Once a journalist, always a journalist

Howard Goldowsky stopped by the New England Masters tournament on Wednesday and filed this thought-provoking, "informal" report:

I stopped by the Peabody Holiday Inn yesterday. I don't have a formal report, but what struck me was the complete isolation in which master-level chess tournaments are played these days. The Monroi was in full swing, everybody was following the games online, and there were no live fans on-site. It's a sign, I think, of just how niche chess has become (or always was). There was Alex Shabalov, by one criterion the best player in the United States, skillfully performing his craft, without a single fan -- not a single one -- there to appreciate it. There is a form of tension that develops between OTB players that doesn't get transmitted over the Monroi, and can only be felt in-person. If a position on a computer screen exudes tension, then the tension at the physical board is multiple times higher. This is why I mourn for the lack of fan presence; but like you, and hypocritically enough, I also had to get back to work, and I could not stay long. My entire stay lasted about 20 minutes. Alas, we all live, in some form or another, a slave-life.

Here are some mini observations about the tournament:

There were a number of photographers present. One said she was taking pictures for Chess Life. Another, whom I chatted with over the Monroi chat feature after I got back to my office, said he was taking pictures for Chess Horizons. Thus, the photographers outnumbered the fans two to one (the lone fan being me).

Brad Bournival looked his image of the 20-something entrepreneurial-gambler. Yesterday he was wearing an untucked, oversized Philly Flyers jersey. He looked laid back and confident at the board, very low-key and likable. I was surprised that I actually felt a connection to his style. If I was still doing interviews, he would be a prime candidate.

Nigel Davies was one of the oldest players, and he dressed the most conservatively with a button-down dress shirt. There were some other conservative dressers too, notable some of the foreign players, but most of the kids (and I say kids because most of the players seemed to be under 30) were dressed in shorts, T-shirts, and comfortable summer attire. The laid-back dress code was a striking contrast to the serious tension filling the room.

For your more salacious readers who like to read about strong female chess players, Liz Vicary appeared even skinnier in person than she does in her pictures. A significant length of her forearm could fit within the diameter of a half-dollar coin.

Shabalov was wearing a T-shirt, and appeared calm at the board, like the champion he is. Board 1, where Shabalov sat, used a nice wooden set and board. All the other boards used standard plastic pieces and vinyl roll-up boards.

Dave Vigorito is a tall, solid man with a physical presence. I imagine that he becomes intimidating when he leans over to examine his pieces. Liz Vicary has stated online that Vigorito is her coach. Before Round 4 started, Vigorito said a few words to Vicary (who was sitting at 0.5/3 points at the time), and then he went to his board. Little moments like these I find fascinating (as a former chess journalist). What does Joe Torre say, after he takes a trip to the mound, to the promising rookie pitcher who just gave up 3 runs without an out in the first inning? What words does the boxing trainer give the aspiring prize-fighter between rounds? This type of inside reporting is sparse in chess magazines and in sports magazines in general.

In a sad turn consistent with the proliferation of chess over the Internet, chess seems to be suffering from "science textbook syndrome." In science textbooks we see pictures of the "great scientists" along with short biographies and technical explanations of their contributions. In chess, we see pictures of the "great players" in magazines and get some technical annotations (sometimes from the player, but often not). The learning and the appreciation is all done second-hand, in an idolized way. Or, it's being done voyeuristically on ICC. In reality, the masters playing in Peabody (and elsewhere) are just normal, laid-back guys and gals who happen to play chess well. Yes, some are eccentric (and so were some scientists), but most are not. They all have their promotable qualities; yet, the public and chess fans never get to interact with them much except online. Without getting to know these players as people, chess fans are missing out.

I wanted to talk more with the TD, Chris (something) [ed: Bird], ask him about what it's like to use the Monroi system, what it's like to begin organizing master-level competition in New England, etc. It's great to see a tournament like this in our neighborhood. I admire the TD's dedication to chess, and people like him should be celebrated. Unfortunately, I didn't have time to chat. I asked him if he had an extra Monroi device to play with, but he said no. I am very curious to see how those things operate. What I'm wondering is if players bring their device with them when they get up from the board (or go to the bathroom), so they can study the position away from the board. Some players -- Max Enkin included -- were not using the Monroi. I also noticed that the "old-timer" Nigel Davies was not using it, either.

I wish I could write more, but, like yesterday, I need to get back to work.

Howard

A Kangarevuoo

Shaun Press reviews Goldowsky's Engaging Pieces with a Down Under twist ... This line caught my eye:

(My review copy of the book was supplied to me by the author)

Hey, wait a minute! Where's my free copy?

Goldowsky Replies

Howard has asked that I post his response to Hisbestfriend's review of "Engaging Pieces." In it, he addresses some poignant issues which were raised, as well as some other topics which he believes prospective readers might be interested in.

**********

June 27, 2007

HisBestFriend,

I appreciate your purchase of my book, and I appreciate your comments. A number of newspaper columnists (Worcester Telegram, Washington Post) have reviewed Engaging Pieces, but you own the first blog to do so. You raise some poignant issues that I'd like to address. Other readers will certainly have similar issues, so I hope you don't mind if this is an open letter.

My main concern about Engaging Pieces was (and is) that all of the interviews, stories, and opinion pieces, save two, were previously published. Why, as you point out, would anyone want to spend their hard earned cash on writing that could be downloaded from the Internet, in a matter of seconds, for free? Good question. There are many answers.

Some middle-tier fiction writers give their writing away for free on the Internet, before it's even published, just to garner some publicity. Cory Doctorow is one of them. He has a Web site where he gives away his stories for free. He claims that some people who like his stuff on his Web site will want to own the actual book. For every person who is Internet savvy, who reads his work online, there is another person who is introduced to his writing online who would like to own the hard-copy. Others just don't like reading on a monitor. Others hate printouts. Others want an addition to their library. Lastly, not everyone has the time or fortitude to go back and find all of my articles, including those published in Chess Life. Even if they did, how would they know when they found them all?

The last reason may sound a little pretentious; however, in my case, I like to think of this pretentiousness as confidence in my writing ability. I understand that there is a fine line between confidence and delusion. Just look at the auditions for American Idol. But I've been writing long enough, have gotten enough feedback, have published in mainstream chess magazines enough and have gotten paid enough for my work, to be certain that I'm not deceiving my readers.

Obviously, most articles in Engaging Pieces are less than timely, so the book must stand on the strength of its writing and on the ideas that this writing conveys. In the literary world, it's not uncommon to see the collected stories, or even movie and book reviews by good writers, published. Martin Amis' War Against Cliche: Essays and Reviews 1971-2000, is cited as an example. Many, many other writers collect their work, too. It's also common for authors to throw in some new material along with their old stuff, and I've done this with Engaging Pieces. My book includes two previously unpublished short stories, edits to almost every article, postscripts updating the reader with new highlights about relevant articles, and, of course, the appendix that lists every major chess novel or anthology published since 1933. You can't find this type of chess fiction bibliography on the Web. You'll find smaller, more confusing lists, but nothing this authoritative. (I've actually purchased or seen every book in the bibliography.) By the way, if you're still trying to get rid of my book, but want to keep the list of chess fiction in the appendix, then I have a two word solution: copy machine. But maybe I'm being presumptuous with this solution. Maybe you're the type of person who prefers to have such a list in bound form, like others might prefer to have the book's articles in bound form. If so, then I've sold you a copy of my book. :)

A few comments about your post:

1. Where do I apologize for my writing style? I tend sometimes to be reflective or philosophical about my writing, but where have I been apologetic?

2. The quote is "About an hour into the student activity-fair," not "About an hour into the student activity."

3. No, I wasn't trying to be funny in the first sentence. But thanks for the compliment, anyway. This story is based on a true situation that happened when I was an undergrad at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. It was written a number of years ago when I was still a bachelor, lamenting the 'girl that got away.' When those two girls walked in and stayed a while, I couldn't believe my eyes. I couldn't figure out why they were there. Some day I knew I would have to write a story to explain the mystery, and I did.

Part of my motivation for writing Engaging Pieces was to bring a form of closure to my interviewing and writing about chess. My son Tyler was born, coincidently, on the release date of the book, and with a bigger family, less time for hobbies, and an itching desire to improve my chess game, I need to spend less time on my writing. Publishing everything I've written about chess was a good way to close the door on one era of my writing life. When the book is behind me, I hope to spend more of my (limited) free time studying chess. At almost 36, I'd like to make an attempt at Expert or even Master before it's too late. I might start a chess blog. I might not. I might start a different writing project. I might not. I might become a Knight Errant. I might not. Lots of stuff is in the air. I don't know where it will fall. One thing is certain, though: I'm going to spend more time improving my chess game. How it is done and how public I'm going to be doing it, is really all that's really in question.

Again, I appreciate your post, and I appreciate my opportunity to get the author's 'backstory' in. If you would like to discuss the book, or have any more questions, I'm happy to discuss things.

Best,

Howard Goldowsky

**********
Update: It turns out that Hisbestfriend also posted the letter at his blog, and then he and Howard continued the discussion in the comments.

Engaging Reviews

The first review of Howard Goldowsky's new book "Engaging Pieces" that I found comes from the blogosphere (since then, I also happened upon this Worcester Telegram article which is part preview, part review). Hisbestfriend's point of view on the book is... well... decidedly mixed:

Do I recommend it? Hell no! But I read it cover to cover, learned something, and I am having a tough time getting rid of it. Take that however you want.

From another of Hisbestfriend's posts, I learned that the book includes a reference to the Knights Errant and Boylston Chess Club Weblog:

The first chapter is an interview with de la Maza, and in the Postscript on Page 17...

Since the publication of Michael de la Maza's book, Rapid Chess Improvement (Everyman Chess, 2003) there has been a growing cohort of de la Maza disciples populating the Internet (many of them listed at the Boylston Chess Club Weblog: http://boylston-chess-club.blogspot.com/).

Unread, that's enough for me to heartily endorse it. :)

The Preface to Goldowsky's Engaging Pieces

During the last six years, I’ve contributed interviews, fiction, and opinions to a variety of state, national, and online chess magazines. This book, a complete collection of my chess writing, is the culmination of that work. Its title, Engaging Pieces, describes both the art writers strive to create and the medium with which chess players strive to create art.

I compiled this book for the same reason I began writing about chess in the first place: I wanted to share my curiosity about the cultural, social, and competitive nature of the game. Thus, the topics running through these pages include complex, contemporary issues that I wanted to make accessible to the public. Some of these topics include the details of chess rating systems, the interaction of artificial intelligence with chess computers, the relationship between feminism and women’s chess, the marketing and promotion of chess, and the question of whether or not chess is a sport. Simply put, I’m a chess fan. Each article and story represents the type of in-depth and entertaining chess writing that I, and other chess fans, deserve to read.

After reading this book, it will become evident that chess players and those surrounding the game are dynamic and passionate people. For example, my first interview, a profile of Michael de la Maza, was written because I was curious about his obsession with chess tactics, and I was fascinated by his rapid rating ascension; Maurice Ashley’s vision of chess promotion prompted my essay about the HB Global Chess Challenge; the humble yet impudent personality of a young Hikaru Nakamura inspired a conversation with him right before he won the U.S. Championship in 2005; and a brash, chess-playing homeless man panhandling in Harvard Square became the archetype for a character in the short story "When the Balance be in Your Favor."

It is rare to see both fiction and non-fiction published in one volume. Yet having all of my chess writing collected in one place ties my work into a convenient package, and helps bring closure to one stage of my writing career. In the future, I’d like to spend more time improving my chess ability and pursuing other literary interests.

Lastly, many of the pieces here contain a postscript. These are brief, one hundred to seven hundred word updates about related events that have transpired since an article was originally published. These postscripts add a current perspective to each article, and, if necessary, they will help bring the reader up to date.

I hope these articles and stories prove to be as enjoyable to read as they were to write.

*****
Engaging Pieces is currently available for pre-order at Amazon.com.

Engaging Pieces - from front to back

Pre-order Engaging Pieces by Howard Goldowsky at Amazon.com.

The Best of Goldowsky

Howard Goldowsky's new book, Engaging Pieces: Interviews and Prose for the Chess Fan, is off to the printers.

The book is a collection of Howard's chess writing from the past six years. It includes interviews with many interesting chess celebrities, chess fiction, and in-depth reviews and editorials. All but two stories and the appendix have been previously published, but most people have probably not read everything. The appendix lists every chess novel or anthology of chess fiction with considerable chess content published from 1933 to the present. Many books from 2007 are included in the bibliography. It is the most complete and up-to-date list of its kind. If one is interested in chess fiction, this is a must-read list.

Knights and other tactics hounds will be interested in Howard's profile of Michael de la Maza which originally appeared in Chess Horizons. The story "Chess as a Sport" also incorporates the thrill of tactics study.

Greater Bostonians may find interest in "When the Balance Be in Your Favor", which follows the going-ons in Harvard Square and "En Passant: An Opportunity Lost" which takes place at MIT.

Here is the complete table of contents:

INTERVIEWS/PROFILES
Michael de la Maza ('400 points in 400 days')
Mig Greengard
Paul Hoffman (chess writer and TV broadcaster)
Hikaru Nakamura
Charles Katz (former VP of Edge TV -- was planning to have chess on cable TV )
Chrilly Dollinger and Muhammad Nasir Ali (Team Hydra)
Jennifer Shahade (author, Chess Bitch)
Greg Shahade (President of the U.S. Chess League)
Joe Block (chess playing Beauty and the Geek star)
David Shenk (author, Immortal Game)
Mark Glickman (USCF Ratings Committee Chair)
Michel Weinreb (author, Kings of NY)

FICTION
En Passant: An Opportunity Lost
Chess as a Sport
Chess Doesn't Care
Inspiration for a Young Chess Master
A Conversation with Anthony Meters
When the Balance Be in Your Favor

OPINION
The Chess Journalist Letter
Tournament Entries: A New Perspective
Computer Chess: Looking Back, Looking Forward
Chess and the Art of Negotiation: A Review

APPENDIX
A bibliography of contemporary chess fiction

Engaging Pieces is currently available for pre-order at Amazon.com.

The new and improved CJA Awards?

Long time readers will recall that we've previously addressed the annual Chess Journalists of America (CJA) Awards with both seriousness and fun. As the 2007 Awards season gets underway, our friend Howard Goldowsky reports on his efforts to reform the organization from within (he sits on the CJA Awards committee) and on this year's changes to the awards program:

This year's CJA Awards Call for Entries should now be published in the April Chess Life. My guess is that people have begun to receive the April Chess Life, because I have begun to receive entries for the Mainstream category (I am the contact address for this category), Category 24. Here are some notes about this year's awards...

Over the last decade or so, the CJA awards have received much notoriety in the chess media. People (including myself) have complained about the high rate of self-nominations and the general absence of quality entries; in general, the CJA awards have not been taken seriously for some time. Probably the most ruthless attack on the awards came a number of years ago when Edward Winter publicly denounced the CJA as "a dazzlingly undemanding body with a track-record of dispensing hundreds of awards, often to self nominees [sic] with no realistic hope of winning an accolade from elsewhere. The winners read like a Who’s Who of who deserve nothing."

During the past three-plus years, I've been lobbying the CJA to reform its awards system. This year will employ the first major attempt to bolster the awards' prestige. There are two major changes. The first is that the CJA has reduced the number of categories from 39 to 24. This creates more competition per category. Done away with are categories that have historically received little or no entries and redundant categories. The second major change is the addition of Category 24, the Mainstream Media category. This category is open to free nominations by CJA members, and the CJA will accept nominations from any mainstream article (see the official rules for more details).

Here are the official rules and new categories for 2007.

Now my interest, of course, is in the chess blogosphere and I'm sorry to see that none of the changes reflect the new realities of chess journalism which have been established through the growth of our medium. Certainly, Howard has his own agenda for change which he has been pursuing for many years (finally, with at least some small measure of success); nevertheless, I might have hoped that his familiarity and experience with chess blogs could have bled over into the CJA reform process. Not this year obviously, though I'm sure Howard will tell us that this is likely to be a multi-year process and there will be more opportunities for change and improvement in the future.

So where does this leave chess bloggers in 2007? While it is a plausible option for bloggers to submit their sites to the Best General Website Category, I'd be surprised if a blog would ever win. While blogs, I suppose, are technically websites, a chess blog is as different from a traditional chess website as that website is from an offline chess publication. Quite simply, it's not an apples to apples comparison and I don't see the judges abandoning the traditional criteria for what makes a good chess website in order to give the award to a blog.

The alternative is to submit a single post or series of posts to one of the media independent categories. From my reading of the rules these might include: Best Tournament Report, Any Media; Best Human Interest Story; Best Historical Article; Best Interview; Best Editorial; Best Review; Best Analysis; Best Instruction; and Best Humorous Contribution. I can certainly think of blog posts I've read this year that fit into each of these categories; however, I wonder whether the judges will consider a post to be equivalent to an article or a story. Also, I'm not sure if they will consider a series of related posts (e.g., The Chess Mind's series on "Something Different vs. the French") as a single journalistic piece.

For my part, I'm considering testing these concerns by submitting the complete BCC Weblog coverage of the Boston Blitz's 2006 US Chess League season to the Best Tournament Report category. How do you suppose it might fair against current CJA President Jerry Hanken's most recent edition of his endless annual reports on US and National Opens? For amusement, I could submit my post on the Pete Tamburro chess journalism awards to the Best Humorous Contribution category. Do you suppose the judges will find it funny?

The CJA Best Chess Blog Award ... we're just going to have to wait.

A new one for Goldowsky's library

Chess Rumble
By G. Neri
An illustrated novella
For ages 10 and up
Coming in Spring of '08
From Lee and Low Books

Terrell is an angry young man. His sister died. His father left. His mother works two jobs. He's overweight and pushed to the limits by his enemy, LeAlan. His only recourse for his anger is to use his fists. But his fists only get him in trouble. He's one fight away from getting kicked out of school when he meets a mysterious chess master named CM who challenges Terrell to fight his battles on the chess board.

So begins Terrell's journey as he fights to regain control of his life through chess....

From Teen Fiction From The Mind Of G. Neri

Pete Tamburro chess journalism awards announced

Thanks to About Chess for pointing us to the announcement of the 2006 Chess Journalists of America (CJA) awards. Here's a small sampling:

• Chess Journalist of the Year: Peter Tamburro


• Best Review: Peter Tamburro (Honorable Mention)


• Best Analysis: Peter Tamburro (1st)

Oh by the way, it just so happens that the Chief Judge of the CJA and Chairman of the Awards Committee is none other than Pete Tamburro. Draw your own conclusions.

Our friend, Howard Goldowsky, won again (for Best Interview) but as he has pointed out in the past, it is getting harder and harder to take these things seriously.

[In the spirit of full disclosure, I should point out that I received an Honorable Mention in 2005. Now, if I could just remember what I did with that certificate.]

So I was thinking, if Pete can create an awards committee and hand out accolades to himself and his friends, then so can I. Presto! The 2006 Chess Bloggies.
The entire awards committee (that's me) met in my shower this morning and are now prepared to announce the winners:

• Best Scholastic Chess Blog focusing on the Midwestern U.S.: The 64 Square Jungle


• Best Chess Blog based in a former republic of Yugoslavia and authored by an internet playing site admin: Chess News and Events


• Best Chess Improvement Blog by a maniacal Dutchman on a quest to solve over 70,000 chess problems on CTS: Temposchlucker


• The Don Q award for most humorous Chess Improvement Blog based in a tornado prone region: J'adoube


• Best coverage of fishing in a Chess Blog: Pale Morning Dun (1st), Central Oregon Chess Journal (Honorable Mention)
  


• Best Canadian Chess Blog by someone named C.: C's Chess


• Best Canadian Chess Blog by someone not named C.: Online Chess.ca


• Best coverage of otherwise unremarkable female chessplayers brought to world attention through the actions of boorish Englishmen: The Closet Grandmaster for Arianne Caoili (1st), BCM Blog for Jessie Gilbert (Honorable Mention)
  


• Best coverage of Dennis Monokroussos' shows on Playchess.com: The Chess Mind


• Best Chess Improvement Blog with a rotating Jared from Subway looking head on the banner: Blue Devil Knight


• Best Chess Blog representing a club in Somerville, Massachusetts: It was a close vote, but BCC Weblog squeaked it out. A recount has been demanded.

Think an award is missing? No problem, just list your own categories and award recipients in the comments. Don't feel shy about awarding yourself -- Pete didn't.

Put the champagne back in the fridge

The Chess Journalists of America (CJA) announced their 2005 prize winners on August 10th at the U. S. Open Chess Championships in Phoenix, Arizona during the annual CJA meeting.

My acceptance speech -- well, it's going to have to wait.

Chess Horizons Editor Mark Donlan submitted my article "2004 Boylston Chess Club Championship" (based on content from my blog of the same name) in the Best Magazine Tournament Report category. The bad news is that I was beat out by articles written by Mig and Tim Redman; the good news is that I received an Honorable Mention (see category 14).

I can imagine the judges reviewing the submissions: "Mig, Redman, Heisman, uh huh; Kavalek, Shabazz, Nunn, sure; DG...who the heck is this guy?"

Further down the list, you'll see that our occasional Guest Blogger Howard Goldowsky won the award for Best Editorial. Congratulations!

This leads me to a bit of editorializing of my own. Two years ago the CJA finally caught up with the new media trend by introducing internet-based award categories. This was certainly a major step forward in recognizing the role the web is playing in communicating chess-related information. In fact, I would be inclined to argue that web-based chess journalism far exceeds print at this point in time (at least in quantity, if not quality).

Yet, the current CJA internet categories are rather limiting given the broad range of web-based chess content being produced. For example, Michael Goeller had no better choice than to submit The Kenilworth Chess Club site under the Best General Website category. While he had little chance of winning in that category, I suspect he would have been a very strong contender in the unavailable Best Chess Club site category.

More importantly (and I'm sure you saw this coming from a hundred miles away), there are no categories for chess blogs. In fact, had 2004 Boylston Chess Club Championship not been adapted into a print article, there would have been no logical category to submit the site to (they don't even have a Web-Based Tournament Report category). Surely sites like Mandelamaza and The Chess Mind deserve the opportunity to receive recognition for the quality chess journalism they represent.

As a start, I would like to encourage the CJA to reevaluate the web-based award categories. Specifically, I believe -- at a minimum -- a Best Chess Blog category should be added. Should we be lucky enough to achieve this objective, in the future they might even consider sub-Blog categories, e.g. Best Chess Improvement Blog, Best Chess Analysis Blog, etc.

What do you think?