Nova Daily - 20 September: Proceeding

Hi!

The BlogChamps Elite 8 results came in. And dear oh dear! I proceeded to the final four!

It certainly came as a surprise to me, and if I recall correctly, the public was very divided on whether Rodgy or I would proceed. Rodgy is a Top Blogger and a NM, which means that he knows how to write well and has reached 2200 USCF once.

Presuming that @Rodgy would continue chronicling his quest for the NM title, I decided not to lock horns with him by picking a similar topic. To me it'd feel like I'd be trying to one-up him, and I'm not in favour of such a practice. It'd make it somewhat easier for the judges to compare them, but that's a lousy reason to do it because it'd mean external influence over the creative process.

I can wholeheartedly recommend @Rodgy's quest reports. I think they're a must-read series: it's a brutally honest personal account of a chess-player's struggles on their way up. Click here to read Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3, and wait with me for Part 4.

Proceeding

As I indicated, I managed to advance to the next round. Of course my own blog wasn't perfect, and there was quite some feedback to it. I'll address this feedback here.

A really creative topic with an outstanding title! The only issue was that the thumbnail didn't fully introduce us to the blog. It wasn't bad, but perhaps not that connected or impactful. The editing was a bit rough in a few places at the beginning. For example, 'allow the slow-burning flames of boredom manifest inside you' should have the word 'to' in front of 'manifest'. Overall, it felt like you could trim a little off, as it was very detailed in places where I questioned the necessity. I always get the feeling that you're afraid of cutting things, but writing is rewriting and it's usually better even if we feel like it's incomplete. However, we never felt bored while reading, so that's positive. Also, it sometimes felt more like 'life connected to chess' than 'chess connected to life'. Nevertheless, this blog felt complete and covered every element that people claim to find boring in chess. Other positives were the excellent quotes and the personal example of N+Ps versus B+Ps. In summary, you chose a really creative topic, and your explanations were excellent, so it was an enjoyable read.

As for the thumbnail: I quite agree. This is an area in which I still have a lot to improve. There are many ways in which to do thumbnails; mine didn't stand out, and I'm happy to concede this.

The non-perfect editing is something that I'll have to take into account better. I don't believe I make that many language errors, but they still creep in if I don't re-read it one more time.

I wasn't exactly sure what the point about Life connected to chess rather than the other way round tried to say, but one of the points that I hoped to make was that the technological landscape of the day coupled with the human tendency to shy away from the hard things in favour of the quick little pleasures also has its manifestation in the way many people treat the game of chess. For the chess-player, chess and life are connected, and during play they reflect the other in some capacity.

Trimming

Trimming is the one thing that repeatedly gets me into trouble. I have a touch of perfectionism in my method: I want to do things thoroughly, I write more than strictly necessary (quelle surprise!), and that may make the material somewhat less suitable for blog format. That doesn't have to matter, but it certainly does if I'm doing blogs. There's a typical writer's advice called "Kill your darlings," which means that at times you have to remove things that don't suit the narrative.

I'd like to make the invalid point here that you don't see the writing process. You only see the end result. Much of what I wanted to write about had already been scrapped at the drawing board. I had already decided to leave it at one or max two examples per subsection, with a bit of extra attention to the London System because it's often the first thing that comes to mind when people say "boring chess." If I did it in the way I wrote Bish, there would've been a subsection on every matter that I only name-dropped.

The reason why the above point is invalid is that while it's true that you don't see the process, you'll always be judged on the end result. It doesn't matter that I shaved off 90% of the superfluous material if the remaining 10% makes it overkill all the same. I once read the line "Communication isn't done when the words leave your mouth. Communication is done when the message enters their brain." And I think that I should be more self-conscious about this.

Connecting this to my blog, I can see the points where I could've cut more material from the final version. The section on the London System could've been much shorter: my club-mate's anecdote, Sofronie's game, and even the two Magnus games could've been omitted almost entirely without infringing on the point I wanted to get across.

I'm working on it, but it's not where it's supposed to be yet. I'll certainly keep this in mind for future entries. Even if I want to turn this idea into its own book (and it can't be a surprise that this is a thought that I've been toying with for a long time by now), I'd have to keep this in mind. Because as I happen to know, the material in books is also heavily edited, and many overkill examples are removed from the final edit.

I've got a new idea for a blog. It's too unsuited to be released as its own entry for BlogChamps or TBA, but I do think that it's fun.