In chess you get letters before your name if you do well. CM, FM, IM, GM for example. Even though they are worthless outside their field, they are nonetheless a source of great pride for a great many and rightly so.
If you enter into academia instead, you also get letters but they usually come after your name -or at least they used to-, with certain exceptions such as Dr. Given that they are academic in nature, and embolden numerous transferable skills, which sounds weightier in terms of value? Should we frown upon titled players given that we have more letters than they do or should they frown upon us for having letters after our name and not before? Does anyone really care?
Which seem more cherished and why? What does that tell you? It seems to me that academics care much less about letters after their name as they tend not to be boastful about this whereas titled chess players are rightly proud of their title (even though its worthless outside of chess). Within chess, though, it is clearly advantageous on a number of levels, and generally speaking, holds greater importance than current rating, well for weaker Grandmasters most certianly, less so for the so-called SuperGMs. Whatever the answers may be amongst the very great many who do or do not play our beloved game the answer may be found in Nietzsche’s maxim ‘live by your passions’, which according to him, we all should be doing (note: not ought to be doing as that implies moral obligation which is not the point here).
Advice: should you encounter a titlted player and they point this out with statements such as I am a GM, you can always counter by saying something like, ‘no you are not, you are you, and whenever you bypass the normative aspects of what something is you invaribaly end up saying very little about it’.
As I am sure you know, there is snobbery in chess, and to be forewarned is to be forearmed. Ultimately though, everyone gets on just gets on fine and many refrain from defining themselves in terms of their titles, which to be fair, are identity-conferring.
All that aside, enjoy your chess. (ah, yeah and this just be me wanting to write again even though I don’t have much to say)
…eventually I will return home, its only a matter of time…
…when I read Homer’s Odyssey in Summer 1993 I distinctly remember when Odysseus returned home there were many unwelcome suitors at his home, gaff much to his dismay…
…I wonder not if I will feel the same but I am unsure what will come of it all…
…technically speaking I am almost inactive and have been so for some time…
…I have become quite unused to competitive chess, whether I will resume playing is something I am yet to ponder…
…it is undeniably true in all eventuality I will resume some responsibility although the extent of that is likely to remain undetermined until my presence is felt…
…no doubt I will get shanghaied into something or other…
…1997 seems like a long time ago now…
…what’s most important of all is that it is inevitable, its just a matter of time…
…I had thought I would not return to classical chess but more recently realized, it is infrequent tournament chess pushing that agenda and not contempt for classical chess, more so being out of form through lack of practice…
….once a dream that I would return home to run my old club and county is, given the distinct lack of competition, not just a dream and more so a probability than a possibility…
…I cannot say when this will occur as it is contingent on other factors more pressing…
…as Arnie once said ‘I’ll be back’…just not quite sure how I feel about it yet.
…ah well
…time will tell…
…above all else it must remain the case that those of us within Bedfordshire should continue to enjoy league, country, and national chess…given that theres always someone better than yourself, lets see how it pans out…perhaps it’s just a dream…
…on what this site initially became…on what this site is now becoming…on what this site cannot become…
On what this site initially became…
…once upon a time, the chess-related musings of an adrift academic were bound playfully and electronically in this online journal of sorts. They grew and grew as the decade did too. I kept on because I love to write whether I had much to say or not; therefore, being read by others was usually of little or no importance, comparatively speaking. Content was based on personal thoughts and experience on various topics with no intended audience borne in mind. With topics broadening, my own take on things always shaped the narrative I constructed: I often thought I was insightful but never that I was right. Sometimes imagination gave rise to originality: and of that I have always remained proud. I often introduced humour, believing that I am funnier than I really am. Sometimes, I found my own style antithetical to the conservatism I believe chess is plagued by -oftentimes that has put a gracious smile on my face… .
On what this site is now becoming…
…this site is now becoming a collaboration of chess in Bedfordshire: much more so of the past than the present -that has become the dominant trend. I document the history of chess in Bedfordshire as much as I can, and as time has passed I have become more thorough and resourceful. However, I am not a trained historian as my background lies principally in philosophy but yes it is true I did study some modules on history as both an undergraduate and a post-graduate too; furthermore, I have trained myself up, particularly in terms of postmodern history. Since 2015, I have only read history and historiography as well as those philosophers who have been so influential on postmodern history, such as Nietzsche (whom I once wrote a 19,000 word dissertation on, entitled: Can the Will to Power be Found in The Birth of Tragedy?), also Richard Rorty and Foucault and I suppose certain structualists such as Claude Levi-Strauss too. Regarding postmodernism, mostly I keep to Hayden White, Keith Jenkins and Alan Muslow.
Some friends and former playing partners back home describe me as the ‘go to guy’ for the history of chess in Bedfordshire. This compliment says more about the lack of interest in the subject than my own endeavour. As mentioned, I am too adrift from academia to feel chuffed. Rather. I tend to lament that my historical research, like my chess, just isn’t what it should be. Even though I may well have a broad understanding of Bedfordshire chess history courtesy of the volume of research put into it, all of which began in 2014, this is not something I am particularly proud of. Nonetheless, out of courtesy compliments are graciously received. If the truth be told, I just see it as my job and only that – after all someone’s got to do it and no one else is that interested!
Amongst the many others, I have created three categories: ‘Bedfordshire Chess’ and ‘History of Bedfordshire Chess’ and ‘Luton Chess Club’. This website is slowly moving towards a consolidation of those (all of which can be found in one of the toolbars to the right).
On what this site cannot become…
…I like to be both creative and amusing when I can be, factor in that playfulness has been an ever-present factor, the content of this site should be thought of as multifarious. It could be said I continue to enjoy undermining the conservatism I believe chess is underpinned by even after all these years, and often try to use humour to do it still, believing I have got better at it. Consequently, despite the general direction its going in, this site cannot only be about Chess in Bedfordshire and nor will it be. It may become noted for that yes -in fact that’s been the case for years already even by established historians, archivists, and whoever else. External factors aside, this site is titled McCreadyandChess. I cannot, nor will I not, remove my own personal thoughts and experiences of chess from the posts of this site -especially if I think they are funny or original for they constitute my writing at its very, very best. In addition, the number of categories alone tells you that breadth of content is important to me. I am proud of my site, it is identity conferring and that is how it shall stay -end of story. All you really have are: ‘Some thoughts on the beautiful game’, which, incidentally, just happen to be my very own; nothing more, nothing less, take of it whatever you please… .
A side note on how to read old Tom Sweby's columns
Not perhaps, but quintessentially, Old Tom Sweby is best thought of as a passionate devotee to the newspapers he wrote for. He was well read and knowledgeable of the Bedfordshire chess scene and well beyond, given that he was the president of the S.C.C.U. once upon a time. He was generally well-respected and rubbed shoulders with many, if not all, of those eminent within British chess circles. It would, however, be a critical mistake to see his column is primary source material entirely. That it is not. You will also find secondary source material quoted too, and the reliability of that is not quite as Tom hoped. Given that he wrote for decades, this is to some degree inevitable, and after all we are all prone to error whether we realize it or not. Thankfully, with regards to old Tom Sweby, they are infrequent and for the most part old Tom continued to document events and developments in the Bedfordshire league from the get go as best he could but, of course, everything lies open to interpretation. Despite this, and generally speaking. this does indeed make him informative and thus worth reading. Dare I say his columns constitute a narrative describing the latest developments, match reports and changing nature of the Beds league...he knew his audience and wrote according. This manifested itself over decades but brevity was always in play courtesy of the restictions imposed by writing a column. Should you wish to read a in instrumental figure of the Beds' league post WW2, you are quite welcome to peruse what has been posted here... . :-) I should, however, point out that as the decades wore on he gradually moved on away from narratives concerning the Bedfordshire league towards affairs both historical and international. The reasons for this are multifarous, old age was a predominante factor presumably, however, the bottom line is with regards to how the Bedfordshire chess scene developed post WW2: old Tom Sweby is your go to guy. He wrote more about chess in Bedforshire than anyone else did but given he was a Lutonian and writing for a Luton newspaper there is both bias and greater coverage of his hometown than the rest of the county.
Gallery
I’m either 10 or 11 here
1982, myself versus Brian from Sunderland.
At the Thai Junior chess championships. My daughter of course.
Pattaya 2011
2011
Thai Junior Championships
2008
2011
Around 2011
2011
Pattaya 2009
2011
Kuwait 2008
2012
2012
2011 BKK Chess club
2011
2011 Thai Open
2011 Thai Open
2013 approx
Around 2014
2010
2012
Around 2011
2011
2011
2013
Around 2011
Around 2011
2020
2011
2008
2011
2013 or thereabouts
2010
2017
2014?
2010
2024
2024
2024
To add comments, please see the bell at the top of the page.