by DannyBloem 27 Replies latest jw friends
No Chess?
I once had a demonstration on a circuit assembly about not going to parties with worldly people (yeck when I think of it, I basically told all: he dont have fun or jehovah is going to kill you)'
Anyway the demonstration ended that it was better to do nice recreation things. And we saud "then we better not go to this party, and play chess tonight, okay). My friend was holding a chess board on the stage.
this was approved by the CO, so was there ever a rule, no chess?
Danny
No. There was no rule. However there was a lengthy article comparing chess to war and discussing its origins as a war strategy game. The heavy inference was that mature Christians would avoid such competitive warlike games. Similar comments have been made regarding soccer (Internationally, "Football" or "Futbol") and football (American style), however, making comparisons to the violence of Roman arenas, but we can all attest to how effective that has been in limiting JW interest in such sporting events. I assume Rugby would be similiarly frowned upon officially. But there is no rule.
Respectfully,
AuldSoul
Uh, DannyBloem, E4 sir.
connections: e7-e5
Yes AuldSoul is right Danny, the Society has compared it to war games. My older brother and I have always enjoyed chess. He is a Master chess player with a rating over 2300. He was New Haven, Conn. Chess Champion several times.
Chess takes quite a bit of thinking ability as you know. Maybe that's why the Society has so much against this game, cause it gets ones thinking ability going.
My brother and I are no longer witnesses. Think the game of Chess had anything to do with it? Could be.
The Claw.( 0f the Sicilian defense crowd )
funny then, that the demon-stration I had on the curcuit assemby, promoted the chess game....
The WBTS doe`s frown on war like games like Chess..Although they don`t mind a $500million dollar contract from the US Navy,with thier 50% owned company,the Rand Cam Engine Corp...OUTLAW
In plain language there is no such rule.
But in Witness speak there very definately is for the reasons Auldsoul stated. I remember when that article came out. There were a number of us who played the game in my congregation who were also quite good. But when the article came out, we had to stop playing! It wasn't that we would be Df'd if we continued, but we knew, and the elders reenforced it, that we would no longer be considered acceptable for fopr such things as Ministerial Servant or any "privileges" if we were known to continue.
That is the way it is done in "Da Troof". The leaders can effectively ban anything they want without going on record as doing it. I've been a bit surprised at the current rebellion on the part of some with the recent "higher education" ban.
Forscher
In spite of the society frowning on the playing of chess my wife did buy a cheap chess set for my daughter. She did however insist that I snap off the small cross from the head of the Bishops. I played chess with my daughter for awhile but don't think I ever won..
*** Awake! 1973 March 22 pp.13-14 Chess-What Kind of Game Is It? ***
Highly Competitive Game
However, pitting one mind against another, with the element of chance eliminated entirely, tends to stir up a competitive spirit in chess players. In fact, chess is frequently characterized as an 'intellectualized fight.' For example, dethroned world chess champion Boris Spassky noted: "By nature I do not have a combative urge. . . . But in chess you have to be a fighter, and of necessity I became one."
This helps to explain why there are no topflight women chess players-the more than eighty chess grand masters in the world are all men. Actress Sylvia Miles observed regarding this: "To be a professional chess player, you have to be a killer. If the spirit of competition in American women ever does become that strong, then I think we'll get some major female players."
The spirit of competition in chess may be stirred to fever pitch, which is reflected in chess players' attitudes and language. "There's no comparison in any other sport in the attempt to destroy your opponent's psyche," explains chess player Stuart Marguiles. "I never have heard anybody say that he beat his opponent. It's always that he smashed, squished, murdered or killed him."
True, players with which one may be acquainted may not use such language. But, nevertheless, the spirit of competition between players can lead to unpleasant consequences, as the New York Times last summer reported: "Most families manage to keep the inevitable conflicts that arise in games to the chessboard. But in some homes, tensions linger long past checkmate."
Of course, chess is not, in this respect, much different from other competitive games. Participants who desire to please God, regardless of the game they are playing, need to be careful that they do not violate the Bible principle: "Let us not become egotistical, stirring up competition with one another, envying one another."-Gal. 5:26.
However, there is something else regarding chess that deserves consideration.
Relation to War
This is the game's military connotations, which are obvious. The opposing forces are called "the enemy." These are "attacked" and "captured"; the purpose being to make the opposing king "surrender." Thus Horowitz and Rothenberg say in their book The Complete Book of Chess under the subheading "Chess Is War": "The functions assigned to [the chess pieces], the terms used in describing these functions, the ultimate aim, the justified brutality in gaining the objective all-add up to war, no less."
It is generally accepted that chess can be traced to a game played in India around 600 C.E. called chaturanga, or the army game. The four elements of the Indian army-chariots, elephants, cavalry and infantry-were represented by the pieces that developed through the centuries into rooks, bishops, knights and pawns. Thus the New York Times, August 31, 1972, observed:
"Chess has been a game of war ever since it was originated 1,400 years ago. The chessboard has been an arena for battles between royal courts, between armies, between all sorts of conflicting ideologies. The most familiar opposition has been the one created in the Middle Age with one set of king, queen, knights, bishops, rooks and pawns against another.
"Other conflicts depicted have been between Christians against barbarians, Americans against British, cowboys against Indians and capitalists against Communists. . . . It is reported that one American designer is now creating a set illustrating the war in Vietnam."
Probably most modern chess players do not think of themselves as maneuvering an army in battle. Yet are not the game's connections with war obvious? The word for pawn is derived from a Medieval Latin word meaning "foot soldier." A knight was a mounted man-at-arms of the European feudal period. Bishops took an active part in supporting their side's military efforts. And rooks, or castles, places of protection, were important in medieval warfare.
Thus Reuben Fine, a chess player of international stature, wrote in his book The Psychology of the Chess Player: "Quite obviously, chess is a play-substitute for the art of war." And Time magazine reported: "Chess originated as a war game. It is an adult, intellectualized equivalent of the maneuvers enacted by little boys with toy soldiers."
While some chess players may object to making such a comparison, others will readily acknowledge the similarity. In fact, in an article about one expert chess player, the New York Times noted: "When Mr. Lyman looks at a chessboard, its squared outlines dissolve at times into the hills and valleys and secret paths of a woodland chase, or the scarred ground of an English battlefield."
When one considers the complex movements, as opposing chessboard armies vie with each other for position, one may wonder whether chess has been a factor in the development of military strategy. According to V. R. Ramachandra Dikshitar, it has. In his book War in Ancient India he examined this matter at length, and concluded: "The principles of chess supplied ideas to the progressive development of the modes and constituents of the army."
The Need for Caution
Some chess players have recognized the harm that can result from playing the game. According to The Encyclopaedia Britannica, the religious reformer "John Huss, . . . when in prison, deplored his having played at chess, whereby he had lost time and run the risk of being subject to violent passions."
The extreme fascination of chess can result in its consuming large amounts of one's time and attention to the exclusion of more important matters, apparently a reason Huss regretted having played the game. Also, in playing it there is the danger of "stirring up competition with one another," even developing hostility toward another, something the Bible warns Christians to avoid doing.
Then, too, grown-ups may not consider it proper for children to play with war toys, or at games of a military nature. Is it consistent, then, that they play a game noted to be, in the opinion of some, an "intellectualized equivalent of the maneuvers enacted by little boys with toy soldiers"? What effect does playing chess really have upon one? Is it a wholesome effect?
Surely chess is a fascinating game. But there are questions regarding it that are good for each one who plays chess to consider.
[Emphasis Added]
