Rand
ARP 166-03B-001-023
One can see the seeds for The Fountainhead in a later draft of the DeMille scenario: “Howard Kane is the hero of New York. He is a young architect who has won a big competition sponsored by a news-paper and is now building a skyscraper.”
Although DeMille never produced Rand’s version of this scenario, projects like this enabled Rand to stock her subconscious with story ideas that she would later explore in The Fountainhead.
More to explore: Enjoy a related excerpt from Rand’s biographical interviews:
Transcript:
“I had always wanted to, someday, write a story which would be glorifying the American skyscraper as a symbol of achievement. Not necessarily think of it in terms of an architect, but that it was an aspect of America, or a symbol, which I always wanted to use because it stood in my mind precisely in the terms that I used in The Fountainhead, as the symbol of achievement and of life on earth. So that idea I had in a general way. I thought of that when I first saw the New York skyline, which I didn’t actually see as a skyline, you know, but my first glimpse of skyscrapers. I was thinking then, someday I’m going to use this in a novel.”
Following the publication of We the Living, Rand wanted her next novel to feature a fully realized hero embodying her unique concept of individualism, but she lacked a dramatic conflict that could fuel a plot. The Fountainhead was born during a conversation with an ambitious executive assistant at a Hollywood movie studio. When Rand asked her what she wanted out of life, the assistant replied: “If nobody had an automobile, then I would want to have one automobile. If some people have one, then I want to have two.”
For Rand—the independent valuer who had spent many years observing people and asking, “What makes them tick?”—this conversation came “like one of those light bulbs going off in my mind, like a dramatic revelation.” She had grasped the concept of a “second hander,” of a type of person who is motivated solely by the opinions of others, and “Second-Hand Lives” became her working title for The Fountainhead. With the basic conflict between Howard Roark and Peter Keating in place, she was ready to begin formulating her novel’s theme.
Rand described a novel’s theme as “the general abstraction in relation to which the events serve as the concretes.” This document is the earliest written record—from December 4, 1935—of work on “Second-Hand Lives.”
December 4, 1935
Ayn Rand
ARP 167_01B_001_001
The first page of Rand’s original notes on the story that would eventually be titled The Fountainhead.
Some of the phrasing in Rand’s early notes is necessarily highly abstract: “a defense of egoism in its real meaning”—“an egoist is a man who lives for himself”—“a question of egoism and selflessness…only in concrete human forms…the psychological bases of both.” In other passages she imagines how the abstractions will be embodied in particular characters: “if a man struggles for power and achieves it by accepting and championing the ideology of the masses—he himself knows that he has no real power, but he has it only in the eyes of the mob.”
These early notes reflect the influence of Friedrich Nietzsche, whose ideas she increasingly rejected as the writing of the novel progressed. Rand scholar Shoshana Milgram notes that these early stages “included and even emphasized several Nietzschean elements: the world’s hostility to Roark, his lack of friends, the opposition between him and the world. But she ultimately changed all of that. The hostility vanished. The friends joined him, and as traders rather than serfs. No longer is any man in the street his enemy, because any man willing to use his own mind is an ally.” Years later, in Rand’s introduction to the novel’s twenty-fifth anniversary edition, she condemned Nietzsche as “both a mystic and an irrationalist.”
The philosophical perspective presented by Rand in The Fountainhead is entirely her own. As she identifies on the first page of these notes, her goal was to create “a new definition of egoism.” The theme, in its final formulation is: “individualism and collectivism, not in politics, but in a man’s soul.” With this theme firmly in mind, Rand intensified her development of the novel’s concrete events and characters.
More to explore: For more information on Nietzsche’s earlier appeal to Rand and influence on The Fountainhead, we recommend this article by Tom Bowden and Shoshana Milgram’s essay “The Fountainhead from Notebook to Novel,” in Essays on Ayn Rand’s “The Fountainhead,” edited by Robert Mayhew.
Enjoy a related excerpt from Rand’s biographical interviews:
Transcript:
“It was literally like one of those light bulbs going off in my mind, like a dramatic revelation. Because, (a) it integrated an awful lot of things about people of that type, which I had observed and could not identify the root of. I had so often asked myself, ―How can they? or―What makes them tick? I knew that this was an explanation, much wider than this girl’s. Because so many things fell into place in my mind, it explained so much. That’s a; (b) I don’t think that without that statement of hers I could ever have arrived at this explanation…I mean, it’s so second-hand a statement that I couldn’t have given it a better formulation in fiction. And it’s…when she said it, it didn’t take me very long, you know, it’s almost lightning-like that everything fell into place. And what the result of it was that I saw immediately the principle of difference between me and this girl—and that was Roark and Keating.”
The means by which a fiction writer presents his theme—what Ayn Rand called the “plot-theme”—is “the central conflict or ‘situation’ of a story.” The plot-theme of The Fountainhead is, in her words, “the struggle of a creative architect against the society of his time.” (The Art of Fiction, p. 17)
Inspired by the New York skyline, particularly “the shapes and the thought that made them,” Rand knew that it was crucial to emphasize her hero’s struggle. “Since my purpose is to show that a man of creative independence will achieve his goal regardless of any opposition,” recalled Rand, “a story in which there is no opposition would not dramatize my message.”
In these early pages of her notebooks, Rand devised the “professional, economical, and emotional” trials that Roark would face on his journey. She describes “petty jealousies…years of struggle with obscure jobs, poverty, silent, grim, relentless work. Every economical humiliation that society knows how to inflict.” Rand imagined the “hardest obstacles possible,” on the premise that “the more struggle a story involves, the better the plot.”
Roark’s life in The Fountainhead differs dramatically from the life of architect Frank Lloyd Wright, often alleged as the inspiration for Roark. Rand herself clarified in a letter to a fan in 1950, “there is no similarity between Roark and Mr. Wright as personal life, character and basic philosophy are concerned. The only parallel which may be drawn between them is purely architectural.” In another letter, Rand even went so far as to say that Roark “is almost the opposite of Frank Lloyd Wright.” Thus, the apparent similarities between their respective careers and Rand’s admiration for Wright’s buildings does not alter the fact that The Fountainhead’s plot and hero are original.
February 9, 1936
Ayn Rand
ARP 167_01B_001_054
Notes on Howard Roark’s character from Rand’s original set of notes for The Fountainhead (page 54).
February 9, 1936
Ayn Rand
ARP 167_01B_001_055
Notes on Howard Roark’s character from Rand’s original set of notes for The Fountainhead (page 55).
More to explore: For more on the comparison between Roark and Wright, consult this talk by Shoshana Milgram and Mike Berliner’s essay “Howard Roark and Frank Lloyd Wright,” in Essays on Ayn Rand’s “The Fountainhead,” edited by Robert Mayhew.
Enjoy a related excerpt from Rand’s biographical interviews:
Transcript:
“Frank Lloyd Wright has nothing to do with Roark. Because, by the time I had read even only the biography and long before I met him, I couldn‘t stand the sense of life that he projected ideologically. Only in the passages when he wrote about architecture I admired him, but even then it was not Roark speaking. So that character-wise, there is absolutely nothing in common … As architect, only in the theoretical way, that is, what he presented as his idea of architecture, what the issue was if you went past his terms, such as organic architecture and all the mystically undefined stuff, yes. That is what you could abstract from his books and [Louis] Sullivan’s on their basic theory of modern architecture, its justification, why it’s firsthand as against copying the buildings of the past. That was the abstraction taken from them, in effect. But only in the broadest sense. In other words, taken as a principle, which was in fact correct. Everything else I had to devise myself. So that I’ve always said there is a resemblance to Wright only in the fundamentals of modern architecture and in the sense that it’s a man alone who is fighting against a whole trend for a new architecture. Outside of that, no resemblance at all.”
After much deliberation, Rand formulated the relationships among the characters for whom the novel’s four parts were named. Howard Roark, a first-handed individualist, was directly contrasted with Peter Keating, a “second hander” who “didn’t want to build, but to be admired as a builder.” In her notes, Rand calls Keating “the man who never could be [an ideal man] and doesn’t know it.” By contrast, Gail Wynand is “the man who could have been” if not for a tragic error. The novel’s primary antagonist, Ellsworth Toohey, was conceived as the enemy of the individual spirit, a destroyer who “never could be—and knows it.”
ca. July 14, 1937
Ayn Rand
ARP 167_03D_014_001
As shown on this handwritten page, each character has a contrasting relationship to the novel’s ideal: a fully independent character.
Also featured in these notes is Dominique Francon, who would later be conceived as a frustrated idealist with a malevolent worldview. Dominique’s role and characterization sharply dramatizes Roark’s struggle, forcing him to withstand the attempt by the woman he loves to end his career.
Rand created additional characters at this early stage, most of whom were either cut or absorbed into the novel’s five leading figures.
She also made extensive notes when projecting her characters’ visual appearance. “This gives me a concrete focus so that the character does not float in my mind as a mere collection of abstract virtues or vices,” Rand said. “Seeing his appearance is like having a physical body on which I can hang the abstractions. That is how Roark was created.” (The Art of Fiction p. 86)
Contrary to the notion that Rand’s novels are populated with “cardboard characters,” her extensive character notes—on display in this exhibit—reveal profound thinking and psychological insight. As Rand would later identify in her fiction writing course, “a character can have enormous conflicts and contradictions—but then these have to be consistent. You must select his actions so that the reader grasps: ‘this is what’s the trouble with this character.’ For instance, there are contradictions in Gail Wynand’s actions throughout The Fountainhead, but these contradictions are integrated to their ultimate root. If a character has contradictory premises, to say ‘I understand him’ means: ‘I understand the conflict behind his actions.’”
February 9, 1936
Ayn Rand
ARP 167_01B_001_041
On this page, you can see how Rand imagined Roark’s physical presence.
No date
Ayn Rand
ARP 092_03x_002_010
This page is from a notebook Rand used while attending a lecture by Harold Laski, a Marxist political thinker and British politician, who inspired her physical image of Ellsworth Toohey.
December 26, 1935
Ayn Rand
ARP 167_01B_001_035
Original character list for The Fountainhead in Rand’s early notes on the story (page 35).
December 26, 1935
Ayn Rand
ARP 167_01B_001_036
Original character list for The Fountainhead in Rand’s early notes on the story (page 36).
December 26, 1935
Ayn Rand
167_01B_001_037
Original character list for The Fountainhead in Rand’s early notes on the story (page 37).
More to explore: Enjoy a related excerpt from Rand’s biographical interviews:
Transcript:
“The characters of Wynand and Toohey were the next step. And the way I built it for myself, in effect this is the procedure of my thought, was: that if we take the ideal man as the center, that is really the theme of the story, that’s Roark, then in relation to him I show three other types in this way. Roark is the man who could be the ideal man and was. Wynand is the man who wasn’t but could have been. Keating was the man who wasn’t and didn’t know it. Toohey was the man who was not the ideal man and knew it. That was the definition for myself as to why I take these four as the key figures. Now, it wasn’t that I figured out this as a sort of syllogistic assignment, but that I first projected in my mind the variants of this issue, of man against others. The choice that Roark made—what else could a man do who really had independence and a great mind, what would happen to a Roark if he surrendered to others? That would give me Wynand. Who would be the arch opposite? An enemy of both Roark and Wynand. That gave me Toohey. Who is the average man that, in effect, rides on evil without fully knowing it. That would be Peter Keating.”
Years after writing The Fountainhead, Rand observed that a novelist can start writing from the beginning, middle, or the end, but that one “must start plotting from the end.” (Art of Fiction, p. 50) This was true of The Fountainhead. “Nothing in the story could be set firmly, only tentatively, until I had the climax,” recalled Rand. “And that was really a mind-breaker.” She wanted the story to end in dramatic fashion, with Roark at the center of an intense public scandal. Yet what event could put an architect in real danger and provoke fury from the rest of society?
After more than two years of thinking, the idea of Roark dynamiting the Cortlandt housing project hit her “like Newton’s apple.” Yet Rand knew that this flash of inspiration didn’t come out of nowhere. “Accidents happen only to those who deserve them…the idea came to me because I had done an enormous amount of thinking while working on the outline and theme of The Fountainhead (and long before).”
These pages capture what is likely Rand’s first outline of the climax, a version that bears some differences from the final version. Nevertheless, with this key event set in place, Rand could finally begin plotting finer details and drafting the novel itself.
April 4, 1938
Ayn Rand
ARP 167_03D_006_001
April 4, 1938
Ayn Rand
ARP 167_03D_006_002
More to explore: Enjoy a related excerpt from Rand’s biographical interviews:
Transcript:
“The main assignment was that it has to be the progression of Roark’s career. And what I did was then devise very slowly […] a lot of pure superstructure calculations. What would be the key points of Roark’s career, that is, how would he start, what would be the difficulties on the early stage, how would he become famous? It went that way… Oh, one other thing that helped me enormously was the Stoddard trial. Once I had devised that as one of the turning points which would show how his career could be set back, what I wanted to show was the ups and downs, you see. How after he had risen to a certain extent, the combined evil of all the villains in the story could throw him down seriously, that helped to give a certain firm point in the progression of the years, you see. But I had the most impossibly difficult time, and nothing in the story could be set firmly, only tentatively, until I had the climax. And that was really a mind-breaker. Because what I wanted was an event which necessarily had to be connected with architecture, but which would put Roark in the position of real danger and of antagonizing the whole of society. And, incidentally, I found that dramatizing events of an architect’s career is enormously difficult anyway, because the art itself is physical; you don’t deal with people. All the conflicts would have to be ideologically tied to the building, but they’re not about the building as such. A lawyer or a doctor would be much easier to dramatize. And I remember cursing the profession for that reason, all through the years it took me on that outline. Now, you understand it wasn’t years of exclusively sitting and thinking about it. I was doing research at the same time. But, nevertheless, it was such a tortured process of trying to figure out something, not having unlimited financial means, and not being able to know when would I be able to even start the novel as such—and feeling I am almost a fake anytime I talk about my new novel, when I don’t yet know the central part of it, when nothing is set until I have the climax.”
Rand’s outlines were not designed to be “a synopsis in objective terms.” Rather, Rand made them “as brief as possible,” in what she called “headline style,” readily understandable to her. “I know more specifically than this what will go under the general headings, but I write down only what I need in order to remember the progression and to get a bird’s-eye view of the structure.” (The Art of Fiction, p. 49)
April 10, 1938
Ayn Rand
ARP 167_03D_004_001
No date
Ayn Rand
ARP 167_03C_013_001
By 1940, Rand completed her initial drafts of parts one and two of the four-part novel. In her notes, one can see the ruthless editing process that followed. She identified unsatisfactory elements of her own writing as “awkward” or “too obvious,” and she spotted areas where she had “sacrificed content for style.” She cut out unnecessary adjectives, journalistic references to contemporary events, even entire characters and plotlines. In one of her notes on a draft, Rand recognized that Roark’s philosophy was planted too quickly and his heroic qualities were “too obvious.” Each of these points reveals a writer dedicated to relentlessly improving her craft at every stage of the novel’s development.
February 18, 1940
Ayn Rand
ARP 097_56B_004_001
February 18, 1940
Ayn Rand
097_56B_004_002
February 18, 1940
Ayn Rand
ARP 097_56B_004_003
More to explore: Enjoy a related excerpt from Rand’s biographical interviews:
Transcript:
“I went to the public library here on 42nd Street, and they have a service of that kind, or had then, and I told them that I’m writing a novel about architecture, could they give me a reading list. I want to get acquainted with the profession from the ground up, both the history and the esthetics of architecture and the professional aspect of it. They gave me an excellent reading list within a very short time. I think it took them two days, and they mailed it to me or something like that. But they looked it up. And I began reading the books on the list, and I found every single one of them very valuable, very well selected. I couldn’t at that time certainly afford to buy books, but I remember one of the first rather thrilling things about it was that Frank brought me home a book on architecture that he had seen on sale. It was a very expensive book that had been marked down and as it is it was a luxury, but he thought he might as well give me one book. And I have it. And I remember being enormously thrilled by it because it gave it kind of a most professional touch, in the fact that it was a luxury that we properly shouldn’t have afforded, but I was glad that Frank thought of it. And it’s a very good history of modern architecture. It was illustrations, in fact probably the best of all the books that I read for a very well done survey of the whole history and problem of architecture. And then of course one of the first things I did was read Frank Lloyd Wright’s biography. The rest of the books on that list were very varied. There were very few books, except Frank Lloyd Wright’s biography, on the careers of architects, practically none. But most of the reading was either esthetic volumes or historical—histories of art. But by the time I finished with the list, I was quite thoroughly acquainted with the field. I also read a lot of architectural magazines. And that gave me the feeling of the way in which they discussed their problems and what are the specific, immediate professional problems that come up, and their lingo. Now, this took me, of course, several years.”
The Fountainhead was rejected by twelve publishers before finding a home at Bobbs-Merrill. The Indianapolis-based publisher had earned Rand’s admiration for defiantly publishing The Red Decade by Eugene Lyons, a work unmasking communist influences in America during the 1930s.
No date
Ayn Rand (?)
ARP 136_01F_020_001
She wrote for a solid year, meeting her contractual deadline of December 31, 1942.
November 29, 1942
Ayn Rand
The last page of the handwritten manuscript of The Fountainhead.
The novel was published in May 1943, as World War II raged across the globe and government paper rationing constrained the number of copies that could be printed.
No date
ARP 091_01x_004_001
Gradually, sales rose. More than two years after publication, The Fountainhead achieved bestseller status, remaining a fixture on national bestseller lists thereafter.
As The Fountainhead became a bestseller, Rand was already planning and researching her next novel. Atlas Shrugged was published over a decade later in 1957. In the author’s postscript to Atlas, Rand paid tribute to The Fountainhead’s place in her career: “To all the readers who discovered The Fountainhead and asked me many questions about the wider application of its ideas, I want to say that I am answering these questions in the present novel and that The Fountainhead was only an overture to ATLAS SHRUGGED.”
This guided tour has touched on a few highlights from Ayn Rand’s development of The Fountainhead. To delve deeper into these archival materials, you can explore the exhibit gallery featuring over two-hundred documents and their transcripts.
Search the Exhibit
Bibliography
(All sources directly quoted.)
Berliner, Mike, ed. Letters of Ayn Rand. 2nd, online ed. Ayn Rand Institute, 2022. https://aynrand.org/archives/
Mayhew, Robert, ed. Essays on Ayn Rand’s The Fountainhead. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2007.
[To read many of these essays online, click here.]
Rand, Ayn. The Art of Fiction: A Guide for Writers and Readers. Edited by Tore Boeckmann. Plume, 2000.
Rand, Ayn. Biographical interviews by Barbara Branden, 1960-1961.
Rand, Ayn. The Early Ayn Rand. Revised ed. Edited by Leonard Peikoff. New York: Signet, 2005.
Rand, Ayn. The Fountainhead. New York: Scribner, 1986.
Rand, Ayn. The Romantic Manifesto. 2nd revised ed. New York: Signet, 1975.
Additional Resources
(Sources suggested for further exploration and not previously cited.)
Bayer, Ben and Keith Lockitch. “Discussing The Fountainhead, Part II, Chapters 1-8.” Recorded in 2020 by the Ayn Rand Institute. https://www.youtube.com/live/bWqGWCRvB6M?feature=share
[For the full discussion series, click here.]
Bowden, Tom. “Nietzsche’s Influence on The Fountainhead.” New Ideal (July 9, 2018). https://newideal.aynrand.org/nietzsches-influence-on-the-fountainhead/
Ghate, Onkar. “Is Ayn Rand a Writer of Didactic Fiction?” New Ideal (April 4, 2018). https://newideal.aynrand.org/is-ayn-rand-a-writer-of-didactic-fiction-2/
Journo, Elan and Shoshana Milgram. “The Dramatic Story Behind the Making of The Fountainhead Movie.” Recorded in 2019 by the Ayn Rand Institute. https://youtu.be/ITXsl4r_Dg0
Mayhew, Robert. “‘Kill by Laughter’: Humor in The Fountainhead.” Recorded in 2018 by the Ayn Rand Institute in Newport Beach, CA. https://youtu.be/lAdMUuNyn2s
Milgram, Shoshana. “Frank Lloyd Wright and The Fountainhead.” Recorded in 2018 by the Ayn Rand Institute in Newport Beach, CA. https://youtu.be/_92ExHpA1vc
Curator: Brandon Lisi
Editorial Assistance: Elan Journo, Audra Hilse, Tom Bowden, Jeff Britting, Onkar Ghate
Transcription: Audra Hilse, David Hayes, Ginger Clark, Brandon Lisi, Daniel Schwartz, and other ARI Junior Fellows.
Web Production: Jesse Hashagen, Vinicius Freire
Audiovisual Production: Lucy Rose
Proofreading: Donna Montrezza
SPECIAL THANKS
Leonard Peikoff
Ayn Rand Institute Donors
Copyright © 1985 – 2024 The Ayn Rand Institute (ARI). Reproduction of content and images in whole or in part is prohibited. All rights reserved. ARI is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. Contributions to ARI in the United States are tax-exempt to the extent provided by law. Objectivist Conferences (OCON), Ayn Rand Conference (ARC), Ayn Rand University (ARU) and the Ayn Rand Institute eStore are operated by ARI. Payments to OCON, ARC, ARU or the Ayn Rand Institute eStore do not qualify as tax-deductible contributions to the Ayn Rand Institute. AYN RAND, AYN RAND INSTITUTE, ARI, AYN RAND UNIVERSITY and the AYN RAND device are trademarks of the Ayn Rand Institute. All rights reserved.