Do you read chess-based Fiction?

Sort:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov
ChessAuthor wrote:

@ Lyudmil, Well, movies aren't really the point. Can you not name any significant novels within the last 100 years?

I have VERY BIG difficulties with this one. happy.png

Would like that a name comes to my mind, but it just does not.

Well, Asimov, Foundation, the downfall of the Earrth into the abyss of timelessness and creative sterility.

ChessAuthor
VicountVonJames wrote:
I find many chess novels

1. Rather preachy about moves and games

Or

2. The author doesn't no squat about chess.

I'd rather read reports of actual games that are either pure moves or are written in a romanticised style, but still educational and completely factual.

I agree with you! This is exactly what I was asking, thank you. I think I'm on the right track then with my writing. I don't force feed the reader chess and I had one reviewer say "the chess parts are accurate." happy.png If you decide to read my books, I'd like to hear what you thought. 

ChessAuthor

@Lyudmil_Tsvetkov, How about, Lord of the Rings, To Kill a Mockingird, Snow Falling on Cedars? Or authors like Raymond Chandler, Michael Chabon, Robert Heinlein, Philip K Dick and so many others?

 

Lyudmil_Tsvetkov

Too insignificant story.

Unrealistic.

Novels are there to teach and edify, if there is not a new idea and the story is insignificant, what can you teach.

Tolkien wrote it earlier.

Moriarty_697

Fiction is definitely not dead.  Sure, I love a lot of older authors but there are many many younger writers doing great things in fiction.  As for chess fiction, I found a copy of Tevis' The Queen's Gambit not long ago and intend to read it soon.  Other than that, I haven't read much chess fiction.  I'm not opposed to it. Just haven't gotten around to it yet.

Rocky64
ChessAuthor wrote:

So, does having chess as part of a story make you, as a player, want to read it, or avoid it? 

Having chess as part of a story definitely helps. I think of chess content as a bonus in fiction, where the basic things like plot and characters need to be good, of course, and if the chess part seems authentic on top of that, then great!

Unfortunately I don't seem to have the time for book fiction these days. Pre-internet age, I had read some famous chess novels like The Defense by Nabokov and The Queen's Gambit by Walter Tevis.

1e4

I'd like to read it, I just haven't found any yet (but this thread is ripe with options). 

I ended up reading the Lewis trilogy, after stumbling across it when looking for chess books.  But it wasn't really chess related at all. Which was disappointing. 

ChessAuthor

Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:

Too insignificant story.

Unrealistic.

Novels are there to teach and edify, if there is not a new idea and the story is insignificant, what can you teach.

Tolkien wrote it earlier.

Lyudmil, of course you are entitled to your opinion, but I think many many people would disagree that To Kill a Mockingbird is an insignificant story! As for realism and teaching, creating a different world (which some may consider inrealistic) in order to get your story across is exactly what novels do. Don't underestimate the entertainment value of a novel, it can spark imagination! And, by the way, Lord of the Rings was published in 1954, well within your century of dead fiction.

GWTR

Find the script to this 1992 American thriller film if you want to read great chess fiction!

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knight_Moves_(film)

 

 

Lyudmil_Tsvetkov
ChessAuthor wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:

Too insignificant story.

Unrealistic.

Novels are there to teach and edify, if there is not a new idea and the story is insignificant, what can you teach.

Tolkien wrote it earlier.

Lyudmil, of course you are entitled to your opinion, but I think many many people would disagree that To Kill a Mockingbird is an insignificant story! As for realism and teaching, creating a different world (which some may consider inrealistic) in order to get your story across is exactly what novels do. Don't underestimate the entertainment value of a novel, it can spark imagination! And, by the way, Lord of the Rings was published in 1954, well within your century of dead fiction.

But written before the War.

Yeah, some novels tickle your imagination.

But none inspires your feelings to the extent that you are ready to change the world.

It is the same old world, no inspiration, no change.

Btw., as of late, even science fiction masterpieces died away.

ChessAuthor

Not sure what war you're referring to, but WWII ended in the 40s. As for the rest of your statements, to each his own. All art is subjective.

ChessAuthor

Rocky64 wrote:

ChessAuthor wrote:

So, does having chess as part of a story make you, as a player, want to read it, or avoid it? 

Having chess as part of a story definitely helps. I think of chess content as a bonus in fiction, where the basic things like plot and characters need to be good, of course, and if the chess part seems authentic on top of that, then great!

Unfortunately I don't seem to have the time for book fiction these days. Pre-internet age, I had read some famous chess novels like The Defense by Nabokov and The Queen's Gambit by Walter Tevis.

@Rocky64, Thanks for your feedback. I know what you mean in terms of time, I thought the Internet was supposed to save time! 🤔

ChessAuthor
[COMMENT DELETED]
Piscivore

As much as I hate to blow my own horn--actually, this doesn't bother me a whit, but I do dislike being caught outright while doing it--I have one chess short story to my credit, "Retrograde Analysis," published in the December 1987 issue of Analog.  Without giving too much away, I can tell you that the hero is Emanuel Lasker, visited by a time-traveler from the 21st century on the eve of leaving for his title match with Capablanca.  If you're interested, look the story up.  I only hope that in my portrayal of Lasker, I did him justice.

If you read it, I would be very happy should you care to e-mail me with your thoughts.

Lyudmil_Tsvetkov
ChessAuthor wrote:

Not sure what war you're referring to, but WWII ended in the 40s. As for the rest of your statements, to each his own. All art is subjective.

Did not Tolkien write it in 43?

I am happy, if you could enjoy art, but I can not.

In order to write a story and create a piece of art, you should have something real happening, something new, something original, inexperienced. As the human race has more or less already experienced everything in terms of emotions, there are no new stories to write.

That is why I took to beating SF.

 

ChessAuthor
dntfeedthemnkys wrote:

I'd like to read it, I just haven't found any yet (but this thread is ripe with options). 

I ended up reading the Lewis trilogy, after stumbling across it when looking for chess books.  But it wasn't really chess related at all. Which was disappointing. 

@dntfeedthemnkys, I was planning on reading the Lewis trilogy as well for the same reason. Thanks for the heads up. I'll probably still read it someday, but without the chess expectation.

ChessAuthor

Thank you everyone for your feedback. Any other thoughts?