eShop USA > Books > Chess Facts And Fables
Chess Facts And Fables
Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
Our Price: $45.00 Prices subject to change.
Customer Reviews
Rating:  - Philosophy of history
Historiographical analysis.
(L) I would like to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of Edward Winter's work but do note: I am not attacking or praising "the man" but offering effective exegesis on "his work."
The advantages are obvious: precise, well-cited, no grammatical errors in the text and to the novice reader, consistant. The information is quoted exactly from seconday sources and nothing is ever left out. Refuting fables written by other "historians" is very noticeable in Winter's work but it is necessary for any historical subject. It is clearly evident that no other chess historian stands on Winter's level and any "historian" should hopefully produce the same results in the future. To make matters simply, one only needs to read his article titled, "Worst-ever Chess Book?"
The disadvantages are not noticeable to the novice reader and now the subject turns into a philosophical and historiographical one. In The Idea of History (Oxford University Press, 1994The Idea of History: With Lectures 1926-1928, Revised edition with an introduction by Jan Van Der Dussen) R.G.Collingwood writes, (page 257)
"History constructed by excerpting and combing the testimonies of different authorites I call scissors-and-past history."
We see this in all of Winter's work such as, for example:
In contrast, on page 79 of A Short History of Chess (written in 1917 but not published until 1963) Murray wrote that Johann Allgaier `was the conductor of the Automaton when it played and defeated Napoleon'
or
The BCM (October 1922 issue, pages 375-376) reported that on the morning of Thursday 14 September 1922 Williams was found dead in bed:
or
1922: Samuel Reshevsky (C.N. 742)
A report on pages 16-17 of the January 1923 BCM:
It is very useful to note exact references and citings from other works but let's return to R.G.Collingwoood's, the Idea of History, in which he writes, (page 260)
"Now, anyone who had read Vico, or even a second-hand version of some of his ideas, must have known that the important question about any statement contained in a source is not whether it is true or false, but what it means. And to ask what it means is to step right outside the world of scissors-and-paste history into a world where history is not written by copying out the testimony of the best sources, by BY COMING TO YOUR OWN CONCLUSIONS (caps are mine)
Winter never comes to his conclusions but only compiles "facts" and "fables" from the works of others. His articles are a compilation of material already printed from other authorities or, "correspondents." He is not a writer nor an historian but an experienced researcher. Historians come to their own conclusions drawn from primary sources. Primary sources are archaeological artifacts, scientific data, etc. Secondary sources are books, articles, or columns, written about them.
To understand this concept more clearly, let's use the following model of history:
(a) Archaeologists discover primary sources: thier job is to dig up material and decipher these materials using scientific analysis.
(b) Researchers then compile this data and categorize this information.
(c) After the compiled work of the researcher from the material discovered by the archaeologist, the historian will now come to his own conclusion as to what happened, where, why, who, and when. He must produce exact, unbiased, and scientific analysis in a book (the secondary source)
(d) After the historian has drawn his own conclusions, there is one more person in our model, (often the most critical) and that is the writer: his job is to make a story out of it or to produce a moral or fable. This is where "lost in translation" occurs, or better yet, an old adage says: "traduttori traditori"
It is very easy to copy already printed material from other chess books, but coming to your own conclusions from primary sources, is the making of a real historian. There is nothing original, "stunning" or "riveting" about Winter's work...only that is brilliantly researched as compared to the works of other chess historians. This is the faux paus of his work but since there are only a handful of chess researchers/historians (the subject is very limited) his books are monumental compared to others.
One needs to be very skeptical about such historical tidbits, no matter how tedious or time-consuming it may be. Jan Timman writes the the following taken from his foreword of Winter's other book, A Chess Omnibus:
"He is particularly skilled at sifting research material from a multitude of sources thoughout the world and drawing everything together in the form of elegant essays and notes which take our knowledge forward."
This...I agree (T)
Rating:  - Chess Facts And Fables
Mr.Winter is THE MAN , of Chess History. I have played the art my whole life off and on , and I can tell you that no one has researched the science and mystery of the royal game as has this man.If you like to read in the WC , then I suggest you not take this into that chamber! You will never get off the Pot! The volume is packed with rare photos and is a treasure trove of inside information on the great masters and history of Caissa`s web!
A Thumbs Up!
Rating: - "Disengaging Fact and Fable"
This book is a generous selection of items from Edward Winter's long-running "Chess Notes" column. Its goal--like that of "Chess Notes" in general--is, first, to discover and investigate new (or forgotten) facts about chess history, and, second, to explode old fables circulating as "facts". There is no way to fairly review all of the material in the book, but a few examples will give the idea:
1). In the "Games" section, Winter presents many dozens of unknown games by famous masters--and also investigates in detail what is possibly the most famous game of all time (Morphy vs. the Duke and Count), noting that much of what is written about that game in various books has no basis in fact.
2). The "Biography" section contains much information on lesser-known or unjustly forgotten players (such as Gossip and Mary Rudge) and investigation of lesser-known aspects of famous players' life (such as Blackburne's feats as a problemist). But it also investigates and disproves fables (not to say libels) about famous players, such as the claim that Alekhine "smashed the furniture" after losing a game, or Sultan Khan being "completely illiterate".
3). The "Quotes" section--perhaps the area of chess history where fable is the most prevelant--Winter gives us forgotten genuine quotes about chess which are deserve to be remembered for being either especially insightful or spectacularly awful. But he also investigates the origins of oft-quoted chess cliches ("The threat is stronger than the execution"; "Chess is vanity"; etc.), finding that, in many cases, the master to whom the quote is usually attributed probably never said it.
Of course these are just examples--the book contains, literally, hundreds of items on every aspect of chess history, all throroughly researched.
So what? One could say. Why replace the amusing tall tales with dour, boring truths? But the book's real strength is that truth, in chess, is often stranger than fiction. The true biographies, games, histories, quotes, and incidents from players' lives and famous tournaments, are more often than not FAR more interesting and amusing, than the ersatz "Morphy once said", "Alekhine once did", "Steinitz once played" 'history' presented to us in one potboiler after another.
If one has any interest in chess history at all, one should get this book (and for that matter, Winter's previous ones). Not only will you be educated about chess history, you will also be greatly entertained. It is a rare book indeed that manages to do both well, and an even rarer one that can amuse and entertain so well without sacrifising anything in accuracy and thoroughness.
| |
 |
