Last night was family movie night, and my wife, a fellow educator, selected one of my all-time favorites, Searching for Bobby Fischer. I imagine that most gifted educators have seen the film at one point or another, likely during your gifted endorsement program. For those who haven't, it must be placed at the top of the Netflix cue. Beyond being a great film and a true story, it is an excellent case study in the characteristics and challenges that many gifted children face. After viewing the film, my wife suggested I add a film review to my blog since, she reasoned, any good discussion on education, particularly education, will eventually have to get around to Bobby Fischer!
The film is the story of Josh Waitzkin, a chess prodigy who began playing chess at the age of six, defeated a chess master at the age of ten, led his school to six national chess championships from grades 3 to 9 (while winning eight individual national championships during the same span), and who won the U.S. Junior Chess Championship in 1993 and 1994. His teacher fails to recognize his talents for what they were and, instead, regarded them contemptuously, as though they were distracting him from more important academic pursuits in the classroom. His father and professional coach recognizes the gift and relentlessly pushes Josh to refine and master his skills, overlooking that fact (which only his mother and friend, Vinnie, seem to appreciate) that, while being gifted in a particular area, Josh is nevertheless a child, with all the emotions, dreams, and frailties that children possess.
As an educator, I consider the film's greatest value to be the manner in which it illustrates a number of gifted characteristics. Giftedness, of course, is a broad, ill-defined concept, but children with extraordinary gifts in the area of abstraction, intuition, and critical thinking possess a number of hallmark characteristics, some of which Josh shares.
Josh is, first, highly inquisitive. In the opening scene of the film, for example, while playing during a rain storm, Josh ventures into an underbrush and finds a lone chess piece lying on the ground. He is encountered by Vinnie, who would eventually be his friend and mentor, who offers to exchange the chess piece for a baseball. Josh is so fascinated by the chess piece that he refuses the offer. His inquisitiveness is further suggested during frequent trips through the park, where he becomes intensely intrigued by the game of speed chess. Disregarding many of the foul elements present in the park that might offend or scare many others – i.e., alcohol, gambling, the presumption of drugs, homelessness, etc. – Josh seems to be completely undeterred in his pursuit of observing, and eventually, participating in the game of chess.
Josh also exhibits an extraordinarily mature degree of conscientiousness. While he may not have developed a concern for the plight of homelessness in America in general, he is able to draw the inference that Vinnie is homeless, and he is so bothered by that fact that he asks his mother to allow Vinnie to sleep on his top bunk. In doing so, Josh demonstrates, not only a great deal of personal affection for his friend, but an ability, beyond his years, to recognize differences in economic conditions and situations and to empathize with those who may not share his social status.
Perhaps Josh’s most telling gifted characteristic is his remarkable ability to learn and master the game of chess with little or no prior experience with the game, his keen sense of observation, and his ability to construct abstractions. While the film does indicate that Josh’s skills are unrefined, and that he does require extended, professional training to achieve the level of master, his rudimentary abilities far exceed those of nearly all of his peers and many of the adults (professionals and lay players) that he encounters. Josh seems to have learned the most basic and many advanced techniques from mere, occasional observation. With each game he plays and, eventually, each lesson from his professional tutor, Bruce Pandolfini, Josh advances at a remarkably swift pace, defeating former adult U.S. champions, learning the skill of developing combinations with no pieces on the chess board, anticipating plays that are 6-7 moves in the future, etc.
Despite his gifts and abilities, Josh shares, with many of his gifted peers, an extremely critical view of himself. During the film, he begins to succumb to the pressures of his family, teacher, and the competition, he begins to lose sight of the basic enjoyment of the art of chess, and he begins to question his own abilities. Like many gifted learners, Josh is nearly overwhelmed by the fear of failure. He comes to view chess as a lose-lose situation: if he loses, people will say he was not that good, but if he wins, people will say that they assumed he would do so. It is in the moment of crisis that Josh demonstrates perhaps his most profound gift – the gift of goodness and decency that leads him to remember his love for chess, to cling to his kindness and defeat the urge to “hate” his opponent, and ultimately, to win honorably.
Searching for Bobby Fischer is a remarkable, compelling, and truly moving story. It illustrates not only the extraordinary abilities that the gifted possess, but also the extraordinary, sometimes overwhelming burdens the gifted may carry. In doing so, it encourages the viewer to remember always the innate dignity of every child and to be aware that, though the gifted may appear adequately equipped for success, they are often times the most vulnerable and frail.
Mr. Stinson,
ReplyDeleteWe actually have quite a bit in common. I am a Marine Officer (Helicopter pilot, please don't judge) and I am getting close to retirement. When I do retire, I plan on going into education.
I watched Searching for Bobby Fischer twice last week. I did so for an assignment I'm working on. I'm curious as to how you believe Vinnie and Bruce would define "learning", in this case learning chess. It seems to be that Vinnie believes that playing is learning. Simply put, he wants Josh to enjoy playing and learn from each match. My favorite thing about Vinnie is that he wants Josh to take risks and understand that you can't appreciate winning if you are scared to lose. For Bruce, he seems to be more of a classical behaviorist, leaning on extrinsic motivators to get Josh to learn - chess master points, etc. I imagine he would agree most with operant conditioning.
What do you think?