Did Ogilvy Play Chess?
by Adrian Hanft, (9 comments)
Why wasn't I required to read "Ogilvy on Advertising" in college? Yeah, its dated, but I wish I was learning this stuff instead of black and white illustration. Anyway, I am a third of the way through the book, and he has made 3 chess references that I can't help but comment on. A chance to talk about chess in the context of graphic design doesn't come along often, so I have to take it.
Ogilvy quotes Raymond Chandler as saying, "Chess is about as elaborate a waste of human intelligence as you could find anywhere outside an advertising agency."
Obviously, I am going to take offense to that statement both as a chess player and as a person working for an ad agency. There are so many ways to waste intelligence. Pick anything besides chess or advertising. Strategy, tactics, knowledge, planning, creativity, risk, and execution are all balanced methodically if you are going to have success in either activity. Chess is a game, but hardly a waste because it sharpens your intelligence, and keeps your mind alert in everything else you do. I will argue with anyone who thinks advertising is not a reputable occupation. Sure, its not perfect, but what career doesn't have its share of scoundrel?
The other 2 chess references were not as exciting and fall into one of my pet peaves: using chess as a cliche. He makes a reference to a gambit in one chapter, and in another he says, "In your day-to-day dealings with clients and colleagues, fight for the kings, queens, and bishops, but throw away your pawns." I see what he is saying about picking your battles, but the chess analogy only exposes his lack of chess knowledge. A single pawn is the only advantage a player needs to beat his opponent. If you aren't fighting for your kings, queens, and bishops, you aren't playing chess.
So Ogilvy didn't play chess, but that doesn't mean I am not enjoying his book. I will try and give a quick review of it when I am done.
Comments (9)
AHanft2 said:
I had quite a few chuckles as I read your posting for today. I am familiar with chess and have payed it since I was 4 years old (that makes 51 years of playing chess literally around the world); I am familiar with graphic design and agree with your wondreful analogy and comparsison of it with chess (“Strategy, tactics, knowledge, planning, creativity, risk, and execution … all balanced methodically [for] success”); but here I am going to show my ignorance for all the world to see: “Who was (is) Ogilvy?” Obviusly I missed that in college (and graduate school) too!
Posted on June 28, 2004
Adrian said:
The quick David Ogilvy biography: Ogilvy is considered one of the “fathers of modern advertising.” His firm, Ogilvy and Mather was responsible for ads for Hathaway Shirts and Schewepps among many others. I like his quote, “If you always hire people who are smaller than you are, we shall become a company of dwarfs. If you always hire people who are bigger than you are, we shall become giants.”
Posted on June 28, 2004
Bennett said:
This is one of those books that I haven’t gotten around to yet. I will be interested to read your final review.
I have to say I don’t totally disagree with Mr. Olgilvy’s view on chess. Of course I don’t play and I don’t really want to learn. My mind doesn’t work that far in advance and I don’t really have fun when I do try and play. It is pretty easy for a person that doesn’t really like something to say that it is a waste of time. I would say that for me it would be a waste of time. For those who enjoy it and get mental stimulation from playing, then that is anything but a waste of time. I sort of envy the avid chess player.
If you want to read a great comparison that Ogilvy seems to know a great deal about. Read “Confessions of an Ad Man”. He makes some very interesting correlations between working in an ad agency and working in a gourmet kitchen.
Posted on June 28, 2004
Adrian said:
B, Sorry, but chess would not be a waste of your time or intelligence. Maybe you can’t afford to spend time playing chess, but time spent using your brain is never going to be time wasted. That is like saying that going for a run is a waste of time because I can’t run that far and its no fun because my legs hurt when I am done. I think you missed the point of my post. Ogilvy never said Chess or advertising is a waste of time. I just thought that it was interesting that he made three references to chess in the first half of his book, and doesn’t know anything about the game. Why is it that people like Ogilvy and people who don’t play chess think that chess is a universal metaphor? I see it in commercials all the time, and it has become such a cliche. Why is that? -A
Posted on June 28, 2004
Bennett said:
A,
Maybe a waste of time is a bit harsh. Here is my perspective. It is a game. Games are supposed to enjoyable. I don’t enjoy chess. It is time I would rather spend on something else. I will stimulate my mind in some other way. Exercise is never a waste of time, but maybe someone would rather swim than run.
I think everyone uses chess as an analogy, because it is so classic, so universal and at its core it is about strategy. Of course this is coming from a non-chess player. I think the cliche works as long as a non-chess player doesn’t try to take the analogy too far. Oglivy has obviously gone past what a chess player would think of as a good analogy. It is of course overused and trite, but if someone is going to make the comparison, then maybe they should run it past a real chess person first.
B
Posted on June 28, 2004
Adrian said:
B,
Your last comment is well said. Sometimes I have a hard time understanding why everyone can’t be more like me. If it were up to me, chess would be a mandatory part of grade school education. There are very few other activities that engage the mind like chess. Where else can creativity and personal style exist so perfectly within the context of mathematical structure and explicitly defined objectives? Man, how big of a nerd am I?
A
Posted on June 28, 2004
AHanft2 said:
Ade, I wouldn’t call you a nerd. (Not even a little one.) Your last comment on this posting that “If it were up to me, chess would be a mandatory part of grade school education” I thought was very good. Your reasoning for suggesting such a bold curriculum adjustment is sound. There is much chess would teach a young mind besides “winning”. (I’m writing this as a fromer grade school teacher too.) Students might even be encouraged to acutually think! I ordered the Ogilvy book yesterday. It will be interesting to read it for myself. I introduced the guy who ordered it for me to this web site too!
Posted on July 1, 2004
Dom said:
I used to very much enjoy chess as a social game, either with a family member or friend over a glass of whisky. Then I discovered FICS, Caissa.com and other sites where you played with someone you never knew. I discovered the cosy family feeling replaced by real fear. Fear of losing, but also fear of being humiliated for in the real world people are not always nice and kind to you if you make a silly move, you may well be wasting their time and they sometimes show it. The chess became addictive and always accompanied by adrenaline. Real fight or flight reaction. Then I found that the computer on Shredder.com mercilessly defeats me each time and realised that for me there is no point.
I am a loser and I want to forget and just play at home occasionally with beautiful wooden pieces and no fear.
Posted on January 12, 2008
chess against computer said:
Great website. I always liked the chess opening kings Indian. But as time passed I thought I’d explore more chess openings. I really enjoyed the chess book called Powerful Chess Opening Play by M, Hayward, found at chess analysis . This neat book helped me develop my own personal chess opening system effectively and quickly. I’d recommend it.
Posted on July 6, 2008