| The Historian 2005-05-31, 8:31 pm |
|
Chess One wrote:
(Snip Innes' absurd comment about librarians.)
quote:
> The fault of any history or biography is usually either an insufficient
> appreciation of individual factors against a background context, or lack of
> comparison with other individuals at the time.
>
> May we all learn something from this dialogue. What would be an
> objectionable result would be to make conclusions concerning Keres/Botvinnik
> from the clerical-stance of only noting who said what in their respective
> columns, as represented here in these threads. This latter approach suits
> only librarians and bean counters, incurious of how many beans there are to
> count, and if they are of differing qualities.
Again, the debate is not over Keres/Botvinnik. If you could read, you
might understand this point.
quote:
> It seems to me that Larry Parr has recognised the truth of this in his
> perspective above. If we were all in accord with it perhaps we could move on
> and allow ourselves to write better chess histories and biographies.
The last chess history/biography Mr. Parr wrote was 20 years ago. And
God save us all from anything you pen in the field.
|