Category Archives: Articles

The Search for Chinese Chess

Posted on by
4

Xiangqi (象棋 )(Shong Chee) is Chinese chess; the name isn’t a literal translation, but it’s in the same family of games, and bares many resemblances. There are a few competing theories as to how “chess-type” games spread throughout the world, though it’s generally agreed upon that they are all of Asian origin (the places vary) and have changed many times both when moving to different regions, and staying in those regions. These changes have both added and reduced complexity over the years, and while it’s easy to see that xiangqi is related to chess, the games are played very differently, have a quite distinct set of pieces, meaning different sets are required to play each.

Traditional Xiangqi Set

A Traditional style Xiangqi Set

Now this post isn’t going to be about how to play xiangqi or strategies, there are many good online and long form explanations of those two things. And I’m also no good at the game, just like chess, I’m mediocre at the game but I like playing it. This post will be about a problem I ran into while trying to play xiangqi that just seems weird to me.

I live in the US, and obviously xiangqi isn’t going to be as popular here as it is in China, or other surrounding countries even, regular chess isn’t even that popular here, and xiangqi is very popular in China. So most sets are more geared to Chinese player, or those who already know the game. This wouldn’t be a problem if the game used figures like chess, but instead the pieces are marked with Chinese characters, and the characters vary depending on the side (so they can be told apart with no paint from it either wearing off or never being applied). This obviously restricts the game to people who know what the Chinese characters mean, or want to take the time out of their day to learn both the meanings of some Chinese and how to play a possibly boring variant of what is wildly considered a very boring game (not my thoughts, but people find it boring). And while I am quite willing to spend my time learning parts of a new language to play a game, most of the people I know aren’t, and if I was going to get the game played I needed them to be willing to play it. So I set out looking for a set that had pictures, or stand up pieces, and this sent me on a journey.

Okay, that might be overstating things a little bit, if one is looking for “stereoscopic” pieces the sets are readily available. But they are a bit expensive and I feel like they don’t hold as much cultural ground, I like the idea of keeping the flat disk look of the traditional Chinese game. Also if one is looking for a fully westernized version of the game, where the player even plays inside the squares and not on the intersections, the Elephant Chess Club released fairly recently a set that has enough pieces the play both xiangqi and chess. But it turns out in the past this same company made the exact product I was looking for, a disk set of xiangqi with Chinese characters on one side and western-style pictures on the other. From the little information I can gather these sets were started in 1997 (that’s the copyright in the instruction book) and sold from then until a the early/mid 2000s, some stores might still have them even. After this the company produced a run of the internationalized version I mentioned before and seems to currently have that out of production as well, though I don’t know, they could make a new print run in the near future.

The smaller version of the "Stereoscopic" Xiangqi sets with brass pieces

The smaller version of the “Stereoscopic” Xiangqi sets with brass pieces

Beyond that set though I combed the internet and found no “internationalized” version of the game. This was very strange to me; xiangqi is possibly the most popular game in the world and here I am, only able to find sets that only have Chinese characters. It makes sense that the majority of these sets would have only these characters, but I would expect at least a few more to a least attempt to appeal to a western audience. So I spent more and more time looking, hoping I was just using the wrong search term and suddenly a huge list of the answer I was looking for would pop up. This didn’t happen. So during that time I contented myself with making my own Chinese chess set, it wasn’t very good, but I could play with it.

The Elephant Chess Club Internationalized version with the western sides showing

The smaller Elephant Chess Club Internationalized version with the western sides showing

After a while I set up a list of what I was looking for, it had to be a set that a) was disk shaped, like a traditional set, b) had both traditional characters, and western pictures, c) was made of wood, or plastic to be suitably light and hard to break, and d) was portable enough to play the game at a café or the like, as I don’t have a car this means it should fit easily in a backpack. This list came about after finding several sets that should have fixed my problem, but I didn’t like for various reasons. The stereoscopic and dual internationalized sets I mentioned before just didn’t seem to capture the traditional feel. Sets that did were mostly just the Chinese character versions. And some were quite large, 1 ½” playing pieces might not seem big, but they are. I also found a nice set (that was too large but still) that had Chinese characters with just the western names written beneath them, which seemed good enough for me, but the set was made of stone, and lugging a stone set to a café or even risking dropping it at home was a bit much for me. I was trying to buy a set that would introduce me and my friends to a game that we would play. So I kept on looking.

There are quite a few sets that appeared throughout the 20th century as it turns out, some not internationalized but many were, but almost all of them poorly. Finding one of these sets online in good condition was still hard, and I didn’t like the quality on most of them, they just didn’t seem as substantial as the real thing. At this point I just was baffled. How had at least a few companies not made (or currently be making) sets that were identical to the traditional sets, but with the simple addition of a stamp on the other side? I had no idea why this wasn’t happening. Eventually I did find something though. I found one set currently in production, in Brazil, for sale from a company that doesn’t ship to the US, and since I don’t speak Portuguese I think getting the set would be hard. So I just waited on eBay, and settled for the Elephant Chess Club wooden versions, they aren’t bad, but they just aren’t exactly what I’m looking for. I also got a used version of the stereoscopic set, which is small enough that at the moment it might be my go-to set. I have magnetic and wooden traditional sets now as well.

My collection of Xiangqi sets, including Traditional, Stereoscopic, Magnetic (with my homemade pieces inside), and two Elephant Chess club sets (with an additional playing mat)

My collection of Xiangqi sets, including Traditional, Stereoscopic, Magnetic (with my homemade pieces inside), and two Elephant Chess club sets (with an additional playing mat)

So I might have gotten what I wanted, but I really haven’t. What I want doesn’t seem to exist (except maybe that Mitra Brazilian version) which makes no sense to me. I know I have weird desires with products sometimes (I spent forever trying to find the perfect pocket flashlight) and that things aren’t made for me, but this just seems so obvious, and it seems like enough of a market is out there to make this sort of thing profitable.

I just don’t understand it, and my search for xiangqi isn’t over yet, but I have the sets that are easily available to me, and they’ll work for some time. I hope in the future I can be able to obtain my perfect set, but for now I’ll enjoy what I have and keep looking over eBay. And I’ll encourage you to go out and take a look at xiangqi if you enjoy chess and chess variants; it is a fun an interesting game. Maybe if enough people are interested more “internationalized” and “training” versions will be produced, but even if they aren’t, taking the time to learn a little Chinese is fun, and the game can bring a lot of joy.

Back to Playing Chess

Posted on by
Reply

I like chess; I’ve always liked chess. Perhaps that’s just my general favor of board games, or perhaps it is the greatest game ever: that’s not for me to judge. Still, I’ve played it for a long time, and still play and enjoy it. In the past few years I played very little, though. That was mainly because I was no longer in school, and the main place I used to play chess was in my math class after I had finished assignments. I still played on my phone, but the AI on there is far too dumb to be interesting or far too hard to be fun. It just wasn’t like playing with the average or slightly below average casual chess player. I say that because I’m very bad at the game. According the chess.com, at the moment I’m about a 700, which is very low (and everyone beats me). I’m getting better, but my head just doesn’t really work for chess. Even though I enjoy playing the game, figuring out even a few of my opponent’s next possible moves just doesn’t click in my brain. From the middle game on I barely know what to do.

And with chess, it’s never really been just the game.  Even though I enjoy the game, there is so much more surrounding it. I’m almost forced to look at it since I can hardly find the time to play chess, mostly because when I do play board games they are for more than two players, because it’s just easier that way. So I mess with the board.  A set up chess game, unlike many other set up games, looks quite nice sitting about, so I bought a few different ones to change out now and again, and then a few more. I have quite a few chess sets now, and every time I find one different from what I have at an affordable price, I buy it. There are so many different permutations of chessmen that I’m not sure I could ever see them all, and that means I can afford to only get the ones I want. Looking at them, and playing on them is great, and the tactile feel of each different set is wonderful.

Beyond that I also enjoy looking up variants and strategies. I’m no good at employing the strategies and tactics myself, and I can barely remember them at times, but clever puzzles and other such things are very fun indeed. I think my favorite part, though, is the variants. Chess is such a simple concept, and its individual pieces break down so well, it seems like it would be infinitely variable, and it is. From regional variations like xiangqi and shogi (more on xaingqi next article, hopefully) to piece variations (chess 960 and most older variations) to board variations (hexagonal chess) to adding cards (Knightmare chess) and even just creating a whole new game from chess-like mechanics (the Duke, etc). Having all the different boards, rules, and pieces, and knowing the different games is just fun, and it immensely increases the options one has when attempting to start a game.

Still, I find myself going back to basic chess quite a bit. It is a masterfully-crafted game that may indeed last, almost unchanged from its current state, for a significant portion of human history. It’s a one-in-a-million formula that is great for both casual and experienced players (as long as people of vastly different skill levels generally play each other in moderation, and those on their own levels more). I hope to play more often in the future than I have been, but even so I know for certain that I will continue playing, both in real life, and on the computer, and even when I inevitably lose, I will have a blast

Book Design Choices I Dislike

Posted on by
Reply

I read physical books, still, quite a bit. One might say I do most of my reading in them. That may or may not be true, but it is true for most of my long-form reading. And there are a few things I notice bookmakers doing that I just can’t understand. I would assume that, aside from actually selling you a thing that you want to read, a bookmaker’s job would primarily be to provide you with the best possible reading experience. And many publishers do (my favorite-feeling books are regular Penguins, though sometimes Penguin makes mistakes, too.) And while none of these things will ever drive me away from reading physical books, they seem like easy-to-fix things that the printers would think about.

My least favorite of the three things I’ll mention are deckled edges. I cannot fathom why they still exist when I know that we easily have the capacity to produce nicely squared-off books. If it’s an older volume I’ll let it slide, but what are my brand new, just from the bookstore copies doing with this unprofessional edge? It looks like they don’t know what they’re doing. To some it might make them feel, I don’t know, “nostalgic”, for lack of a better word. But the uneven pages are just a nuisance, it’s hard to keep, find, or even turn a page, which I do quite often when reading a book. It also makes then not fit nicely against the back of bookshelf, I don’t understand why they are there, they only detracts from the reading experience and is so easily avoidable.

Not quite as antiquated or problematic, but just as nonsensical, are dust covers. I will never understand who invented them in the first place, but removal of the dust cover is phase one of reading a hardback book, and feeling bad about completely ruining it is at least one phase at some point in the reading. They just don’t do anything. They protect nothing, and at this point, printer tech has advanced enough that we can print high-quality images right on the book’s cover. I guess they do allow one to swap between the flashy, bookstore cover, and the classical library cover, but who in the world does that? I’ve only ever ripped the things or laid them next to me when reading. I guess they can serve as a bookmark, too, if you want to bend them out of shape.

And least annoying, and only really annoying to those with collections, as it affects the reading of the book in no way, is the inconsistency in the graphic design of series spines. This is especially true before the boxed sets of series are released, when sometimes two books in the same series are released with different spine heights. This is also the most excusable because I know that many people and companies can’t predict the exact time between two books in a series, or if a book will even be a series at all. But, still, a little more consistency would help my shelves a lot. And looking at little problems like that irk me. But I will still read boks, so the publishers have me there

Why I Collect

Posted on by
Reply

To outsiders, it might appear as if I collect everything under the sun. I might disagree, because though I would like to I hardly have the room. But I do collect a vast array of things of many different genres. I collect action figures, board games, video games, statues, books, knives, lighters, display ships, old computers and computer equipment, containers, notebooks, pens, tools, stamps (the rubber not the letter kind), and a host of other things that happen to interest me when I find them.

I don’t know what it is about me that makes me a collector.  Wanting to preserve history is one of the things. I’ve seen what other people do with items I would consider significant and it’s not pretty. However I do know that I am markedly less interested in preserving some things than others. That is all my preference, and I do hope that those items are being bought and saved by someone who cares, though as I often know with the things I miss, they are not. Still, I buy a lot of things new, and buying things new is not how one preserves history, at least generally, I also open things.  Some people would cringe at the Lego sets I’ve bought on EBay and opened a decade after their release. Or an Atari 2600 game I did something similar with. I don’t believe that things exist to be sealed in boxes and never touched (though some things I created I’ve done that for) but I do think things should be cared for and used appropriately. I have a huge collection of green plastic army men, not because I think my parents bought me more than others, but because I never blew mine up with fire crackers.  Even something as simple and cheap as those plastic men I couldn’t just destroy (side note: why are their tanks still M-60s and Centurions? Shouldn’t they update those to Abrams and Challengers or something?)

I don’t think those people are wrong.  While I might dislike the way the treat their things, they are theirs, and I’d never tell them to not do that unless it was hurting something else. I just have a different mind, a mind suited for collecting things. It’s not that I don’t use things either; I use all of my pens and play all of my games, and have a fun time doing so. And when something wears out I put it aside. I keep it to remind me to get another, to fix it, or to just have it around and maybe recycle. I hate throwing things away. Which makes collecting things so hard. I know of many people who can cycle through collections, either disposing of or selling things that they want less than the things they are about to get. I wish I could do that, but I find that picking up something I haven’t in a while and messing with it is almost as enjoyable as getting something new, and much more cost effective (I still spend way too much on stuff though). Nor can I be like my brother and live with almost no things. I like things too much.  Things are great; I love learning about things, how they work, their history and using them. And I believe that I could meet almost anyone and have something which we could discuss, that is to say my hobbies overlap with the hobbies of most other people in some way (I even go outside sometimes).

I like having a wide array of things to talk about, study, and collect. Part of it likely has to do with the expense, getting into many things is cheap, maintaining interest is sometimes expensive. And so I get into a lot of things. I also enjoy the smaller communities found from a wide variety of things. I don’t interact with them much, and wouldn’t really consider myself a part of them, but I do appreciate them. So I like collecting a lot of things, and just have a colleting-based mind I guess. It’s fun, and though I wish I was more focused at times, I would never have found some things I really love if I hadn’t branched out in my hobbies and collections so much. I hope I can find just as many interesting things in the future.

A Few Interesting Things Part 1 – Cobra Puzzle, Pirate Ship, and Wooden Village

Posted on by
Reply

I collect lots of things, for all kinds of reasons. And while some things I have are massive collections, others are single pieces, or fit into smaller groups. And right now I would like to share a few of those things that I have been messing with recently and quite enjoying.

First up is the “Mighty King Cobra” 3D puzzle. It’s a 3D jigsaw puzzle with thick wooden pieces. Mine (as with most of my stuff) is second hand and it looks like it was heavily used, meaning that the pieces don’t fit back together as well as I think they once did. I also must admit I haven’t taken it apart fully to assemble it, because I am terrible at puzzles and it might never be complete again if I do that. Even then it’s a great coffee table piece.

photo-19

Next up is a pirate ship, again found second hand, and I believe, based on the paint job and the flags that this ship was customized. Whether it was from a store or a kit I can’t tell, but I’m leaning more toward a store bought thing. I do have a (surprisingly large) collection of ships on stands, but the two are separated at the moment. Once this ship meets up with the others there it will go, but for now it sits proudly on my interesting shelf, as evidence of the uniqueness one can find in many places.

photo-21

And finally, something a little older, a wooden toy village that is German inspired, I don’t know where it came from or how it was made. But it reminds me of the toys I had when I was a kid (and still do). It’s like a more primitive version of Legos. I just spend however long organizing the houses and church and making sure the people and animals are in the right spots for what they’re doing. And that the trees are providing enough shade. It’s really fun and peaceful, and it looks so quaint.

photo-20