Kenneth Roberts Books: “Boon Island” Advanced Review Copy

It appears that every year around my birthday, I find a unique Roberts collectible. This year did not disappoint. Today I received an Advanced Review Copy of Boon Island.  Below are some photos:

imageimage imageimage

I must admit that, at first, I was unsure whether this was the real thing. But Ken Lopez, at his website, has a helpful post that discusses uncorrected proofs and advanced review copies. According to Lopez:

While most collectors don’t often have a chance to acquire the manuscripts of their favorite authors’ books, they do have ready access to a preliminary state of the book that precedes the first published edition— that of the “uncorrected proof” or “advance reading copy.” Publishers have long issued advance copies of forthcoming books, prior to the book’s publication date, for a number of reasons: they want reviewers and periodicals to have a chance to read them and schedule reviews to coincide with publication, even given the long lead times many magazines require for production; they want to get the opinions of important buyers who are likely to purchase large quantities of the book if they believe in it — buyers for the major wholesalers, the chain bookstores, and the large independent stores around the country; they want to get early copies to the author’s friends and peers — preferably well-known ones — who can give comments about the book that the publisher can use for promotion, on the dust jacket as “blurbs,” in ads, and in the promotional literature sent out to the news media as press releases.

How the advanced review copies (ARC) were presented has changed over time. Lopez states that “the typical advance copy was a set of typeset sheets, bound directly into the dust jacket — that is, identical to the finished book with the exception of the lack of hard covers.” Publishers began changing how ARCs were presented in the 1950s that it began to be commonplace to distribute paperback, uncorrected copies of the book for promotional purposes (Lopez, n.d.). But, “By the Sixties, the major publishers were routinely doing bound softcover volumes of ‘uncorrected proofs’ — which, for a time, were called ‘Cranes,’ after the printing company that had proposed them.”

Though, with my limited resources, I did not have much to go on regarding the Boon Island ARC, what was posted on eBay seemed legit. So, I bought it (plus, it was at an excellent price). Upon receiving the ACR today, I have no doubt that what I have is the real thing. Judging by the aging of the paper, the creases and fraying of the binder, and how the font was set on the paper, what I have is a unique piece of Kenneth Roberts memorabilia. I hope to have the story behind my particular copy, which I will share.

I must confess that Boon Island has not been my favorite Roberts novel in the past. However, as things have fallen in place, I’ve found today several articles published in the past several years regarding the true events that served as the basis of Boon Island. As I continue to read upon the fateful wreck of the Nottingham, I find the story fascinating as one side blames the captain of the ship, and another side blames certain crewman for spreading false reasons for the wreck (Roberts took the latter side). The wreck of the Nottingham is so intriguing that papers and websites in Maine (in particular) and New England (in general) still write about it. In light of this, Boon Island is quickly becoming one of my top Kenneth Roberts’ novels.

Keep your eyes open; I’ll be writing on this intriguing story soon!

Kenneth Roberts on Immigration: An Unflattering Opinion Reflected in Today’s Political Landscape

The cover of "Europe's Morning After", 1921 1st ed. Courtesy of Townsend Books.

The cover of “Europe’s Morning After”, 1921 1st ed. Courtesy of Townsend Books.

One thing I enjoy about running this site is coming across current websites and blogs that interact with Kenneth Roberts. Though Roberts is no longer in the mainstream, there still exists a loyal following of Roberts and his works. For the most part, any mention of Kenneth Roberts is favorable, particularly toward his more well-known novels. (I’ve tried to share any favorable mentions of Kenneth Roberts. I’ve recently begun a Twitter feed that posts to the Kenneth Roberts Website Facebook page where I share recent findings. I find this easier than posting them as a blog post.) However, not all mentions of Roberts are favorable. In fact, one area in which Roberts is frequently discusses is that of immigration.

Before Roberts began his work as a novelist, he worked for for The Saturday Evening Post (primarily) as a correspondent. Though Roberts penned many essays for The Post, what he is primarily remembered for is his work on immigration reform. The Post‘s audience consisted primarily of white, middle-class, conservative readers, and one area of concern among this group was the influx of immigrants from Eastern and Southern Europe. Roberts viewed these immigrants as “worthless” and a bane to society. For Roberts and those of like-mind, it was those of the Nordic race who had contributed the most to populating young America.  In an effort to influence public opinion and government policy about immigration reform, Roberts devoted several essays to the call for tighter restrictions for immigration. We can still read Roberts’ Post work on immigration in Europe’s Morning After and Why Europe Leaves Home, two collections of his Post essays.

Facsimile of the dust jacket for "Why Europe Leaves Home". Courtesy of Facsimile Dust Jackets, LLC.

Facsimile of the dust jacket for “Why Europe Leaves Home”. Courtesy of Facsimile Dust Jackets, LLC.

For those today who study the history of immigration to America, and those who study current attitudes toward and policy for immigration, Kenneth Roberts is viewed as the spokesperson of past and present fears of conservative Americans toward a more open immigration policy. In fact, Ronald Bailey in “Silly panic: The fuss over a ‘minority white’ nation” (2012) claims that Roberts’ Europe’s Morning After influenced Congress, in part, the 1924 Immigration Act “to change the national origins formula, limiting the annual number of immigrants to two percent of the number of people from any country who were already resident here based on their numbers in the 1890 Census” (Bailey, 2012). Bailey is not alone is making this claim; indeed, Roberts’ influence in writing predated his work as a novelist; it began long before as a correspondent for The Saturday Evening Post (I hope to write another post or two on other works written about Roberts and his work on immigration).

Roberts’ opinions regarding immigrants reflect a growing trend among some Americans, particularly those among Trump’s supporters. With the recent tragedies at the hands of ISIS, and President Obama’s recent attempts to address illegal immigration in America, the attitudes of the early twentieth century (as illustrated in Roberts) are alive and well nearly one hundred years later.

This image is the cover of the Post edition containing Roberts' article titled "Scraps from a Wanderer's Notebook" - a collection of thoughts from his travels in Eastern Europe. Courtesy of The Fiction Mags Index.

This image is the cover of the Post edition containing Roberts’ article titled “Scraps from a Wanderer’s Notebook” – a collection of thoughts from his travels in Eastern Europe. Courtesy of The Fiction Mags Index.

What is the purpose of this post? Why bring up this unflattering picture of Kenneth Roberts? For this post in particular, I want to open the discussion on the one area of Roberts’ work with which I do not agree. I admire Roberts’ ability to write, his wit and sarcasm, and his love and loyalty for his home state and country. However, I find his views on race objectionable. Though there are those today who hold to similar views as Roberts, the tone and tenor of our society for the most part has significantly changed such that there is greater sensitivity and understanding toward issues of race.

As such, how are we to understand Kenneth Roberts – the man and the author? Does his view on race dictate how we view his novels? Are we to respect him less as a person? These questions – among others – are ones that I’ve had to struggle with as a fan of Kenneth Roberts. For a time, I just sat on the issue, unsure of what to do. However, as we inch closer to the 2016 presidential election, the hot topic of immigration will continue to garner more and more attention. As such, more will be written on the issue or immigration (and race), with more references to Kenneth Roberts’ and his influence on early twentieth century immigration policy. I feel, then, that it’s time for us to wrestle with Roberts’ stance on race and immigration, and how it plays into his overall body of work.

I should say now that I do believe it is possible to appreciate Kenneth Roberts as a man and author in spite of his views on race and immigration. While there are various reasons for this, I think one key factor is that Roberts was a product of his time and culture. Though his views on race and immigration are (to me) objectionable, it is anachronistic to condemn him in light of today’s sensibilities and standards. This is not to justify Roberts’ views; rather, it’s saying that we can accept a person despite their flaws. For instance, I strongly disagree with Sam Harris on a number of issues; however, I appreciate his honesty, his clarity, and his desire to pursue truth. I respect Harris as a person while simultaneously object to a number of his views. In this light, I believe we can approach Roberts in the same way. (I think it is fair to say that we approach nearly everyone we know in this manner. It’s rare to agree with someone in every single area. There are those with whom you agree with more than others, but on some level we respect others for who they are in spite of certain areas of disagreement. There is a question, though: at what point do you disassociate from someone due to their views? This question, I believe, goes well beyond the scope of this website for it is philosophical and theological in nature. But, in light of the topic of this post, it is one we must all reflect upon and come to a conclusion consistent with one’s worldview.)

%d bloggers like this: