The Moves That Matter by Jonathan Rowson

[Keith Arkell]

Some interesting points in the 'second' (or third?) life of this thread.

Keith, is this the John Hawthorne you are referring to?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hawthorne

If you compare that article with the one on Jonathan Rowson (putting aside for the moment any concerns about Wikipedia as a whole, and using it merely as a starting point), you see the difference between a classical 'academic' career and the career (or life choices) path taken by Rowson.

Yes. I know John Hawthorne extremely well, to the point where we still bestow on each other that schoolboy phrase of 'best friend'. I also consider Jonathan Rowson to be a friend - certainly more than an acquaintance, anyway. And I think I have something to offer by comparing the two.

JH expresses his ideas and concepts in a very down to earth way, and does so effortlessly, and in such a way that Joe Bloggs has a reasonable chance of knowing what he is on about. Of course, in the case of some deep subject matter this is simply impossible for anybody to do; but I would say that the difference between the style of the two of them is that it always 𝒇𝒆𝒆𝒍𝒔 to me that JR's prose is bloatedly there, in your face, the words appearing bigger than that which they were intended to convey. And John doesn't do that, when he can get away with not doing so.

[MJMcCready]

Yes you do have a point there. There are many parts of the moves that matter where Jonathan clearly writes with much intensity and inserts concepts and ideas which are deep and complex and alter the narrative quite dramatically. I get the feeling he pushes himself very hard when he writes and sometimes that gets the better of him as he is also more than capable of putting things in simple terms that his readership can glide over effortlessly.

[MJMcCready]

Some interesting points of note, one of which made me chuckle.
pg.144 'Professional chess may look like a glamorous world' I can only interpret that as Scottish humour, its obviously not a statement which reflects a view held by some or anyone for that matter, surely? About as glamorous as working in a sewer I'd say.

More importantly, and I find this to some degree at variance with his account of Magnus Carlsen, pg.145 He quotes a basketball coach who said 'The will to win is not as important as the will to prepare to win'. If that's true of chess at the very highest level then I am very glad I didn't get that far. I'm not quite sure how that stands with his laudible remarks over Magnus and his sheer tenacity seperating him from the rest.