Worst Chess Novel

Main

Date: 06 Jul 2007 12:06:04
From: Chess One
Subject: Worst Chess Novel

Susan Polgar remarked this week that chess novels seem to present the game
as if, to paraphrase her comments, only eccentrics or grotesques played it,
and since I am reading the new Martin Cruz Smith novel which introduces
chess as a theme in his latest; Stalin's Ghost, the usual gritty Moscow
scene which Arkady investigates, and since I just corresponded with an
author writing a second scholastics-level chess novel, I was reminded of
perhaps the worst one I've read, and where for a change I am in strong
agreement with Taylor Kingston, who actually gave me the book.

I don't quite remember all Taylor's verbal comments, and it seems rude to
celebrate the author in this way, but a few things may still be said about
the appearance of chess playing and chess players in novel form, which
substantiate and accord with the Su Polgar comment above.

The title; Alekhine's Anguish, carries a sub-title; A Novel of the Chess
World, which is immediately deflated by the Author's Note which serves as a
preface, to explain that some events and people are real, and some are
invented, even 'the types of personalities portrayed for all concerned,
including the protagonist, are purely imaginary.'

So... a novel of the chess world? Or more a novel of an imaginary chess
world.

The main criticism of this sort-of history based on the life of Alekhine is
that neither the light nor the dark of the title's subject are found in its
pages, despite its cover illustration with nice Swastika and Hammer&Sickle
flags, plus a tank, a castle, a Queen and a martini!

Instead we have invented characters playing significantly key roles in the
life [Lupi, eg], and invented events supplanting actual histories, placed in
a novel which is 75% dialogue composed of one stodgy 'voice' throughout, and
with no change of pace from start to finish.

There are now pencil notations in the book, which I see both Taylor and I
made: here is one of his from page 83, where Capa is reported to be "also
undefeated and drawn six games only," - the pencil notes says "Capa's actual
score was +11 =4 -0". So even the 'real' parts of the book are inaccurate.

So many real and truly strange things are left out of the book which would
have provided a veracity for the character of Alekhine as well as the chess
scene in Europe and Russia, not to mention the constant and dramtic menace
of WWII occupation in France, Germany and Poland, but no... instead there is
inert sense of this backdrop, that is to say, the background is not posed as
more stressing than a walk down 5th Avenue on a busy Saturday afternoon, and
as if sleep-walking and nothing is really real.

Alekhine is painted brown, never reaching to actual dark and light
actualities of his life, and the furrow of the book's progress drawn at oxen
speed, ploughs its weary way to a close with hardly a surprise. The last
Chapter [the death] pages 189-194 cover that circumstance, though the entire
book could have rested on the only real intrigue introduced in the 194
pages, instead of merely re-stating in the last 5 what you could read in
Wikipedia.

Change a dozen names, and the sort of game being represented, and you would
have a book about billiards. There is nothing in the one above that has
anything but generic sense of the chess art. Why chess should suffer these
suppositions more than other games or art-forms, is perhaps because it is
relatively obscure to most people, therefore representing playing the game
faithfully is perhaps nothing worth bothering with.

One further shameful circumstance is that a now deceased author was bilked
of his real and considerable efforts to write a deep biography of Alekhine,
which the publisher, who I won't name, supplanted with the effort above.

Phil Innes

Date: 10 Jul 2007 10:18:53
From: William Hyde
Subject: Re: Worst Chess Novel

On Jul 8, 8:56 pm, Taylor Kingston <tkings...@chittenden.com > wrote:
[re: Asimov and chess]

> > So when he needed chess for the above book, he used an
> > actual game (it can be found in several collections of short
> > games) so that the scene actually works for chess players
> > reading the book. Certain other writers, probably stronger
> > players than Asimov, *thought* they understood the game well
> > enough to include it without doing some research, and the
> > results are jarring.
>
> Care to share any examples? I know that Sinclair Lewis consulted
> Reuben Fine (or was it I.A. Horowitz?) when writing "Cass Timberlane";
> is that one you had in mind?

I was thinking mainly within SF. Heinlein, for example used chess
and chess references now and again, but it grates every time.

William Hyde

Date: 10 Jul 2007 01:59:06
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Worst Chess Novel

On Jul 6, 1:52 pm, Kenneth Sloan <KennethRSl...@gmail.com > wrote:
> Chess One wrote:
> > Susan Polgar remarked this week that chess novels seem to present the game
> > as if, to paraphrase her comments, only eccentrics or grotesques played it,
>
> and her point was....?

Obviously, that "normal" people play chess, as well as
-- if not better than -- the Eccentrics and Grotesques.
We're up for a match, if that's what you E&Gs want.

> > and since I am reading the new Martin Cruz Smith novel which introduces
> > chess as a theme in his latest; Stalin's Ghost, the usual gritty Moscow
> > scene which Arkady investigates, and since I just corresponded with an
> > author writing a second scholastics-level chess novel, I was reminded of
> > perhaps the worst one I've read, and where for a change I am in strong
> > agreement with Taylor Kingston, who actually gave me the book.
>
> well, whatever GM Polgar's point was - yours appears nowhere in sight.
> It even seems to be receding, rather than being brought to the fore.

Dr. Sir IM Innes has difficulties with English, but he
is said to be a whiz at playing chess.

> What's a "Su Polgar"? Is that an Andean abbreviationism?

A Su, or better still, S. Polgar, is simply the eldest
of the three famous chess-playing sisters, abbreviated
so that the typist does not wear himself out. In one
thread named by the Andean scholar Dr. Sir IM Innes,
he came up with the interesting abbreviation "C21st",
representing "the twenty-first century" -- quite a bit
shorter you must admit, even if 42.7% of readers
mistakenly took this for an obscure reference to Bingo.

> > Instead we have invented characters playing significantly key roles in the
> > life [Lupi, eg], and invented events supplanting actual histories, placed in
> > a novel which is 75% dialogue composed of one stodgy 'voice' throughout,

What I find amusing is how someone with the quirky
writing style of Dr. Sir IM Innes can find fault in the
style of others, while at the same time not realizing
that his own style pretty much lowers the bar right
into the ground.

It sure looks as though people were expecting the
book to be a bona fide biography of GM Alekhine,
and were sorely disappointed. But we are a very
tough crowd. For instance, I clicked on a link and
replayed a game between GMs Kramnik and
Kortchnoi, and *gasped* as the old grandmaster
attempted to hold on to the gambit pawn in a QG
Accepted; every Russian school boy knows better
than to try that! He lost like a duffer. Yet many
players would see this as a brilliant win for GM
Kramnik, never even realizing that his grandmaster
opponent committed positional suicide. Perhaps
we are too tough a crowd -- impossible to please.

-- help bot

Date: 10 Jul 2007 12:16:37
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Worst Chess Novel

"help bot" <nomorechess@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:1184057946.543098.163740@r34g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...

> Dr. Sir IM Innes has difficulties with English, but he
> is said to be a whiz at playing chess.

I do not insist that you use all my titles, and an initial 'Highness'
followed by Sir, is sufficient for you yanks.

>> What's a "Su Polgar"? Is that an Andean abbreviationism?
>
> A Su, or better still, S. Polgar, is simply the eldest
> of the three famous chess-playing sisters, abbreviated
> so that the typist does not wear himself out.

There are 2 Polgar sisters with inital letter 'S' in English, it
distinguishes Su from So. I suppose an alternate would be Z. Polgar [not to
be confused with Master Zed]

> In one
> thread named by the Andean scholar Dr. Sir IM Innes,
> he came up with the interesting abbreviation "C21st",
> representing "the twenty-first century" -- quite a bit
> shorter you must admit, even if 42.7% of readers
> mistakenly took this for an obscure reference to Bingo.

42.7% of 'readers' don't read much? Perhaps they should stick to Winnie the
Pooh? as I have previously recommended to Eyeore, here... but no, he strays
beyond the 100 acre wood, and is forever confused by the big wide world, and
then bleats like a lost, er, donkey?

If I were a carpenter
And he were a Lady
I would ignore him anyway
The big cry-baby!

>> > Instead we have invented characters playing significantly key roles in
>> > the
>> > life [Lupi, eg], and invented events supplanting actual histories,
>> > placed in
>> > a novel which is 75% dialogue composed of one stodgy 'voice'
>> > throughout,
>
>
> What I find amusing is how someone with the quirky
> writing style of Dr. Sir IM Innes can find fault in the
> style of others, while at the same time not realizing
> that his own style pretty much lowers the bar right
> into the ground.

What is this? A consistent metaphor? Surely the first one in a chess
newsgroup? Of course, the netwit who wrote it suffers such envy of strong
chess players and formidable writers that it is his constant topic. To be
insulted by such a person, is in fact to be noticed for one's greatness, as
ani ful no, [who don't live in a cornfield]

> It sure looks as though people were expecting the
> book to be a bona fide biography of GM Alekhine,
> and were sorely disappointed. But we are a very
> tough crowd. For instance, I clicked on a link and
> replayed a game between GMs Kramnik and
> Kortchnoi, and *gasped* as the old grandmaster
> attempted to hold on to the gambit pawn in a QG
> Accepted; every Russian school boy knows better
> than to try that! He lost like a duffer.

More GMs... more people to bring down to earth... says the patzers now, as
ever.

> Yet many
> players would see this as a brilliant win for GM
> Kramnik, never even realizing that his grandmaster
> opponent committed positional suicide. Perhaps
> we are too tough a crowd -- impossible to please.

Tal often committed positional suicide by tactical brilliancies that every
fool could refute, tomrrow, but no genius could at the board at the time.
These factors about actual chess playing are lost on the raging-librarians,
who wanna be bril, but come off like shills, they're over the hill, and they
gimme the chills - they wanna do the rap, but cant write for [and here a
rhyme fails me].

Cordially, Phil Innes
Int'l Postal GM [a norm, anyhow]
(IPGM sounds like a cold-war missile, don't it?)
Lord of the Mountains, and several bits of valley, reasonably slopey
Queen of the May, 1962,
Barf-Slayer, 1990 - current

> -- help bot
>
>
>
>

Date: 08 Jul 2007 17:56:05
From: Taylor Kingston
Subject: Re: Worst Chess Novel

On Jul 8, 5:25 pm, William Hyde <wthyde1...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Jul 6, 3:05 pm, Taylor Kingston <tkings...@chittenden.com> wrote:
> . Andy Soltis'
>
> > "Book of Chess Lists" (2nd edition) has a chapter "18 Novels with
> > Chess Themes"; of those I've read only four, and it seems quite a
> > stretch to call one, "Pebble in the Sky" by Isaac Asimov, chess-
> > themed.
>
> That is true, but there is an interesting aspect to it all the same.
> Asimov comments that he was a terrible chess player. He
> became interested in it while young, and taught his younger
> sister and brother to play. Soon he was losing to them (admittedly
> his brother went on to become a tournament
> player) and gave up the game.
>
> So when he needed chess for the above book, he used an
> actual game (it can be found in several collections of short
> games) so that the scene actually works for chess players
> reading the book. Certain other writers, probably stronger
> players than Asimov, *thought* they understood the game well
> enough to include it without doing some research, and the
> results are jarring.

Care to share any examples? I know that Sinclair Lewis consulted
Reuben Fine (or was it I.A. Horowitz?) when writing "Cass Timberlane";
is that one you had in mind?

> Fritz Leiber (rated a USCF expert, I am told) wrote a number
> of chess-themed stories, but I don't think any of his novels
> were such. Though the protagonist of "Our Lady of Darkness"
> is a chess player, loosely based on Leiber himself, it seems
> to me.

His "Midnight by the Morphy Watch" (1974) is as thoroughly chess-
themed a short story as one might wish for. I recommend it and pretty
much everything in the chess/sci-fi anthology "Pawn to Infinity"
edited by Fred Saberhagen (Ace Books, 1982). Another avid chessplayer/
author (Class A, I think he was) is George R.R. Martin, whose "Unsound
Variations" is included.

Date: 09 Jul 2007 11:39:10
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Worst Chess Novel

"Taylor Kingston" <tkingston@chittenden.com > wrote in message
news:1183942565.993507.223200@n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com...

>> So when he needed chess for the above book, he used an
>> actual game (it can be found in several collections of short
>> games) so that the scene actually works for chess players
>> reading the book. Certain other writers, probably stronger
>> players than Asimov, *thought* they understood the game well
>> enough to include it without doing some research, and the
>> results are jarring.
>
> Care to share any examples? I know that Sinclair Lewis consulted
> Reuben Fine (or was it I.A. Horowitz?) when writing "Cass Timberlane";
> is that one you had in mind?

Michael Chabon, [2001 Pulitzer prize winner, fiction], features sources for
chess in his new title: TheYiddish Policemen's Union.

For Chess references he noted:-

The Chess Artist; JC Hallman
The Pleasures of Chess; Assiac (Heinrich Fraenkel)
Treasury of Chess Lore, Fred Reinfeld
Mendele; url~ shakto.trincoll.edu/
Chessville; www.chessville.com

Phil Innes

Date: 08 Jul 2007 14:25:30
From: William Hyde
Subject: Re: Worst Chess Novel

On Jul 6, 3:05 pm, Taylor Kingston <tkings...@chittenden.com > wrote:
. Andy Soltis'
> "Book of Chess Lists" (2nd edition) has a chapter "18 Novels with
> Chess Themes"; of those I've read only four, and it seems quite a
> stretch to call one, "Pebble in the Sky" by Isaac Asimov, chess-
> themed.

That is true, but there is an interesting aspect to it all the same.
Asimov comments that he was a terrible chess player. He
became interested in it while young, and taught his younger
sister and brother to play. Soon he was losing to them (admittedly
his brother went on to become a tournament
player) and gave up the game.

So when he needed chess for the above book, he used an
actual game (it can be found in several collections of short
games) so that the scene actually works for chess players
reading the book. Certain other writers, probably stronger
players than Asimov, *thought* they understood the game well
enough to include it without doing some research, and the
results are jarring.

Fritz Leiber (rated a USCF expert, I am told) wrote a number
of chess-themed stories, but I don't think any of his novels
were such. Though the protagonist of "Our Lady of Darkness"
is a chess player, loosely based on Leiber himself, it seems
to me.

William Hyde

Date: 08 Jul 2007 13:50:03
From: skc
Subject: Re: Worst Chess Novel

On Jul 6, 8:06 am, "Chess One" <inn...@verizon.net > wrote:
> Susan Polgar remarked this week that chess novels seem to present the game
> as if, to paraphrase her comments, only eccentrics or grotesques played it,

Certainly...any novel needs bold characters to stand out and make the
reader remember it. How distinct? Well, it depends...if one reads
"the Dragon Variation" by Anthony Glyn, one can see both the
eccentrics and groteques and the other flawed folks you see at
tournaments, not to mention the use of some real tournament game
scores for the various events in the book. On the other hand, if one
reads the hack master piece "Sex Mates of a Chess Mistress", by Ted
Mark, which I can remember making the rounds at the Virginia closed in
1975 or so, then...let's say we would have a whole lot more folks
showing up at tournaments to see what really goes on.

The first is a good read generally and a reasonable take on the
sometimes extreme personalities that play the game. The second makes
"The Queens Gambit" by Tevis look like high literature.

skc

p.s. for a fairly comprehensive list of chess fiction, go to:
http://www.geocities.com/siliconvalley/lab/7378/lit.htm

Date: 07 Jul 2007 02:15:01
From: The Historian
Subject: Re: Worst Chess Novel

On Jul 6, 12:56 pm, Richard <blueghos...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> On Jul 6, 8:06 am, "Chess One" <inn...@verizon.net> wrote:> Susan Polgar remarked this week that chess novels seem to present the game
> > as if, to paraphrase her comments, only eccentrics or grotesques played it,
> > and since I am reading the new Martin Cruz Smith novel which introduces
> > chess as a theme in his latest; Stalin's Ghost, the usual gritty Moscow
> > scene which Arkady investigates, and since I just corresponded with an
> > author writing a second scholastics-level chess novel, I was reminded of
> > perhaps the worst one I've read, and where for a change I am in strong
> > agreement with Taylor Kingston, who actually gave me the book.
>
> OK, I just can't resist mentioning this. Not trying to be
> condescending or anything, but I just found it very ironic that you
> started a post about bad writing with the above paragraph. That's got
> to be one of the worst run on sentences I've ever seen.
>
> --Richard

>From time to time I've pondered the semi-literate writing style of the
Nearly an IM 2450. The kindest remark one can make of the sentence you
quoted is that it is entirely typical of the author's prose. Even his
'writing' at Chessvile is distinguished by such displays of ahead of
the curve sentences as we see here. My favorite example I quoted in my
review of Chess Bitch:

"Much of the press controversy provoked by the title and cover is
silly, and in at least one case, a ridiculous interview with Ms.
Shahade at the Chessville website, an assault against grammar: "What
do you think of mostly men who say that they would object to the book
becoming part of a high school studies course, not because of the
history between the covers, but because of the word "Bitch" in the
title." Despite my ignorance of what a "mostly men" is, or why the
interviewer doesn't know questions end with a question mark..."

http://correspondencechess.com/campbell/articles/a060214.htm

Leaving aside the fact Innes is a nutter and poseur, his prose
problems seem to stem from his manic desire to interject himself into
every discussion in such a way as to appear important. Note the
sentence you quoted, with the repeated self-references. It's a run-on
because Innes is so excited to talk about himself he can't stop.

Date: 06 Jul 2007 12:05:05
From: Taylor Kingston
Subject: Re: Worst Chess Novel

On Jul 6, 1:09 pm, William Hyde <wthyde1...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Jul 6, 9:53 am, Taylor Kingston <tkings...@chittenden.com> wrote:
>
> > Second worst is probably "The Queen's Gambit" by Walter Tevis.
>
> Was it really that terrible as a novel? The chess
> was appalling - which I thought very odd given
> that Tevis is said to be a rated C player - but taken simply as a
> novel it didn't seem that bad.
> Not, I admit, very good, but readable.

Bill, I was not saying that it is really bad -- merely the second-
worst among the few I've read. While I've read probably 100 or more
chess-related short stories, the full-length chess-themed novels I've
read number maybe 6 or 7. The Tevis novel is considerably better than
"Alekhine's Anguish," but just not as good as the others. Andy Soltis'
"Book of Chess Lists" (2nd edition) has a chapter "18 Novels with
Chess Themes"; of those I've read only four, and it seems quite a
stretch to call one, "Pebble in the Sky" by Isaac Asimov, chess-
themed.
It was interesting to see "Forrest Gump" in Soltis' list. It wasn't
in the movie, but in the novel it seems that Gump has a brief-lived
chess career when his talent is discovered by a master, who enters him
in an "Interzonal" (!) at the Beverly Hills Hotel.

Date: 06 Jul 2007 10:56:47
From: Richard
Subject: Re: Worst Chess Novel

Date: 07 Jul 2007 11:24:06
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Worst Chess Novel

"Richard" <blueghost73@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1183744607.699680.49940@c77g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 6, 8:06 am, "Chess One" <inn...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> Susan Polgar remarked this week that chess novels seem to present the
>> game
>> as if, to paraphrase her comments, only eccentrics or grotesques played
>> it,
>> and since I am reading the new Martin Cruz Smith novel which introduces
>> chess as a theme in his latest; Stalin's Ghost, the usual gritty Moscow
>> scene which Arkady investigates, and since I just corresponded with an
>> author writing a second scholastics-level chess novel, I was reminded of
>> perhaps the worst one I've read, and where for a change I am in strong
>> agreement with Taylor Kingston, who actually gave me the book.
>>
> OK, I just can't resist mentioning this. Not trying to be
> condescending or anything, but I just found it very ironic

But not quite ironic enuf!

Cordially, Phil

PS: that's 'run-on' otherwise you propose some extremely long sentence laid
out in a straight line on several sheets of paper, which is maybe then used
by athletes, sprinters, and such folk

> that you
> started a post about bad writing with the above paragraph. That's got
> to be one of the worst run on sentences I've ever seen.
>
> --Richard
>

Date: 06 Jul 2007 12:52:36
From: Kenneth Sloan
Subject: Re: Worst Chess Novel

Chess One wrote:
> Susan Polgar remarked this week that chess novels seem to present the game
> as if, to paraphrase her comments, only eccentrics or grotesques played it,

and her point was....?

> and since I am reading the new Martin Cruz Smith novel which introduces
> chess as a theme in his latest; Stalin's Ghost, the usual gritty Moscow
> scene which Arkady investigates, and since I just corresponded with an
> author writing a second scholastics-level chess novel, I was reminded of
> perhaps the worst one I've read, and where for a change I am in strong
> agreement with Taylor Kingston, who actually gave me the book.

well, whatever GM Polgar's point was - yours appears nowhere in sight.
It even seems to be receding, rather than being brought to the fore.

>
> I don't quite remember all Taylor's verbal comments, and it seems rude to
> celebrate the author in this way,

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

> but a few things may still be said about
> the appearance of chess playing and chess players in novel form, which
> substantiate and accord with the Su Polgar comment above.

What's a "Su Polgar"? Is that an Andean abbreviationism?

>
> The title; Alekhine's Anguish, carries a sub-title; A Novel of the Chess
> World, which is immediately deflated by the Author's Note which serves as a
> preface, to explain that some events and people are real, and some are
> invented, even 'the types of personalities portrayed for all concerned,
> including the protagonist, are purely imaginary.'

Great! We've made it past the sub-title to the Preface.
>
> So... a novel of the chess world? Or more a novel of an imaginary chess
> world.
>

Perhaps an imagined novel of an actual chess world?

> The main criticism of this sort-of history based on the life of Alekhine is
> that neither the light nor the dark of the title's subject are found in its
> pages, despite its cover illustration with nice Swastika and Hammer&Sickle
> flags, plus a tank, a castle, a Queen and a martini!

Shaken, or stirred?

>
> Instead we have invented characters playing significantly key roles in the
> life [Lupi, eg], and invented events supplanting actual histories, placed in
> a novel which is 75% dialogue composed of one stodgy 'voice' throughout, and
> with no change of pace from start to finish.

Why have we invented characters and events?

>
> There are now pencil notations in the book, which I see both Taylor and I
> made: here is one of his from page 83, where Capa is reported to be "also
> undefeated and drawn six games only," - the pencil notes says "Capa's actual
> score was +11 =4 -0". So even the 'real' parts of the book are inaccurate.

In that case, the book has found an appropriate reviewer. Carry on!

<snip >

--
Kenneth Sloan KennethRSloan@gmail.com
Computer and Information Sciences +1-205-932-2213
University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX +1-205-934-5473
Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://www.cis.uab.edu/sloan/

Date: 07 Jul 2007 11:21:04
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Worst Chess Novel

"Kenneth Sloan" <KennethRSloan@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:f6lvhv$oqu$15@SonOfMaze.dpo.uab.edu...
> Chess One wrote:
>> Susan Polgar remarked this week that chess novels seem to present the
>> game as if, to paraphrase her comments, only eccentrics or grotesques
>> played it,
>
> and her point was....?

And ABC for a 123

...Far too complicated for mathematicians to scan all in one go. May I
suggest taking baby steps, thus: She (a) said about chess novels, that (b)
players represented in them are (c) frequently nutz@

>> and since I am reading the new Martin Cruz Smith novel which introduces
>> chess as a theme in his latest; Stalin's Ghost, the usual gritty Moscow
>> scene which Arkady investigates, and since I just corresponded with an
>> author writing a second scholastics-level chess novel, I was reminded of
>> perhaps the worst one I've read, and where for a change I am in strong
>> agreement with Taylor Kingston, who actually gave me the book.
>
> well, whatever GM Polgar's point was - yours appears nowhere in sight. It
> even seems to be receding, rather than being brought to the fore.

Lets go slow again - I (a) said (b) in agreement with what TK said, that (c)
the Alekhine title (d) sux@, because it (e) confounded two things; (f)
actual history, and (g) imagined or invented history (h) unsuccessfully.

Now, deep breath; (i) the nutz-nature referenced above is (j) continued in
this title by relegating the player to fishwife conversation, while (k)
avoiding any real heights or depths of Alekhine, (j again) resulting in an
unconvincingly character, either (l) of imaginary sort or (m) like really,
so (n) sucked at both.

---------

>> but a few things may still be said about the appearance of chess playing
>> and chess players in novel form, which substantiate and accord with the
>> Su Polgar comment above.
>
> What's a "Su Polgar"? Is that an Andean abbreviationism?

Its a secret known only to (a) chess players, and (b) literate intuition*.

>> The title; Alekhine's Anguish, carries a sub-title; A Novel of the Chess
>> World, which is immediately deflated by the Author's Note which serves as
>> a preface, to explain that some events and people are real, and some are
>> invented, even 'the types of personalities portrayed for all concerned,
>> including the protagonist, are purely imaginary.'
>
> Great! We've made it past the sub-title to the Preface.

Ah! I see your problem, this is often difficult for you no? And your
frequently terse expressions (a) maximise your diction, and (b) whatever
context you reference.

>> So... a novel of the chess world? Or more a novel of an imaginary chess
>> world.
>>
>
> Perhaps an imagined novel of an actual chess world?

Perhaps, indeed. But as an introduction, this presentation has a certain
failing, to wit; what is being introduced?

>> There are now pencil notations in the book, which I see both Taylor and I
>> made: here is one of his from page 83, where Capa is reported to be "also
>> undefeated and drawn six games only," - the pencil notes says "Capa's
>> actual score was +11 =4 -0". So even the 'real' parts of the book are
>> inaccurate.
>
> In that case, the book has found an appropriate reviewer. Carry on!

Thank you - of course you are right. Novels should best be reduced to simple
statistical phrases, possibly reporting on (a) the total appearances of the
word 'the' in them, as well as (b) the proportion of the word 'the' to other
words.

The only possible criticism of this approach is that (a) literates will not
understand anything by this approach, which, granted, (b) non-literates will
prefer. To resolve this tricky equation I propose (c) that since literates
buy books the (d) normative treatment should be maintained, which is (e) to
bias reviews in favor of descriptive appeal to those who can read.

Cordially, Phil Innes

notes on the text:

* not anything we need to go into here, since, ipso facto, if the phrase
itself is not self explanatory, then its like [simile] explaining jazz to
someone who doesn't get it.

> <snip>
>
>
> --
> Kenneth Sloan KennethRSloan@gmail.com
> Computer and Information Sciences +1-205-932-2213
> University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX +1-205-934-5473
> Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://www.cis.uab.edu/sloan/

Date: 06 Jul 2007 10:09:12
From: William Hyde
Subject: Re: Worst Chess Novel

On Jul 6, 9:53 am, Taylor Kingston <tkings...@chittenden.com > wrote:
> On Jul 6, 8:06 am, "Chess One"
>
> > Change a dozen names, and the sort of game being represented, and you w=
ould
> > have a book about billiards.

Ursula LeGuin performed a similar experiment
with a scene from a fantasy novel. Replace
"Duke" with "Senator", "Count" with "representative" and it read like
a scene from
a rather bland novel of US politics.

> Second worst is probably "The Queen's Gambit" by Walter Tevis.

Was it really that terrible as a novel? The chess
was appalling - which I thought very odd given
that Tevis is said to be a rated C player - but taken simply as a
novel it didn't seem that bad.
Not, I admit, very good, but readable.

, "The Flanders
> Panel" (a murder mystery involving retroactive analysis)

That was quite good, although the mystery itself
was a little easy, I thought.

and
> especially "The L=FCneburg Variation" by Paolo Maurensig

That's good news. I have this one but have yet
to read it.

William Hyde

Date: 07 Jul 2007 10:44:33
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Worst Chess Novel

"William Hyde" <wthyde1953@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1183741752.566685.266030@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 6, 9:53 am, Taylor Kingston <tkings...@chittenden.com > wrote:
> On Jul 6, 8:06 am, "Chess One"
>
> > Change a dozen names, and the sort of game being represented, and you
> > would
> > have a book about billiards.

Ursula LeGuin performed a similar experiment
with a scene from a fantasy novel. Replace
"Duke" with "Senator", "Count" with "representative" and it read like
a scene from
a rather bland novel of US politics.

**Ha! What appears constant is novels is chess mataphor - example of the
blurb from Shadow Without A Name, Ignacio Padilla, a first rate though very
dark novel which has no chess in it, "Playful and provocative... A gleefully
tricksey book... This ingenious fictional chessboard full of gambits,
feints, exchanges and sacrifices is leading up to a final puzzle.

**From your note above I think the absense of what is essential to the game
from the player's point of view, is revealed. And what you get is the
outside appearance, which is much the experience of any spectator
perspective to anything.

**Oddly, Through The Looking Glass is, as well as being allegorical, also a
chess 'novel'. Its been some time since anyone posted the moves here.

> Second worst is probably "The Queen's Gambit" by Walter Tevis.

Was it really that terrible as a novel? The chess
was appalling - which I thought very odd given
that Tevis is said to be a rated C player - but taken simply as a
novel it didn't seem that bad.
Not, I admit, very good, but readable.

**It had, for me, some interesting features in it, such as the solid Russian
wall of interest and collusion, which does not give way very quickly. Though
when the protagonist proves herself, then 'the bear shares the honey'. It
also had a go at what might be termed the pedagogics of chess, as if, you
know, the author had noticed their was an actual process and preparation
necessary in order to play well.

, "The Flanders
> Panel" (a murder mystery involving retroactive analysis)

That was quite good, although the mystery itself
was a little easy, I thought.

**Tim Hanke wrote here some years ago that someone told him the retrograde
puzzle was flawed. But I never found out the bust, and I think, neither did
he. It might be interesting to see if this group could find it?

and
> especially "The L�neburg Variation" by Paolo Maurensig

That's good news. I have this one but have yet
to read it.

**I've wound up with two versions of that. I think the book has much pain in
it, which is rather difficult to overcome in order to assess the chess
content - and perhaps doesn't resolve either very well. Maurensig seems to
have used his genuine knowledge of chess as an aside to the main action,
thoguh ostensibly... but you haven't read it...

**back to the top: an unfortunate aspect top Mr. Yaffe's title is that
despite a long life of chess playing he was unable to describe the character
of playing or of preparation sufficiently to make it other than generic,
neither could he relate the tension of chess encounters, nor of the
background. Even yesterday I wrote something here to do with 'tensions' at
the top, with context of being able to creatively perform at the chess
board, as part of some notes on Ray Keene's new title on Petrosian - and RK
wrote back avering that, yes - this is indeed an underappreciated factor. In
fact - should the game be viewed the player's point of view, these
performance apprehensions seem to be a primary drama. It is addressed
somewhat in Carl Haffner's Love of the Draw, but more nodded to, I think,
rather than gone into. Glavinic's character Haffner is based on Schlechter,
who has a 'winning' problem.

**Alekhine's Anguish relies far too much on dialog, and you have to be a
superb writer to evoke enough interest that way. Unfortunately for Mr.
Yaffe, he is no Evelyn Waugh.

**Talking of wars and Waughs, in London his son Bron offers an annual 'worst
of' award, but for bad sex writing. I understand no winner has ever attended
the award. In the USA the worst chess writing is given an annual award by
the CJA.

Phil Innes

William Hyde

Date: 06 Jul 2007 06:53:25
From: Taylor Kingston
Subject: Re: Worst Chess Novel

On Jul 6, 8:06 am, "Chess One" <inn...@verizon.net > wrote:
> Susan Polgar remarked this week that chess novels seem to present the game
> as if, to paraphrase her comments, only eccentrics or grotesques played i=
t,
> and since I am reading the new Martin Cruz Smith novel which introduces
> chess as a theme in his latest; Stalin's Ghost, the usual gritty Moscow
> scene which Arkady investigates, and since I just corresponded with an
> author writing a second scholastics-level chess novel, I was reminded of
> perhaps the worst one I've read, and where for a change I am in strong
> agreement with Taylor Kingston, who actually gave me the book.

Yes, I remember the occasion.

> I don't quite remember all Taylor's verbal comments,

Probably an informal prec=EDs of my ChessCafe review, which can be
read here:

http://www.chesscafe.com/text/alekang.txt

> and it seems rude to
> celebrate the author in this way, but a few things may still be said about
> the appearance of chess playing and chess players in novel form, which
> substantiate and accord with the Su Polgar comment above.
>
> The title; Alekhine's Anguish, carries a sub-title; A Novel of the Chess
> World, which is immediately deflated by the Author's Note which serves as=
a
> preface, to explain that some events and people are real, and some are
> invented, even 'the types of personalities portrayed for all concerned,
> including the protagonist, are purely imaginary.'
>
> So... a novel of the chess world? Or more a novel of an imaginary chess
> world.
>
> The main criticism of this sort-of history based on the life of Alekhine =
is
> that neither the light nor the dark of the title's subject are found in i=
ts
> pages, despite its cover illustration with nice Swastika and Hammer&Sickle
> flags, plus a tank, a castle, a Queen and a martini!
>
> Instead we have invented characters playing significantly key roles in the
> life [Lupi, eg], and invented events supplanting actual histories, placed=
in
> a novel which is 75% dialogue composed of one stodgy 'voice' throughout, =
and
> with no change of pace from start to finish.
>
> There are now pencil notations in the book, which I see both Taylor and I
> made: here is one of his from page 83, where Capa is reported to be "also
> undefeated and drawn six games only," - the pencil notes says "Capa's act=
ual
> score was +11 =3D4 -0". So even the 'real' parts of the book are inaccura=
te.
>
> So many real and truly strange things are left out of the book which would
> have provided a veracity for the character of Alekhine as well as the che=
ss
> scene in Europe and Russia, not to mention the constant and dramtic menace
> of WWII occupation in France, Germany and Poland, but no... instead there=
is
> inert sense of this backdrop, that is to say, the background is not posed=
as
> more stressing than a walk down 5th Avenue on a busy Saturday afternoon, =
and
> as if sleep-walking and nothing is really real.
>
> Alekhine is painted brown, never reaching to actual dark and light
> actualities of his life, and the furrow of the book's progress drawn at o=
xen
> speed, ploughs its weary way to a close with hardly a surprise. The last
> Chapter [the death] pages 189-194 cover that circumstance, though the ent=
ire
> book could have rested on the only real intrigue introduced in the 194
> pages, instead of merely re-stating in the last 5 what you could read in
> Wikipedia.
>
> Change a dozen names, and the sort of game being represented, and you wou=
ld
> have a book about billiards. There is nothing in the one above that has
> anything but generic sense of the chess art. Why chess should suffer these
> suppositions more than other games or art-forms, is perhaps because it is
> relatively obscure to most people, therefore representing playing the game
> faithfully is perhaps nothing worth bothering with.
>
> One further shameful circumstance is that a now deceased author was bilked
> of his real and considerable efforts to write a deep biography of Alekhin=
e,
> which the publisher, who I won't name, supplanted with the effort above.

Yes, and one wonders if the biography ever will be published. I
don't know that any "bilking" was involved, but I do know that Whyld's
relationship with McFarland & Co. went sour. Some years ago the
publisher extended a public olive branch to the author, but I never
heard that anything came of it.
I can't say whether "Alekhine's Anguish" is the worst chess-themed
novel ever written, but it is definitely the worst I have ever read.
Second worst is probably "The Queen's Gambit" by Walter Tevis. In
contrast, most others I've read were good, e.g. F.P. Keyes' "The Chess
Players" (a historical novel about Paul Morphy), "The Flanders
Panel" (a murder mystery involving retroactive analysis) and
especially "The L=FCneburg Variation" by Paolo Maurensig (reviewed here:
http://www.chesscafe.com/text/novels.txt ). Gathering dust on my shelf
is "The Dragon Variation" by Anthony Glyn, bought second-hand years
ago and not yet read; some reviews I've seen indicate it may be a
"worst" contender, at least in terms of chess verisimilitude.

Date: 07 Jul 2007 14:47:39
From: Ralf Callenberg
Subject: Re: Worst Chess Novel

06.07.2007 15:53, Taylor Kingston:
> In
> contrast, most others I've read were good, e.g. F.P. Keyes' "The Chess
> Players" (a historical novel about Paul Morphy), "The Flanders
> Panel" (a murder mystery involving retroactive analysis) and
> especially "The L�neburg Variation" by Paolo Maurensig (reviewed here:
> http://www.chesscafe.com/text/novels.txt ).

Yes, that's a good one. Do you know "Stalemate" by Icchokas Meras? A
local chess talent has to play an SS-Officer in the ghetto of Vilna. If
the boy wins he will get killed, if he loses all children from the
ghetto face death - but the boy will live on. Only a draw will save the
boy and the children.

Also quite good and meanwhile translated into English is "Carl Haffner's
Love of the Draw" by Thomas Glavinic. Carl Haffner stands in for Karl
Schlechter and the book is about his match against Lasker.

Greetings,
Ralf

Date: 07 Jul 2007 13:27:30
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Worst Chess Novel

"Ralf Callenberg" <ralf.callenberg@web.de > wrote in message
news:f6o21b$1bf$03$1@news.t-online.com...
> 06.07.2007 15:53, Taylor Kingston:
>> In
>> contrast, most others I've read were good, e.g. F.P. Keyes' "The Chess
>> Players" (a historical novel about Paul Morphy), "The Flanders
>> Panel" (a murder mystery involving retroactive analysis) and
>> especially "The L�neburg Variation" by Paolo Maurensig (reviewed here:
>> http://www.chesscafe.com/text/novels.txt ).
>
> Yes, that's a good one. Do you know "Stalemate" by Icchokas Meras? A local
> chess talent has to play an SS-Officer in the ghetto of Vilna. If the boy
> wins he will get killed, if he loses all children from the ghetto face
> death - but the boy will live on. Only a draw will save the boy and the
> children.

Yes - they made a movie of that one. Again, somewhat exceptional
circumstance, 50% of the chessplayers being SS.

----

Somewhat similar in background is the essay [Novellen!] by Stephan Zweig,
The Royal Game [Schachnovelle], who had his 1935 Die Schweigsame Frau,
banned by the Nazis. He died, 1942. Fortunately for this much neglected and
very high quality writer, he escaped to England, with his wife to be, Lotte
Altmann, and they married in Bath Sept 6, a week after the invasion of
Poland.

John Fowles, no less, comments:

... written in the last 4 months of his life. This fine story of a man
who outwits the Gestapo and manages, though scarred, to find the courage to
go on living.... must be seen as an attempt to exorcise guilt and
unhappiness through wish-fulfillment, a very common phenonomon in novelists.
Never was there a clearer literary case of 'Dor, cure thyself'...

...We may also see a parallel between the mad, but saving, sanctuary the
hero finds in 'imaginary' chess and Zweig's own habitual retreat into the
imagination (or literary work) when domestic or political reality threatened
him too closely. The mystery is how he failed to see that this last fiction,
surely one of the most powerful ever based on the imagery of a game, proved
the very contrary of what he persisted in believing: that his daimon was
gone, he was 'written out'. It shows how tyrannical -- one might almost say
totalitarian -- his pessimism had become at the end.

Phil Innes

> Also quite good and meanwhile translated into English is "Carl Haffner's
> Love of the Draw" by Thomas Glavinic. Carl Haffner stands in for Karl
> Schlechter and the book is about his match against Lasker.
>
> Greetings,
> Ralf

Date: 07 Jul 2007 16:33:43
From: Ralf Callenberg
Subject: Re: Worst Chess Novel

07.07.2007 15:27, Chess One:

> Yes - they made a movie of that one.

The only thing I found was that a German-Polish co-production making a
film out of this book got a grant a several weeks ago. I don't think
this film is already done. In the Internet Movie Database I couldn't
find any hint of an existing film based on this book.

> Somewhat similar in background is the essay [Novellen!] by Stephan Zweig,

I took it for granted, that this book is known to everybody interested
in books on chess. At least here in Germany it is *the* book on chess,
far more popular than Lushin's Defense or anything else. Nevertheless,
your quotings were interesting.

Greetings,
Ralf

Date: 07 Jul 2007 18:10:02
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: Worst Chess Novel

"Ralf Callenberg" <ralf.callenberg@web.de > wrote in message
news:f6o887$gh5$02$1@news.t-online.com...
> 07.07.2007 15:27, Chess One:
>
>> Yes - they made a movie of that one.
>
> The only thing I found was that a German-Polish co-production making a
> film out of this book got a grant a several weeks ago. I don't think this
> film is already done. In the Internet Movie Database I couldn't find any
> hint of an existing film based on this book.

its been on american tv, a cable channel. can't remember which, hbo?

>> Somewhat similar in background is the essay [Novellen!] by Stephan Zweig,
>
> I took it for granted, that this book is known to everybody interested in
> books on chess. At least here in Germany it is *the* book on chess,

well, yes!

> far more popular than Lushin's Defense or anything else. Nevertheless,
> your quotings were interesting.

from maybe the best novelist in england - this is big applause for Zweig. he
finishes his introduction:

...But now I must let Zweig's troubled, but always humane, spirit speak
for itself. It has wandered much too far out of the English-speaking world's
memory. It is time, on this centenary of his birth, that we read him again.
JF, 1981.

Cordially

> Greetings,
> Ralf