I've got over 600 of the bloody things.
I've read 7 at the most. I've dipped in and out of most of them.
But read as in played every game, read and absorbed every word.
I still try to do an hour at the board every night and pick a book at random.
But often find myself slinging it and going back to one of the favourites.
New thread within a thread. Desert Island Books
You are only allowed one book.
Me first (my idea).
Tartakowers 500 games. Great games - brillo notes.
Ah yes,the impossible desert island question.Think I'll stick with the classic Zürich International 1953 and try to smuggle in 'Life & games of Tal' and maybe 'Life and games of Rubinstein'.Oh,and 'Keres' best games' and 'Grand strategy, 60 games by Boris Spassky' and 'Petrosian's best games' and and and....Gah!Impossible question! 😞
Originally posted by Tatarana CrocodiloYou are a mere beginner.
Yes!!!!😀
I just bought 50 used chess books from some frustrated ex-wannabe-player.
Now I'll have more than 100 books I'll never read. 😉
User 33598 has over 4,000
Originally posted by Tatarana CrocodiloI've got over 300 chess books, not to mention a pile of CDs and NIC issues. They look good on the shelves, even if they don't get out to the desk much. 😀
Yes!!!!😀
I just bought 50 used chess books from some frustrated ex-wannabe-player.
Now I'll have more than 100 books I'll never read. 😉
Originally posted by adramforallHe/she collects them as a hobby.I wonder how many he actually read.
You are a mere beginner.
User 33598 has over 4,000
Some books are to be tasted, others to be swallowed, and some few to be chewed and digested: that is, some books are to be read only in parts, others to be read, but not curiously, and some few to be read wholly, and with diligence and attention.– Francis Bacon, "Of Studies"
(I have a mere 200 chess books and use most of them, but have read few cover to cover.)
Originally posted by Wulebgr"[For] people who possess a fairly sizable library (large enough in my case that someone entering our house can't help but notice it; actually, it takes up the whole place.), visitors enter and say, "What a lot of books! Have you read them all?" At first I thought that the question characterized only people who had scant familiarity with books . . . but there is more to it than that. I believe that, confronted by a vast array of books, anyone will be seized by the anguish of learning and will inevitably lapse into asking the question that expresses his torment and his remorse.
Some books are to be tasted, others to be swallowed, and some few to be chewed and digested: that is, some books are to be read only in parts, others to be read, but not curiously, and some few to be read wholly, and with diligence and attention.– Francis Bacon, "Of Studies"
(I have a mere 200 chess books and use most of them, but have read few cover to cover.)
In the past I adopted a tone of contemptuous sarcasm. "I haven't read any of them; otherwise, why would I keep them here?" But this is a dangerous answer, because it invites the obvious follow-up: "And where do you put them after you've read them?" The best answer is the one always used by Roberto Leydi: "And more, dear sir, many more," which freezes the adversary and plunges him into a state of awed admiration. But I find it merciless and angst-generating. Now I have fallen back on the riposte: "No, these are the ones I have to read by the end of the month. I keep the others in my office," a reply that on the one hand suggests a sublime ergonomic strategy and on the other leads the visitor to hasten the moment of his departure."
-Umberto Eco, "How to Justify a Private Library"
Originally posted by wormwoodUmberto Eco is a demon, his readers devils. I have two of his books on my shelf, have the movie version of another (starring Sean Connery and F. Murray Abraham), and am ashamed to admit that I read the condensed and much weakened rip-off of Foucault's Pendulum, i.e. Dan Brown's bestselling work of crap about which the best that can be said is that it's better than the movie.
"[For] people who possess a fairly sizable library (large enough in my case that someone entering our house can't help but notice it; actually, it takes up the whole place.), visitors enter and say, "What a lot of books! Have you read them all?" At first I thought that the question characterized only people who had scant familiarity with books . . . but ...[text shortened]... nt of his departure."
-Umberto Eco, "How to Justify a Private Library"
Originally posted by WulebgrI think you are being generous to Dan Brown's book - insulting crap like that!
Umberto Eco is a demon, his readers devils. I have two of his books on my shelf, have the movie version of another (starring Sean Connery and F. Murray Abraham), and am ashamed to admit that I read the condensed and much weakened rip-off of Foucault's Pendulum, i.e. Dan Brown's bestselling work of crap about which the best that can be said is that it's better than the movie.
I've enjoyed Eco's books, and both the book and movie of 'The Name of the Rose' are good.
Now, if only all of my 300+ chess books were worth reading. I've found for every useful, insightful chess book, there are many more issued that ain't worth the paper.
