Official Review: Bobby Fischer World Champion for Poiltic...
Posted: 03 Sep 2017, 21:42
[Following is an official OnlineBookClub.org review of "Bobby Fischer World Champion for Poiltical Reasons?" by Julio A Hidalgo.]
1 out of 4 stars
Share This Review
Who doesn't love a good conspiracy theory? Unfortunately, Bobby Fischer: World Champion for Political Reasons? fails to build on an intriguing premise: did the Soviets, the U.S., and all of the individual participants fix the 1972 world chess championship to serve their own political ends?
The elements for an excellent story are all here: the drama of a one-on-one match of wits, a high-stakes moment in the Cold War, and a conspiracy surrounding the intersection of the two. The book starts with a review of Soviet-U.S. relations in the 1950's through the early 1970's and then jumps straight into the tournament, recapping Fischer's games and matches against the Soviet Mark Taimanov, the Danish Bent Larsen, and finally the 1972 championship match with Boris Spassky.
There are a few moments of genuine suspense--most notably, the crucial turning point in the Spassky match. Spassky took the first game, but Fischer resigned the second after becoming upset upon learning there were television cameras in certain places in the room. The match almost fell apart, but Spassky agreed to continue after acquiescing to Fischer's seemingly arbitrary demands before Game 3. Spassky was never the same as the match progressed. Hidalgo wants to explore whether there was more to the story of the gamesmanship and the match as a whole.
But there is not anything more to the story, at least as far as this book can credibly prove. Hidalgo presents his argument mostly by cutting, pasting, and occasionally bolding large portions of other published works that do not share his thesis. These block quotes comprise about two-thirds of each chapter, and are often newspaper coverage of the games or later-printed interviews with those who were present. Hidalgo explains that one must read between the lines to find the truth. But rather than mine those depths directly, each block quote is typically followed by rhetorical, conclusory questions that ignore either the context of the statements or the actual words used.
The rest of the evidence of a fixed match are essentially no different than the pre- and post-game quotes from any modern-day sporting event. Before the match, the challenger is overrated. After the win, the champ is an all-time great. As in all cases, the truth is probably somewhere in between.
The reader imagines Hidalgo insisting "See! I told you so!" over and over again while the reader thinks "So what?"
Aside from the games 2 and 3 intrigue, the primary entertainment comes from a couple of unexpected pictures (including Fischer playing chess against Fidel Castro and Franklin Roosevelt smoking a cigarette with Stalin) and some lively commentary from Fischer's competitors.
But those are not enough to save the book or even the premise. I rate this book 1 out of 4 stars for failing to bring any life to what could have been a compelling story and failing to meaningfully resolve the promise of the title. If the topic interests you, you are better off reading the source materials that Hidalgo copied into his book.
******
Bobby Fischer World Champion for Poiltical Reasons?
View: on Bookshelves
Like RegularGuy3's review? Post a comment saying so!
1 out of 4 stars
Share This Review
Who doesn't love a good conspiracy theory? Unfortunately, Bobby Fischer: World Champion for Political Reasons? fails to build on an intriguing premise: did the Soviets, the U.S., and all of the individual participants fix the 1972 world chess championship to serve their own political ends?
The elements for an excellent story are all here: the drama of a one-on-one match of wits, a high-stakes moment in the Cold War, and a conspiracy surrounding the intersection of the two. The book starts with a review of Soviet-U.S. relations in the 1950's through the early 1970's and then jumps straight into the tournament, recapping Fischer's games and matches against the Soviet Mark Taimanov, the Danish Bent Larsen, and finally the 1972 championship match with Boris Spassky.
There are a few moments of genuine suspense--most notably, the crucial turning point in the Spassky match. Spassky took the first game, but Fischer resigned the second after becoming upset upon learning there were television cameras in certain places in the room. The match almost fell apart, but Spassky agreed to continue after acquiescing to Fischer's seemingly arbitrary demands before Game 3. Spassky was never the same as the match progressed. Hidalgo wants to explore whether there was more to the story of the gamesmanship and the match as a whole.
But there is not anything more to the story, at least as far as this book can credibly prove. Hidalgo presents his argument mostly by cutting, pasting, and occasionally bolding large portions of other published works that do not share his thesis. These block quotes comprise about two-thirds of each chapter, and are often newspaper coverage of the games or later-printed interviews with those who were present. Hidalgo explains that one must read between the lines to find the truth. But rather than mine those depths directly, each block quote is typically followed by rhetorical, conclusory questions that ignore either the context of the statements or the actual words used.
The rest of the evidence of a fixed match are essentially no different than the pre- and post-game quotes from any modern-day sporting event. Before the match, the challenger is overrated. After the win, the champ is an all-time great. As in all cases, the truth is probably somewhere in between.
The reader imagines Hidalgo insisting "See! I told you so!" over and over again while the reader thinks "So what?"
Aside from the games 2 and 3 intrigue, the primary entertainment comes from a couple of unexpected pictures (including Fischer playing chess against Fidel Castro and Franklin Roosevelt smoking a cigarette with Stalin) and some lively commentary from Fischer's competitors.
But those are not enough to save the book or even the premise. I rate this book 1 out of 4 stars for failing to bring any life to what could have been a compelling story and failing to meaningfully resolve the promise of the title. If the topic interests you, you are better off reading the source materials that Hidalgo copied into his book.
******
Bobby Fischer World Champion for Poiltical Reasons?
View: on Bookshelves
Like RegularGuy3's review? Post a comment saying so!
