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

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

Just a reminder that today and tomorrow are the LAST DAYS to either nominate a book for our June discussion OR second one selected by another ORG member.

There's a thread dedicated for this purpose atop the LOGISTICS section.

Be there or be square, as they used to say (in the hip 60s, I think).

For 2024, we're using a new nomination method that's a bit more transparent. Previously nominators messaged a single nomination to a moderator who then created a poll of all titles. This time we're just going to give those interested a chance to nominate a book on the public square of a thread.

RULES FOR JUNE:

1. Any book works for June, old or new. You'd be wise to choose one that's easily available (libraries included) and obscure enough to be intriguing to all of our serious readers with loaded reading shelves.

2. Yes, the author can be famous but only IF the title is a much less read or known title by said author. Other posters may debate relative obscurity here if they feel it's not "obscure" enough.

3. If you choose to nominate a book, you must be willing to read it and help "host" the discussion. Do not choose a book you've read already and love (and thus might take umbrage over should others not love it as well). A "fresh" read makes for a refreshing host! (Benjamin Franklin should have said that.)

4. Most importantly, a much smaller poll will be made of any book that gets seconds and thirds here, so if you like someone's selection, give it a second (or third, or fourth -- it's your job to count). The poll will appear on April 29th or 30th, so stay tuned.

If you make a nomination, create a live link via "Add book/author") so folks can check out a description, how many pages it is, what other readers said, etc. Remember, by nominating you are also offering to read and help host should your book ultimately be selected. We expect a much smaller poll via this method and only ONE round of polling, but expectations are sometimes great (Charles Dickens should have said that.)

Cindy: While the whole point of an "OBSCURE" reading club is to find little known gems, it is fraught with danger based on personal tastes. Well, maybe this is true with all books, not just obscure ones.

;-)

When I think of Dickens, I chastise myself in the opposite direction. I still haven't read some of his well-known and much-heralded books (here's looking at you, Bleak House).

This is one case where I might be tempted that way vs. this one, where we saw Dickens working for money in the press, changing his mind, tapping into old successes (Mr. Pickwick), etc.

Oh, well. Win some, lose some. I'm glad some readers found much to love with this book, but understand where others (like you) were disappointed, too.

There's always June (our next pick), right?

Week One Discussion is open! Clock in at will!

I love it when problems resolve themselves (with a little help from concerned friends). The magic number is 118.

Interesting that Dickens brings back crowd favorites Mr. Pickwick and Sam Weller. I quite enjoyed The Pickwick Papers, one of the first Dickens books I read (on my own, vs. at the schoolboard's command... that would be the dreaded Tale of Two Cities).

Kathleen: That plan looks great. Light and breezy = two weeks for 118 pp.

Fergus, Quondam Happy Face wrote: "If I may offer a suggestion: if we have a look at wikipedia or other websites, we'll see how other Dickens Humphrey stories intertwine with the basic one, if there is one. I think if we have a pass..."

Yes, in a sense this will be like reading a collection of short stories. Perhaps, though onerous, it might be helpful to define discussion weeks (if they be more than one) by chapter titles, which Dickens provided.

Walter wrote: "Just found this absolute gem of a social crystallization and I am very much in. Question: is it at all discussed by the group? A call or so ~ or do we all just submit our reviews in unison"

Hey, Walter. We're only at semi-precious stone status, so there's work to do. That said, we take compliments as they are, so thanks.

If you look at some of the past books we've read, you can see it's all by discussion thread. Give and take. Ask and answer. Offer hosannahs or jeers. Like a conversation.

Hi, Freedom. Welcome to the group!

Sara, yes that was the plan, but I do see a problem here with all these versions out there. Many are between 100-150 pp. only. Some are 300-400 pp. because they include chapters from (?) or previewing (?) The Old Curiosity Shop and Barnaby Rudge.

Does anyone have a physical copy in front of them already?

Probably the crew planning to participate will have to agree in advance on a copy. Either it's a one-week discussion of the shorter MASTER HUMPHREY or it's a divided in 3 weeks discussion of the longer.

Please discuss here, Dickens fans!

Fergus, you nominated this book. Do you have a physical copy? Is it the long version or the short?

The copy at archive.org is 306 pp.

It gets confusing when you look into it because the book came out as a serial in a magazine. Well THAT'S not confusing, but apparently elements of The Old Curiosity Shop and Barnaby Rudge intermingled with Master Humphrey's Clock as the magazine came out each month.

In my searches I've found copies of only 100 pp. too because it's a mix of stories and novels. Perhaps shorter versions are de-Curiositied and de-Rudged?

I'm no Dickens expert, alas.

Fergus, Quondam Happy Face wrote: "Well, I love his warm Humanity. That's one reason I fell in step with Master Humphrey - he shows us here the aches, pains and very human failings of this lovable senior citizen. I don't believe in ..."

You mean this aging thing is natural? For 2024, I'm considering a mirror-free life! ;-)

Dianne wrote: "I took my two girls to Taylor this past May and .... I doubt it!"

Yeah, I know. A joke, is all. My daughter is also a fan.

Me, I think a lot of her songs sound the same. And that she "talks" as much as sings in her songs.

But I'm a philistine of the first order.

Dianne wrote: "I'm in! Thanks Ken!"

Excellent! Hopefully the Chuck Dickens Groupies show up (almost as big as the Taylor Swift Groupies, I hear).

Dickens? Anything but obscure. Master Humphrey's Clock? Pretty darn obscure.

Hope you have TIME for finding a copy and clocking some hours in the upcoming February discussion of one of Dickens' lesser-known classics.

Doing some housekeeping here when I realized this thread wasn't marked to stay on top (where a WELCOME MAT belongs!).

If you're fairly new and want to give a shout-out, now you know there's a friendly place for it!

I think Darrin has already left the group so might not see your messages.

Dawn wrote: "I still have a ways to go in the book, but wanted to share that partway through History Four, I started hearing Dr. Frasier Crane‘s voice in place of Charles Arrowby’s and haven’t been able to stop..."

Hoo, boy. And I see Frasier has a new show streaming on some PLUS channel designed to put more pluses in a corporation's bank account. No, thank you!

I do agree that Ch. 4 is the turning point, though. For me, the book started to take off there. The annoyance of Chaz's immature and solipsistic ways began to fade in favor of the crazy-ass kidnapping plot.

And yes, what a frustration Hartley was. She objects but not mightily enough. She's kind to Chaz but not kind by half. Milquetoast without the Vitamin D! Do something, lady! Slap him! Punch him! Kiss him! But no, just the same old dishrag pining for her soldier humdrum husband.

And then the plot elements of death, murder attempts, etc. (poor Titus, poor Chaz who gets pushed from the nest of his self-obsessions into the rocky briney)... and the whole WHODUNNIT bit that rode out a few pages after Chaz survived his fall.

Yes, all good. All must-find-out-what's-happening.

Most importantly, I began to respect Murdoch's characterization of Charles, how she made me hate him yet read on. How deftly I was manipulated! How much like Perry I had become (a drink and a shove and we're on our way).

I even tolerated the over-the-top moments of a jealous woman bombarding an expensive car with rocks, silly as it seemed. I mean, as reader early on, I felt an urge to ambush matters, too!

Good question, Kathleen. It's clear that Iris Murdoch had a passing interest in Buddhism, and the ending's point of emphasis leads me to wonder if she intended readers to see more of Charles' experience through Buddhism's lens darkly (as they don't say).

Ecclesiastes would work, too. Vanity of vanities...

One of my pet peeves is what I call the "that would never happened" syndrome (which, to be fair, includes events that maybe COULD happen, but the chances lie somewhere between slim shady and none sunny).

One such event in this book is when 18-yr-old Titus arrives at Chaz's haunted mansion in search of his real dad. As bait for Hartley, Chaz wants to keep Titus there. In their first exchange, C. invites T. to swim in the ocean, which the kid is immediately enthusiastic about.

Um, OK, but Titus has no swimtrunks, of course, so 60-something and heretofore stranger Chaz says they should jump in au naturel because that's how HE does it.

Without a blink of an eye, Titus is in, and these two strangers, two generations apart, jump in the briny like Huck and Tom in the Mississippi.

Yep. The "That Would Never Happen" alarm was blaring.

To me the pathology shows most with the relentless obsession with Hartley. Maybe she's thinking this. Maybe she's thinking that. Surely she wants what I want and just doesn't know it. Ben will do this is I do that. Or not. Or somewhere in between.

A fact others recognize long ago seems lost on him completely due to all the delusional stuff.

Yes. Much worse than silly cooking and eating stuff! ;-)