Books on Soviet Chess

Historical knowledge and information regarding our great game.
Geoff Chandler
Posts: 3486
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Books on Soviet Chess

Post by Geoff Chandler » Sun Aug 04, 2013 6:18 pm

Maybe Sosonko dictated his books to an English academic.
Is he married? Maybe his wife is an English academic.

Why not write your own Russina Chess History making it up as you go along.
It will most likely be closer to the any truth you happen to to uncover.

Start off with Gennadi Sosonko being married to an English academic. Call her Susan.
Susan Sosonko DLitt.(make her the twin sister of Carol Karpov) adding that both hail from Wrexham.

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 3486
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Books on Soviet Chess

Post by Geoff Chandler » Mon Aug 05, 2013 1:12 am

I knew the timing of this thread would cause me bother.

I had a £7.00 bid (+ £3.00 p&p) on the Bob Wade book Soviet Chess on E-Bay.
It was sitting there all cosy till 30 mins before the close then got out bid.
I was not going to go for more than £10.00. That is the max I'll pay for any book.

It's in the Edinburgh Club Library, I'll just refresh myself with it from there.

I've put in bid for Gambits Accepted.
It's mine OK. None of you lot with the exception JR would know what to with it.
So keep your glassed over Fritz'd eyes away from it.
There are dozens of books on endings there (which will tell you what was known 500 years ago.....again.)

Both Alekhines Best Games are there at a good price....

....as is Peter Clarke's Soviet Miniatures.
(did you see how nicley I swung that back on track to the theme of this thread.)

User avatar
MJMcCready
Posts: 3178
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2013 2:30 pm

Re: Books on Soviet Chess

Post by MJMcCready » Mon Aug 05, 2013 7:27 am

Hi,I once read this interview by Axerbakh which I thought was quite interesting.

http://www.chessintranslation.com/2012/ ... e-victors/
Gordon Cadden wrote:
MJMcCready wrote:Could someone personally recommend a publication on the history of Soviet Chess. I would ideally prefer something written by or with input from an historian rather then something written by a titled chess player. I recently bought Soltis's Soviet Chess 1917-1991 but I found it to be disappointing on a number of levels.

Thanks
Yuri Averbach is a Chess Historian, and his memoirs should be reasonably accurate in the Post Soviet Era.

Another Russian Chess Historian is Dr. Isaac Linder, who wrote "Chess in Old Russia", the English Translation published in 1979.

Believe that Andrew Soltis made a good effort, tackling a difficult subject, with "Soviet Chess" 1917 - 1991

A Russian should attempt the Definitive Work. Any Candidates ? (no, not Gary Kasparov).
Gordon Cadden wrote:
Not Kasparov? But he's already done so with his 'My Great Processors' (misspelling is deliberate) series...oh but wait I see what you mean, he isn't Russian as he sometimes claims, oh and come to think of it his real name isn't Kasparov either, oh and he didn't actually write those books anyway, ah well maybe not then.

Soltis has had a good stab at a tough subject. The chess is interesting enough but for the life of me I cannot understand why he doesn't utilize his own bibliography. Occasionally he does cite the text he is referring to but usually we get 'Alekhine said "XXXXXX", Botvinnik said "YYYYYY". Okay, well where did he say that? Again, I like the chess in the book but much of what surrounds it is sloppy and annoying.

Thanks for the Linder pointer. Had never heard of him and will look into it.

User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 8806
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: Books on Soviet Chess

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Mon Aug 05, 2013 7:53 am

Some great suggestions here. I can endorse the suggestion of 'Total Chess' by David Spanier, having just read that, though it does rather reflect the times when it was written. I think I've read 'White King and Red Queen' as well, though I may be confusing that with another book of the same name.

What might be worth looking up is chess magazine articles, as some of those may have material that has not been published in book form yet. Though really, most of that should have been covered by those who have published books on he topic. There may also well be Russian-language sources that have not yet been translated into English, but should be (they may have been translated into other languages).

Finally, you could look for chapters, sections or paragraphs on chess in books on Soviet history.

Do please let us know if you come across other suggestions.

User avatar
MJMcCready
Posts: 3178
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2013 2:30 pm

Re: Books on Soviet Chess

Post by MJMcCready » Mon Aug 05, 2013 2:07 pm

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:.

Finally, you could look for chapters, sections or paragraphs on chess in books on Soviet history.

Do please let us know if you come across other suggestions.
I cannot add to what has been posted here, though your suggestion that there may be (and probably are) books written on Soviet history which discuss chess is interesting.

Simon Spivack
Posts: 600
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Books on Soviet Chess

Post by Simon Spivack » Tue Aug 06, 2013 10:22 am

Those of a certain age will recall Red Robbo, I expect his response to much in this thread would be a variation of "For Finnigan's sake!". I suppose, nonetheless, that I should be grateful to be spared links to inaccurate web pages vetted by committees of clowns.

Any translated, non-trivial work of chess history that only has two errors in it would be exceptional. I wouldn't expect many readers of the English edition of Averbakh to spot much more than that. In reality, though, there are rather more than "one or two" (they are nearly all absent from the Russian). In the Russian version Averbakh gives the wrong location for a tournament, something pointed out to me by a friend in an email in 2011 (I keep forgetting to include this in my notes); Averbakh also gives the wrong initial for Kapitsa (it is omitted in the English edition). These are quite unimportant.

It is extremely difficult to be error free. Even Edward Winter, who probably comes closest to this ideal, can err. For instance, there is: "... among heads of state was Bonar Law ..." The head of state in the United Kingdom is the reigning monarch, not the Prime Minister. I consider this slip so insignificant that I've never previously bothered to mention it in public. It makes no difference to the argument. Incidentally, Alekhine, in the original, is supposed to have employed hombres de Estado. One should strive for accuracy, correct errors that are pointed out (although it is galling when someone clueless points out an error that is merely the figment of a halfwit's imagination) and try and provide a true picture, warts and all. Checking and rechecking is extremely draining.

One of my complaints about some of those who style themselves "chess historians" is that they are geographically and historically illiterate. They traipse through old newspaper articles on nonentities and wonder whether to publish. Knowing next to nothing about the time or country, they effuse thoughts and opinions that are, rather like many of the posts in this thread, utter drivel. Such types often overlook that a newspaper occasionally provides a partial perspective. One time I asked a barrister whether any of his cases reported in the press were faithfully recorded. He confirmed that sometimes he didn't recognise the proceedings! He also agreed that the reporters had been present and were honourable.

In summary, one can't always ignore an oral account, no matter what some may espouse.

Sadly, too, many of these "chess historians" labour under the convenient belief that a computer makes them nearly the equal of a GM when annotating, they are deluded.

A nearly insuperable barrier for anyone writing about Russian chess history is the legacy of Stalinism. Good luck to the individual who imagines it will be easy to access the Chekha's archives for such an endeavour. Then there's the burden of what one is taught in school, it naturally moulds one's mind. Today it is Putin who dictates, tomorrow it will be someone else. It is essential that foreigners interact with Russians, if only because emotional detachment is a vital consideration.

Ferreting involves a lot of work. The Kharkov disaster was hidden from Soviet histories of Barbarossa until the 1960s. The worst aspects of Operation Mars for a generation more. In chess, too, this difficulty exists: post 1945 Russian reports of the Tournament of Four (Moscow, 16-22 February, 1933) are thin on the ground, to put it mildly.

User avatar
MJMcCready
Posts: 3178
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2013 2:30 pm

Re: Books on Soviet Chess

Post by MJMcCready » Tue Aug 06, 2013 1:12 pm

Which brings us onto autobiography. Soltis, who prompted me to start the post -and a person I'm sure you don't like SImon- is heavily reliant on Botvinnik and leans on Levenfish too at crucial points in his publication.

Could someone mention an ex-Soviet player's autobiography that they found particularly useful?

Many thanks.

Tim Harding
Posts: 2318
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2010 8:46 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Contact:

Re: Books on Soviet Chess

Post by Tim Harding » Thu Aug 08, 2013 5:17 pm

MJMcCready wrote:Could someone personally recommend a publication on the history of Soviet Chess. I would ideally prefer something written by or with input from an historian rather then something written by a titled chess player. I recently bought Soltis's Soviet Chess 1917-1991 but I found it to be disappointing on a number of levels.

Thanks
I have just found this thread and read all the responses, many of which are good, some rubbish.
I won't attempt to incorporate everything in this response but I will make a few points that may help.
I cannot comment on the Averbakh book which I have not yet read but perhaps it should be borne in mind that he is 90 years old.

1) You cannot expect there to be any one book, especially in English, that will satisfactorily deal with the history of the Soviet chess period (i.e. early 1920s to 1991) from an academic perspective. Perhaps in the future somebody suitably qualified will write such a book but extensive research in primary sources in Russia and former USSR republics would be required - huge job. So it's more likely to hope for a collection of essays by experts in different regions and periods, at least for a start.

2) The starting point of anybody trying to read their way into this subject must be the book by D. J. Richards which IS an academic work and very strong on the 1920s and 1930s. There are no games in it.

2) As somebody said, 'Chess: the History of a Game' by Richard Eales [NOT Earles] is excellent, but only about nine pages deal directly with the Soviet chess phenomenon as he calls it, and remember this book was first published in 1985 so cannot cover Kasparov and the final years, unless he has done a new edition that I am unaware of. By the way, he is retired (but still working part-time I think) but was indeed on the staff of the Univ. of Kent history dept and his main field is mediaeval history. His wife Professor Jackie Eales is at the neighbouring university Canterbury Christ Church. She is by the way the sister of GM Ray Keene and was previously married to IM David Levy. As Jackie Levy she once had an article about the history of women's chess published in BCM but her main field is the English Civil War.

3) I do have the Soltis book but would not have re-read it in years. Like Bob Wade's book it is aimed at a general chess readership, as of course are the books by Sosonko and just about anything else that has been published.
3a) The exception of course is the book by Kotov and Yudovich, 'The Soviet School of Chess' (editions over the years can vary a lot) which is interesting precisely because it was a work of propaganda aimed at an international readership. From successive editions you can see how they wanted to be seen, and also how Chigorin (portrayed as the grandfather of the Soviet school) and awkward customers like Alekhine and Bogoljubow were seen.
3b) While we are on propaganda, I believe that the Ukrainians finally intend to bring out something new on Bogatyrchuk (Bohatirchuk when he was in Canada) which may include an English translation of his notorious memoir which has up to now only been available in English as a brief abstract. There was a previous attempt to publish this in Canada or the USA which came to nothing many years ago.

4) Some of the things said here about Genna Sosonko sound unfair to me and probably inaccurate too. He was born in 1943 and so (contrary to what somebody wrote here) would have known Keres personally before his emigration in (I think) 1972. I played Sosonko in a Dutch tournament early in 1973 and last met him in 2005. Naturally he had to learn Dutch pretty quickly so English would only be his third or fourth language, but that doesn't necessarily mean he cannot write fluently in the language. Of course he may have had help. His books I find interesting but they must be treated like any other memoir written for entertainment and sale.

5) The most authoritative book on Keres is 'Meie Keres' by the late Valter Heuer who knew him well. I have a signed copy but alas don't read Estonian. Valter was the author of a one-hour television documentary about Keres in English which I have somewhere in a cupboard. That can be considered a very good secondary source.

6) Rather than look for one all-embracing work I think you have to build up your picture of the period through various works that deal with different aspects and personalities. After that you can see if there is a gap that needs filling and where you could make a contribution. A few suggestions:

a) Cafferty's book on the Chess Championships of the Soviet Union.

b) The corresponding book on the Correspondence Championships, entitled 'Red Letters', by Sergey Grodzensky and myself, long out of print. The game collection was mostly done by me and the main text, which was written by Sergey and translated by Ken Neat. The CD that came with the book has a game database and Sergey's original Russian text. CC may seem a very minor aspect but is interesting precisely because it was one of the very few points of contact ordinary Soviet men and women could have with counterparts in the West; at the opening of the 1998 ICCF congress in Latvia, precisely this point was made in a speech at the opening reception hosted by the Mayor of Riga. (See the report at the time in the magazine I edited, 'Chess Mail'.)

c) Sergey, who is an historian, also wrote at least two books that were published in Moscow, as well as occasional articles for '64' etc. "Khod v Konverte" by Grodzensky and I. Z. Romanov is the history of correspondence chess in Russia and the USSR. Less well known is a book he did on chess in the life of scientists (that is the translation of the Russian title but my copy is not to hand right now); Andrei Sakharov is one of those featured. These books have not been translated into English and probably never will be but give an insight into the subject that you will never get from writers like Spanier, Kasparov, Soltis.

I hope at least some of the above is helpful.
Tim Harding
Historian and FIDE Arbiter

Author of 'Steinitz in London,' British Chess Literature to 1914', 'Joseph Henry Blackburne: A Chess Biography', and 'Eminent Victorian Chess Players'
http://www.chessmail.com

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 3486
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Books on Soviet Chess

Post by Geoff Chandler » Fri Aug 09, 2013 2:09 am

Hi

Tim Wrote'

"2) The starting point of anybody trying to read their way into this subject must be the book by D. J. Richards
which IS an academic work and very strong on the 1920s and 1930s. There are no games in it.

There is a copy of this book currently on E-bay (15 hours left) current bid is £7.55 (+£3.00 P&P)

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/RARE-CHESS-BO ... _368wt_958

User avatar
MJMcCready
Posts: 3178
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2013 2:30 pm

Re: Books on Soviet Chess

Post by MJMcCready » Fri Aug 09, 2013 12:46 pm

Tim Harding wrote:
MJMcCready wrote:Could someone personally recommend a publication on the history of Soviet Chess. I would ideally prefer something written by or with input from an historian rather then something written by a titled chess player. I recently bought Soltis's Soviet Chess 1917-1991 but I found it to be disappointing on a number of levels.

Thanks
I have just found this thread and read all the responses, many of which are good, some rubbish.
I won't attempt to incorporate everything in this response but I will make a few points that may help.
I cannot comment on the Averbakh book which I have not yet read but perhaps it should be borne in mind that he is 90 years old.

1) You cannot expect there to be any one book, especially in English, that will satisfactorily deal with the history of the Soviet chess period (i.e. early 1920s to 1991) from an academic perspective. Perhaps in the future somebody suitably qualified will write such a book but extensive research in primary sources in Russia and former USSR republics would be required - huge job. So it's more likely to hope for a collection of essays by experts in different regions and periods, at least for a start.

2) The starting point of anybody trying to read their way into this subject must be the book by D. J. Richards which IS an academic work and very strong on the 1920s and 1930s. There are no games in it.

2) As somebody said, 'Chess: the History of a Game' by Richard Eales [NOT Earles] is excellent, but only about nine pages deal directly with the Soviet chess phenomenon as he calls it, and remember this book was first published in 1985 so cannot cover Kasparov and the final years, unless he has done a new edition that I am unaware of. By the way, he is retired (but still working part-time I think) but was indeed on the staff of the Univ. of Kent history dept and his main field is mediaeval history. His wife Professor Jackie Eales is at the neighbouring university Canterbury Christ Church. She is by the way the sister of GM Ray Keene and was previously married to IM David Levy. As Jackie Levy she once had an article about the history of women's chess published in BCM but her main field is the English Civil War.

3) I do have the Soltis book but would not have re-read it in years. Like Bob Wade's book it is aimed at a general chess readership, as of course are the books by Sosonko and just about anything else that has been published.
3a) The exception of course is the book by Kotov and Yudovich, 'The Soviet School of Chess' (editions over the years can vary a lot) which is interesting precisely because it was a work of propaganda aimed at an international readership. From successive editions you can see how they wanted to be seen, and also how Chigorin (portrayed as the grandfather of the Soviet school) and awkward customers like Alekhine and Bogoljubow were seen.
3b) While we are on propaganda, I believe that the Ukrainians finally intend to bring out something new on Bogatyrchuk (Bohatirchuk when he was in Canada) which may include an English translation of his notorious memoir which has up to now only been available in English as a brief abstract. There was a previous attempt to publish this in Canada or the USA which came to nothing many years ago.

4) Some of the things said here about Genna Sosonko sound unfair to me and probably inaccurate too. He was born in 1943 and so (contrary to what somebody wrote here) would have known Keres personally before his emigration in (I think) 1972. I played Sosonko in a Dutch tournament early in 1973 and last met him in 2005. Naturally he had to learn Dutch pretty quickly so English would only be his third or fourth language, but that doesn't necessarily mean he cannot write fluently in the language. Of course he may have had help. His books I find interesting but they must be treated like any other memoir written for entertainment and sale.

5) The most authoritative book on Keres is 'Meie Keres' by the late Valter Heuer who knew him well. I have a signed copy but alas don't read Estonian. Valter was the author of a one-hour television documentary about Keres in English which I have somewhere in a cupboard. That can be considered a very good secondary source.

6) Rather than look for one all-embracing work I think you have to build up your picture of the period through various works that deal with different aspects and personalities. After that you can see if there is a gap that needs filling and where you could make a contribution. A few suggestions:

a) Cafferty's book on the Chess Championships of the Soviet Union.

b) The corresponding book on the Correspondence Championships, entitled 'Red Letters', by Sergey Grodzensky and myself, long out of print. The game collection was mostly done by me and the main text, which was written by Sergey and translated by Ken Neat. The CD that came with the book has a game database and Sergey's original Russian text. CC may seem a very minor aspect but is interesting precisely because it was one of the very few points of contact ordinary Soviet men and women could have with counterparts in the West; at the opening of the 1998 ICCF congress in Latvia, precisely this point was made in a speech at the opening reception hosted by the Mayor of Riga. (See the report at the time in the magazine I edited, 'Chess Mail'.)

c) Sergey, who is an historian, also wrote at least two books that were published in Moscow, as well as occasional articles for '64' etc. "Khod v Konverte" by Grodzensky and I. Z. Romanov is the history of correspondence chess in Russia and the USSR. Less well known is a book he did on chess in the life of scientists (that is the translation of the Russian title but my copy is not to hand right now); Andrei Sakharov is one of those featured. These books have not been translated into English and probably never will be but give an insight into the subject that you will never get from writers like Spanier, Kasparov, Soltis.

I hope at least some of the above is helpful.
Hi yes thanks for taking the time to add. This is all interesting. Let us all know if your co-authored book 'Red Letters' finds its way back into print. I, for one, would certainly be interested in reading it.

Regarding point one. I couldn't agree more, my initial point was that had such a task been attempted from within an academic framework (I am referring to Soltis' work here) it would not have found its way into print in its present form, having been subject to much refinement and a narrowing of its scope substantially. Those of us who have had to verbally defend proposals and thesis know this all too well. An author writing alone, perhaps not attached to an institute is likely to be denied this process, and may continue their work with critically unchallenged motivations. I see this often in chess, which is a shame because we are talking about history and not chess here; they must be treated quite separately I think.

Regarding point 4. To clarify, it was me who referred to a 'blunder' made by Sosonko. What I was referring to specifically was more his handling of narrative. I don't have the text anymore so I can't refer specifically to the point in question, though I do remember there was a first-person account of an event connected to the birth of Keres which the author could not have witnessed. I assumed the account had come from elsewhere but it wasn't sourced or stated and there was no change in narrative style, which I found confusing.

Regarding authorship, I have to stand my ground on that one. Firstly, it is speech that is assessed in terms of fluency, written English is assessed in terms of competency. For a non-native speaker of English, who as you say is using English as a third or forth language, to write prose with such sophistication, with such mastery of complex and compound sentencing without error would imply he is able to pass the Cambridge Proficiency Exam, which is the only Cambridge exam that tests creative writing for speakers of other languages. This is not the person I have heard speaking several times, the person that cannot go beyond relatively simple sentences without numerous errors. I do not wish to be unkind or disrespectful to Mr.Sosonko here as that is an achievement in itself, my sensitivity is borne out of the fact that I teach English and pick these things up very quickly. The disparity is far, far too great for Mr.Sosonko to be the true author. It may well be the case that he wrote beautifully in Russian and that we have a translation, though I fail to understand why this is not mentioned in the publication. I am aware that his publications are, essentially, a collection of essays written for New In Chess, perhaps the original articles state this and omissions have crept into the publication, I don't know. I have trained students for Cambridge examinations for nearly 15 years, I have taught journalists and Ph.D students that were authors many years before I met them yet cannot write with such creativity, which ultimately, is the tell-tale sign that the writing is from an English speaking person in my opinion. Again, I don't wish to be unkind to Mr.Sosonko here, I am just stating that the authorship of his articles is to some degree questionable.

Regarding point 6. I Agree, and if I may add, the great joy of research is watching that picture take shape, though as Simon has rightly pointed out, 'Soviet Chess' does need to be read more assiduously than other nations' histories. I would be more than happy to purchase the more difficulty acquired texts mentioned in this post, should anyone wish to relinquish them.

Mark

Simon Spivack
Posts: 600
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Books on Soviet Chess

Post by Simon Spivack » Sat Aug 10, 2013 10:45 am

A good post from Tim.
Tim Harding wrote:While we are on propaganda, I believe that the Ukrainians finally intend to bring out something new on Bogatyrchuk (Bohatirchuk when he was in Canada) which may include an English translation of his notorious memoir which has up to now only been available in English as a brief abstract. There was a previous attempt to publish this in Canada or the USA which came to nothing many years ago.
The first two Russian language volumes have recently been published. They are largely devoted to chess. The third, which will be far and away the hardest, will deal with Bohatirchuk's politics and radiology. Bohatirchuk was considered world class in radiology, having won the Barclay Medal in 1955. The notoriety, as Tim hints, relates to the politics. I am hopeful of receiving copies shortly. A friend of mine already has the first two volumes, he has greatly enjoyed what he's seen.

Chess historian Sergey Voronkov, who lives in Moscow and is the author of the "Zhivago of Russian Chess", as the books are titled, has received a great deal of help from many people, including Yakov Zusmanovich (he has done an awful lot of chasing), a Muscovite now resident in California. Sergey was encouraged by Bohatirchuk's daughter, the late Dr Tamara Fyodorovna Eletskaya. She wanted an anti-Soviet Russian, which is certainly true of Sergey, to write the biography. Sergey was given a lot of material by Dr Eletskaya, including private correspondence, photographs and sundry documentation. It's possible that Tim's source was aware that Sergey was in Kyiv in July, hence the suggestion that the biography is of Ukrainian origin, it's not. Both Sergey and Yakov have devoted years to this work.

Incidentally, Sergey co-authored the Russians verses Fischer. I like this book, but, given I could be accused of partiality, I'll leave it to others to express a more considered opinion.

From memory, one émigré wrote that it's not certain whether Russian or Ukrainian was Bohatirchuk's mother tongue. I suspect the former. If so, then his family in Ukraine would ordinarily have used Bogatyrchuk (there being no "h" in Russian). However, given he was Ukrainian, Bohatirchuk is the neutral term. He certainly envisaged a future for Ukraine as being a part of Russia. Bearing in mind the sensitivity of this topic, I don't propose to discuss this here.

I know that Sergey and Yakov are considering an English translation. The difficulty is finding a translator who understands chess, both its history and how to play, in a sense its culture, and who also has a good knowledge of Russian and Ukrainian history. I don't know how technical Sergey is going to be when it comes to discussing the radiology, that potentially would make the translation harder still. ("To write about Fyodor Parfyonovich as first of all a chess player is, in my opinion, the equivalent to writing about Mikhail Yuryevich Lermontov as primarily a painter, or Leonard da Vinci as an engineer" - Roman Dneprov {1924 – 1995}, real name Rurik Dudin, was active in the post-WWII Vlasovite movement.) Note, too, that an English edition is more likely to appeal in Canada than elsewhere in the Anglophone world, for that was where Bohatirchuk eventually settled (an ancient joke runs that Ukraine is the most widespread country in the world. Its rulers are in Moscow, its best men in Siberia and its churches ... in Canada). I can't envisage many copies being sold in the West, which would undermine its commercial potential (the two existing Russian texts already total more than 900 pages).

To give the reader an idea of some of the difficulties facing the author. After the Nazis occupied Kyiv in September 1941, Bahazii became the mayor. He was from the Melnykite wing of the OUN, the Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists, that wing was wiped out by the rival Banderites later in the war. Bahazii was executed by the Nazis in February 1942. As an ethnic Russian, Sergey will be unable to approach Ukrainian nationalist organisations directly with much prospect of success. (To illustrate this, one reason the nationalists never obtained much purchase amongst Dnieper Ukrainians was due to the intense nationalist hatred of Russians.) The interest in Bahazii is because the Melnykites provided the seed money for the Red Cross organisation that Bohatirchuk was persuaded to head. If any reader can provide additional, reliable information about Bahazii and similar topics, I'm fairly confident that Sergey would be delighted to hear from them. Nationalism is a minefield in eastern Europe, and that goes for many historians, academic or otherwise.

Incidentally, Sergey is a friend of Averbakh's, having worked with him for years. They are still in contact. My belief is that the 91 year old Averbakh's mind is as clear as a bell. Averbakh could have revealed more in his autobiography, however, my impression is that he's innately cautious (even so, it's come out that he was a childhood friend of Romanov, the post-war chief of the NTS, an émigré organisation), unlike Sergey; furthermore, given the enduring popularity of Stalin (see, for instance, Anton Antonov-Ovseyenko's obituary in the print edition of Thursday's Daily Telegraph, available online here), going too far would not necessarily appeal to a Russian audience.

Some of the stories about Soviet chess are absurd, such as Botvinnik defying Stalin. Averbakh was quite right to ignore such.

--------------------
<edit>The noun "biography" has been changed to "autobiography", to eliminate a potential misunderstanding.</edit>

Jessica Fischer
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 2:21 pm
Location: South Korea
Contact:

Re: Books on Soviet Chess

Post by Jessica Fischer » Mon May 05, 2014 3:59 am

Good afternoon.


I wish to make a few comments on Andrew Soltis, "Soviet Chess 1917-1991" McFarland, 2000.

Though Mr. Soltis is one of my favorite story tellers, there remains a maddening practice that I believe limits the usefulness of his work for future historians, or just for people who like to be able to check the facts presented in a given work.

Instead of supplying proper notes in the text and a proper footnotes section, Mr. Soltis supplies only a "chapter summary" of his primary sources for each chapter of text. It is virtually impossible to find out with any degree of accuracy where, exactly, a given claim in a chapter actually came from.

I was most disappointed to find that Mr. Soltis' new biography of Mikhail Botvinnik features exactly the same substandard reference system- merely chapter summaries of primary sources with no actual notes/footnotes, and no source page numbers either.

Though his new Botvinnik biography is an excellent read, like his book on Soviet chess, it cannot reliably be used as a source for future chess history work.

It can only be employed as a guide for new research.

This is maddening to me, because all Mr. Soltis had to do was supply proper notes and footnotes in order to have fashioned two very fine chess history works of academic standard. This would have been very easy to do, and yet by not doing it Mr. Soltis has diminished the usefulness of his own work to others.

McFarland is one of the best publishers of chess history. I own many excellent McFarland chess history books which do feature proper references. These books can reliably be cited in future chess history work.

Olimpiu G. Urcan's "Arthur Kaufmann- A Chess Biography, 1872-1938" (McFarland, 2012) is a good example. Mr. Urcan lists his primary sources within the body of his narrative, giving the name, date(s) and page numbers of those sources.

This is the bare minimum academic standard for history writing in general, and it's not that difficult for a writer to do this. Why might it not be the bare minimum academic standard for chess history writing as well?

I wish an editor at McFarland would gently remind Mr. Soltis of this.

At any rate, please don't misunderstand me- I really do love reading the work of Mr. Soltis. It's just that the claims he makes in his books must be corroborated by another source if such claims are reliably to be cited by future work.

Best regards to Mr. Soltis and all,
Jessica Fischer

Gordon Cadden
Posts: 490
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:57 pm

Re: Books on Soviet Chess

Post by Gordon Cadden » Mon May 05, 2014 9:45 am

Amazed that the Forum has found it's way to South Korea. I also collect the McFarland hardback books on chess history.
I agree that corroboration is very important, and sources should be listed with footnotes.
Doubt if Andrew Soltis has discovered the English Chess Forum. You will find him in the U.S.A.
Have protested to McFarland, about the recent introduction of softback volumes to their history collection.

Jessica Fischer
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 2:21 pm
Location: South Korea
Contact:

Re: Books on Soviet Chess

Post by Jessica Fischer » Mon May 05, 2014 10:45 am

Gordon

Thank you for your comments, which I found interesting. What is the downside to McFarland offering paperback runs? I'm curious about that.

I am indeed in South Korea, and this website was recommended to me by my good friend Tryfon Gavriel (kingscrusher).

I have to say I found the moderator who helped me through the registration process to be both affable and helpful. I'm also impressed by the good manners that prevail at this website, and by the august company who I have previously "known" only through their books which I have purchased in the past.

Further on the subject of Soviet chess history, I found Bernard Cafferty and Leonard Barden's "Spassky's 100 Best Games- The Rise of Boris Spassky 1949-1971" Hardinge Simpole Publishers, 2002 (originally published in the UK by Batsford 1972) to be of particular interest. The historical narrative section benefits greatly from Mr. Barden, who donated much rich material from his interviews with Mr. Spassky. We get a fascinating "inside look" into the way Spassky thought, and about his sometimes odd habits- such as "preferring," it seems, to cite games he lost as some of the most interesting at a given event.

I'm appreciative of Hardinge Simpole in general, largely for their run of Harry Golombek's tournament and match books, which are indeed written to a fine academic standard. He dates everything and his primary sourcing is impeccable- he was there! I don't know where he found all the time to write down such wonderful notes, journals, and information at these events whilst simultaneously serving, often, as an arbiter or FIDE representative.
Attachments
Spassky 100 best games.jpg
Spassky 100 best games.jpg (40.6 KiB) Viewed 2657 times

User avatar
MJMcCready
Posts: 3178
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2013 2:30 pm

Re: Books on Soviet Chess

Post by MJMcCready » Mon May 05, 2014 12:04 pm

Jessica Fischer wrote:Good afternoon.


I wish to make a few comments on Andrew Soltis, "Soviet Chess 1917-1991" McFarland, 2000.

Though Mr. Soltis is one of my favorite story tellers, there remains a maddening practice that I believe limits the usefulness of his work for future historians, or just for people who like to be able to check the facts presented in a given work.
I think the point you need to bear in mind is that story-tellers such as Soltis write for the general public and are intentionally loose with details so they can add colour to their writing and sell more. Historians tend to write for each other so that a body of trusted research can emerge. If you've studied history/historiography within academia then you will know it is often a painstaking task offering dry material that is not usually a joy to read.

The difficulty with work like Soltis's is that it tries to pass itself off as being critical, which it most certainly isn't. You only have to read the introduction to see that the author isn't capable of writing such material. There is much to follow which confirms this, as you have pointed out in one or two places.

Titled chess players like to use their name and title as a means of crossing into fields of expertise where they have little or no credentials. Forgetting that their title is utterly worthless outside of chess. Some however, are able to historicize critically -many are already mentioned in this thread- but Soltis isn't one of them. His books are written for the public and bought by the public and there is a world of difference between that and critical/professional history.

Post Reply