Readers' Voices

Beth Harmon Has Become Our Chess Darling!

by Josip Asik, editor-in-chief, and our dear readers and subscribers
Published in American Chess Magazine #20

As readers will have undoubtedly noticed, we are featuring a cover page dedicated to The Queen’s Gambit movie for the second time in a row. The Netflix hit series is a phenomenon that is still being powerfully felt throughout the world. No one explains it better than our reader, Bernard Christensen, who has noticed that “Beth Harmon has become our chess darling – so much so that my friends believe she was truly the best chess player of all times.”

It’s the essence of media to be right where the audience’s general interest lies. Having that in mind, I can’t help but admit how shocked I was to realize that some notable chess magazines chose to ignore The Queen’s Gambit theme completely. It reminded me why we started American Chess Magazine in late 2016, tired of seeing so many missed opportunities by institutions and media who continually failed to promote chess as a new lifestyle. While you can play music with the philosophy that it is art for art’s sake, the chess media perspective has to be different. First of all, it’s about undertaking a mission which to be precise is the task of actively influencing a positive development of chess. In short, The Queen’s Gambit is a gift from the gods for all chessplayers.

The principal question is what kind of long-term effect, if any, the series’ global popularity might have on the chess community. While the most accurate answer would be that only time will tell, and yes, although media plays its role to some extent, it shouldn’t stop us from making our projections or expressing our hopes. So we asked readers to respond to a survey containing two questions – how much did they enjoy the series, and what was their gut feeling, whether it has resulted in just a temporary hype/boom/bubble or something that will change our chess environment in a much broader and deeper sense. The number of responses was overwhelming – and a joy to read! I can only regret we don’t have enough space to display all the lucid and engaging answers, so what follows is a kind of analytical summary.

Is it a big deal?

14% of the participants in our survey stated that they hadn’t watched the series yet (at the end of February/beginning of March 2021 – about five months after it was aired on TV for the first time). While most didn’t offer any further explanation, the responses received did vary from those of Dr. Julius Wynn and Brian Deane: “haven’t seen it yet but I intend to,” or “I read Walter Tevis’ book instead,” as with Michael Palmer, Jim Duffy, and David Wagner, and then all the way down to “haven’t seen it and I don’t intend to” from Mat Weiss, which I guess may be construed as meaning something like “I refuse to watch it to the extent that it is not a remake of the Bobby Fischer story. It is pure fiction (aka nonsense),” which was the view of Mark Swartz.

Not everyone can be happy with the series and view it quite negatively. In fact we have 6% of responses that fit into this category. Some readers see it as pretentious and artificial, but the main reason for disliking the movie is because it sends the unwelcome message “take drugs to be good at chess,” as noted by Gene Randolph, and this is also the view supported by Jose Luis Tamayo, Natalia Mathura, and Elliott Winslow.

Others found the series good but pointed out that it would have been even better without its excessive display of drugs, smoking, and drinking, as observed by Diederik Oostindie and Ray Fourzan.

We need to mention a contrary viewpoint by Guy Bendana, who sees the addiction issues as being instrumental in shedding light on another side of the argument: “Chess is a way to abandon bad habits and be better.” Or, as noted by Harsha Bellur: “Beth’s addiction to the magic pills finds a reallife example in Mikhail Tal who was addicted to morphine to lessen the pain during his illness.”

There are 3% of people who are pretty much indifferent towards the series. Yes, they watched it, but it wasn’t a big deal for them. “I thought it was overrated,” says David Abrams.

Book vs TV

8% of participants stated they had read the book and had also seen the series – though there was no specific question from our side to highlight this aspect. It does bear a natural comparison and the majority prefer a good ol’ book, as do William Humphries, Sylvain Lamarre, Tony Schleizer, and Lucien Liboiron. However, David Wagner, Todd Wolf, and Michael D. Buss think that the series was faithful to the book. “It’s a shame that Tevis didn’t live to see his novel brought to life in such a masterful way,” says Suzanne Bilyeu, who entirely agrees with the folks above. Randall Julian goes a step further: “I enjoyed the book first, and the series was even better. It’s more real than when everyone thought that chess was only positive after the Searching For Bobby Fischer craze.”

We have some original input here from John Patrick Dellova: “In 1983, Walter Tevis brought copies of the rough draft novel to the Marshall Chess Club and asked several of us to read them and give him chess opinions. We did so, leaving notes inside the copy we were given and made chess corrections, all of which were ignored. Then I forgot about it till seeing the series. I looked up Walter’s bio online, and it turns out he passed away in 1984, the same year The Color of Money came out as a movie. I guess he died before he read our suggestions or was able to incorporate them into the finished work.”

We are delighted

Finally, 77% of participants genuinely enjoyed the series. They described their experience as “immensely enjoyable; loved it; excellent series”, etc. Some of our readers watched it several times, as did Gary A. Lewis, Michael Sakarias, and Joao Pedro da Cunha Dias.

Others are witnessing the growth of interest in chess that is sparking around them. Indicative is the following real-life experience: “I watched the series with my wife, a person who hates the game, but she was caught by surprise with the story of Beth Harmon. I was able to say – now you understand my passion for chess!” We love to hear this, kudos to the happy couple, Carl E. Galloway and his supportive wife!

Similarly, from the UK, Jeremy Hart reports: “The best thing about it was the number of my non-chess playing friends raving about the series and wanting to talk about chess!”

The time has come that being a chess player is pretty cool, as with the first-hand experience of John Teixeira: “I had at least ten people who played little or no chess ask me about The Queen’s Gambit. They were fascinated by both the game and the story. I have been playing chess for 50 years (yikes!), and this is by far the most interest shown in the game since the Fischer Boom.”

We are pleased to learn that our magazine was a tool to disseminate further interest in chess (and the series), as we heard from Matthew Grinberg, who bought several issues of #19 to give them away. Thanks, Matt!

It’s hype, but...

Now, what about the long-term impact? 20% of participants in the survey believe that the series is hype, but they divide into two very distant groups:

1) “It’s hype and nothing else but a short-lived hype,” believe 7% of our survey participants. Mike J. Papa explains this with a dose of humor: “When the public finds out how difficult it is to achieve mastery in real life, most will quit.” Or, as warned by John Fusto: “I’ve found people are reluctant to get involved in chess because they’re ‘not geniuses’. Nonchessplayers think it’s only a game for the higher educated. This is what needs to be addressed to attract new players.”

2) “It’s probably hype. But if this is hype, make the most of it!” is W. Hoggatt's positive response. There is life after the hype, believes Jessica Hamilton: “Unlike with other trends, this show will and has already introduced people to a well-established and deeply diverse field. Chess allows people to play for fun, be a novice, or become a master and still find both success and room for growth. There’s room for all, which is what’s brilliant because chess has a standing level of prestige and cultural significance that other fleeting trends do not. So I believe that this show will help introduce a lot of people to chess but then chess itself and the community is what will make people want to stay or pursue it.”

Michael Howard looks over the mountain tops: “Some of the hype will die down after a time, but, like chess players, we are glad to have some additional attention on this great game. The money will follow. And platforms like Chess.com, Chess24, and many others will gain additional capital to invest in improving their offerings for core chess audiences.”

Of course, it doesn’t mean that someone is right just by being more optimistic than others, and a realistic approach makes a great deal of sense in certain situations, especially when the bet on a better future will involve expenditure of funds.

For example, Lyle Craver, who serves as national secretary of the Canadian Chess Federation, warns: “I don’t see a long-term impact and think the USCF and other national federations would be making a big blunder in planning new programs based on this.”

Then again, something should be done, and Antonio Galan Alcala is clear about it: “This kind of chess-craze might go very quickly unless some follow-up comes to reinforce the initial success.”

There are members of our community who vividly remember the chess boom following the Fischer – Spassky match of 1972, and they see something similar happening today. Our readers also understand the importance of the COVID issue at the present time but it’s an evenly-matched battle among those who see the success of the series as being based on the state of lockdown, and those who believe that the impact would be much stronger if the series had been screened a year before.

It’s life-changing

The vast majority of our readers, 80%, believe that the phenomenal impact of The Queen’s Gambit will last much longer than momentary hype. “This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity for the chess world,” is Jack Ferreri’s dramatic viewpoint, and he has every right to believe this is so, being a retiree from the world of marketing. Jack has no doubt about the path the chess world should take: “Now’s the time to reignite boomers as they sunset themselves, not to mention kids and COVID-corralled people of all ages.”

A similar opinion we find with Eric Pacini, who is very proactive about how to leverage the momentum. Eric suggests a list of things we should all emphasize: “(1) Historical and cultural context; past, present, future (everyone loves this aspect); (2) Accessible to anyone (look at the men in the park at the end); (3) Intertwined with life’s challenges (death, love, travel, etc.) – crucial; (4) Rich personality types in chess with potential for in-depth character development. (5) Ability to bring in past events; political, social rights, women’s rights, international, etc.” The series will surely bring benefits to the chess community!

The view that we are attracting more players, especially female players, is strongly supported by Richard Winfield Jones, Michael Palmer, Cheryl Lins, Elizabeth Shaughnessy, Jack Williamsen, Wilhelm Figueroa, Ronald Keele, Douglas White, Robert J. McFetridge, Robert Eichelberger, Richard Merrit Reich, Gary Kent, Dr. Robert H. Stauffer Jr., Rickey D. Watkins, Stewart Reuben, and David Wagner.

New respect for female chess players is an aspect that goes well together with the previous views, and is noted by Dan O’Hanlon, Phoebe Moffatt, Leonard Dickerson, and Michael Ruiz.

Cindy Murphy is in a position to see things behind the scenes: “I run a chess program in an urban school district, and to me, one of the most important things was to have a positive female role model on the big screen. There is a scene where she is a little upset that the media was pushing the fact she was female and not just an excellent up-and-coming chess player. Once the pandemic is over and we are back to hosting chess tournaments again, I will be using her story to remind our young female players not to allow anyone to intimidate them with gender stereotypes.”

We also have testimonials that are hard to be challenged, since they are coming from important areas which can spread chess culture further afield:

(School) “As someone who runs a chess tutoring company, I saw a dramatic interest in chess lessons since the release of The Queen’s Gambit. I think the rise of chess interest amongst all age groups is here for the long haul. There is definitely a resurgence of interest in chess – much like the Fischer Era when he was playing against Spassky for the World Chess Championship – we are now in the Beth Harmon Era,” says John Sadoff.

(Army) “I think it is changing the environment in the long run. One of the most significant positive impacts is that our Armed Forces (officer and enlisted) are being introduced to chess to encourage and develop critical thinking, strategy, and tactics,” testifies Dody Bracken whose also admitted that the series renewed his interest in playing chess which had lay dormant since his high school years.

(Library) “I can see increased interest in chess learning and playing. More chess may mean improved personal and international relations and improved life skills,” reports Lauren Decker.

Behind the scenes

It’s great that we can learn from our readers and gain more insights, so here I will present some of the answers that grabbed my attention.

Miles DeCoster writes: “A friend of mine from Chicago’s days, Bill Horberg, was an executive producer and was previously involved in Searching for Bobby Fischer movie. I know The Queen’s Gambit had been on his radar for a long time. What really made the series work for me was the overall excellence of the production, the writing, casting, and acting, the fashion, the art direction, and location choices, the music. So much attention to detail. They, and by they I mean the director, the actors, writers, and producers, also managed to capture much of the drama and intensity that is a chess game without totally over-dramatizing the play or resorting to ‘amazing’ moves which are not realistic at championship levels. But as much as the chess served as a vehicle to carry the plot it was the interaction of the characters and particularly the unfolding of Beth’s development as a player and a woman, as a person with her own demons and dreams that kept us captivated throughout the series.”

Michael Ketrow is suggesting a plan that shouldn’t be overlooked by anyone who is seriously inclined and in a position to influence chess development: “It’s not just hype... but an insight into the chess culture world and how fascinating the game of chess really is to play. There are four phases of chess. The first phase is the beginner chess years for kids. Second is the middle chess years of college and work. The third is the later years for adults who dropped out of chess for a long period of time to raise a family and work and then decided to get back into playing chess again. One of the biggest problems I see here is that a lot of returning adults do not want to play against kids as it makes them feel dumb when they lose against a 12-year-old. The fourth is the later years of chess for adults and seniors who play a slower game of chess as we age but really enjoy the game. Develop a marketing plan that addresses all four phases of the chess life cycle and the game of chess can only grow for years to come.”

Edward Frumkin shares his memories from the NYC chess scene: “They did a pretty good job recreating the atmosphere, including the clocks in the major tournaments. It also helped that some of the characters reminded me of real chess players from the 80s when Tevis wrote the book. Benny Watts reminded me a lot of Walter Browne and there was certainly a lot of Diana Lanni in Beth, but Larry Kaufman as the model for the other guy? Nah! That’s Larry’s ego talking. Diana was largely in New York and Larry in the DC area. I’m not aware of them ever having met, whereas I faced Diana in tournaments multiple times. A major tournament site from the late 70s to 1984 was the Bar Point, one flight up at the northeast corner of 14th Street and 6th Avenue, where backgammon and poker were also on the menu.”

I want to thank everyone who has spent their time responding to our survey. It helps us to understand the path we should take, and reinforce some of the decisions we have already made. We received over 600 surveys, and it’s a treasure for the federations or researchers, anyone who really wants to do something.

Allow me to conclude this summary of the survey with two short responses that say a lot: “Hopefully it allows more people to discover the joys and beauty of our game,” says Alex Robinson.

And, “It doesn’t matter what race or gender you are, you can achieve things if you put your mind to it,” wrote Peter Merrifield, who watched the series – Pete, you’re now a record holder – eight times!