Ducks in a Row: What do You Assume?
by Miki Saxon
When chatting over dinner the conversation often takes on a more philosophical turn; this happened recently in a discussion of good places to work.
One mid-level manager commented wistfully that while he understood that business was a game, he wished it could be a bit more gentlemanly—like chess.
While we understood what he meant, the example was a source of amusement.
Chess is the last game to use as an example of function over dysfunction.
The latest intrigue revolves around corruption allegations by the two candidates for the federation’s presidency, Garry Kasparov, the former champion and Russian opposition figure, and Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, the incumbent president and self-described space-alien abductee.
Such charges would normally hardly raise an eyebrow in the world of organized chess, which has been rife with rumors of corruption for decades.
This time there are smoking guns, although each side claims theirs is being misinterpreted.
As Lady Macduff said, “things are not always as they seem,” but, at times, we all attribute certain qualities or abilities based on assumptions.
We think of chess being a scholar’s game and scholars are usually gentlemen, therefore the world of chess must lack the typical nasty interactions of other human organizations.
An assumption that is obviously false—as most assumptions usually are.
Flickr image credit: M.J. Ambriola
