The Obscure Reading Group 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.

Wow, I am just as amazed as you are that this won, mainly because of the length. I'm game though, as I have never read it.

I didn’t vote, but I have read the book. It’s brilliant in my opinion. I will be reading your discussion comments. It’s one of the handful of books that I refer to often when I am engaged in philosophical debates. Happy reading!

I didn’t vote for it just because I read it in November. I too think it is brilliant, a 5 star read. This year I will be reading more by Dostoevsky.

I didn't vote for this, and was shocked but pleased to hear the news. I have read it, though long ago now and it has been crying out for a re-read.

It's an amazing novel, but dense and hefty and getting it read in our timeframe will be a challenge for me, but one I'm excited to take on. This could be a wonderful discussion!

I have read it and won't be going for a second read, but I will pop in now and then and follow the conversation.

I am surprised it won also, but don't see that as a bad thing. I thought, like some of you, that it was not obscure enough. Regardless, I look forward to reading it.

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.

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.newyorker.com/magazine/20...

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 Russian and become a literary scholar, I will graduate out of Constance Garnett translations, and get to know the "real" Dostoyevsky. But I've loved all the translations I've read of hers, authentic or not, so I'll be sticking with this copy I just found on my physical bookshelf:
The Brothers Karamazov

Oh and I love this Hemingway quote from the article:
"In Dostoevsky there were things believable and not to be believed, but some so true they changed you as you read them; frailty and madness, wickedness and saintliness, and the insanity of gambling were there to know as you knew the landscape and the roads in Turgenev, and the movement of troops, the terrain and the officers and the men and the fighting in Tolstoy."

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.

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).

P&V are the go-to Russian translators these days as far as I'm aware and they haven't failed me yet. (And Ken, Ciardi!)

I too was surprised to see this book both in the list of nominees and as winner. I’ve never thought of it as obscure though I know many avoid reading it. I did until a few years ago. I won’t be reading it again with the group but will try to follow the discussion. Maybe I will try another Dostoevsky tome in companionship.

Ken, that New Yorker article doesn't particularly favor Avsey's Oxford translation; just is quite amusing and interesting about the intricacies of accomplishing translations, in particular of Dostoevsky. I was able to save a PDF of the article so if you want it, message me your email address. There's a lengthy, fascinating description of the methodology used by Pevear and Volokhonsky. Mostly the article compares theirs with Garnett's.

This article, on the other hand, does compare head-to-head, five different translations of Karamazov, and it's on that basis that I'm favoring (in this moment) the Avsey/Oxford translation.
http://www.patrikbergman.com/2017/07/...

Think I'm going to order a copy of that one online; couldn't find it in my local library or via the Link interlibrary loan system here.

I also read somewhere that the most recent revision of the Norton edition is a pretty good translation, so just did an interlibrary loan request for that one, too.

PS to everyone: the covid test came back negative yesterday. Yay. Guess my sore throat, weariness, etc. are from some other virus.

Here’s another potentially illuminating compare-translations website.

https://web.archive.org/web/201311092...

This is perfect. I haven’t read it in probably 30 years and want to get back to it.

I purchased a used copy on eBay which will be here by mid-January.

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

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-readers.

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.

That is certainly true. I am not a marcher and never will be. I like to think I would have protested at Hitler's book burnings, but it's folly to go against guns. I would have been an undercover reader, hiding books where I could. Shades of Farenheit 451.

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!

I am thrilled to hear this, Ken. I read On Tyranny not long ago, but love having this list you posted. I wanted to read The Origins of Totalitarianism, but a quick once-over made me realize I'd need a quite a bit more education before I can attempt that one. Bros K is maybe more my style, and it will be interesting to approach it thinking of this angle.

So funny--I'm picturing an introverts march--faces all hidden behind books ...

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.

This conversation makes me think there's another aspect of fiction reading that is helpful to us. An aspect that works in conjunction with empathy is we learn about character. By reading stories involving myriad personalities, we learn the sometimes subtle signs the author gives us that can show an individual's character, and tell us whether they're lying/phony/untrustworthy/downright evil, etc. We see it over and over in fiction, and maybe that helps us be more discerning in real life--it kind of exercises a discernment muscle. I like to think so anyway, and it's yet another reason I wish more people read!!

Good point Kathleen. Every person I know, every politician, every celebrity, has a counterpart in a book I have read. And every book I read shows a side of human nature that I'm familiar with already.

Look what I found. The Brothers Karamazov t-shirt: https://www.litographs.com/collection...

If you don't like the embedded image, there's one down below that's text only.

Bunch of other authors on that website, too; book lovers are likely to find it fun. None particularly obscure, though. (I have no financial interest in showing you this online business, in case anyone wonders. Just thought it amusing.)

Yvonne wrote: "Ken, that New Yorker article doesn't particularly favor Avsey's Oxford translation; just is quite amusing and interesting about the intricacies of accomplishing translations, in particular of Dosto..."

Thanks for that. I really, really had decided not to participate in this read as I just don't do long, drawn-out Russian giants. But then I thought, nothing ventured, nothing gained. I went for the McAndrew translation, as it fits my cultural word flow better than any of the others.

I put up the reading schedule. Each "Book" is around 200-235 pp. Book Four, however, runs some 325 pp. I decided to break that in half and spill into March. That way, should anyone fall behind, there will be some time to catch up.

Are we OK with this? Does it look doable?

The P&V translation is available on Kindle today for 2.99. I just bought it.

Ken wrote: "I put up the reading schedule. Each "Book" is around 200-235 pp. Book Four, however, runs some 325 pp. I decided to break that in half and spill into March. That way, should anyone fall behind, the..."

Looks great. Thanks, Ken. Looking forward to getting started.

Yvonne wrote: "Look what I found. The Brothers Karamazov t-shirt: https://www.litographs.com/collection...

If you don't like the embedded image, there's one down below th..."

Too funny, Yvonne--thanks for sharing! Did you see those puzzles? I'm almost tempted by the Wuthering Heights shower curtain--ha, ha!

One of the reasons I find Russian literature difficult are the naming conventions and also, the frequent use of nicknames. I came across a list of nicknames for the main characters in The Brothers that others may find helpful in keeping tabs on just who is in the conversation or action.

Alexei Fyodorovich Karamazov
(Alyosha, Alyoshka, Alyoshenka, Alyoshechka, Alxeichick, Lyosha, Lyoshenka)

Dmitri Fyodorovich Karamazov
(Mitka, Mitya, Mitenka, Mitri Fyodorovich)

Ivan Fyodorovich Karamazov
(Vanya, Vanka, Vanechka)

Agrafena Alexandrovna Svetlov
(Grushenka, Grusha, Grushka)

Katerina Ivanovna Verkhovtsev
(Katya, Katka, Katenka)

Liza Khokhlakov
(Lise)

Nikolai Ivanov Krasotkin
(Kolya)

Ilyusha Snegiryov
(Ilyushechka, Ilyushka)

Oh wow. Thanks for that names/nicknames list. Thinking I should format it as a bookmark!

I believe the suffix "-ovich" means "son of." Thus the father of Alexi, Dmitri, and Ivan would be Fyodor.

Fantastic, AJ--thank you!

And to add to Ken's comment, correspondingly, I think "ovna" means daughter of, so the father of Agrafena Alexandrovna would be Alexander.

I like this convention, cuz it helps keep track of who's who!

I guess it makes identify theft easier in Russia, where there are some pretty good hacks.

Thanks, AJ, for putting that together. I had to make a similar list when I read War and Peace.

Amazon doesn't have the Avsey translation. Do you guys have a suggestion of where I can purchase a new paperback copy? Thanks in advance :-)

Scout wrote: "Amazon doesn't have the Avsey translation. Do you guys have a suggestion of where I can purchase a new paperback copy? Thanks in advance :-)"


Scout, I got it it at Barnes & Ignoble by searching The Karamazov Brothers Oxford World's Classics.

Reading a book on the Stoics today and came across this quote that applies, I think, to the odyssey we are about to embark on:

"Many schoolteachers teach The Odyssey all wrong. They teach the dates, they debate whether Homer was really the author or not, whether he was blind, they explain the oral tradition, they tell students what a Cyclops is or how the Trojan Horse worked.

"Seneca's advice to someone studying the classics is to forget all that. The dates, the names, the places--they hardly matter. What matters is the moral. If you got everything else wrong from The Odyssey, but you left understanding the importance of perseverance, the dangers of hubris, the risks of temptation and distraction? Then you really learned something.

"We're not trying to ace tests or impress teachers. We are reading and studying to live, to be good human beings -- always and forever."

Ken, I love that bit about the lasting importance of reading The Odyssey. I did teach, it but I did not beat the students over the head with memory work. My students especially liked discussing whether or not they would classify Odysseus as a hero. I think we can ask the same thing about each character in a story. I will be interested to hear who you all think is the hero in The Brothers Karamazov.

Scout wrote: "Amazon doesn't have the Avsey translation. Do you guys have a suggestion of where I can purchase a new paperback copy? Thanks in advance :-)"

Scout, I got mine via Amazon. It's this one: https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/0...

Note, trade paperback, not Kindled.

I have read it. In fact I just gave my copy away, as I was downsizing, and this one took up to much space. I am not up to a re reading as my eyes won’t allow it. Enjoy it and I will look in and see the comments.

This was the copy I have away. The Brothers Karamazov: A Novel in Four Parts With Epilogue. Excellent translation and easy to read.

I might try to join, I found my book, it was “Crime and Punishment” I gave away. Now that was a dark dreary book.

Thanks, Yvonne! I didn't look for The Karamazov Brothers :-)

I confess I loled when this book was chosen. Mainly because this was the LEAST obscure book of all of them. I would go on a limb and say this one is not obscure at all ;)

I think this group is a good study of human nature. Although we are in a group that is searching for 'obscure' reads, human nature is to trend towards the known, or what we are familiar with. I've noticed that often, it is always the most well known names/authors that are the books that win. Not saying this is bad, just interesting!


I love Russian lit but I abandoned Karamazov because I felt the dogma was too strong in this one for my personal preferences. That might make for good discussions in a group read, however, and I will give it another whirl!!

Kelly wrote: "I confess I loled when this book was chosen. Mainly because this was the LEAST obscure book of all of them. I would go on a limb and say this one is not obscure at all ;)

I think this group is a ..."


Fair. There's some merit to that second paragraph of yours especially. I see the same dynamic (or, as you call it, "human nature") at work with genres. Readers say they are expanding their comfort zone by reading more "obscure" genres like poetry, drama, and short stories, but the reality on the ground is it's mostly talk.

Fiction, fiction, fiction -- with the occasional nonfiction title thrown in for good measure (and thanks to "creative nonfiction," those two genres have been dancing of late, as nonfiction writers use the novelist's toolbox to good effect more and more).

Oh, well. I'm going to rationalize by saying The Karamazov Bros. is obscure in one respect -- the number of readers who won't pick it up plus the number who abandon it make the total finishing it, um, somewhat obscure. (How's that for creative math?)

Glad you're giving it another whirl, though. If parts of the book get out of control, we'll give Dosty a time out in the dogma pound

Interesting comment, Kelly. I've noticed that voting for the most well-known seems to be an unfortunate aspect of polling in all of my groups--particularly by the members who don't end up joining the discussion. I sometimes think people just can't resist polls, whether they plan to read or not.

So I was surprised by the choice too but I think this group will make an excellent discussion out of it and I'm getting excited to start!

I'm going to start, but not promising to finish if it gets too deep. I promised myself that this year would be more about books I'm really excited about, so if I get bored, it's kurtains for Karamazov.
My in person book club seems to think that assigning a book on the bestseller list is a sure bet, but for me the opposite is the case. There are a lot of hidden gems that never got the notice they deserved and I prefer those.