Collective Chess Memory: Chess Improvement Through Shared Experiences

Welcome to the 38 new subscribers who joined this week. The newsletter now goes out to 3,308 people around the world! If you have not yet subscribed sign up for free today and receive a free eBook of the first volume in the Tactics Ladder series.

---

Earlier this week I asked the paid subscribers of Say Chess what subjects I should write about. The clear winner was chess improvement. Sholom, an avid chess player and chesspunk, asked me the following questions along with his vote:

1) In hindsight, what do you think was the biggest factor in your own improvement?

2) In hindsight, what would you have done differently regarding your chess improvement?

The questions are too big to answer in one post, and I’m also working on a book on the subject, so hopefully the book will cover it.

However, the question made me think of how the chess community in general answers this kind of question. Then the term collective memory popped up in my head, a term that I was very interested in studying while I was doing my master's degree in history now some years ago. So what is the best way to improve according to the chess community? How do we arrive at an answer? What is accepted as the best method and what is not?

Collective memory can be understood as the shared pool of memories and knowledge that exists within a group or society.¹ It shapes our understanding of the past, influences our present, and often guides our future. One of the first to write about collective memory was the Frenchman Maurice Halbwachs (1877 – 1945). Halbwachs was a philosopher and sociologist in the early 20th century and has the following description of the term:

Collective consciousness is a spiritual reality. [...] Its action and extensions may indeed be followed into every region of each man’s conscience; its influence on the soul is measured by the influence exerted on sensitive life by the higher faculties, which are the means of social thought.

Maurice Halbwachs, “La doctrine d’Emile Durkheim” (1918)

In short, we do not only exist in our own consciousness, but we are also part of a group’s shared collective consciousness. When we play chess, share our thoughts on r/chess on Reddit, tweet about it, or discuss chess at our local club we are all engaging in the discussion about the game and what approach might be the best way to improve. This activity is pushing and shaping the way we see chess in our shared community. Thousand of chess books have been published each one adding to the knowledge base while giving a slightly new answer each time. Some ideas are passed on and revisited again and again, while others slowly are forgotten.

Halbwachs proposed two laws governing the evolution of collective memory: a Law of Fragmentation and a Law of Concentration. Some memories are tied to a place and then fragmented into pieces, while other memories concentrate at a specific location.

”It adjusts the image of old facts to the beliefs and spiritual needs of the moment. It is as if the collective memory empties itself a bit when it feels too full of differences: Some memories are evacuated as the community enters a new period of its life”

—Halbwachs, La mémoire collective, chap. 3)²

Like a bucket with water, we cannot store all the vast amounts of chess information out there. Some stories will be forgotten, while it is most likely that it will be remembered forever that Botvinnik played blitz only once — on a train in 1929. We can either fragment the information, concentrate it together, or forget it. I have tried to apply the idea of fragmentation and concentration to a chess context:

1. Fragmentation: In the context of chess, this law can be observed as how chess players and communities simplify and break down complex games, stories about the game, and strategic and tactical concepts. For instance, a famous game may be remembered for a few critical moves or a stunning sacrifice, even though the game in its entirety involved many complex sequences over many moves. Maybe Ding’s winning rapid game will be remembered as the Rg6-game and can be referenced as that within the chess community. This fragmentation allows players to learn and remember critical aspects of games or strategies that can be applied in their own games. Another example of fragmentation would be to take Nimzowitch’s classic ‘My System’. The book was very influential on past generations of chess players, but today most likely only fragments from the material are passed on to the new generation of chess players (unless the new players actually read it)..

2. Concentration: Within the chess community certain tools, books, advice, resources, openings, or players might receive more focus than others based on their popularity, effectiveness, or the values of the community. For instance, the Sicilian Defense is a highly studied and widely known opening due to its aggressive nature and the high success rate for black. We often hear an opening is trending. This emphasis often leads to concentrated study and a collective understanding of this opening, while other potentially useful but less popular openings may be overlooked. Another example is something I remember FM Nate Solon writing about on

   Zwischenzug
   , is the minority attack that seems to be the most important plan in chess, but maybe it is not, but we see it as a perfect example.

Chess players, particularly those in the process of improving their game, can benefit from being aware of these dynamics. By recognizing the tendency to fragment, forget, and concentrate, players can better navigate the jungle of advice.

The question of the "best approach" or most effective approach to chess improvement, as seen through the lens of collective memory, is both complex and subjective. It raises interesting considerations about the nature of knowledge, learning, memory, and the role of community in shaping individual growth.

The concept of collective memory means that our understanding of chess is not an isolated process, but rather a communal one, shaped by the shared knowledge and experiences of the chess community. This knowledge is passed down through generations of players, in the form of opening theories, documented games of grandmasters, and shared annotations. Every chess player stands on the shoulders of those who came before. We often mention that an expert player of the past would have a hard time against today’s experts.

However, collective memory, as discussed earlier, is influenced by the laws of fragmentation and concentration. It simplifies complex events and concentrates on certain aspects at the expense of others. In the context of chess, this means that some parts of the game or methods of improvement may be overemphasized, while others may be overlooked. Thus, an important question arises: Can the best approach to chess improvement truly be determined by a collective memory that is selective and subjective?

Maybe it is just important to acknowledge this and try to adopt a balanced approach. The collective chess memory can serve as a valuable guide. It provides a map to understanding the game's depth, shaped by the experiences of countless players. Yet, it is equally important to recognize its limitations. Understanding that collective memory can be selective and fragmented encourages an individual to explore beyond the well-trodden path. This might involve studying less popular openings, analyzing overlooked games, or developing new training methods. Furthermore, every chess player is different and one method might not work for all.

Finally, the chess player's journey does also contribute to the collective memory. Each game you play, each conversation about the game, adds to the pool of shared knowledge and memories. Your next move might end up in another player’s annotations. In this sense, chess improvement becomes a cyclical process – one learns from the collective, contributes to it, and learns again.

“In each epoch memory reconstructs an image of the past that is in accord with the predominant thoughts of the society.”

― Maurice Halbwachs

The "best approach" to chess improvement, therefore, might not be a singular path defined by the predominant idea of the chess community, but rather a dynamic interaction with it. It is about understanding and using the wisdom of the collective, while also exploring, questioning, and adding to it. And by doing that you will hopefully find out what works for you.

/Martin

1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_memory

2. Cultural Memory Studies, edited by Astrid Erll · Ansgar Nünning in collaboration with Sara B. Young, 2008, page 148