Ayn Rand as Client

ARI

Charles, you were one of Miss Rand’s attorneys. What was she like as a client?

CHARLES

Her main attorneys were in New York City, but in the ear­ly sixties, I handled a few matters for her. When it came to discuss­ing legal matters, her manner was complete­ly professional. Her tone was impersonal, almost as if she were not acquainted with you. Her focus was on the issue at hand and how it affected her.

ARI

We’ve seen in the archives some of your legal correspondence which Miss Rand had reviewed. Was this customary?

CHARLES

When I represented her, she went over letters I wrote. She was a hands-on client. She didn’t sit back and let her lawyers take over. She wanted to know what legal issues were involved and what were her rights. She wanted to be consulted before ac­tion was taken. Not that she wanted to direct every aspect of a case. She knew that her attorneys had legal expertise she didn’t have, and she respected that. But she thought it was her responsibility to know what ac­tion was be­ing taken and why.

ARI

Let’s talk about the letters.

CHARLES

The very first letter I wrote for her was to an adversary, and it concerned the misappropria­tion of the names of characters in her novels. It was a good letter from a legal standpoint; it made all the right points. When I reviewed it with Ayn, she complimented me on the open­ing sentence, but asked if the next sentence could be changed as to a word or two and the juxtaposi­tion of a clause. It sounded good to me so, of course, I agreed. We made other changes. When I got back to my office in Maryland and dictated the revised letter, I found that the on­ly part of it that remained word for word from the original was the first sentence! Her editorial changes gave the letter a greater clarity and brought the issues into sharper focus.

ARI

What was her manner dur­ing the edit­ing process?

CHARLES

Whenever she suggested a revision, she gave reasons for it, no matter how small the change. She was open to discussion; if I disagreed, she listened and we talked it out. She took her time and gave you time to think. I never felt pressured.

Short­ly after that, I wrote a couple of lengthy letters on a libel matter. She approved the letters, which resulted in an effective conclusion to the case.

ARI

What case was that?

CHARLES

It was the debacle of the show­ing of The Foun­tain­head film in Portland, Oregon. In October 1963, Ayn received an honorary degree of Doctor of Humane Letters from Lewis and Clark Col­lege in Portland. I was not with her, but I was do­ing some legal work for her at that time.

ARI

What happened?

CHARLES

Dur­ing the two days of special presenta­tions of her works, in tribute to her as philosopher and writer, The Foun­tain­head was shown as part of the honors and ceremonies. The rented film had been cut and distorted, contrary to the assurance that the film shown would be the uncut original. Ayn stopped the film when it became apparent that Roark’s speech to the jury had been omitted. She gave an extemporaneous condemna­tion of the wrong that had been perpetrated.

ARI

What was your involvement?

CHARLES

I did some research on Oregon libel law. Then I wrote to the film company demand­ing, among other relief, that the uncut version be provided for show­ing at the col­lege. Lewis and Clark Col­lege was innocent of any fault in the matter. The film company advised that although the cuts were made without their knowledge, they would make amends immediately, and they did so. As a result, Ayn wrote to the president of Lewis and Clark Col­lege regard­ing a date for the show­ing, say­ing, “I am anxious to have the full film shown at Lewis and Clark Col­lege in order to correct the disgrace­ful impression made by the censored version.”

ARI

You’ve said she was a “hands-on” client. Did that make it harder or easier to deal with her?

CHARLES

Easier, without a doubt. It was clear she had done considerable think­ing before we discussed legal matters—so she saved us time, which was important to both of us.

When Mary Ann had the art reproduc­tion company, I pre­pared the contracts by which Ayn and Frank gave the company the exclusive rights to reproduce both Ilona’s1 portrait of Ayn and Frank’s paint­ing, Diminish­ing Returns. Ayn was very experienced with contracts. She was an old pro, you could say. This was apparent in the one modifica­tion she requested in her contract—the right to have the portrait reproduced on book jackets and/or in periodicals. Otherwise the contracts were signed as written.

ARI

Did be­ing friends make the process easier?

CHARLES

Be­ing friends never entered into it. She was focused on whether the contracts protected her and Frank’s interests. It was strict­ly business. That’s what made it a pleasure.

  1. Artist Ilona Royce Smithkin ←

Search
HOME BUY THE BOOK