N.Dharmeshwaran has written an essay on the Black & White Chess Magazine (blackandwhiteindia.com) entitled, Chess is no good, in which he posits:
•Chess serves no real purpose outside itself
•Chess uses time and effort, and displaces other activities which might be better than it in some ways
•Chess is inherently unconstructive. While the theory can be intellectual and academic in nature (though inherently unimportant), the purpose is fundamentally to defeat the opponent. It is possible that chess causes unconstructive patterns of thought by a process analagous to transference. i.e. in chess you are fighting alone against an opponent, so other things can seem like that even if they are not, which can be unhelpful. Of course, there are ways in which this could be considered a pro - perhaps in certain areas like business the fighting aspect of chess could be well-channeled. [This point is based both on my own experience and what I have observed in others]
•Very few chess players can earn money from chess, especially with the large number of GMs in the world these days. Professional chess has very limited income streams from non-participants. Of course this is not a con at all to most people, who play chess as a hobby and have no interest in chess as a career
•While some types of chess are cheap, playing in frequent OTB tournaments is expensive and takes a lot of time, with a large impact on the rest of one’s life.
•Chess can be obsessive, which can be damaging to other areas of life.
If you don’t like art, competition, history, camaraderie, joy, philosophy, travel, science, psychology, having fun, pizza, watching children laugh, bughouse, the idea of play, sports, and, in short, living in general, then chess can seem to be a waste of time. Others have made the author’s observations before, a bit more eloquently, and equally without foundation.
As a couple of posters noted on the other website, you can substitute golf and other pastimes or art and other pursuits for the word chess in the author’s diatribe. We are made to live and strive. To be without any form of art is to create a soulless existence.
Methinks he lost a bad King’s Indian Defense game at a chess club and is venting his spleen in a plaintive wail against the injustice of the world. When he wins a game his manic depression will go back into balance.
He’s mostly correct. Chess is pure diversion. I don’t buy the premise that chess makes you smart, or prepares you for some other endeavor except, perhaps, to be patient.
The embryos running around at most tournaments these days are good players because they’re smart, not the other way around. And many are exquisitely coached.
Similarly “chess imitates life” or vice versa is absurd. Unlike life, chess is a game of complete knowledge. If you play better than your opponent you win. It’s 100% objective, minus some psychology.
Life is a game of incomplete knowledge that cannot be won by pure calculation. Life’s many twists and turns, and hidden obstacles, do not guarantee success, even to those who do the right thing 100% of the time. Life resembles the card game bridge much more than chess.
Didn’t Bronstein at one point rue that he’d wasted his entire life on a silly game?
Articles like this have to be written periodically because there are people who manage to forget the basic truths in the article.
Curiously, the articles have the tone of being written by someone who did, in fact, forget the basic truths. They sound like they were written by someone who really took Chess seriously, and suddenly realized that he had wasted his time playing Chess.
For me, the time spent playing Chess takes time away from things like watching TV. Therefore, Chess is a pretty good thing. If you find that it takes time away from personal relationships or careers, then you are taking Chess too seriously.
The benefits of this game are only outstripped by its negatives when you become obsessed with it. However, that is true for just about any vocation or avocation. Therefore, I’m not certain how much I would worry about either Dharmeshwaran or his article.
How can something that has given me great pleasure for 46 years be a waste of time? Can’t speak for anyone else, but for me, the answer is a resounding NO.