A little college essay I wrote on Chess.

Post Reply New Topic

Noah Yates 10/21/09
Standing Stern on Horizon’s Table
All you melancholic patrons of man’s swashbuckling odyssey into the boundless eternal- all you intrepid pioneers of the fore-fronts of novel aesthetic- all you enterprising explorers of lofty continents that manifest in the depths behind man’s eyes, let us trek into the wild frontier, whose primordial jungles have not yet been entirely defiled of their mystery, where high adventure beckons the brave to call out the gods of uncertainty to battle for truth, where viperous pitfalls and dazzling labyrinths of unfathomable infinities await in perpetual reverie. Let us stand upon those alien shores and muse on the heroic quest of man to chart a definite path in a land where there is no conclusive direction; only the half beaten trails of ingenious virtuosos and the crude topographic maps of their mighty, fallen predecessors give guidance to the fledgling youths of modern practice.
~
"Click tic click tic click tic," echoes through the silence-- sporadically interrupted by a sharp thud, followed by a smack. The candied scent of fresh vinyl pervades the air, as the 64,000 checkered squares of 1000 vinyl chess boards span the grand ballroom of the Riviera hotel and casino in Las Vegas, Nevada. 2000 players, wholly wrapt in contemplation, peer into their games. Burly-bearded old timers, clean-cut college kids, snot-nosed, can’t-even-tie-their-shoes youngsters, skate-boarding, metal-listening teenagers, modest old hippies, nerds, obvious geeks, and everyone in-between have gathered here to take part in the 2003 International Chess Festival—a twelve round, Swiss style tournament.
On the far horizon, behind the glorious sea of chess, hoards of curious fans have amassed in front of a fenced-off area. Within the red, velvet ropes, on center stage, the top grandmasters engage in epic struggles, pouring over their boards-- eyes darting back in forth in deep calculation. Brow-furrowed , jaw clinched, and legs shaking, a young prodigy confidently stretches his hand over board number one, boldly removes a white pawn, and drops his queen on that square-- finishing his turn with an assertive slap of the clock. "For that move, he should be confined to a lunatic assylum," whispers one spectator to another; for black has traded his queen for a measly pawn with no foreseeable compensation- an airent blunder for which he should lose the game. Resting on his laurels, the seasoned veteran takes only seconds to ponder this apparent mistake and snatches up black’s queen, without hesitation-- he finalizes his decision with a tap of the clock.
To the audience’s shock, horror, and delight, 12 moves later, after forced combinations predicated by any and every variation, white resigns—facing mate in two. Only now does it become apparent the awesome beauty that had layn in quiet anticipation behind black’s queen sacrifice; for black had gazed deep into the possibilities and found a move that resonates with perfection. No doubt, such a beautiful artifact will be immortalized in chess lore, as have so many aesthetically pleasing brilliancies like it.
~
Chess is a blood-sport. Two players sit opposite each other, taking turns moving their pieces -- with the goal of trapping the enemy king with checkmate. This is a game so archaic that scholars have been unable to trace its origin beyond the general assumption that it originated somewhere in ancient Asia. Although, over thousands of years, chess had undergone many dramatic changes in its rules, appearance, and popularity, following its establishment in western Europe, the game has remained virtually unaltered-- with the occasional introduction of a new rule—in the past 500 years, the only changes have been topological (with the introduction of time controls and tournament regulations-- both of which came with the turn of the 20th century.) Today, chess is among the most popular competitive sports in the world. Despite its cultural status as a trivial board game here in America, for the dedicated fans and avid players, chess is something more than just a game or recreation; it is a legitimate sport, a science, and perhaps above all, the composition of a great chess game is an art form of aesthetic beauty that is in many ways unrivaled.
~
“Don’t move until you see it… don’t move until you see it…,” Bruce Pandolfini (Ben Kingsley) whispers a silent prayer as his pupil, Josh Waitzkin (Max Pomeranc), scans the sixty-four squares for a winning combination in the film “Searching for Bobby Fischer.” The moves stand poised to be played—but he must find them.
~
Although, the ordinances of chess suggest that the progressions of moves in a game are theoretically finite, the exponential permutations that characterize the possible positions that could arise within an average game of forty-moves are astronomical. Consider that after each player has made two moves there are 72,084 positions that could occur; after just three moves apiece, there are more than 9,000,000 positions possible; and after each player has made only ten moves there is an absolutely confounding 169, 518, 829, 100, 544, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000 possible arrangements of pieces on the board (chess-poster.com). Therefore, it must be recognized that there are virtually no certainties in chess, and that ,hence, all theory on the game is subject to constant innovation and re-casting, as players delve deeper into the seemingly inexhaustible landscapes of chess imagination.
Through the duration of the last century-and-a-half, millions of chess games have been played out. The greatest practitioners of the game continue to elaborate new themes in an ongoing, dynamic flux— where opening ideas, originally supposed to be advantageous, are later demonstrated to be subtle mistakes, while other, once-thought unfavorable lines are subsequently found to be crushingly powerful. Today, every top-level chess player contains within their vast memory banks thousands of ideas about tactics, strategies, combinative-patterns, and opening theory. The over-the-board games between those players who hold rank in the uppermost echelons of the global/historical chess community, represent the most instructive examinations of theory in practice; and, through the games between, say, a reigning world champion and his challenger, some notion of “truth” about a particular position is conveyed to the rest of the world; for the embedded logic that lies behind the progression of moves, which led to and stemmed from a given position, contains self-evident, objective facts. It follows, then, that chess itself is being gradually “perfected,” as generation after generation of chess players learn from these compositions--compiling those “truths” in an ongoing synthesis. At once, students of the game are utilizing the traditional, intuitive ideas of the past, while simultaneously deriving new insights that hinge upon the novelties, which precipitate from the structural sequences of contemporary grandmaster games.
We see, here, that there is a certain character of chess as a science, which is ever striving to delineate the good moves from bad, by defining decisive principles that have implications across all positional types. Just as a scientist cannot make discoveries or formulate hypotheses without going into the field to actively investigate phenomenon, chess players cannot find truth or reason behind theory without implementing different tactics/strategies over-the-board.
Many of the great chess players have commented that good chess play is based solely on careful analysis/calculation and the methodical application of the ideas that are propounded by chess theory. However, it is also recognize that “chess is the story of 1001 blunders”- Savielly Tartakover, and “that without error there can be no brilliancy”- Emmanuel Lasker. This is where we find that chess is more than just a struggle between two minds in an onslaught to out-whit each other. In reality, one must recognize that to play a game of chess is to play against the game of chess itself—and that, as a chess player, your true enemy is yourself—your patience- your concentration- your willingness to consider not only all of your possibilities, but also the possibilities of your opponent.
~
"The Chess pieces are the block alphabet which shapes thoughts; and these thoughts, although making a visual design on the chessboard, express their beauty abstractly, like a poem.” (Marcel Duchamp)
~
Paul Morphy, Bobby Fischer, Gary Kasparov. These names epitomize a certain sphere of chess players, who, in the eras of their respective careers, were so dominant over the competition, as to be deserving of a category unto themselves. Each of them employed techniques over-the-board that both revolutionized the game and provided awe-inspiring glimpses of the profound beauty that lies at the heart of chess. It must be said of Kasparov that he embodies the sum total of all modern chess theory combined and re-forged to engender an over-the-board omnipotence, while Morphy and Fischer are heralded as composers—inventors—conjurers of magic.
Widely recognized as the first modern chess player, Paul Morphy lived in an era when chess play was undeveloped, haphazard, and moves, which were fashionable at the time, have since been proven weak, once analyzed from the authoritative perspective of modern chess theory. The brilliancy of Morphy’s chess was a product of his intuitive, avant-garde understanding of time in chess. His swift, natural development of the pieces during the opening moves in conjunction with the unyielding propensity of his dynamic attacking style, based on a mastery of positional initiative and fully effective/efficient use of all of his pieces, produced some of the most fantastically elegant combinations the world has ever seen-- even now, nearly 200 years later.
~
"Combinations have always been the most intriguing aspect of Chess. The masters look for them, the public applauds them, the critics praise them. It is because combinations are possible that Chess is more than a lifeless mathematical exercise. They are the poetry of the game; they are to Chess what melody is to music. They represent the triumph of mind over matter.” (Reuben Fine)
~
There is an interesting debate amongst the chess community about whether or not the great, early players, such as Paul Morphy, if alive today, and allowed the opportunity to study modern chess theory, would be able to compete at the top-level against modern grandmasters; or if the remarkable success of such a player was only the result of the feeble, un-conscious play of his opponents. Perhaps this quote from chess theoretician Reuben Fine will elucidate why it is that many experts agree that Morphy would in fact still represent a dangerous opponent even for modern grandmasters:
“It is always true, though not always clear, that moves in the chess openings are based on certain definite ideas . These ideas form the background and foundation, while the moves themselves represent actual construction. In every field the man who can merely do things without knowing why is at a disadvantage to the one who can not only build but also tell you just why he is building in that way. This is especially noticeable when the prescribed cycle does not obey the laws it is supposed to: then the labourer must sit with folded hands while the mechanic or engineer comes in to adjust the delicate mechanism. All this holds true in chess, just as it holds true in every field which is a combination of theory and action. And since actions or moves in chess are much less standardized than, say, the construction of a house, theory represented by ideas is so much more important.” [The Ideas Behind the Chess Openings (pg. 1.)]
. Could it be that these prodigious players possess some attribute or were influenced by some circumstance that is quite rare among humans? Several independent studies (Nippold) have indicated that there is little correlation between high verbal or spatial intelligence and excelling aptitude in chess (for the average player) (although both Kasparov and Fischer are reported to possess/have possessed extremely high IQs). Therefore, it must be concluded that there is some other factor feeding into a great chess player’s understanding of the game.
Interestingly, there may be some merit to this postulation. Paul Morphy is reputed to have taught himself how to play chess by watching his father and uncle play casual games. Legend has it that on one occasion, after waiting for a game to conclude, a very young Morphy proceeded to set up a position from earlier in the game, inquiring as to why his father had not played a certain move, which he demonstrated would result in a forced win a few moves later. Comparatively, a six-year-old Fischer was taught the rules of chess by his sister, who soon lost interest in the game. Without a human opponent, the young Bobby would spend his all his waking hours absorbed in contemplation of games he would play against himself, taking turns moving the white and black pieces. This continued for some months before his mother, concerned for his mental health, sought out neighborhood kids for him to play chess with. Bobby would go on to win the “Game of the Century” at age 13.
~
As previously mentioned, a player’s actual burden in chess is to struggle against his own willpower, and the supreme endeavor is to conquer the game of chess itself (in an existential sort of way)—all of the correct moves are there in hyper-space, waiting to be played-- it is the players who must make them manifest. Therefore, it is possible Fischer’s engagement with the game as a puzzle to be solved-- as a means of creative fulfillment/exploration of novelty led him to cultivation some deep comprehension of/ insight into the “soul” of chess.
A true appreciation of its essence assures chess a status as art for the beholdment of the mind’s eye—it is “a touchstone of the intellect” (Goethe), where “The chessboard is the world, the pieces are the phenomena of the Universe, the rules of the game are what we call the laws of Nature and the player on the other side is hidden from us”(Thomas Huxley).

As chess advances into the modern age of modern technology there is a fear that chess will lose its quality as an art due to the sheer calculating power of computers— beating down and slashing through the underbrush that entangle the thick jungle of possibilities in chess. Already, there have been instances where computers have used their “brute force” method of calculation to refute many once beautiful sacrifices that were played in legendary games. However, there is also the question of whether computers will ever posses the creative abilities of humans. After all, computers operate on fixed mathematical algorithms, and in chess "You must take your opponent into a deep dark forest where 2+2=5, and the path leading out is only wide enough for one” (Mikhail Tal).
Rooted in the passion of man to create new frontiers of aesthetic design the world chess is approaching a tipping point, as “Technologies are not merely aids to human activity, [they are] also powerful forces acting to re-shape the activity and its meaning.” (Langdon Winner.) Perhaps the future will garner a new breed of chess players, who will combine the mystical powers of human creativity and the calculating force of computers to yield even more exquisite games, as man journeys steadfast into the infinite domain of transcendent novelty.
Works Cited
* "Chess Quotes." Chess-poster.com. Ed. Chess-poster. Chess-poster- Compu-experts, 08 Oct. 2009. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. <http://www.chess- poster.com/english/notes_and_facts/chess_quotes.htm>.
*"Did You Know?" Chess-poster.com. Ed. Chess-poster. Chess-poster- Compu- experts, 08 Oct. 2009. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. <http://www.chess- poster.com/english/notes_and_facts/did_you_know.htm>
*Fine, Reuben. The Ideas Behind the Chess Openings. New York: Random House, Inc., 1989. Print.
*Glass, J. "Celestial Clockwork." Rec. 4 May 2005. Celestial Clockwork. Illogic. Raptivism, 2005. MP3.
The title of this (Noah Yates’) essay is a lyric from the title track of Illogic's 2005 LP "Celestial Clockwork"
*Hartson, William. The Kings of Chess. New York: Harper & Row, 1985. Print. *Nippold, Marilyn A. "School-Age Children Talk About Chess: Does Knowledge Drive Syntactic Complexity?" Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research 52.4 (2009): 856-71. Ebscohost: Academic Search Premier. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. <http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.uky.edu/ehost/detail?vid=21&hid=6&sid=b1c5118e-6370-4b67-ade7-ec38e77fd898%40sessionmgr10&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#db=aph&AN=43421309#db=aph&AN=43421309#db=aph&AN=43421309>.
*Searching for Bobby Fischer. Dir. Steven Zaillian. Perf. Max Pomeranc, Joe Montegna, Joan Allen, Ben Kingsley, Laurence Fishburne. Mirage Entertainment, 1993. Videocassette.
*Winner, Langdon. "Technological Somnambulism." 1986. Remix: Reading+Composing Culture; Catherine G. Latterell. 2nd ed. Boston-New York: Bedford/ St. Martin's, 2010. 644-49. Print. ["Technological Somnambulism" was originally published in "The Whale and the Reactor: A Search for Limits in the Age of High Technology" (1986)]