C.N. 11763 (15 March 2020) announced: ‘Owing to
other commitments, it will be necessary for us to
curtail the posting of new C.N. items as from the end
of March 2020. Thereafter, additions to the main C.N.
page and to feature articles will be possible only
occasionally.’
If contacting us by e-mail (ewinter@sunrise.ch),
correspondents need to include their name
and full postal address.
C.N. 10977 referred to the unavailability of any sound
recording featuring Emanuel Lasker, but now Olimpiu G.
Urcan (Singapore) has found an instance on the Beeld
en Geluid website and has secured permission for
the file to be presented by us:
It was broadcast by the Dutch station KRO on 5 November
1935, during the Alekhine v Euwe world championship
match. The interviewer, it seems, was Salo Landau.
The following transcript of Lasker being interviewed in
Dutch has been provided, together with an English
translation, by Hans Renette (Bierbeek, Belgium):
‘Ja, ja, ook zij hebben getoond zwakke zijden te
hebben. Zo is de mens nu eenmaal. Niet steeds
übermensch. Wat is de mens zonder enige zwakte?
[Dat] bestaat alleen in de verbeelding.
Hoe kan Euwe van de zwakke zijde van Aljechin
profiteren?
Indien hij speelt wat Aljechin niet goed ligt.
Meer voor de hand ligt de vraag: wat zal Aljechin
doen om zijn zwakke zijden te versterken? Dat hij
daarmee tussen het spelen van de partijen druk
bezig is, daaraan bestaat voor mij geen twijfel.
Zal het hem lukken?
Ik zal je een geheim toevertrouwen. Deze jonge
man heeft talent. [De interviewer lacht.] Dat
zeker. Dus wat een geniaal mens bereiken kan en
hoe snel en handig hij iets kan aanleren, kan
immers niemand raden.
Als ik het goed begrijp, heeft Euwe dus goede
kansen als hij met wit speelt mits hij met de
damepion opent. Maar hoe staat het met zijn
verdediging als hij met zwart speelt?
Tot nu toe heeft hij met zwart ongunstig
gespeeld. Vier partijen verloren met zwart is
allesbehalve mooi. Maar vijf winstpunten met wit
en slechts een verliespartij met deze kleur is
uitstekend.
We zullen het zo zeggen: wie met wit speelt heeft
een voordeel?
Zo was het niet altijd. Zukertort’s mening was
dat e2-e4 een slechte zet was die door e7-e5
weerlegd werd en Aljechin’s loopbaan onderlijnt
dit. Hij heeft met zwart in de Spaanse partij, die
toch als zeer sterk geldt, zo goed als alle
partijen gewonnen en geen enkele daarvan verloren,
haast dertig jaren.
Tegenwoordig echter worden de meeste partijen door
wit gewonnen?
Maar dat is individueel en afwisselend. Sommige
meesters voelen zich beter thuis in de verdediging
en anderen voelen zich meer op hun gemak als ze
kunnen aanvallen.
Hoe komt dat dan, dokter?
Alles in het leven gaat op en neer. Zo is het
ook hier. In het ene tijdperk winnen de witte
stukken, in het andere, de andere keer, winnen de
zwarte. Ik zal u liever vertellen wanneer Euwe
zich echt in zijn element voelt.’
‘Yes, yes, they too showed weaknesses. That is how
man is. Not always an übermensch. What would
a man be without weaknesses? That exists only in the
imagination.
How can Euwe take advantage of Alekhine’s weak side?
By playing that which does not suit Alekhine. But
the more obvious question is: what will Alekhine do
to strengthen his weaknesses? I have no doubt that
he is working on that between the games.
Will he succeed?
I shall entrust you with a secret. This young man
has talent. [The interviewer laughs.] That is for
sure. How much a genius can achieve and how quickly
and skilfully he can learn something – that is
anybody’s guess.
If I understand correctly, Euwe has good chances when
playing White – provided that he opens with the
queen’s pawn. But what about his defence with Black?
So far he has played inauspiciously with Black.
Losing four games with Black is anything but good.
But five wins and just one loss with White – that is
excellent.
Can we put it this way: White has the advantage?
It was not always like that. Zukertort considered
e2-e4 a bad move, refuted by e7-e5, and Alekhine’s
career underlines this. With Black against the
Spanish Opening, known, after all, as a very strong
opening, he has won almost all his games and did not
lose a single one for nearly 30 years.
However, nowadays are not most games won by White?
But that is individual and variable. Some masters
feel more at home in defence, and others feel more
at ease when they are able to attack.
How can this be explained, Doctor?
Everything in life goes up and down. The same also
here. In one period, the white pieces win, in
another the black pieces do. I would prefer to tell
you when Euwe truly feels in his element.’
Richard Forster (Winterthur, Switzerland) points out
that Lasker mentioned the radio broadcast in two letters
to his wife Martha (xeroxes courtesy of Jurgen Stigter,
Amsterdam). On 31 October 1935, Lasker wrote from
Amsterdam:
‘Jetzt arbeite ich an meinem nächsten
holländischen Vortrag vom 5ten Nov Abends 9.45min,
indem fortgesetzt unter Leitung von Alex Frank
Übungen an der Aussprache mache.’
[‘Now I am working on my next talk in Dutch for 5
November, 9.45 PM, by doing constant pronunciation
training under the guidance of Alex Frank.’]
For some details concerning the journalist and actor
Alex Frank (1888-1950), see this webpage.
On the day of the radio broadcast, 5 November 1935,
Lasker informed his wife late at night:
‘Alle sind erstaunt, dass ich so gut auf
holländisch geredet habe. Landau + Alex Frank waren
entzückt, auch die Leute vom Radio selbst.’
[‘Everyone is amazed how well I spoke Dutch. Landau
and Alex Frank were delighted, as were the radio
people themselves.’]
11906. Buckle
and Korchnoi
Olimpiu G. Urcan (Singapore) has obtained permission
for us to show the following images here:
Henry Thomas Buckle
(The archives of the
Pushkin State Museum in Moscow hold this original
engraving by Stephen Henry Gimber.)
Victor Korchnoi
(A 1979 portrait from
the Lev Abramovich Borodulin Collection held by the
Multimedia Complex of Contemporary Arts in Moscow.)
11907.
Additions
Of late, additions have been made to many feature
articles, and especially Chess
Jottings. From that page, six posers are
reproduced below:
Black to move
White to move
Mate in two
Black to move
Black to move
What is the fastest mate
for White?
11908.
The early life of James Mason
From John Townsend (Wokingham, England):
‘Several sources indicate that James Mason was for
some time employed as a newsboy in New York. For
example, an article appeared on page 5 of The
Sun (New York), on 25 June 1882, entitled “The
Newsboy Chess Player”:
“Fifteen years ago or thereabouts a bright-faced
youngster “established himself in business”, as he
was fond of telling his customers on board the
Fulton Ferry boats. His business was selling the
morning and evening papers. In time, he had a list
of regular customers, who waited till they were on
the boat to buy papers of him. The youngster’s name
was James Mason. In those days Otis Field, well
known to New York billiard players, kept a billiard
room in the basement at the northeast corner of
Fulton and Nassau streets. On the Nassau side he had
tables for chess and draughts. The newsboy had to
pass the place four times a day, and, as the windows
were open in warm weather, could not fail to see the
chess games, with their carved men. One day, while
he was watching the pieces with boyish interest, an
old gentleman at one of the tables beckoned him down
stairs ...”
The chronology in this article may not always be
accurate. It can be viewed on the Chess
Archaeology website.
To this picture, Stephen Davies, on page 37 of Samuel
Lipschütz: A Life in Chess (Jefferson, 2015), adds
that, having sold newspapers in the morning, Mason
worked in the delivery department of the New
York Evening Telegram in the afternoon.
The New York Evening Telegram was
established (in 1867 according to Chronicling
America) by James Gordon Bennett, the son of J.G.
Bennett. The Oxford Companion to Chess
(Hooper and Whyld, second edition, 1992, page 250)
makes the following comment in connection with
Mason:
“Coming to the notice of J. Gordon Bennett of the New
York Herald, he was given a job in the
newspaper’s offices ...”
Meanwhile, using Chronicling
Americait is possible to follow newspaper
reports of the newsboy’s growing force over the
chequered board and his advancing fame. When the New
York Herald, 16 January 1869, reported on page 7
about the “Handicap Chess Tournament” at Seider’s
Café Europa, Nos. 12 and 14 Division Street,
“Captain George Mackenzie being the manager”, James
Mason was noted as being “among the most prominent”
players.
On page 9 of the New York Herald of 7 May
1870, which looked forward to the approaching
Baden-Baden congress, “J. Mason” was
identified as someone who could ably represent chess
in America. As it turned out, no US players took
part.
He was occasionally mentioned in the press in
connection with local chess activities, as in a
report in the New York Herald of 28 October
1870 (page 8):
“This evening the Nineteenth Ward Chess Club will
play their return challenge game with the Downtown
Chess Club at the Europa Chess Rooms, 12 and 14
Division Street, at eight P.M. Messrs. Perrin,
Mason, Merian, prominent players, also a committee
from the Williamsburg Chess Club will be present to
witness the contest ...”
Fairly close in time to the above reports was the
United States Federal Census of 1870, which can be
viewed on-line.
The census day was 1 June, and no reason is known
not to expect Mason to have been in New York at that
time. Only one James Mason entry has been found
which is at all consistent with his place of
residence, his occupation, and his supposed age. A
certain James Mason, aged 22, resident in New York
city’s 9th District and 6th Ward, is described as a
“vender” [sic]. Vendors were commonly seen on
the streets of New York. Newspapers were among the
items which could be bought, and, although the
merchandise sold by this James Mason is not
recorded, the description of “vender”
is consistent with what is known of the
chessplayer’s work. Residence in New York city is in
line with expectation, and the age is also tolerably
accurate. In the same household are to be found his
father, James Mason, aged 52, a tailor, his mother,
Mary Ann Mason, aged 43, tailoress, and his younger
sister, Kate Mason, aged 18. The parents were born
in Ireland, which also fits the bill, but,
interestingly, the birthplace of both children was
entered as “US” (United States) and
has been overwritten with “NY” (New
York). However, it is not yet possible to confirm
whether this census entry relates to the
chessplayer. The same James Mason has not so far
been identified in any other US censuses.
The story of James Mason’s birth in Kilkenny in
1849 has been widely embraced by chess writers, and
they may well be right. However, caution is called
for. It is difficult either to prove or disprove.
There has been no corroboration from a primary
source, such as a birth or baptism record, and no
information about his early life and background in
Kilkenny was ever given beyond a date of birth, even
though he is said to have been 11 when he was next
mentioned in the United States. His existence during
those first years has taken on an almost mythical
quality.
Leaving this New York census entry aside, there
are other difficulties with attributing Irish birth
to Mason. In the English census of 1881, the first
after his arrival, the chessplayer’s place of birth
was, similarly, entered as “America” (see National
Archives, RG 11 590/90, page 14).
In the 1901 census, his place of birth was
recorded as “Ireland, American citizen” (National
Archives, RG 13 30, page 52). If that were correct,
one would assume that he had been naturalized in the
US. Searches so far for a naturalization record have
proved negative. The only other way he could have
been an American citizen was by birth.
P.W. Sergeant was evidently perplexed by Mason. On
page 172 of A Century of British Chess he
remarked:
“But James Mason was not an American, either by
birth or, apparently, even by naturalisation, since
in 1901-2 he played for Britain in the
cable-matches. He is one of the most enigmatic
characters in the history of British chess.”
Sergeant implies that American citizenship would
have prevented him from playing for Britain. Yet
American citizenship is precisely what he declared
to the 1901 census; if it was not true, then it is
hard to understand why he said it. Sergeant does not
comment here on the extent to which birth in
Ireland, as opposed to America, may have assisted
his eligibility to represent Britain in
international matches. He also made the point that,
on his arrival in 1878, Mason was not received as
one returning to Britain:
“... and, though he was, in a sense, like Bird, an
exile returned, he was not recognised as connected
with the British Isles. He was received as Mr Mason,
the American master.”
James Mason was well liked and he has emerged with
the reputation of an honest person. His alleged plea
to Buckley (“Don’t split on me till I’m dead ...”),
noted in your feature article Who
Was R.J. Buckley?, entails an element of
conspiracy, but chessplayers have, generally,
sympathized with the circumstances. However, when
considered in conjunction with that, the
inconsistent information which he gave to censuses
gives one cause to question how straightforward he
was in the matter of nationality, and whether Irish
birth was the truth.
One final point: that Mason was born in “New York
city” was affirmed by the editors of the Columbia
Chess Club Chronicle (who included S. Lipschütz) in
the Editor’s Table on page 31 of the issue dated 23
July 1887:
“The St Paul Pioneer states that an
American gentleman, greatly interested in chess, is
endeavoring to arrange a match between Blackburne
and James Mason, the strong American player, who is
by far the finest native player since Paul Morphy’s
time. Mason is still a young man. Born in New York
city, he began life as a newsboy there. In later
years he has pursued a journalistic career in
London, where he has resided for nearly ten years.”
Conclusion:
Although it is widely accepted that James Mason
was born in Ireland, there is also a significant
amount of evidence that he was born in the United
States. More information is needed before any firm
conclusion can be safely drawn.’
11909. Lasker
volume three
Just received: the final volume in the Emanuel
Lasker trilogy by Richard Forster, Michael Negele
and Raj Tischbierek, published by Exzelsior Verlag,
Berlin, with a Foreword by John Nunn.
Extracts
are available on-line, and the book may be ordered
direct from the publisher’s
webpage, although some readers outside Europe may
prefer to use the McFarland
page.
Below are four photographs of Lasker (on, respectively,
pages 125, 149, 196 and 220 of the book):
In common with its predecessors,
this third volume is of superlative quality.
11910. As
incorrigible as ever
Below is the text of C.N. 11126, posted on 6 December
2018:
Olimpiu G. Urcan (Singapore) draws our attention to
his review
of the e-book Carlsen v Caruana: FIDE World Chess
Championship, London 2018 by Raymond Keene and
Byron Jacobs (London, 2018) and sends us half a dozen
lines from the book’s ‘History of the World
Championship’ section:
We offer a few comments:
Anderssen’s opponent in the Immortal
Game ‘of London 1851’ was Kieseritzky, a name
which Raymond Keene has persisted in misspelling for
decades.
The Evergreen Game was not ‘against the
pseudonymous Dufresne (in reality the German player
E.S. Freund)’. Dufresne was his name, and E.S.
Freund was his pseudonym. Raymond Keene made the
same obvious gaffe 30 years ago, on page 136 of his
Pocket Book of Chess (London, 1988), as
pointed out in C.N. 10155. See too Cuttings.
Anderssen v Dufresne was not played in 1856. Our feature
article on the game shows that it was
published on pages 338-339 of the September 1852 Deutsche
Schachzeitung.
Anderssen v Zukertort was played in Barmen, not
Breslau.
Even without primary sources, a quick glance at, for
instance, The Oxford Companion to Chess by D.
Hooper and K. Whyld (Oxford, 1992) would have sufficed
to avoid all these elementary blunders.
***
Now we quote from Raymond Keene’s Article
dated 30 July 2022:
‘Anderssen can claim to be one of the supreme
tacticians of all time. Three of his wins are of
imperishable beauty. On their own they would justify
anyone’s devotion to chess. They are his Immortal Game
against Kieseritsky (played at Simpsons-in-the-Strand,
not the tournament) of London, 1851; his Evergreen
game against the pseudonymous Dufresne (in reality the
German player E.S. Freund) of Berlin 1856, and his
majestic sacrificial masterpiece against Zukertort of
Breslau, 1869.’
