James Blish On Poul Anderson

William Atheling Jr., The Issue At Hand, studies in contemporary magazine science fiction, edited and with an introduction by James Blish (Advent: Publishers, Chicago, 1964).

More Issues At Hand (for reference, see Gadgets).

In The Issue...
On pp. 71-74, in a review written in Autumn, 1953, Atheling/Blish discusses Poul Anderson's "The Immortal Game" (The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, February, 1954). Apparently, the editorial blurb by Boucher and McComas described the story as:

science fiction;
"The Chess Game Story";
as having "incomparable romantic sweep";
a "tragic epic." (p. 71)

Blish denies all these descriptions and adds that "...several more negative judgments..." (ibid.) could be applied. He argues that, in a chess game story:

the game should be a good one;

there should be an evident relationship between the moves and the story;

the story should come first;

a story that follows the game to its detriment satisfies neither chess fans nor fiction readers;

the game should "...be original with the writer..."; (p. 72)

it should be "...a part of the creative act..." (ibid.), serving the story like any other background condition;

Through The Looking Glass satisfies all these criteria whereas "The Immortal Game" does not.

Blish continues that, in "The Immortal Game":

the game, not original with the author, is a straitjacket imposed on the story;

the chessmen are clumsily personified;

there is a parenthetical attempt to explain the personifications by reference to computers;

there is a small amount of "...fan-fiction irony..."; (ibid.)

the plot is nothing but the sequence of moves;

the name-keys and typographical tricks have no advantage over using the right names for the elements of the game;

translating the nomenclature back into chessboard terminology leads the reader our of, not into, the story;

the writing is in Anderson's Planet Stories vein which is like "...writing in his sleep..."; (ibid.)

this is not "tragic epic" or "romantic sweep" but "romanticist-manque"; (ibid.)

the text is full of "...duplicate or incantatory statement[s]..." which are "...signs of automatic writing..."; (p. 73) (Blish quotes: "'Good! Oh, good, my Queen!'" (ibid.) etc)

Finally, Blish presents "Danish Gambit" by Carl Gentile as a very good chess story which Boucher and McComas should reprint "...to take the taste of the Anderson out of the mouths of chess lovers and fiction readers alike..." (p. 74)

Blish quotes Anderson as replying that his story was allegorical and made a "...childishly obvious..." point (p. 72) that "...seems to have escaped Mr. Atheling." (ibid). Blish responds that:

the point still escapes him;
a real game is too specific "...to support an allegory." (ibid.)

We feel that giants have clashed.