Ken’s Comments (group member since Jan 21, 2020)

Ken’s comments from the The Obscure Reading Group group.

The book banners in states like Texas are at it again, ripping books out of schools and town libraries and such. They know better than the rest of us, because they are THE STATE.

Jannifer wrote: "Hello all!
I'm Jan and I live just outside Austin, Texas. I've had The Brothers Karamazov on my TBR pile for a long time so I'm really excited to join this group! Looking forward to great discussions."

Welcome, Jannifer (and, again, Rachel!). I'm glad you're both joining at such an opportune time. Everyone gets to pick a favorite brother.

There are many ways to fight back, including behind-the-scenes resistance. But right now the best strategy is preventative measures.

Meanwhile, I look forward to seeing WHY Snyder picked Bros. K as an anti-authoritarian book. I read it in '09 (longer back than I at first thought, explaining the tabula rasa), so I don't recall any connection like that. It will be interesting!

Diane wrote: "So we are good citizens because we read books. But we always knew that, didn't we? Study after study shows that fiction readers are more informed, more tolerant and more compassionate than non-read..."

Yes, BUT. If we keep it indoors and to ourselves, we're of little good and only help tyranny first come to and then maintain power. The only language they understand is mass protest on a scale of ML King's marches or the Gdansk movement against communism in Poland. So there's that ===> introverts are readers but seldom marchers, even if their sympathies lie strongly with the marchers.

I decided to buy a copy, too, due to the time it will take. After reading Yvonne's link with the sample translations side by side, I narrowed it down to the MacAndrew or the Avsey and wound up buying the Avsey.

Interestingly, as I am reading On Tyranny Graphic Edition: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century, I came across a quote about ways book-reading citizens can better understand the wiles of tyrants and, in the case of the U.S., would-be tyrants. When what to my wondering eyes should appear, but the Bros. K:

"When we repeat the same words and phrases that appear in the daily media, we accept the absence of a larger framework. To have such a framework requires more concepts, and having more concepts requires reading. So get the screens out of your room and surround yourself with books. The characters in Orwell's and Bradbury's books [1984, Fahrenheit 451] could not do this -- but we still can.

"What to read? Any good novel enlivens our ability to think about ambiguous situations and judge the intentions of others. Fyodor Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov and Milan Kundera's The Unbearable Lightness of Being might suit our moment. Sinclair Lewis's novel It Can't Happen Here is perhaps not a great work of art; Philip Roth's The Plot Against America is better.

"One novel known by millions of young Americans that offers an account of tyranny and resistance is J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. If you or your friends or your children did not read it that way the first time, then it bears reading again."

Snyder goes on to recommend political and historical texts:

Politics and the English Language

The Language of the Third Reich: LTI--Lingua Tertii Imperii: A Philologist's Notebook

The Origins of Totalitarianism

The Rebel

The Captive Mind

The Uses of Adversity: Essays on the Fate of Central Europe

The Burden of Responsibility: Blum, Camus, Aron, and the French Twentieth Century

Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland

Nothing Is True and Everything Is Possible: The Surreal Heart of the New Russia

Yvonne wrote: "For those of you thinking about which translation, you might find this article both fascinating and funny. I myself am thinking about using the Oxford/Ignat Avsey translation.

https://www.newyorke..."

Thanks for the link, but I can only read two paragraphs because I do not subscribe to the New Yorker. Do they actually come out in favor of the Oxford/Ignat Avesy translation?

Translation questions bedevil me all the time. I need a similar piece on the best English translation of Dante's Divine Comedy (on my '22 To Do list).

Kathleen wrote: "Ken, maybe we'll see who is reading and what everyone wants to do. Stretching it out a bit would be helpful for me, but not necessary.

Yvonne--what a great article! In my next life, when I learn R..."

That Hemingway quote sounds like it came from A Moveable Feast, the repository of all romantic Hemingway quotes.

If 250 pp/week seems tough, there's no reason we couldn't run into March a bit by making it a 5 or 6-week discussion.

It won the first round by a single vote and did it again in the second round by the same margin. Obscure? Not exactly, unless you count the number of people who haven't read it or fear reading it due to its girth.

Most amusing? When this was nominated, I said to myself, "Well that book has a snowball's chance in Hell." Wrong again.

We will figure out a few housekeeping items in the coming days, but for now it's all about the translation. I'll probably get the most recent -- the Pevear/Volokhonsky, but you should grab whatever translation you wish as the gist is all one. (For me it will be a reread, but ask me what I remember of it and I'll show you both tabula and rasa.)

It looks like Part One goes some 215 pp., so we can figure that at the very least as a goal for Feb. 1st. After that, approx. 250 pp. per week, I'd say. Discussion schedule will follow in the coming week.

Deep breaths, people. Deep breaths! Thanks for all of your participation.

Sandra wrote: "I’m quite behind in my reading so am not voting. If I catch up, I will join all of you. I am only 1/3 through History of the Rain by Niall Williams. Because I am savoring every sentence, and becaus..."

Sorry you'll miss things, Sandra, but catching up is important -- as is quality time with your long-distance son!

The second poll is up. It includes the first-place book plus five that finished in a second-place tie.

Before voting, look over the books carefully -- what they're about, when and where they were written, what their influences were, how long they are, etc. One is bound to appeal more than others!

Me, I'm undecided as of now. Mulling over between three of the six.

Yvonne wrote: "Thanks, Ken. Mild symptoms but enough of a match that I thought it wise to request testing, and the advice nurse agreed. Results in two to five days. Meanwhile, curled up with a cozy afghan and cud..."

Keep us posted, Yvonne!


I just sent a "get-out-the-vote" message to all group members, so check your GR mailboxes for an update on Day 1 of 2's voting.

If you're reading this, haven't yet voted, and are considering participation in February's book discussion, VOTE TODAY!

Tomorrow morning I will send out the Round Two poll showing the finalists, meaning many of you will either get the chance to choose your favorite again (if it makes it) or to reconsider the new selections (if it doesn't).

Yvonne wrote: "Ken, I think you are great to be willing to honcho this process at all. Thank you! Your plan for this time is just fine by me. Looking at the list of nominations right now -- great nominations, fol..."

Hope it's not Covid, Yvonne, but if it is, thoughts your way for a hasty recovery.

In 2020 I personally knew no one who caught Covid. In the past two weeks, three people I know have contracted it -- one in Connecticut, one in North Carolina, and one in Maryland.

Bionic Jean wrote: "It depends how many are voting, really. The danger is (as you mentioned once before) that if nearly everyone suggests one book, and they all go into a poll, then most people will vote for the book ..."


Yes. It would be a variation of ranked-choice voting (we have this system here in Maine, but only when no one gets 50% of the vote). The variation would mean everyone votes for a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd choice.

That scenario would shift us away from GR's polls and mean we'd use my inbox instead. If I assigned 3 pts to each 1st place vote, 2 pts. to each second, and 1 pt. to each third, we'd collectively wind up with a wider range of totals on the books.

Let's see how this double poll goes. Then we can look at the above option for June's read. (I believe this is called "growing pains.")

So far we have 18 votes in today with four books tied for first. It's a tough time of year to get people's attention, though. And most GR members of groups are members in name only. Not sure WHY, but it's a fact of GR life.

P.S. What always amazes is how unpredictable voting will be. When I put up a new poll, I typically predict to myself which three titles will be in the running for top dog. And typically, I'm wrong. My three choices this time, for instance, are all sitting at the bottom of the ORG barrel with Zero Mostel for votes.

It's all Greek to me.

Sara wrote: "LOL. I think that was the exact question I got on my SATs."


Yikes. Bad memories. The math SATs blew me out of the proverbial water. Proof positive that I was right when I whined to the math teacher that all these word problems would prove worthless in my life.

I know, I know. Remember those crazy word problems from school? If two trains are traveling in opposite directions, one at 67 mph and the other at 53 mph, and there is construction in Oklahoma, a snowstorm in Utah, and politicians kissing babies and eating brontosaurus burgers in Nevada, where will they meet, rounded to the nearest hypotenuse of the train engineers' apple pi's?

I should clarify what the second poll will look like on Thursday morning because I know there will be ties.

If three books tie for first, it'll be a simple thing. Those are the three finalists.

However, let's say 2 books tie for first, 3 books tie for second, and 2 books tie for third. In that scenario, I will not be entering all 7 books for the final poll.

I will drop down to the next position only to reach the number 3, and if other books are tied there, they all go in the final poll. Thus, in the above scenario, 5 books (those tied for first and second) go into the final and the two tied for third are dropped.

Using this technique could still land us with a bigger second list. If one book alone is first, one book alone is second, and six books are tied for third, I'd have no choice but to list 8 books because, to get my third book, I'd have to dip into a position where there are multiple books tied at that position.

Seem logical? (I'm not particularly logical, so if you see a better way, I'm willing to listen!)

Dzien Dobry! The poll is up! I double checked that I had all nominations, but if you find yours missing, contact me ASAP and I'll fix it.

Happy browsing and happy voting. This is a "meaty" list, as the carnivores say.

Bionic Jean wrote: "There Was an Old Lady Who Swallowed a Bowl, perhaps Ken?

Wolfie says thanks by proxy :) Yes, if you're used to having a dog there's a big hole without."

Ha! That title has it covered!

Our son and daughter each have a dog, so we get our dog fixes when they visit. Still, a man gets used to unconditional love in the form of fur and four paws.

I am one of those Henry James loathers who still hasn't forgiven a college professor for assigning us some book with either "Lady" or "Bowl" in the title. It took James 23 pages to describe a drawing room. No, thank you!

Angela wrote: "Good morning, all. I’m happy to let someone else pick the book, else I will suggest Henry James and everyone will hate me. Seriously, save for one instance, I have read each book and appreciated al..."


Awww. So cute you have a pandemic pup (their numbers are legion). I am in the opposite, pup-lonely, boat. We lost our pooch of 16 years in April of '20. The game plan was NO DOG (first time in our coming-on-40 years of marriage) so we could travel as newly-retired sorts.

Along came a dog of another sort. Covid. The Junkyard Dog that cramps your travel plans as nicely as a real dog.