My casual sentiment on Xiangqi being considered a "variant"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PKp9bvGfsY (Excerpt from video descriptions - "Xiangqi (lit. "the elephant game"), or Chinese chess is probably my favourite variant.")

http://chessvariants.org/xiangqi.html (Noting the fact that Xiangqi is listed as a variant on a website dedicated to chess variants)  

As suggested by these references, Xiangqi is commonly referred to as a variant, and it's something I've always felt to be inaccurately applied. A variant is a mere "spin-off", if you will, of regular chess; something which may be taken more lightheartedly and provides novelty in game sessions.

Xiangqi is not a "variant": it's a fully standardized game of Chess that has developed in the China region when Chaturanga was traveling out of India. It's merely a different version of Chess, but not a variant.

I can understand why it might be called a variant, since it does fit some of the defining characteristics of what variants serve to do. For example, when we play the same Chess game over and over again, it may be interesting to play something that is intriguingly new and yet follows a familiar concept. That is what Xiangqi could do for many of us who have played what our privileged Western asses call "regular Chess". Also, variants attracts an audience based on skills and preferences; certain new and innovated pieces and chess rules may favor some and not others. Once again, Xiangqi also does this. However,  couldn't "regular Chess" do these things as well if Xiangqi or Shogi were the first chess games that we were ever exposed to?

Since all three of these Chess games were derived from Chaturanga, should we not rightfully consider "regular Chess" a variant, as well? We're hardly playing the original.

Regular Chess has a history of development to become what it finally is today; so does Xiangqi and Shogi.

Having said that, I feel that calling Xiangqi a Variant is a bit of an insult: it's saying that it is nothing more than a sidegame not to be taken seriously. While I'm sure that's actually the subtle attitude of many of us who have played "regular Chess" for a long time, I think the game should be treated with equal respect. 

(Of course, Xiangqi does has itself a set of variant that were derived from it. e. g. "Dragon's Chess", a Xiangqi variant, uses a Dragon piece, "龍", which starts in front of the Emperors, "將" and "帥", and is so far only known to be officially played regularly on Vietson, a Vietnamese Xiangqi online-play site.)

Thoughts?

I'm sure that not everyone could. It was just something I needed to unload off my muscular chest. 

I think your sentiment is based on a misconception, namely that 'variant' would mean "spin-off" of FIDE Chess, and is somehow a derogative qualification. But it is really as you mention in the second part of your posting: they are all variants of the same grand game that started with Chaturanga, and FIDE Chess is 'merely' one of those variants. The only thing that sets it apart from most (but not all) other variants is that it became somewhat popular in certain sectors of space-time. It is currently not even the most-played variant on this planet, but comes second after Xiangqi. FIDE Chess is known as the 'Mad Queen variant' of Chess, ('Regina Rabiosa') to distinguish it from its immediate predecessor, where the Queen moved identical to King. This, at least, is the concensus attitude on chessvariants.com.

And for those who think the Queen was a Western invention: Chu Shogi, the most popular Chaturanga derivative in Japan for many centuries, already featured Rook, Queen and Bishop around the year 1250.

I agree with the OP that this is an inaccurate use of the term "variant".  A chess variant is a game that is based on chess and modifies it in various ways.  Games like Xiangqi, Shogi, Makruk etc. are not based on western chess but rather share a common ancestor.  Therefore they are more like chess "relatives" than chess variants.

Basically you are trying to hijack the word 'Chess' for exclusive application to something it has not meant for the largest part of history.

The point is that although "chess" may not have referred to FIDE chess for "the largest part of its history" it does in the modern vernacular, and the term "chess variant" is usually used with this definition in mind.

It only does for YOU. As you can see from Peterau98's post, the translation of 象棋 (pronounced 'xiang qi') is 'Chess', and in China FIDE Chess is referred to as 'international Xiangqi'.

And on chessvariants.com, where one would expect to find people knowledgeable in Chess variants, they certainly do not use your definition. In fact you are just trying to impose the deviating view of a small minority on the rest of the world...

If by small minority you mean 99% of people who speak english as their first language then you have a point.

Who natively speak English. Which is indeed a small minority of the World population. And of course most of those would not even know how to play Chess, and would not be able to see the difference between Mad Queen  or any other Western variant if you hit them on the head with an Archbishop. Only 1% of those would probably know that there exist different variants of Chess.

By your logic since people who are interested in chess variants (actual variants not games related to chess) are a small minority of chess players their opinion can be discounted.

I always found it more logical to dismiss the opinion of the ignorant, be it a majority or minority. I would not ask the average men in the street whether he thinks a the tau particle is a lepton or a quark, I would ask a physicist. No matter how small a minority physicists might be compared to the general population.

The Craggy Island China Town contingent will now be after you !

But we're not talking about factual data we're talking about definitions, which are created by the way in which people use a word, in which case a "minority" opinion is probably not that significant.

On this forum, and if you're speaking to just about any other English speaker the word "chess" means western chess, and therefore a chess variant is a variation of western chess.  If this was a chinese forum then maybe you would have a point but probably not haha.

The point is that it is not very significant when people that only know one form of Chess mean that form of Chess when they speak about 'Chess'. Because they still use the word in the meaning "all forms of Chess that I am aware off".

It is not unusual that a small group of people highly specialized in one subject develop a 'jargon' that attaches non-standard meanings to commonly used words. That does not mean that using these words in their common every-day meaning as the rest of the World, or people specialized in other subjects would use them can be labeled 'wrong'.

I just pointed out that this is the case here. In the World at large 'Chess' means a board game with many different pieces that can be captured by replacement, where you win by capturing one particular piece, usually referred to as King. And FIDE Chess is one of the variants on that theme. That you claim that on this forum another opinion could prevail, is quite another mathod, and in fact exactly what I described: hijacking the term for your own purpose.

That doesn't mean it would be wrong to call Xiangqi a Chess variant. If anything is wrong, it is insisting that FIDE Chess is not a variant. That is just a narrow-minded view that you would expect of people so absorbed by the only game they are playing, that they are not aware there even is something like an outside world.

I'm basically accusing you of the same thing haha.

In my experience - which is the only evidence I have available.  The word "chess" refers to Western chess - both on this forum and in every other situation I have ever encountered.  Obviously your experience is different to mine.

The point is that if chess mean FIDE chess then Xiangqi is not a chess variant.  On the other hand of chess refers to any for of chess then the variant designation kind of loses its meaning.  In my view a 'variant' is usually used for the numerous alternative rulesets for an established form of chess (be it western or other).

Hmmm? Well people call xiangqi 'xiangqi' and call chess 'guojixiangqi'.

Interesting topic.

To me, a 'chess variant' is similar to science fiction, in the sense it is an hypothesis about how chess could be played in some future.

Xiangqi and (western/international) Chess are two games of the Present (and of the Past).

I wouldn't say 'Xiangqi' is 'Chess'.

I would be more inclined to say it is a game in the same family as chess, (but with a name, an identity and an attached imagery of its own). Much like modern Spanish, ancient Greek and err... Hindustani are all classified as indoeuropean languages.

Besides, it is quite well known that the discoverer of chaturanga was also the discoverer of indoeuropean...

Exactly

There were also plenty of Chess variants in the past, even in the direct ancestry of the variant that is currently most popular in the west (Mad Queen). Such as Shatranj and Courier Chess. Tamerlane Chess was also an interesting side branch.