...
Show More
I had high hopes for this one. Alas! Flanders Panel opened up brilliantly and hooked me right in. The initial exploration of arts and history was captivating and promised a thrilling journey. Nonetheless, what started so promisingly culminates into a mundane anti-climax. You rarely see such a miserable finale. It's truly pathetic! Without giving away any spoilers, I can't help but share a particularly foolish, absurd, and downright annoying inference from such a sublime and graceful game of Chess. Just hold your breaths and read this conversation between two characters: “The mathematical aspect of chess,” he replied, unaffected by Julia’s ill humour, “gives the game a very particular character, something that specialists would define as anal sadistic. You know what I mean: chess as a silent battle between two men, evocative of terms such as aggression, narcissism, masturbation... and homosexuality. Winning equals conquering the dominant father or mother, placing oneself above them. Losing equals defeat, submission”... That's just fucking blasphemous. I don't know what cheap drug Pérez-Reverte was on. Perhaps he was anally abused by some chess player and decided to blame chess for it. It's a travesty to reduce the beautiful game of chess to such baseless and offensive interpretations.