Mention GM Nigel Short and we think grandmaster, world championship challenger, coach, author and journalist. Some of us will also associate him with the French Defence, an opening that he used to play regularly many years ago. But away from the chess board, this man is also very well known for his witty reports and articles on chess. Edwin Lam interviews the chess writer.
Bisik-Bisik with GM Nigel Short
By Edwin Lam Choong Wai
As a chess player, Short, the England number two, is best known as the man who challenged Kasparov’s throne back in 1993. En route to his world championship summit against Kasparov, Short defeated no less an opposition, than the ex-World Champion, Anatoly Karpov, in a match. Besides his illustrious individual career, Short is also a constant feature in the English national team having represented them to countless Chess Olympiads, Euroteams and World Team Championships.
Away from the chess board, this man is also very well known for his witty reports and articles on chess – a far cry from the other writers who are content with a drier approach to chess journalism. His writings have appeared on the pages of The Sunday Times, The Daily Telegraph, The Daily Mail and The Spectator.
While his competitive chess career may have been very well documented, the same cannot be said about his career as a chess journalist and writer. In this Bisik-Bisik column, let us sit back and read more about Short, the chess journalist.
Edwin Lam: Do you consider yourself, first and foremost, a chess player and only then a chess journalist? Or, vice versa?
Nigel Short: I have always considered myself to be first and foremost a chess player. This was true even in 2005, when I hardly played at all and was dependent upon writing for my livelihood.
Edwin Lam: When was your first foray into chess journalism?
Nigel Short: I am not quite sure of the answer to this one. I was asked to fill in for Peter Clarke at the Sunday Times, during a four week period of his convalescence. I think I must have been about 18 at the time. My contributions, without being dire, were forgettable.
Edwin Lam: What inspired you to be a chess journalist?
Nigel Short: I really came into journalism by accident. I was a very poor student, having been thrown out of two schools, for low academic achievement, by the age of 17 and thus had a massive inferiority complex. My friend Dominic Lawson, however, totally against prevailing opinion, regarded me as a smart and capable individual, and asked me to do a review of Kasparov and Trelford's "Child of Change" for the Spectator, for which he was working at the time. Dominic liked my piece, as, more importantly, did the Literary Editor of the magazine. I would say that this was the moment when I first began to believe I could become a good writer.
Edwin Lam: When you started as a chess journalist back then, what were your goals like? Did you dream to one day be reporting for the chess public around the world?
Nigel Short: My first regular journalistic job was when I became chess columnist for the Daily Telegraph. I didn't really have ambitions per se: it was just a very useful source of income. I guess it took me a little before I really found my stride.
Edwin Lam: Could you please share with us as to what your journey was like, over the years, as a chess journalist?
Nigel Short: My best work was done during the ten years I wrote for the Sunday Telegraph. Of course, not everything I submitted was a masterpiece, but I managed to produce sharp and witty columns at fairly regular intervals. To be honest, I would not mind seeing them in an anthology. I was also very pleased with the overwhelmingly positive response to my San Luis World Championship reports for ChessBase. The website received literally hundreds of e-mails praising my reports. It is quite obvious that the vast majority of chess fans don't care for masses of analysis: they want excitement, flavour and good description. Almost everyone I know possesses a volume or two of Kasparov's classic "My Great Predecessors" but I have found again and again that people simply have not read it. At some point they become intimidated by the labrythine variations. I think there is a moral there.
Edwin Lam: In your opinion, what was the role of a chess journalist back then?
Nigel Short: Chess journalists should inform and entertain.
Edwin Lam: The Internet emerged as a great force in the 1990s. In your opinion, how has the Internet changed the face of chess journalism?
Nigel Short: It has made it much easier to cover events.
Edwin Lam: And, how has the Internet changed the role of a chess journalist in the past 15 years?
Nigel Short: Nowadays everyone is a big genius sitting on his fat arse in front of the computer watching Rybka and Fritz whirring away. Therefore journalists who just copy and paste cyber evaluations don't produce anything worthwhile. I am certain there is a huge unmet demand for humorous, instructive, amusing, quality writing.
Edwin Lam: Over the past few years, very many chess players have also started blogging. How do you see the role of bloggers being different from that played by a chess journalist?
Nigel Short: I have not given enough thought to this question.
Edwin Lam: Thank you for this interesting conversation.
Courtesy: Chessbase
If you liked the article kindly Digg it, Stumble it, Add to Technorati, bookmark it and please consider subscribing through "Subscribe by Email" and have articles & a Everyman Chessbase eBook delivered right to your inbox! OR "Subscribe to Chess Blog Feed" in a Fead Reader of your choice OR Subscribe to "SMS Alerts" & Get Article Headlines & Updates delivered to your Mobile Phone for free.Click here to Subscribe to FREE email updates from "Attack The King", so that you do not miss out anything that can be valuable to you !!
0 comments:
Post a Comment