Compare the article above with this one on Karpov -- Flambers Drugstore

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, [7] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Tue, February 11 2003, 2:10:49
Author: Todd, violating copyrights
Subject:

Compare the article above with this one on Karpov
In reply to: Todd 's message, "This time Khariton disappointed me." on Mon, February 10 2003, 7:54:44

When Khariton writes on Russians it is clear that he
knows what's he talking about. But when he tries to
"defend" Fischer, his arguments are weak and pathetic.

Sarah, Where Is Your Insight?
(Sarah Hurst on Anatoly Karpov)

There is hardly any chess journalist for whom I feel more respect and appreciation than Sarah Hurst. Some years ago she won, if I am not mistaken, the prize of the best English chess journalist. I was particularly impressed by her unflinching campaign against President Ilyumzhinov four years ago after she had visited Elista and and had seen the level of corruption in this republic. At that time I was in correspondence with Sarah wishing her all the best in the boycott of the Elista Olympiad. Yes, this young English woman possesses the courage you cannot find with many strong men. At that time she sent me one of her books signing, �to Lev Khariton, a chess journalist who always writes honestly. A very rare type!�

I do not think that Sarah will be offended if I continue being honest even as regards her journalistic work. Recently at www.chesscafe.com there appeared Sarah�s work on Anatoly Karpov. The editors of this site inform the readers that this work is actually a chapter from her book �Curse of Kirsan�. As usual, Sarah is very creative in her titles: �Disneyfication of Karpov�! This chapter is based on Sarah�s interview of Karpov. Having devoted quite a few years of my work to profiling Karpov in various chess publications, I can say that Sarah�s portrayal of Karpov is at best too reserved, if not distortive. This is all the more strange if one comes to think that for many years Karpov symbolized the Soviet Union, the �Empire of Evil� (and I cannot find a better clich� to describe the country where I was born and lived for 44 years). Frankly, I do not believe a single word of Karpov�s even today when he, the true chameleon, has changed color to suit the new times.

I think that a few remarks will be quite to the point here.

I do not know how old Sarah was when Korchnoi played his matches with Karpov. But anyway, she is right thinking that these matches were crucial for chess history. She quotes Karpov�s letter after Korchnoi�s defection to the West: �I support the decision of the Soviet Chess Federation to strip Korchnoi of his titles and rights to represent the Soviet school of chess on the world stage�. I do not know if Karpov is ashamed to read these words. But can anyone strip Einstein of what he did for science, or Shakespeare for poetry?

As is known, Karpov wrote his own letter against Korchnoi. He did not join the other Soviet grandmasters. Here is another quote: �I was much softer than the other grandmasters in their letter. I didn�t sigh their letter�. Karpov was much softer?! Karpov who played the title match in Merano with the man whose son was in GULAG only for his intention to join the father abroad?!

Surprisingly, always straightforward and unreserved, Sarah Hurst does not make any comments on Karpov�s revelations. In all her previous writings Sarah was directly involved in what she was saying. What eludes me is how she, so partisan some years ago, has become so detached from what her interviewee, Karpov, is saying. Look at this: ��their (Karpov�s and Korchnoi�s ) relations gradually improved, especially as Korchnoi�s wife and son were allowed to leave Russia, with Karpov�s approval� (!?). Sarah gives no comment. But this is what Karpov says today to imbellish himself - well, he was so nice, he let Korchnoi�s people go! I don�t believe it! And even if it true, why then did he keep them hostages in the Soviet Union when he was playing Korchnoi in Merano? So, everything depended on Karpov - the freedom and captivity of his opponent�s family? With her heart upon her sleeve, does Sarah believe that Karpov is such a democrat today as he passes himself for?

Sarah is silent even when Karpov, beaming with pride, speaks about his stamp collection. Characteristically, Karpov does not say what he had come to know as regards history, geography, science etc. while collecting stamps. As is always the case with him, he is much more emphatic about the price of each stamp he acquired. The unhidden greediness and narrow-mindedness would be well understood with any other man, but the legend of chess history?

Until now Karpov seems to be bearing a grudge against Andrei Makarov who was at one time President of the Russian Chess Federation. Feeling no sympathies for this ex-lawyer ( incidentally, he was Brezhnev�s son-in-law�s lawyer to defend one of the most corrupted man in the Soviet Union), it should be noted that Makarov was none the worse than all the people who were propelled to the highest ranks of the Soviet chess hierarchy during Karpov�s reign. Karpov is begrudging Makarov the title of an international master. But this title was awarded to him by that same Campomanes who had had more than a deal with Karpov!

Karpov calls himself �a more or less free person�. Again no comment from Sarah. A more or less free person?! Probably, less free than more?! Karpov always did what the Communist dictators obliged him to do. More than that, he was obviously happy to comply because all their needs ran in line with his ambitions. As a dyed-in-the-wool cynic, he never experienced any tinge of shame.

Alexander Roshal is a grotesque figure, as can be seen from Sarah�s narrative. Just read Sarah describing Roshal� and Karpov�s visit to the White House, when Roshal was performing the duties of Karpov�s interpreter without knowing a word of English! But even today, owing to his opportunism and total lack of principles, he is considered to be a great chess authority. Interviews with him or his interviews with others (see his interview with Kramnik at www.chesscafe.com ) are being widely published. He has been glorifying Kirsan Ilyumzhinov for years obviously sponging on his bucks for his magazine �64�, the mouthpiece to promote Kirsan morally and politically. Last year grandmaster Sergei Makarychev, the chess caster of Russian television, said the year 2001 was the jubilee year of great chess figures - Botvinnik, Euwe, Smyslov, Karpov and� Roshal! But I repeat, Sarah remains stunningly non-chalant towards Roshal, the man who is called today by some people ( for example, by the editors of Chess Monthly) �the dean of Soviet journalism�. Amazing!

In conclusion, I can say that it is not by chance that The Chess Caf� published Sarah�s chapter on Karpov. This site has recently shown too much caution as regards fair criticism of certain chess �untouchables�. Obviously, Karpov is one of them. But no one is exempt from criticism. Neither Sarah nor, certainly, the author of these lines.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Re: This time Khariton disappointed me. -- Margaret, Tue, February 11 2003, 14:07:18