Ponterotto's Psychobiography of Bobby Fischer

The paperback arrived today from Amazon.uk, less than a week after ordering it. Total cost with shipping is about $43. Excellent is not superlative enough a word to describe the analysis and readability of this work. The Author’s Note, Preface and Acknowledgments really demonstrate the seriousness and thoroughness of his research into Fishcher’s mental state and its development. The shocker to me was the actual cooperation afforded to the author by the FBI answering Freedom of Information Act requests and even arranging for him to be given permission to publish an early FBI photo of his mother found in the file.

For anyone interested in what made/allowed Fischer to rise to chess greatness only to sink in to an abyss of illness, you can’t not have this book in your library.

how about “superlative” to describe the “analysis and readability”? :smiley:

Juat about finished with reading it. Interesting on a number of levels. there is a Kindle edition available if you’re interested and want to save a bit on the purchase price.

I always have my doubts about Psychoanalytic Biographies. I spent some time in college reading examples, from the ground-breaking books by Erikson on Luther and Ghandi, to the absurd book by Nancy Gager Clinch on the “Kennedy Neurosis.”

I would think it difficult for an analyst to diagnosis a “patient” that he never had in therapy. Did the author ever even meet with Fischer? Fischer may well have been just a very talented kid that never had a strong mentor in his life to tell him to stop acting like a little jerk. And then when Fischer reached adult-hood, he was able to exclude any friends or acquaintances, except those that held their tongue. And that eventually, this isolation led to a person that lost too much contact with reality.

But, having said all that, I am interested in all things Bobby Fischer, and if anyone ever writes a “Pscyho Biography” of me, they should delve into that obsession of mine.

Jack Martin

I suggest that you read the book and then form an opinion. The field of psychobiography has come a long way and Ponterotto makes very clear what his attempt can and can not do. In the meantime, take a look at
jre.sagepub.com/content/8/4/19.full.pdf+html

Finished the book Monday evening. Interesting reading. I’d recommend the book to everyone without reservation. If you can borrow it or get it through library loan, do that before buying it.

Have been doing more reading and digging about Fischer lately because he has become topical again. Looked at old mags and newsletters from way back down at the Pittsburgh Chess Club. Checked out the Cavett interviews again. Reread Darrasch, Brady, and others. Pored over the recent NIC, 2015/3. Even got a chance to look at some of the stuff in the expensive Delucia book that someone I know who has more money than sense purchased. After all of the reading, I cannot feel anything but sad about the life of Fischer. He was sick from an age earlier than I thought. Diagnosed, to a degree. Treated, no.

The questions we are left with are what would have happened had he been treated with medications? Would he have displayed the same skill and “genius” for chess? His obsession, self absorption, lack of empathy, and descent into delusion do not paint a very nice picture. How much those could have been changed by modern medications is something only professionals can explore. Given the side effects of many medications, what weird places in the mind he might have gone to makes me cringe. A Fischer on medications that might make him feel fuzzy, not focused enough, or even super focused, might have led him to consider suicide. Not everyone has seen what people in manic phases or the depths of depression can do to themselves and others. I have known a couple of people like that, even some chess players, but I will leave it at that, may they rest in peace.

Good points and overview. We can only wonder and never know what his life might have been like with earlier professional mental health intervention. One additional point to consider, and I draw this from my present reading of Barbara Taylor’s book The Last Asylum: A Memoir of Madness in Our Times is that most of the really positive advances in psycho-pharmacology that might have helped Fischer and kept him possibly chessically creative, were not yet available in the 1950s when they may have helped Fischer the most. Bobby was a living tragedy as human being. I for one would have preferred to see less chess brilliance and and a happier and more productive life over his full 64 years.

I haven’t read the book, yet, but I did find this interesting article (by the author, himself) on Ponterotto’s approach and conclusions:
http://www.psmag.com/books-and-culture/a-psychological-autopsy-of-bobby-fischer-25959
The article is very comprehensive – far more than I expected.

Ponterotto speculates as to how Fischer, as a troubled, but brilliant teen, might be treated today, with more social and psychological services available. He also poses the question if it is indeed possible to treat a prodigy without diminishing his zeal and motivation.

A lot of kids, even today, fall through the cracks. But there is no excuse for a prodigy, like Fischer, to be overlooked, even 60 years ago. Fischer lived in the Chess capital of North America, and it’s hard to believe that his accomplishments didn’t alert anyone of his teachers that he possessed a very gifted mind, in spite of his lack of interest in his studies. Maybe Brian, having read Pontoretto’s book, would know if there was any outreach from one of young Bobby’s teachers.

The only problem I have with his article is using Justin Beiber as an example of a prodigy who was successfully mentored by an older former prodigy. :sunglasses:

My lasting impression of Fischer’s personality is “I’m right, so there!” I don’t think medication would have any effect.

brilliance and madness are flip sides of all coins

I don’t know that medication would have changed his belief systems, but his anxiety and explosive personality surely could have been manged by meds. I’ve had friends who suffer from similar disorders, and with meds, they are are very reasonable, and quite pleasant to be around. Without those meds, however, they become very agitated and difficult to deal with.

I don’t know if Bobby had ever been properly diagnosed, but some of the disorders require medication that produces terrible side effects for them, and they end up stopping them. At that point, it becomes very difficult to get them to restart without a court order. As far as I know, people can’t be made to take their medications (even when they are admitted to a hospital) without a court order. I could be wrong.

Interesting link above and a fascinating article. Penterotto correctly writes that he never met Fischer and has never seen his medical records so it would essentially be unprofessional for him to render a an official diagnosis. What he does is speculate on several diagnoses based on family history, family genetics, and observations of people who knew Fischer. He talks about psychological treatment and therapy but does not mention psycho-pharmacological treatment because there has never been a truly effective medication to treat personality disorders. Treat some of the symptoms, help someone with agitated paranoia to relax, I’ve seen Risperdal take some of the edge off paranoia but it too has side effects that can be worse than the paranoia.

There has been a trend for many years to place emotionally disturbed adolescents into residential treatment where they can receive individual, family and group therapy along with milieu therapy. This didn’t exist when Fischer was a teen and I doubt whether someone with his really strong personality and conflict with authority could do well in a residential treatment center. He would just clash with staff attempting to get him to fit in and might wind up over-medicated with psychotropics designed more for behavioral control than treatment.

Since time travel doesn’t exist we’ll never know whether Fischer would have benefited from today’s forms of treatment. Anything predictive is speculation, like my speculations above. I think it is probably better in the end to admire the chess the man created and leave everything else alone.

Michael Atkins