Stefan Zweig's Chess Story

[Traveller]

Hello everyone, we can start commenting on Chess Story by Stefan Zweig on December 7.

[Bonitaj]

Need to start reading it ASAP. Look forward to where your "collective" commentaries will lead me!

[Vigneswara]

It's a really short story, but leaves you nauseated towards the end.

[Traveller]

Thanks for commenting, people, it's very good to see you both on board, but lets avoid discussion of the ending for the time being, since it is quite long for a short story - it's more novella length, really, and in our previous discussions of much shorter stories (A visit by Shirley Jackson, for example), we filled more than one thread, IIRC, and it is still only December 6, if I'm not mistaken. 🧐 Our discussion of the story proper starts December 7.
Vigneswara, nice to meet you! I'm going to comment on what you said about the ending a bit later, after some more people have had a chance to catch up, I hope you understand. :)

In the meantime, let's start with a bit of an introduction: Stefan Zweig, born in 1881, was a highly acclaimed prolific and much-translated Austrian author. As per Wikipedia: As a Jew, Zweig's high profile did not shield him from the threat of persecution. In 1934, following Hitler's rise to power in Germany, Zweig left Austria for England, living first in London, then from 1939 in Bath.

Because of the swift advance of Hitler's troops westwards, and the threat of arrest or worse – Zweig was on page 231 of the "Black Book" - a list of people to be immediately arrested in the event of the German conquest of Britain, Zweig and his second wife crossed the Atlantic to the United States, where they lived for a few months.

On 22 August 1940, they moved again to Petrópolis, a German-colonized mountain town in Brazil.

Zweig, feeling increasingly depressed about the situation in Europe and the future for humanity, was found dead on 23 February 1942, along with his wife.
Both died of a self-ingested barbiturate overdose in their house, holding hands. "I think it better to conclude in good time and in erect bearing a life in which intellectual labour meant the purest joy and personal freedom the highest good on Earth", he wrote before his death.

The Zweigs' house in Brazil was later turned into a cultural centre and is now known as Casa Stefan Zweig.

So, this short novella, Chess Story, was written shortly before Zweig's death, and may well have been partly based on his trip to Brazil.

Btw, this story was made into a German-language film, "Brainwashed" in 1961, and again as a film called "The Royal Game", in 2021.

Any The Queen's Gambit fans? (Either the book or the Netflix series?) I watched the show on Netflix and loved it, but haven't read the book yet.

[Whitney]

I'll be joining in this one. I went through a mini "Zweig phase" several years ago, but but haven't read him since. I've never read "Chess Story" so it's as fresh to me as everyone else not rereading.

I would add one note to the biography. His suicide was a little more complicated than despair for Naziism and humanity. Zweig had suffered from depression for much of his life, and he had a complicated relationship with his homeland and politics, as well as a complicated personal life. He was condemned by many of his contemporaries for saving himself and then failing to speak out about fascism, which one biographer wrote was among the reasons for his fall from grace as a literary darling.

This New Yorker article is a bit more nuanced, for people who want to take a deeper dive, https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/20....

[Traveller]

Whitney wrote: "I'll be joining in this one. I went through a mini "Zweig phase" several years ago, but but haven't read him since. I've never read "Chess Story" so it's as fresh to me as everyone else not rereadi..."

Thanks for that background, Whitney! Looking forward to your continued participation.

Yes, I've been wondering if he wasn't perhaps keenly feeling the loss of that "World of Yesterday" in which he featured quite prominently. Aspects of that does seem reflected in the novella, which we can discuss when we get to a closer discussion of the text.

[Traveller]

...and now that it is officially the 7th, let me kick off the discussion of the text with some short comments:

We see two nested stories contained within the ‘main’ story – the story of Czentovic, and the story of Dr B. ('Nested' meaning the main narrator narrates events told to him by yet another narrator.)

Czentovic’s story is described first, told by ‘an acquaintance’ of the main narrator of the story.

As a matter of interest, although Czentovic is described as an idiot savant, it seems that no real idiot-savant chess players have been known to history. If you do know of any, please share with the rest of us! (An ‘idiot-savant’ is a person who has a mental disability or learning difficulties but is extremely gifted in a particular way, such as the performing of feats of memory or calculation. )

I'd love to know what you guys think of the character sketch of Czentovic. Do you feel that this character feels authentic?
At first I felt sympathy for him as the underdog, but it soon became clear to me that he was not meant to be portrayed as a sympathetic character.

In this story, Zweig actually makes more commentary on the human psyche and human cognition than on the game of chess itself – although he does have quite a lot to say about the game of chess as well.

The narrator says:

But is it not already an insult to call chess anything so narrow as a game? Is it not also a science, an art, hovering between these categories like Muhammad’s coffin between heaven and earth, a unique yoking of opposites, ancient and yet eternally new, mechanically constituted and yet an activity of the imagination alone, limited to a fixed geometric area but unlimited in its permutations, constantly evolving and yet sterile, a cogitation producing nothing, a mathematics calculating nothing, an art without an artwork, an architecture without substance and yet demonstrably more durable in its essence and actual form than all books and works, the only game that belongs to all peoples and all eras, while no one knows what god put it on earth to deaden boredom, sharpen the mind, and fortify the spirit? Where does it begin, where does it end?

Any child can learn its basic rules, any amateur can try his hand at it; and yet, within the inalterable confines of a chessboard, masters unlike any others evolve, people with a talent for chess and chess alone, special geniuses whose gifts of imagination, patience and skill are just as precisely apportioned as those of mathematicians, poets, and musicians, but differently arranged and combined.

Zweig, or his main narrator, comments a lot about the "uselessness" of chess, but is not any competitive game useless? What is the usefulness of baseball or hockey?

And that said, a lot of mathematical theory produces nothing either, and doesn't really "calculate" anything to do with the real world - I often feel like it's a bunch of geeks trying to outdo one another while building their models and formulating their theorems.

I'd say chess is rather more exciting in that there's always the element of the unknown, even when watching a game by people whose style and approach you are cognizant of. There is no single path to winning- there are endless permutations to reach a point where you either achieve 'mate' or a draw. How do you guys feel about that and/or about the usefulness/uselessness of games and/or Zweig's apparent opinions in this regard?

Just by the way, chess is apparently pretty good for humans in a variety of ways, and one of them is that it helps stave off dementia in older people, and seems to have a positive influence on the memory function. As they say, 'use it or lose it'.

[BJ]

I am at a bit of a loss about what I want to say about this story. It certainly compelled me; I stayed up much later than I planned the other night, having foolishly expected just to start it. I feel that I *should* have a lot to say about it. But I have sat down to join this discussion three times now and found nothing to say... so this time I'm just saying nothing (albeit at some length).

I guess one thing, in direct response to Traveller above, I really enjoyed how ambivalent the story was about chess itself and its value. And by extension, I think - as you imply - the value of all games. Not that Zweig is questioning the worth of games, but rather, that he is poking at what their role is, exactly, for people, or for their minds. There is that incredible moment, actually the end of the long paragraph you quote the beginning of, about how it is almost impossible for the narrator to imagine "a mentally unincapacitated person ["eines geistigen regsamen Menschen", which could perhaps better be translated as mentally active or mentally alert, but in any case clearly *not* describing Czentovic!] whose world reduces itself to the cramped monotony of black and white, one who seeks his life's triumphs in the mere to and fro, back and forth of thirty-two figures ..... an intellectual person who, without going insane, directs his mind's full analytic force time and again onto the laughable task of backing a wooden king into the angle of a wooden board!"

To me, this paragraph, which when I came to it felt just like the kind of exhilarating philosophizing that good writers often give themselves the freedom to indulge in, turns out to be a kind of thesis statement, or perhaps testable hypothesis, for the rest of the story.

And of course the fact that Dr B worked for the Austrian royal family - talk about backing kings into corners.

On another note, re: the question of Czentovic's character sketch feeling authentic. Did it feel like an authentic character sketch of a human being? No, not really. Did it feel like the authentic gossip-inflected back story that could have grown up around the character portrayed, in the flesh, as the story went on? Absolutely. Another sign, to me, of Zweig's total control over his narrative.

And there, I guess I found things to say after all :)

[Traveller]

Oh good, someone else posted a cool comment, thanks so much for that, BJ! Yes, about what the French call "idiot-savant", I see Zweig uses a term which is translated to English as "monomaniac". He doesn't seem to see it in terms of brain damage or genetics, as modern research tells us these conditions are usually caused by, but Zweig seems to almost imply that it is by great focus of will that these people build up their singular strength.

BJ wrote: "Another sign, to me, of Zweig's total control over his narrative."
Indeed, yes. Zweig's use of the "nested form" also increases his control over an already tightly controlled narrative.

Thanks to all of your contributions so far, members, the thread is starting to fill out nicely!

… and now we have the first bit out of the way, we can have a look at the linchpin of the story, the Austrian compatriot of Stefan Zweig, Dr B.

But perhaps it might be useful to first have a look the political climate in Austria when Stefan Zweig, who as mentioned before, was Jewish, decided to leave in 1934.

With the unification of Germany in 1871, Austria, a German-speaking country, had not been included. For various reasons, there had been both the desire for unification, as well as opposition to it, but the point is that adding Austria to Germany was not an unheard of thing, but a political bone of contention. By the time Hitler came to power in Germany in 1933, he coveted Austria for its various resources, and of course, Hitler also had imperialist ambitions.

Interestingly, according to some sources, Austria was 80% pro-unification in 1932, due to fierce Nazi propaganda in Austria, but by the end of 1933, about 60% ANTI-unification.

This had to do with the fact that Adolf Hitler was sworn in as the chancellor of Germany on January 30, 1933 upon which the Nazis came into power – although the Nazi party had gained popularity in Austria, many Austrians seem to have disliked the idea of being ruled by the Nazi’s. No wonder - the Nazi’s weren’t always as subtle as sticking to propaganda. Austrian Nazis committed terrorist attacks against Austrian governmental institutions, causing a death toll of more than 800 between 1934 and 1938.

A right-wing government managed to take power in Austria in 1934 which was quite authoritarian and worked towards dampening Nazism in Austria. However, the Nazi’s caused so much damage that it wore the Austrian chancellor, Kurt von Schuschnigg down.

Despite the unpopularity of the Nazi’s, in February 1938 Hitler invited von Schuschnigg to Germany and forced him to agree to give the Austrian Nazis virtually a free hand. Then, on March 12, 1938, Austria was formally annexed by Germany, in a process called the Anschluss (‘the joining’).

To better understand Zweig’s actions and mindset from about 1933 onwards, one has to realize that anti-semitism was quite strong in Austria even before the Nazi’s took power, and before the Anschluss of 1938. If you were to think that there was anti-Semitism in Germany in the 1930s, it seems to have been even worse in Austria.

Prior to the Anschluss, the Austrian Nazi party's military wing, the Austrian SS, was an active terrorist organization. After the Anschluss, Hitler's Austrian and German armies were fully integrated. During the war, 800,000 Austrians volunteered for Nazi Germany in the Wehrmacht and a further 150,000 Austrians joined up to the Nazi party's military wing, known as the Waffen-SS.

The majority of the bureaucrats who implemented the killing of Jews were Austrian. Political scientist David Art of Tufts University notes that Austrians comprised 8 per cent of the Third Reich's population and 13 percent of the SS; he states that 40 per cent of the staff and 75 per cent of commanders at death camps were Austrian.

With such strong anti-Jewish sentiment in his home country, no wonder Zweig felt that he could never return.

[Traveller]

BJ wrote: "And of course the fact that Dr B worked for the Austrian royal family - talk about backing kings into corners."

Thanks for that intro regarding what I wanted to talk about next, BJ, being the enmity between Hitler and the Austrian royal family.

At the center of this enmity, stands a man named Ferenc József Ottó Róbert Mária Antal Károly Max Heinrich Sixtus Xaver Felix Renatus Lajos Gaetan Pius Ignác; or rather:

Franz Joseph Otto Robert Maria Anton Karl Max Heinrich Sixtus Xaver Felix Renatus Ludwig Gaetan Pius Ignatius von Habsburg, third in line to the thrones, as Archduke Otto of Austria, Royal Prince of Hungary, Bohemia, and Croatia.

Imagine writing that on forms that required your full names! 😣🙈

In any case, Otto von Habsburg, as he was called, was a very interesting man. Long story short, his father was the last emperor of Austria and king of Hungary.
Charles, (Otto’s father) the last Habsburg to rule in Austria-Hungary, renounced the right to participate in Austrian affairs of government on November 11, 1918, and in Hungarian affairs on November 13.

The Austro-Hungarian empire was dissolved in April 1919, and the monarchy abolished. For brevity, I won’t go too much into that background, but rather stay focused on the Hitler thing.

Now, in spite of the Hapsburgs having been expelled as the rulers of Austria, the next in line, being Otto, was still popular in many Austrian ranks, and, being an intelligent and able man, held considerable influence. Otto denounced Nazism, stating:

“ I absolutely reject [Nazi] Fascism for Austria ... This un-Austrian movement promises everything to everyone, but really intends the most ruthless subjugation of the Austrian people .... The people of Austria will never tolerate that our beautiful fatherland should become an exploited colony, and that the Austrian should become a man of second category.”

He strongly opposed the Anschluss, and in 1938 requested Austrian Chancellor Kurt Schuschnigg to resist Nazi Germany. He supported international intervention and offered to return from exile to take over the reins of government to repel the Nazis.

Apparently, Austrian Jews were among the strongest supporters of a Habsburg restoration, since they believed the dynasty would give the nation sufficient resolve to stand up to the Third Reich.

Well, I could go on, but I’m sure you already get the idea why Otto and Adolf weren’t the best of pals.

Following the German annexation of Austria, Otto was sentenced to death (in absentia) by the Nazi regime (luckily he wasn't in Austria and never got caught) and as ordered by Adolf Hitler, his personal property and that of the House of Habsburg were confiscated. The leaders of the Austrian legitimist movement, i.e. supporters of Otto, were arrested by the Nazis and largely executed.

Now, Dr B, the Austrian nobleman from our story, had been a banker for Otto’s family, as well as for the very wealthy Catholic church, so he knew were money and property was hidden that the evil Nazi’s wanted to get their hands on.

Not only were the Nazi’s thugs and murderers, they were thieves as well. It is estimated that the Nazi’s stole nearly 120 billion Reich marks – over £12 billion at the time – from German Jews alone. That’s not even counting all the precious art works they stole from museums and galleries, and other money and property they stole from the church and others, and not counting the modern art which they willfully destroyed because dear little Adolf didn’t like modern art.

Dr B also mentions that he worked for the Catholic Church.

Nazi policy towards the Church was at its most severe in the areas it annexed to the Reich, such as the Czech and Slovene lands, Austria and Poland. In Polish territories it annexed, the Nazis set about systematically dismantling the Church—arresting its leaders, exiling its clergymen, closing its churches, monasteries and convents.
Many clergymen were murdered. Over 1800 Catholic Polish clergy died in concentration camps.

Nazi security chief Reinhard Heydrich soon orchestrated an intensification of restrictions on church activities in Germany.

Hitler and his ideologues Goebbels, Himmler, Rosenberg and Bormann hoped to de-Christianize Germany in the long term. Expropriation of monasteries, convents and church properties surged from 1941. Clergy were persecuted and sent to concentration camps, religious Orders had their properties seized, some of the youth were sterilized(!!) Not a pretty picture.

So yeah, for the Nazi’s the Austrian Royal Family and the Catholic Church were fair game, and Dr B is lucky to have escaped with his life, if only with half of his sanity.

[Jonfaith]

One of the crucial tensions of the novella explores the human capacity for focus but a vital need for distraction. The Yugoslav grand master lacks an ability to parse much of life, thus lacking any sort of historical context, he can imagine himself superior based upon his prowess on the chessboard. Likewise the genius of torment that B faces is an environmental/sensory vacuum.

I’m only halfway through the piece which I have read before, though I didn’t realize such until I was a few pages into the narrative.

[Traveller]

Jonfaith wrote: "One of the crucial tensions of the novella explores the human capacity for focus but a vital need for distraction. The Yugoslav grand master lacks an ability to parse much of life, thus lacking any..."

Wonderful, our discussion is heating up! Fearing the sound of my own voice in a vacuum, you guys are stepping up like magic to fill the spaces in the void, thanks so much Jonfaith!
..and like magic and as I had hoped, you've broached exactly the next subject of great importance in this story. Will comment more on that soon.

[Traveller]

Jonfaith wrote: "One of the crucial tensions of the novella explores the human capacity for focus but a vital need for distraction. The Yugoslav grand master lacks an ability to parse much of life, thus lacking any...[...] Likewise the genius of torment that B faces is an environmental/sensory vacuum. "

In the story "The Yellow Wallpaper" a "cure" for female anxiety and depression is described, where the patient is put into solitary confinement under conditions of a strict lack of any kind of extraneous or intellectual stimulation.

It feels rather ironic, that barely thirty years later, a person with acute insight into the human psyche and well-informed about psychiatry (just btw, Sigmund Freud was a fan of Zweig), such as Zweig, clearly describes the deleterious effects of solitary confinement and sensory deprivation upon the human mind.

I'm going to be lazy and cut and paste from my The Yellow Wallpaper review:

A note here on the effects of solitary confinement : Over time, the stress of being isolated can cause a range of mental health problems.

According to Dr. Sharon Shalev, who authored A Sourcebook on Solitary Confinement in 2008, these problems may include: anxiety and stress, depression and hopelessness, anger, irritability, and hostility. panic attacks, worsened preexisting mental health issues, hypersensitivity to sounds and smells, problems with attention, concentration, and memory, hallucinations that affect all of the senses (like seeing moving and creeping things in wallpaper, when it is the only thing you have to look at, maybe?), paranoia, poor impulse control, social withdrawal, outbursts of violence, psychosis, fear of death, self-harm or suicide.

Research indicates that both living alone and feelings of loneliness are strongly associated with suicide attempts and suicidal ideation.

Most studies focus on the psychological effects of solitary confinement. However, psychological trauma and loneliness can also lead to physical health problems. Studies indicate that social isolation increases the likelihood of death by 26–32%.

According to Dr. Shalev’s book, the recorded physical health effects of solitary confinement include: chronic headaches, eyesight deterioration, digestive problems, dizziness, excessive sweating, fatigue and lethargy, genitourinary problems, heart palpitations, hypersensitivity to light and noise, loss of appetite, muscle and joint pain, sleep problems, trembling hands, weight loss. A lack of physical activity may also make it difficult to manage or prevent certain health conditions, such as diabetes, high blood pressure, and heart disease.

So yes, even just loneliness, let alone an acute lack of stimulation to accompany it, can make people pretty ill. In the "Yellow Wallpaper" story, it drives the patient that it was inflicted upon, totally batty and she loses her mind.

So Zweig is writing with surprising insight and acuity about that aspect of the story.

The studies I mentioned earlier was done with regard to solitary confinement in the US prison system, and it found that even solitary confinement 'lite' can have serious negative consequences.

I watched an experiment where a scientist subjected himself to such conditions for, I think 3 days? In this experiment, there was never a variation of light - the electric light was just always on in his small room. He had enough food and drink to last the 3 days, so that he couldn't observe any kind of routine, such as food being passed to him.

The guy very quickly became seriously disoriented regarding the passing of time, and became very anxious towards the last day, because in his mind, more time had elapsed, and he was starting to get paranoid that something had happened, because he couldn't understand why he wasn't let out. It's amazing how much we rely on feedback from our environment.

[Jonfaith]

Wasn't aware of Freud's interest in Zweig, but not surprising given Zweig's fame. I should acknowledge that I regard Zweig's work as entertainments, similar to the distinction Graham Greene made with respect to literature. It also echoes the protagonist of this novella in terms of his approach to chess. Despite the historical context of the author, I have never been able to approach his work with any trappings of the tragic, unlike, say, Babel or Benjamin.

[Traveller]

Jonfaith wrote: "Wasn't aware of Freud's interest in Zweig, but not surprising given Zweig's fame. ..."

Apparently that was a mutual fan club. Apparently Freud praised Zweig's work Twenty-Four Hours in the Life of a Woman, all the while making it very clear that the story was not any kind of psycho-analysis. 😏

It also echoes the protagonist of this novella in terms of his approach to chess.
The protagonist? You mean the initial narrator? (He seems less of a clear protagonist to me since I almost feel Dr B is the secondary protagonist, being more involved in the story actually than the narrator is.) Both of them express opinions re chess.

Despite the historical context of the author, I have never been able to approach his work with any trappings of the tragic, unlike, say, Babel or Benjamin.
I've not read much of Zweig yet, a situation I intend to remedy soon) but yes, Zweig's work does seem to be tightly controlled, lest anybody suspect that there be any trace of autobiography in his works. He was apparently a pretty naughty boy behind closed doors.

[Traveller]

Oh, I forgot to mention! I think the Freud friendship was due to Zweig being a "collector" of friendships with eminent people - one of the things he lost when the Nazi's came in to spoil the broth. He was also a fanatical manuscript collector. So fanatical that he once bought the manuscript of a speech by Hitler.

[Jonfaith]

Sorry, I should have said framing narrator.

Biographically I only know of Zweig in exile. My best friend bought me The Impossible Exile: Stefan Zweig at the End of the World which I enjoyed, though unfairly I appreciated the contrast between his and Thomas Mann's situations.

[Traveller]

Jonfaith wrote: "Sorry, I should have said framing narrator.
Oh, you mean in terms of that he views it (chess) as entertainment?
Hmm, I'll be in a better position to comment once I've read more Zweig, though I'd already be inclined to view him as somewhat more heavyweight than a pure entertainer - though I think you might also in part be referring to the fact that he prefers to keep himself at a once-remove?

Biographically I only know of Zweig in exile. My best friend bought me The Impossible Exile: Stefan Zweig at the End of the World which I enjoyed, though unfairly I appreciated the contrast between his and Thomas Mann's situations.."

Was it your review of The Magician that I read and commented on the other day? Oh wait, I see now that it's a novel, not a straight biography of Mann.

I don't know, I've tried to like Mann, but there's just something about him that puts me off. In any case, bad rap he got with his stint in the USA...

Re biography of Zweig, I've recently acquired Three Lives: A Biography of Stefan Zweig, but haven't had a chance to read it yet.

I think both Mann and Zweig were very complex people with layers to them! :)

[Jonfaith]

I intended "framing narrator" as it is his experience in the novella as listener and participant which frames/links the myriad narratives within.
Likewise I should read more of Zweig's fiction. we own several of his novels and his famed memoir. Alas I largely know him from his biographies: Erasmus. Balzac and Marie Antionette.

[Traveller]

Jonfaith wrote: "I intended "framing narrator" as it is his experience in the novella as listener and participant which frames/links the myriad narratives within.
..."

Good to put that out on the discussion. This story is indeed a very nice example of the "nesting" technique with primary and secondary narrators where the "overall"or "framing" narrator frames the story, and as you explain so well, links and frames all the narratives that form the story as a whole.

We might be posting a bit at cross-purposes here, missing the other person's last post every time, but no worries, it's good that we have stuff to chat about! 🧐

[Jonfaith]

While I should be working (smile) I have been considering the unchanging absence of B's hotel room and whether it represents either a dearth of possibility/change; or whether, it is similar to the sixty four spaces of the chessboard which we traverse through a set of limited moves?

I like nesting, it affords something organically warm to a sequence.

[Nilanjana]

Traveller and Jonfaith, I began reading this book too (thanks to Traveller for it)

I am loving it Czentovic : ) so much especially the fact that he is an INTROVERTED genius : )

[Traveller]

Hello Jonfaith and Nilanjana, apologies, but silly old Goodreads never notified me of your posts. Glad you're liking it, and interesting thoughts!

Well, it might be time to start adding our opinions on the ending and on the story in general. So,

Uncovered ENDING SPOILERS ALERT:

Vigneswara wrote: "It's a really short story, but leaves you nauseated towards the end."

Indeed, Vigneswara! (view spoiler)[For we find out that although Dr B has the innate ability to beat Czentovic every time, in a rather strange twist of irony, when Czentovic notices that Dr B is very impatient he exploits that fact by stalling, and Dr B's very active mind causes him to go into a manic state similar to when he experienced his breakdown while being held by the Nazis.

I also find it ironic that the framing narrator had initially so deeply underestimated Czentovic's underhanded abilities to coldly exploit a situation to his own advantage. He had initially, based on what his friend had told him, thought of Czentovic as a singleminded oaf, as nothing better than an overperforming village idiot, but clearly the man's shortcomings lies rather in the area of how to make an emotional connection with people, which I suppose could possibly put him in the autism spectrum.

There have been suggestions that Zweig equated Czentovic's cold, callous modus operandi with how the Nazis approached things, and I personally can't really fault that idea. (hide spoiler)]

[Nilanjana]

Traveller wrote: "Hello Jonfaith and Nilanjana, apologies, but silly old Goodreads never notified me of your posts. Glad you're liking it, and interesting thoughts!

Well, it might be time to start adding our opinio..."

Will finish and come back and comment on this, Traveller : )

You needn't apologise : )

[Bonitaj]

Hey everyone.... getting there. so enjoying it! I'm up to where Czentovic has lost his first game and the main protagonist has just found out how Dr.B. acquired his chess prowess. I've tried not to follow your notes to the end Traveller, so thanks for the Spoiler alert.
More later.

[Traveller]

Bonitaj wrote: "Hey everyone.... getting there. so enjoying it! I'm up to where Czentovic has lost his first game and the main protagonist has just found out how Dr.B. acquired his chess prowess. I've tried not to..."

Oops! Sorry Bonitaj. I've now covered the spoilers. You can just click on the green link when you feel ready to view them. Glad you're enjoying it! :)

[Amy (Other Amy)]

*stumbles in late with no Starbucks*

I have not much to add; my experience of the story was simply one of incredible sadness. I will say that Czentovic largely seemed superfluous to me; he in no way actually matters to the point of the story, which is (view spoiler)[that B never really escapes his captivity in his mind, as he is unable to do the only thing he now loves without unravelling his very self (hide spoiler)]. I will also say that the final confrontation between the two reminded me very much of White Fang fighting the bulldog in the dog fighting ring, with much the same result and emotional impact.

[Traveller]

Amy (Other Amy) wrote: "*stumbles in late with no Starbucks*

I have not much to add; my experience of the story was simply one of incredible sadness. I will say that Czentovic largely seemed superfluous to me; he in no w..."

You remember your Jack London well, Amy! I used to love WF and Call of the Wild as a child - been wanting to re-read and you've tipped me towards White Fang, especially since I don't remember the scene you're referring to.
I found Czentovic added a bit of flavor to the story at large. Yes, a sad situation - some say hell resides in the human mind and I can quite understand why.

[Traveller]

Bonitaj wrote: "Hey everyone.... getting there. so enjoying it! I'm up to where Czentovic has lost his first game and the main protagonist has just found out how Dr.B. acquired his chess prowess. I've tried not to..."

Hi Bonitaj, I hope this helps you to re-discover the thread. :)

[Bonitaj]

Excellent! indeed... I'm back "in".... just not today.
Thanks for your trouble.

[Amy (Other Amy)]

Traveller wrote: "You remember your Jack London well, Amy! I used to love WF and Call of the Wild as a child - been wanting to re-read and you've tipped me towards White Fang, especially since I don't remember the scene you're referring to."

White Fang was one of my formative books, most definitely. I probably read it way too young to properly appreciate, but London writes so vividly that certain pieces of it are always with me. I remember I liked it much better than Call of the Wild when I was younger, but I did reread Call of the Wild at some point (college maybe?) and it was better than I remembered. White Fang will always be my favorite London, I think.

Traveller wrote: "I found Czentovic added a bit of flavor to the story at large. Yes, a sad situation - some say hell resides in the human mind and I can quite understand why."

Agree completely. Czentovic maybe adds an especially awful atmosphere to the scene, the feeling of being mocked while wresting with the inner adversary.

[Traveller]

Amy (Other Amy) wrote: "White Fang was one of my formative books, most definitely. I probably read it way too young to properly appreciate, but London writes so vividly that certain pieces of it are always with me. I remember I liked it much better than Call of the Wild when I was younger. "

Ah, I had the opposite chronology. My father bought me a box full of "children's classics", which included books like Alice in Wonderland, Little Women, Tom Sawyer, Black Beauty, etc. and "The Call of the Wild" was included in the collection - so that had been my first contact with the work of Jack London, and interestingly, I do remember more of the adventures of Buck, including the very ending. From what you say, I definitely think WF will be my re-read then. :)

[Nilanjana]

I resumed my reading of this book and I have to say, I love the flow in the author’s writing!

It’s very well-written !

[Amy (Other Amy)]

The writing is really excellent, I agree.

[Nilanjana]

Yes Amy 🙌🏻!

[Nilanjana]

The story is cracking me up! 😛

I didn’t think I would begin enjoying the story at some point. I got really amused reading these—>

“ It's no disgrace for “third class players” to get beaten by a fellow such as Czentovic.” It amused me to notice how deeply my innocent “third class players” remark had wounded McConnor's pride. But…..”

[Nilanjana]

Traveller, I am really grateful for the Stephen Zweig history that you shared above. Very intriguing!

These lines gave me the shivers—->

“ "I think it better to conclude in good time and in erect bearing a life in which intellectual labour meant the purest joy and personal freedom the highest good on Earth"”

He writes really well! A gifted writer!

[Nilanjana]

Also, I don’t really like Czentovic. Such a show-off!

[Traveller]

Nilanjana wrote: "Also, I don’t really like Czentovic. Such a show-off!"
Very much so. The kind of person a reader loves to hate!

Nilanjana wrote: "These lines gave me the shivers—->
“ "I think it better to conclude in good time and in erect bearing a life in which intellectual labour meant the purest joy and personal freedom the highest good on Earth"”

Indeed, Nilanjana. No doubt Zweig is giving some kind of explanation, the reasoning, that lay behind his suicide.

[Nilanjana]

Yes Traveller! I found it very intriguing really! And I have never something like that before!

And yes, that Czentovic is way too arrogant! I don’t like him at all! But it also shows the author’s expertise in creating a character who would irk us to this degree! 😊

[Nilanjana]

I finally have the time to come over and comment on this novel. I must thank Traveller for recommending this book to us.

This novella was an absolutely wonderful read! I loved everything about it, from the narration, the characters, and the plot.

I have played Chess only once in my life and yet came to love this novel SO much. I loved the story so much that I re-read it many times and will continue to, I believe!

The writing is high-quality and very unique, and free of unnecessary verbiage.

Although Czentovic is arrogant, his character sketch was a joy to behold. I loved it very much. It intrigued me to the core!

There were places where I laughed a lot.

I felt mesmerized to read about the psychological re-ordering that struck the main character to enable him to cope with his confinement!


Also, there were many times when I recalled Traveller's introduction of the author of this novel. Many-a-times when I read the book, I kept going back to the premise on which it was written. It felt unbelievable when I tried reconciling the harshness of it with the virtuosity of the penned-hands I was treating myself to!


I feel grateful to have read this book and will remember it for a long time! : )

If it interests anybody, here is my review of the book--> https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

[Amy (Other Amy)]

It was a tremendously beautifully written book about a horrifying reality. Thanks for sharing your review, Nilanjana.

[Nilanjana]

You are welcome, Amy!