Pandolfini Panned
Offramp
5280, has panned Bruce Pandilfini's new book Treasure Chess, which has
the subtitle Trivia, Quotes, Puzzles, and Lore from the World's Oldest
Game.
Of course draughts is older, so Bruce has made a mistake even on the
cover!
The funniest mistake that Winter points out is this one, Pandolfini on
Tal (page 79):
'His intuitive feel for the art of inscrutable sacrifice was difficult
to play against, though chess fans loved it. Finally they had a
champion they couldn't understand, whom they understood.'
LOROL!
help bot
> Edward Winter, athttp://www.chesshistory.com/winter/index.htmlnumber
> 5280, has panned Bruce Pandilfini's new book Treasure Chess, which has
> the subtitle Trivia, Quotes, Puzzles, and Lore from the World's Oldest
> Game.
> Of course draughts is older, so Bruce has made a mistake even on the
> cover!
The cover says "game", not "board game"; surely, you
are not suggesting that a silly board game was invented
before games like keep-away -- played by many social
animals as well as by humans, /instinctively/?
Regardless of which board game was invented first, BP
got his facts wrong. And his dates. For example, the date
of the women's shoes incident is given as happening during
Paul Morphy's lifetime, but in reality, it was much later that
this; it seems to have come about as the result of another
hack writer's efforts long afterward!
> The funniest mistake that Winter points out is this one, Pandolfini on
> Tal (page 79):
>
> 'His intuitive feel for the art of inscrutable sacrifice was difficult
> to play against, though chess fans loved it. Finally they had a
> champion they couldn't understand, whom they understood.'
A few of EW's criticisms seemed to relate to voodoo
phrases, possibly picked up from Mr. Pandolfini's young
student who played in "Searching for Bobby Fischer".
I seriously doubt that EW reads these hack-jobs
thoroughly; it is far more likely he scans through, in
search of spelling errors and wrong dates. For one thing,
we are given nothing in the way of a general impression
of what the book was really about, just random nit-picks.
The conclusion must be that if a hack writer cannot get
his basic facts straight, then his thoughts aren't really
worth reading.
But this all misses the point: most of these famous
writers "churn out material" for the sole purpose of
making money. And we, the general public, are
stupid enough to keep buying their hack-jobs, so the
cycle continues. The worst of the lot "churn out" the
greatest quantity of material, and make the most
money, from the least effort. Go figure.
-- help bot
Offramp
> On Nov 18, 12:06 am, Offramp <alaneobr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I seriously doubt that EW reads these hack-jobs
> thoroughly; it is far more likely he scans through, in
> search of spelling errors and wrong dates. For one thing,
> we are given nothing in the way of a general impression
> of what the book was really about, just random nit-picks.
> The conclusion must be that if a hack writer cannot get
> his basic facts straight, then his thoughts aren't really
> worth reading.
I am pretty certain that Mr Winter's favourite reading is about famous
Brotish comedians. I know that he has read biogs of Morecambe & Wise
and Frankie Howerd. I very much doubt that EW read BP's book in any
depth at all.
Taylor Kingston
>
> I am pretty certain that Mr Winter's favourite reading is about famous
> Brotish comedians.
Ah yes, the typical opening act on the Borscht Belt. The audience
was served brot to go with their borscht.
> I very much doubt that EW read BP's book in any
> depth at all.
If so, it may have been an act of mercy. I like Bruce, he's a good
chess teacher and an entertaining writer, but factual accuracy and
scholarly rigor are not at all his strong suits. As he himself wrote
in his latest "Q&A Way" column at www.chesscafe.com, "I'm no expert on
the history of board games or, for that matter, on anything else."
This does not sound like the kind of book he should have attempted.