Remarkable Trio of Young, African-American Chess Masters(nytimes.com)
nytimes.com
Remarkable Trio of Young, African-American Chess Masters
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/13/crosswords/chess/chess-three-young-african-americans-earn-recognition-as-masters.html?_r=1&hp
25 comments
It's a shame the article doesn't mention how they got interested in chess
Indeed, there are many interesting aspects to this that should have been discussed. How did they get so good? How long have they known each other? Has their skill grown in unison? What type of environment led to this statistical oddity of 3 Black kids from the same area to become such strong players?
My three hopes for these kids are:
a) they manage not to become insufferable d-bags by the time they get to university
b) their parents don't drive them completely insane
c) they still love chess when they're 30
I can only assume it's stressful to be a prodigy in anything, and I could imaging the chess scene being particularly pressure-rich.
a) they manage not to become insufferable d-bags by the time they get to university
b) their parents don't drive them completely insane
c) they still love chess when they're 30
I can only assume it's stressful to be a prodigy in anything, and I could imaging the chess scene being particularly pressure-rich.
I misread your comment. I thought you said "my three hopes for my kids...". I thought: that sounds like a good strategy for any parents to have.
this is really encouraging. The image of African people usually vastly misrepresents their true potential. Great to see some positive news that casts some true light on the immense talents of these gifted people.
...you write this like you don't expect any black people to be reading your comment. I'm offended by reading this, so I can't imagine how black readers of HN that come across this feel.
Also, they're African-American. And no, that's not nitpicking or trying to be PC; it's an important distinction.
Also, they're African-American. And no, that's not nitpicking or trying to be PC; it's an important distinction.
No, I disagree - and I'm black. He's right. The image portrayed of blacks (by everyone - including many blacks that have "made it") is that we are artsy folks who "do" music and play sports. As a result, people often don't intuitively consider blacks when they think of professions and otherwise intellectual activities.
In fact, the only reason most people are going to even click on this link is because they are amazed to see "3 black guys playing chess" ... whoaaa! The simple fact that people are surprised and curious to see "how they got interested in chess" is proof enough that "The image of African people usually vastly misrepresents their true potential".
In fact, the only reason most people are going to even click on this link is because they are amazed to see "3 black guys playing chess" ... whoaaa! The simple fact that people are surprised and curious to see "how they got interested in chess" is proof enough that "The image of African people usually vastly misrepresents their true potential".
I'm certainly not disagreeing with what you're saying or the core of what the parent meant to say regarding images of blacks in the media.
What I'm reacting to is an "Othering" of blacks on HN implied by the comment. A phrase like "these gifted people" implies that the audience he's speaking to is assumed to not include "African [sic] people". It's a default whiteness (and maleness, but that's a story for another day) that's rife in the tech industry that reinforces the image that it's a white boy's club. Yes, the industry is certainly predominantly white male, but when rhetoric and attitudes assume white maleness, the environment becomes unfriendly to everyone else.
-Gay Asian-American woman tired of explaining things that should be taught in schools
What I'm reacting to is an "Othering" of blacks on HN implied by the comment. A phrase like "these gifted people" implies that the audience he's speaking to is assumed to not include "African [sic] people". It's a default whiteness (and maleness, but that's a story for another day) that's rife in the tech industry that reinforces the image that it's a white boy's club. Yes, the industry is certainly predominantly white male, but when rhetoric and attitudes assume white maleness, the environment becomes unfriendly to everyone else.
-Gay Asian-American woman tired of explaining things that should be taught in schools
[deleted]
You are saying the author should write differently depending on whether black people are reading the comment. Is that really what you meant?
Well, no, I think the parent's tone is a bit paternalistic whomever the audience, so I'd say the author should consider writing differently regardless of who's reading. I guess there are several things that rub me the wrong way about the comment -- the paternalism and the implied assumption that HN readers aren't black.
And to the parent, I feel kinda bad now that this is generating this much discussion because I understand there wasn't any malicious intent in the comment but I do feel strongly that what I've said is true.
And to the parent, I feel kinda bad now that this is generating this much discussion because I understand there wasn't any malicious intent in the comment but I do feel strongly that what I've said is true.
Why not just call them what they are: American.
Let's remove all stereotypes, not just the ones you don't like eh.
Let's remove all stereotypes, not just the ones you don't like eh.
> Let's remove all stereotypes
Being of African descent is not a stereotype, it's an ethnicity. It would be a stereotype to call black people "basketball-playing Americans," or "urban-poor Americans." Suggesting that we all just call "them" "American" is insulting -- there is an important and distinct cultural identity shared by many African-Americans that they wish to continue identifying with, at least in part.
I'm Indian-American, and if you told me to just call myself American, I would feel a) that you consider yourself to be in possession/authority over the definition of what it means to be American, and b) you had some strange interest in me behaving exactly like you, instead of expressing cultural differences.
You are offering a false dichotomy -- either be American or be African-American, but not both. Try this instead: how about you be alright with African-Americans as both African and American, and not give so much of a shit about which cultures other Americans choose to embrace?
Being of African descent is not a stereotype, it's an ethnicity. It would be a stereotype to call black people "basketball-playing Americans," or "urban-poor Americans." Suggesting that we all just call "them" "American" is insulting -- there is an important and distinct cultural identity shared by many African-Americans that they wish to continue identifying with, at least in part.
I'm Indian-American, and if you told me to just call myself American, I would feel a) that you consider yourself to be in possession/authority over the definition of what it means to be American, and b) you had some strange interest in me behaving exactly like you, instead of expressing cultural differences.
You are offering a false dichotomy -- either be American or be African-American, but not both. Try this instead: how about you be alright with African-Americans as both African and American, and not give so much of a shit about which cultures other Americans choose to embrace?
If you're going to be so anal about the definition, you shouldn't call yourself 'American'. Everyone else in America is 'American' too, not just people from USA.
> a) that you consider yourself to be in possession/authority over the definition of what it means to be American
It means being from America, or having adopted the country. You can't be an American just by liking the culture.
> and b) you had some strange interest in me behaving exactly like you, instead of expressing cultural differences.
Oh, yeah. That's it.
Or, rather, in getting you to use terms that don't suggest racial identity when you don't mean it.
> Try this instead: how about you be alright with African-Americans as both African and American, and not give so much of a shit about which cultures other Americans choose to embrace?
No. That means that a non-black is either an African American if they embrace the culture - which isn't the way it sounds, or it's a racial/origin term and has nothing to do with culture.
Neither is both useful and accurate.
Also, Africa doesn't have one culture, even to the extent the USA does. Even if you use the term it's hopelessly inaccurate.
Try one of these instead: "American who practices xyz-African culture" "American, recently descended from Africans"
> You obviously can't see what a dick move it is to stand on a soapbox dictate the cultural identities of other people.
I'm not saying you don't act like a resident of India. If you mean that, say it.
> Otherwise, I'd have to imagine that you wouldn't do it. Unless you're a sociopath. So you're an asshole and/or a sociopath, but probably a shitty person either way.
Hilarious. Go off the wall much?
> Plenty of people are willing to acknowledge and embrace my Indian-ness; I don't feel invalidated by some bigoted troll.
You didn't ask if he did, you freaked about his terminology. There was absolutely no suggestion that you are wrong in your interests.
Also, "acknowledge my indian-ness". Ummm, yeah. Get over it.
> Why are you unable to understand that this is not a question of what's written in my passport?
Because you keep insisting on using broken terminology just to differentiate yourself. That language refers, largely, to what's on your passport.
> It is astonishing that you can make the statement of yourself that you are culturally Indian -- so you apparently understand the concept of cultural identity -- but then turn-around and fail to grasp that, when other people say they are Indian-American, they are not making a statement about a field in their passport.
He knows that, but he's pointing out they're doing it wrong. Use more accurate language instead of racist-backlash spin terms.
> There are no facts in contention here, because you are making a straw man argument -- attacking my argument as though I were making statements about my nationality.
Not at all. The argument is you're using the language incorrectly. That millions of others agree with you isn't a counter-argument.
> I believe you are being intentionally obtuse by disregarding the fact that it is a statement about cultural identity, which apparently you are fully capable of understanding.
We feel the same about you.
You know that a more accurate phrase would be along the lines of "An Indian ex-pat who still practices the culture, but also practices USA culture" and you refuse to use it because you see it as denying you your racial heritage or some nonsense.
It means being from America, or having adopted the country. You can't be an American just by liking the culture.
> and b) you had some strange interest in me behaving exactly like you, instead of expressing cultural differences.
Oh, yeah. That's it.
Or, rather, in getting you to use terms that don't suggest racial identity when you don't mean it.
> Try this instead: how about you be alright with African-Americans as both African and American, and not give so much of a shit about which cultures other Americans choose to embrace?
No. That means that a non-black is either an African American if they embrace the culture - which isn't the way it sounds, or it's a racial/origin term and has nothing to do with culture.
Neither is both useful and accurate.
Also, Africa doesn't have one culture, even to the extent the USA does. Even if you use the term it's hopelessly inaccurate.
Try one of these instead: "American who practices xyz-African culture" "American, recently descended from Africans"
> You obviously can't see what a dick move it is to stand on a soapbox dictate the cultural identities of other people.
I'm not saying you don't act like a resident of India. If you mean that, say it.
> Otherwise, I'd have to imagine that you wouldn't do it. Unless you're a sociopath. So you're an asshole and/or a sociopath, but probably a shitty person either way.
Hilarious. Go off the wall much?
> Plenty of people are willing to acknowledge and embrace my Indian-ness; I don't feel invalidated by some bigoted troll.
You didn't ask if he did, you freaked about his terminology. There was absolutely no suggestion that you are wrong in your interests.
Also, "acknowledge my indian-ness". Ummm, yeah. Get over it.
> Why are you unable to understand that this is not a question of what's written in my passport?
Because you keep insisting on using broken terminology just to differentiate yourself. That language refers, largely, to what's on your passport.
> It is astonishing that you can make the statement of yourself that you are culturally Indian -- so you apparently understand the concept of cultural identity -- but then turn-around and fail to grasp that, when other people say they are Indian-American, they are not making a statement about a field in their passport.
He knows that, but he's pointing out they're doing it wrong. Use more accurate language instead of racist-backlash spin terms.
> There are no facts in contention here, because you are making a straw man argument -- attacking my argument as though I were making statements about my nationality.
Not at all. The argument is you're using the language incorrectly. That millions of others agree with you isn't a counter-argument.
> I believe you are being intentionally obtuse by disregarding the fact that it is a statement about cultural identity, which apparently you are fully capable of understanding.
We feel the same about you.
You know that a more accurate phrase would be along the lines of "An Indian ex-pat who still practices the culture, but also practices USA culture" and you refuse to use it because you see it as denying you your racial heritage or some nonsense.
Do you have an indian passport? Are you of official dual nationality? If not, then you are an American. Your personal preference is your own. As far as the state and your neighbours are concerned, you are an American. If you wish to identify yourself as Indian-American, you are free to do so. But to your neighbours, and to me, you are an American.
So actually I'm right about everything?
> Do you have an indian passport? Are you of official dual nationality? If not, then you are an American.
In fact, you do consider yourself to be some kind of authority about who and what is an American?
> If you wish to identify yourself as Indian-American, you are free to do so. But... you are an American.
And you are actively pushing a false dichotomy!
---
I had a lengthy explanation of how we're failing to see eye-to-eye here and what experiences I've had that you may not be aware of.
But instead of investing time proofreading it, I considered it for a minute and then deleted my post, because I'm pretty sure you're just an asshole and you won't try to understand it anyway. Why would you? You've got all the answers. You obviously can't see what a dick move it is to stand on a soapbox dictate the cultural identities of other people.
Otherwise, I'd have to imagine that you wouldn't do it. Unless you're a sociopath.
So you're an asshole and/or a sociopath, but probably a shitty person either way.
Plenty of people are willing to acknowledge and embrace my Indian-ness; I don't feel invalidated by some bigoted troll. Good luck in your life dude, I'm sure it won't be filled with mediocrity and resentment!
> Do you have an indian passport? Are you of official dual nationality? If not, then you are an American.
In fact, you do consider yourself to be some kind of authority about who and what is an American?
> If you wish to identify yourself as Indian-American, you are free to do so. But... you are an American.
And you are actively pushing a false dichotomy!
---
I had a lengthy explanation of how we're failing to see eye-to-eye here and what experiences I've had that you may not be aware of.
But instead of investing time proofreading it, I considered it for a minute and then deleted my post, because I'm pretty sure you're just an asshole and you won't try to understand it anyway. Why would you? You've got all the answers. You obviously can't see what a dick move it is to stand on a soapbox dictate the cultural identities of other people.
Otherwise, I'd have to imagine that you wouldn't do it. Unless you're a sociopath.
So you're an asshole and/or a sociopath, but probably a shitty person either way.
Plenty of people are willing to acknowledge and embrace my Indian-ness; I don't feel invalidated by some bigoted troll. Good luck in your life dude, I'm sure it won't be filled with mediocrity and resentment!
Agreed. Separate but equal didn't work so well the first time. I don't know why people are so quick to want to do it again.
? Are you serious? First, culturally, I am Indian.
Secondly, your nationality is defined by your passport. If it says you are American, then guess what, you are American. I have no idea what your problem is, but remember this. By referring to yourself as Indian-American, you are implicitly implying White-Americans are the true Americans.
If you don't get it by now, I have nothing left to say to you. Good luck in life mate, but try to be more fact based and less irrationally emotional.
Secondly, your nationality is defined by your passport. If it says you are American, then guess what, you are American. I have no idea what your problem is, but remember this. By referring to yourself as Indian-American, you are implicitly implying White-Americans are the true Americans.
If you don't get it by now, I have nothing left to say to you. Good luck in life mate, but try to be more fact based and less irrationally emotional.
Why are you unable to understand that this is not a question of what's written in my passport?
It is astonishing that you can make the statement of yourself that you are culturally Indian -- so you apparently understand the concept of cultural identity -- but then turn-around and fail to grasp that, when other people say they are Indian-American, they are not making a statement about a field in their passport.
There are no facts in contention here, because you are making a straw man argument -- attacking my argument as though I were making statements about my nationality. I believe you are being intentionally obtuse by disregarding the fact that it is a statement about cultural identity, which apparently you are fully capable of understanding.
It is astonishing that you can make the statement of yourself that you are culturally Indian -- so you apparently understand the concept of cultural identity -- but then turn-around and fail to grasp that, when other people say they are Indian-American, they are not making a statement about a field in their passport.
There are no facts in contention here, because you are making a straw man argument -- attacking my argument as though I were making statements about my nationality. I believe you are being intentionally obtuse by disregarding the fact that it is a statement about cultural identity, which apparently you are fully capable of understanding.
African American ⊂ African
The underlying theme behind the article and your comment is that black people are assumed not to be as bright as other people.
no, that they are often portrayed that way, hence the word 'misrepresent'
[deleted]
There is a lot of ability to play chess with many people all over the world, irrespective of ethnicity, but there are just situations where people are born into, where being focused on such a niche sport means you cannot be successful in general.
It's the same problem that mathematicians face. When society is developed and most things already exist, some people will choose such narrow activities, but when it's a dog eat dog world, there is no time for that.