Reb wrote:
I have read Brady's earlier book on Fischer : Profile of a Prodigy and enjoyed it but I don't intend to read his most recent .
Can I ask you why not?
The truth about Dr. Frank Brady and Fischer
Sort:
EscherehcsE wrote:
I sense a bit of irony here. I'm sure if Dr. Brady knew of this thread, he'd thank the OP for maintaining interest in his books about Fischer.
Here is an excerpt of what Brady wrote to a chess master who reviewed his book.
http://www.thechessmind.net/blog/2011/1/4/a-review-of-frank-bradys-_endgame_-a-bobby-fischer-bio.html
You mention that I avoid “dime-store psychology” – I like to call it “dollar-book Freud” – in analysing Bobby and you are right: my goal was to present the facts of Bobby’s life, and allow the reader come to his or her own conclusions, and not intrude with my own opinions. There is ample evidence throughout the book that makes it clear as to how and why Bobby became what he did.
Now isn't that interesting? He claims that he lets the reader come to their own conclusions but titles it, 'to the edge of madness'. Is that letting the reader draw their own conclusions? He claims that there is ample evidence yet not a single person here managed to contribute a shred of empirically established evidence.
robbie_1969 wrote:
Reb wrote:
I have read Brady's earlier book on Fischer : Profile of a Prodigy and enjoyed it but I don't intend to read his most recent .
Can I ask you why not?
I believe Brady has fallen into the " Fischer haters " camp and thus all he writes now concerning Fischer will be biased in that direction and I don't like to read such biased writing .
Reb wrote:
robbie_1969 wrote:
Reb wrote:
I have read Brady's earlier book on Fischer : Profile of a Prodigy and enjoyed it but I don't intend to read his most recent .
Can I ask you why not?
I believe Brady has fallen into the " Fischer haters " camp and thus all he writes now concerning Fischer will be biased in that direction and I don't like to read such biased writing .
Yes to what extent and why his bias exits is of some interest.
robbie_1969 wrote:
Now isn't that interesting? He claims that he lets the reader come to their own conclusions but titles it, 'to the edge of madness'. Is that letting the reader draw their own conclusions? He claims that there is ample evidence yet not a single person here managed to contribute a shred of empirically established evidence.
Now isn't that interesting? He claims that he lets the reader come to their own conclusions but titles it, 'to the edge of madness'. Is that letting the reader draw their own conclusions? He claims that there is ample evidence yet not a single person here managed to contribute a shred of empirically established evidence.
No, not really that interesting. It is my experience, at least in the English language, that the conclusions come at the end not at the beginning.
But, you are determined to continue to waste your time arguing against a book you won't read. Possibly this is the most pointless exercise I've seen here.
Empirically established evidence for what? Evidence for being on the edge of madness? That is like asking for evidence for being on the edge of pregnancy. It doesn't mean anything. It's a biography of Fischer not a case study or a diagnosis of any kind. I'm not sure how many times you need to be told the same thing over and over again. I'm sure we understand you don't agree with the title. OK. Get past it or don't. Maybe I'll try one more time to clear it up for you.
Introduction and Conclusion
Dr Brady does not diagnosis Robert James Fischer with mental illness.(1).
Notes
1. Brady,Frank.Endgame: Bobby Fischer's Remarkable Rise and Fall - from America's Brightest Prodigy to the Edge of Madness New York: Crown Publishing Group 2012. pp 1-432.
Reb wrote:
robbie_1969 wrote:
Reb wrote:
I have read Brady's earlier book on Fischer : Profile of a Prodigy and enjoyed it but I don't intend to read his most recent .
Can I ask you why not?
I believe Brady has fallen into the " Fischer haters " camp and thus all he writes now concerning Fischer will be biased in that direction and I don't like to read such biased writing .
Brady doesn't divulge or allude to his personal feelings in 'Endgame'. I certainly did not come away after reading the book that Brady hated Fischer. If anything, the overall emotion of the book is regret. But that is thematic to 'Prodigy' as well as most anything on Fischer that I have read.
Maybe Brady could have written a happy ending, or at least a happy subtitle. Something like Bobby Fischer - Holidays in Iceland.
As a chess player, most of what is interesting about Fischer is his life up to 1975 which if memory serves is covered in Prodigy. Endgame does expand upon his relationship with his mother and sister which I personally found interesting. Brady also interviews the Polgars which is one of the more significant additions to Endgame from the earlier text. Also worth the read are the later interviews with Spassky. He is a true gentleman. I would read his biography if one is published.
If you followed Fischer's life there will not be too much in Endgame you don't already know.
robbie_1969 wrote:
Reb wrote:
robbie_1969 wrote:
Reb wrote:
I have read Brady's earlier book on Fischer : Profile of a Prodigy and enjoyed it but I don't intend to read his most recent .
Can I ask you why not?
I believe Brady has fallen into the " Fischer haters " camp and thus all he writes now concerning Fischer will be biased in that direction and I don't like to read such biased writing .
Yes to what extent and why his bias exits is of some interest.
Oh boy, a rabbit hole.
Why don't you just call him up and ask him? He is faculty at Barnard College in New York City.
I'll call him if you like, but I would rather a few more questions besides do you hate Bobby Fischer and how much?
I sure didn't get that Brady was a "Fischer hater" in "Endgame" either.
Here's a quote on Brady, which I agree with, from the review Robbie linked -- even though it directly contradicts Robbie's hobby horse:
Brady is also rather gentle with Fischer. It’s by no means a whitewash, but it would be very easy to write a book – an accurate and objective book – in which he comes out looking far worse than he does in Endgame. My overall impression is that Brady is a little too sympathetic, but perhaps it helps balance one-sided portrayals of him as an anti-Jewish, anti-American nutjob.
robbie_1969 wrote:
Darth_Algar wrote:
robbie_1969 wrote:
Darth_Algar wrote:
robbie_1969 wrote:
Darth_Algar wrote:
Publishers, not the author, are responsible for the financing, the printing, the distribution and the marketing of a book. A publisher might ask the author's opinion on the title and the cover and what goes on it, but at the end of the day the publisher, not the author, decides. Now stop being ridiculous.
Its irrelevant how much influence Brady had, the book bears his name and he is directly responsible for its contents of which the title is an integral part. Your seeking to distance Brady from it is touching, but hardly convincing. As for being ridiculous, you will not feel offended when i dismiss those words nonchalantly and skip gleefully and merrily upon my way and ask that you refrain from offering me personal advice in the future for I remain capable of rational thought, despite your protestations.
The title is not an integral part of the contents. A subtitle or cover blub is much less so. Your refusal to read the contents of that book because of a trival subtitle/cover blurb is ridiculous, irrational (despite your protestations) and, as one poster earlier noted, anti-intellectual.
Oh dear, if its not an integral part of what is to follow then he might as well have named it, 'how to herd Yakks in outer Mongolia!' Lets put your proposition to the test, lets choose any other book, for example My sixty memorable games, for according to you the title is merely a blurb and bears a very tenuous relationship with what we might expect to follow inside. In fact we might expect to find seventy games that were not memorable at all, but instantly forgettable! according to you. Is that really what you are saying? If so then may i suggest to you that you get someone to feel your bum and bring you back to reality for you seem to me to be wired to the moon and incapable of rational thought. Did I mention that your opinions are meaningless to anyone but you? no? well now you know. Neeeext!
Yes, a title may give some indication as to the contents of the book, however it is not an integral part of the contents. You're being intentionally thick and ignoring the point. You make the mistake of looking at a title/subtitle and deciding that's all you need to know about the book. Perhaps you'll see Cormac McCarthy's 'The Road' and decide it's about someone driving cross-country in their car.
The term you are floundering for is, disingenuous , which i reject! the title is indicative of Dr. Bradys and/or his publishers projection of Fischer as someone who according to them, descended to and i quote, 'the edge of madness'. I don't need to read the content to understand what they are portraying, the same as i don't need to read the content of the Origin of the species to know what its about, do I. So enough of the pretense, you have been caught red handed trying to extricate the scurrilous Brady away from the work that bears his name and it portrayal of Robert James Fischer as being mentally ill and for which neither you, nor Brady nor anyone else here can produce a ragged vestige of credible medical evidence.
Wrong. You learned elsewhere that Origin of Species is about Darwinian Evolution (though that doesn't mean you "know what it is about"); you didn't just "have" this knowledge, anymore than you "have" the knowledge of what Brady's book is about without reading it. You would make a great Nazi. No need to be confused with the facts
Mersaphe wrote:
One of my good friends who is a Fischer aficionado reportedly told me that Fischer reportedly went nuts because he decided to quit chess after 1972 in order to focus on other pursuits such as women, traveling, women, wine, reading, fishing, women, consuming exotic cuisines, and women. Fischer reportedly had the worst tournament of his career sometime during the 60's when he reportedly invited a local girl (the tournament was in Argentina) whom he met through a mutual acquiantance to become acquianted with himself back in his hotel room. Anyway, Fischer's romantic troubles with the opposite gender were reportedly the cause of his paranoia and delusions of grandeur and usurping of authority figures and general insanity.
He was tall, handsome, athletic, had all his teeth and was employed so how the hell did he have trouble with women!?
Anyway, I don't care for Fischer, he was an antisemite who joined some weird cult (maybe because some hot chick talked him into it?)
robbie_1969 wrote:
najdorf96 wrote:
Robbie & Ipcress have very valid points. Childhood actors/actresses, I dare say, Mike Tyson, have much commonness with the topic. I think most can name other examples. Point is, medical/clinical assessments have changed over the course of 30 yrs, wouldn't anyone say? And Media scrutiny has escalated at least an 1000 fold since the advent of the internet!
Frank Brady's book will always be an mainstay in my library. Has been so for 30+ yrs. Certainly some unsubtantiated claims will not change that. Move forward. Write your oen book. Play chess.
Peace guys.
You are too magnanimous. Brady deserves censure and to be called out for his distorted portrayal of probably the greatest chess player ever to have graced this earth. He could have acted with honour and integrity towards Fischer instead of grovelling to the dictates of publishers and public opinion. Sure Brady says some pleasing things about Fischer but it does not justify his portrayal of Fischer as mentally ill and for that he should not be forgiven.
You don't know what Brady's portrayal of Fischer is because you won't read the book. Never once in 'Endgame' does Brady make any claim of Fischer being mentally ill. I know this because, unlike you, I've actually read the damn thing.
Reb wrote:
robbie_1969 wrote:
Reb wrote:
I have read Brady's earlier book on Fischer : Profile of a Prodigy and enjoyed it but I don't intend to read his most recent .
Can I ask you why not?
I believe Brady has fallen into the " Fischer haters " camp and thus all he writes now concerning Fischer will be biased in that direction and I don't like to read such biased writing .
What leads you to believe that?
_Number_6 wrote:
robbie_1969 wrote:
Now isn't that interesting? He claims that he lets the reader come to their own conclusions but titles it, 'to the edge of madness'. Is that letting the reader draw their own conclusions? He claims that there is ample evidence yet not a single person here managed to contribute a shred of empirically established evidence.
Now isn't that interesting? He claims that he lets the reader come to their own conclusions but titles it, 'to the edge of madness'. Is that letting the reader draw their own conclusions? He claims that there is ample evidence yet not a single person here managed to contribute a shred of empirically established evidence.
No, not really that interesting. It is my experience, at least in the English language, that the conclusions come at the end not at the beginning.
But, you are determined to continue to waste your time arguing against a book you won't read. Possibly this is the most pointless exercise I've seen here.
Empirically established evidence for what? Evidence for being on the edge of madness? That is like asking for evidence for being on the edge of pregnancy. It doesn't mean anything. It's a biography of Fischer not a case study or a diagnosis of any kind. I'm not sure how many times you need to be told the same thing over and over again. I'm sure we understand you don't agree with the title. OK. Get past it or don't. Maybe I'll try one more time to clear it up for you.
Introduction and Conclusion
Dr Brady does not diagnosis Robert James Fischer with mental illness.(1).
Notes
1. Brady,Frank.Endgame: Bobby Fischer's Remarkable Rise and Fall - from America's Brightest Prodigy to the Edge of Madness New York: Crown Publishing Group 2012. pp 1-432.
I am losing my patience with you apologists. Brady intimates that Fischer was or descended to 'the edge of madness', intimating that he became mentally ill. There is simply no other way to interpret his intent (if there is please let it be known), what evidence does he have for the assertion? You and others here have been asked countless times to produce it and instead we are treated to irrelevancies and excuses and apologetics with reason or foundation, so where is the evidence? All you need to do is cite a source and I assure you I will read it. If you will not or cannot then you can have no objection for anyone calling into question the veracity of his text.
ipcress12 wrote:
Here's a quote on Brady, which I agree with, from the review Robbie linked -- even though it directly contradicts Robbie's hobby horse:
Brady is also rather gentle with Fischer. It’s by no means a whitewash, but it would be very easy to write a book – an accurate and objective book – in which he comes out looking far worse than he does in Endgame. My overall impression is that Brady is a little too sympathetic, but perhaps it helps balance one-sided portrayals of him as an anti-Jewish, anti-American nutjob.
It proves nothing it is simply an opinion and without corroborating evidence is actually meaningless.
Wrong. You learned elsewhere that Origin of Species is about Darwinian Evolution (though that doesn't mean you "know what it is about"); you didn't just "have" this knowledge, anymore than you "have" the knowledge of what Brady's book is about without reading it. You would make a great Nazi. No need to be confused with the facts
Then he should change the title for it certainly gives the impression that Robert Fischer became mentally ill (or you can always interpret the phrase, the edge of madness for us) Also in the comments that he has made to reviews of the book he certainly seems to have provided some type of in his own words, 'dollar-psychological', ' evidence'. Are you sure it wasn't the back of a cornflakes packet that you read while still dreaming at breakfast time thinking it was Bradys book?
Wrong. You learned elsewhere that Origin of Species is about Darwinian Evolution (though that doesn't mean you "know what it is about"); you didn't just "have" this knowledge, anymore than you "have" the knowledge of what Brady's book is about without reading it. You would make a great Nazi. No need to be confused with the facts
Another epic fail and logical fallacy. The actual title of the book is,
On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.
by means of which any rational and functioning individual can discern what the book is generally about. Sure if you want to know the details you can read it, but i warn you its a rather tedious book. As for being a Nazi, please make yourself aware of the following logical fallacy,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum
it just may save you from making the same mistake in the future, but i doubt it given your present form. Neeeeext!
I'll call him if you like, but I would rather a few more questions besides do you hate Bobby Fischer and how much?
Sure call him up and ask him why he chose to portray Fischer as being 'mentally ill' and what evidence he based his findings on. Maybe he can actually produce some evidence. If Dr. Brady posts on this thread with evidence i will retract everything i have said and issue a public apology.
robbie_1969 wrote:
I'll call him if you like, but I would rather a few more questions besides do you hate Bobby Fischer and how much?
Sure call him up and ask him why he chose to portray Fischer as being 'mentally ill' and what evidence he based his findings on. Maybe he can actually produce some evidence. If Dr. Brady posts on this thread with evidence i will retract everything i have said and issue a public apology.
Gladly, would you direct me to the page where Dr Brady makes a diagnosis of mental illness. If I simply ask it they way you have, he will probably say he didn't and to read the book (again).
Is there anything else you would like to know? If I'm going to incur long distance expenses I would rather not sound like a one trick mentally challenged internet stalker.
Are you sure you are Scottish?
I sense a bit of irony here. I'm sure if Dr. Brady knew of this thread, he'd thank the OP for maintaining interest in his books about Fischer.