Recommended Study Texts / Books

Specifically regarding strategy, the following recommends what to read as prerequisite material prior to studying Silman's The Amateur's Mind...

Good Positional Chess, Planning & Strategy Books for Beginners and Beyond...

https://www.chess.com/blog/RussBell/introduction-to-positional-chess-planning-strategy

Here a list of good books on various chess topics...

Good Chess Books for Beginners and Beyond...

https://www.chess.com/blog/RussBell/good-chess-books-for-beginners-and-beyond

https://www.chess.com/blog/RussBell

John Emms books really helped me.

If you want to improve, then I think that around 600s, energy spent studying abstract stuff like strategy would be better directed towards tactics and combinations, because 100% of games of 600 players are decided by a blunder - someone hanging a piece, or allowing mate, or dropping a few pawns. It is all very well and good building up a fine strategic masterpiece over 40 moves and then making 1 blunder which throws it all away.

After nearly a 50 year gap, I returned to chess and bought several books. The best I found as a beginner (not quite, but close enough) were several books by GM Yasser Seirawan. They are easy to read and better still easier to understand. As a beginner I would start with Play Winning Chess and Winning Chess Openings. After a bit of experience, His Winning Chess Tactics and Winning Chess Strategies are good, just a little more for someone with some game experience. Winning Chess Endings would also be helpful.

And, he has many great videos on You Tube. Many are for intermediate players, but there are some for beginners. Here's one:

Very first thing , At 600 , You should avoid Blundering pieces .

I made an account and got back into chess after a 30-year gap. And for an old fart who will turn 65 next year, I did OK.

After you get your game up to the 1500-1800 strength, there are a few book that I would recommend.

My 60 Memorable Games by Bobby Fischer

Zurich 1953 by David Bronstein

My System by Aaron Nimzovich

Pawn Power in Chess by Hans Kmoch

and Tal's book on his first World Chess Championship match with Botvinnik.

@CassieDoos -

All of the books recommended by blueemu, while being highly regarded classic texts, are advanced and appropriate for the rating range (at minimum) he suggested.  Until you reach that rating range don't even think about trying to read them.  Based on your current rating, they will be (with all due respect) mostly over your head.  They are even more "technical" than Silman's "The Amateur's MInd", which you mentioned in your initial post.

Advanced players have a tendency to recommend advanced books (it enhances their self image), regardless of whether the books are appropriate for lower rated players.  They would never deign to recommend a book by (gasp!) Bruce Pandolfini, which is precisely the kind of book you should focus on at this point in your development.  Other appropriate and outstanding authors for the beginner-novice would be Dan Heisman, Yasser Seirawan, Jeff Coakley, to name just a few.

I like to mention the analogy - if one is embarking on the study of mathematics for the first time, starting out by reading a book on Calculus is an exercise in futility when you haven't yet mastered (in order) arithmetic, algebra, geometry, trigonometry, etc...

Alekhine's Books

Irving Chernev's books are good since they explain every move. Logical Chess and the Most Instructive Games. I think Logical Chess is a little more for beginners than the other one, but they're both good. Simple Chess is a good one too.

Eh, it isn’t so bad. It’s why I went with the username I did. 

And I think Thriller said something to the effect of “learn endgames first, if you can’t mentally juggle a few pieces, you won’t learn how to account for 32.” As long as you don’t resign or get mated in the middle game (which will happen frequently sub-800), then you’ll get to an endgame. Knowing how to force a tie in a bishop v rook or how to use opposition and zugzwang to promote can’t hurt. It is probably not the best use of the OP’s time (should focus on tactics and hanging pieces), but I don’t think it’s a bad thing for a beginner to study.

Jesus De La Villa’s 100 endgames was one of the first chess books I could actually follow, and you can set up endgames on a chess.com custom board for practice (and turn the computer to 3000 to really hammer it down, that’s how I taught myself the two bishops mate).

I'm a 1300 reading My System and it is hard going. I'm thinking of putting it on hold and picking up some of the books suggested for lower ratings. Part of the problem for me is the prose, the style in which it is written. It's a book of it's time and aimed at a higher rating bracket.

@MarkGrubb - My System is written around a fairly good tactical depth.  Nimzowitsch is expecting his readers to be able to see about 4 moves (8-ply) deep.  However, the positional points he makes are very important, particularly with respect to rook play and pawn restraint.  My own play improved immediately after reading it, I was able to draw against an Expert in my very next tournament (and I was better for most of the game).  However, my tactical depth was barely good enough to understand everything Nimzowitsch was saying, and I can understand how many players, even experienced ones, would struggle with that.

If you want to understand the whole of the book, I'd recommend first going through a book with a thorough explanation of tactics and a good series of deeper puzzles (mate in 3 or 4 type puzzles, and maybe some endgame studies), to build up your depth of analysis.

My System is one of the best chess books ever written, and it is the only major book that really captures the hypermodern style of play.  Understanding only the classical methods of Steinitz & Tarrasch will cause a player like you to stagnate before too long (I did for a long time before I dove in to hypermodern play).  However, with any method of positional play, tactical depth will matter.

Thanks. That is a useful summary. My tactical depth is getting there I think. I can calculate and visualise candidate moves 4 deep when doing puzzles. I'm doing puzzles up to about 1600 rating. My issue with the book isn't the subject matter it is the writing style. That is what I meant by of it's time. He is very wordy, whole paragraphs on rallying the troops rather than getting to the point. He often justifies himself to his critics, and cracks little jokes that aren't funny and then explains them. I find it all gets in the way and breaks up the flow which for me makes it a difficult book to work with. My guess is that at the time he was presenting new ideas and it is written with that in mind which is subtly different to education.

I've read a couple of modern chess books and I have found them easier to work with than My System. It's not the content. I'm no stranger to learning new ideas and difficult topics. :)