1932: Air forces cannot be ignored

This version of chess game is an attempt to keep the game in line with modern warfare. Walter Weaver (not the Reagan appointee, former Ohio representative, or the NYPD officer/9-11 victim) explained the rationale for his invention: Chess was "developed ages before the airplane was thought of...Today, in any game simulating warfare, air forces cannot be ignored."

This was still over five years before the bombing of Guernica.


There's another interesting issue that arises in Weaver's description of status quo chess.

"As is well known, the ancient game of chess is primarily a war game, in which the pawns play the part of infantry, the castles or rooks the part of forts, the knights the part of cavalry, the bishops representing the ancient power of the church, the queen being given a powerful role while the king remained, as head of the state, a piece to be protected, as a king lost meant a kingdom destroyed."

Never mind the fact that the queen was the weakest attacking piece until the 15th century. Would Weaver attribute the change to a greater role of powerful women in the Rennaisance? The end of the description is the more interesting - "a king lost meant a kingdom destroyed."

Wouldn't the rise of the democratic industrial superpowers render this rule obsolete. If we are going to integrate modern technology into the game, maybe we should allow for new political structures.

New Chess Rule: When a king is captured, the remaining pieces elect a new leader from their own ranks.

Does this imply that modern warfare also requires complete annihilation of the opponent? Or was Weaver exposing his own dictator-friendly politics? He wouldn't be the first.

The patent is here.

1931: The reader's curiosity is instantly aroused...

I always loved the crappy novels at the grocery store that had die-cut covers. On the front, the vacuum of space with a pit of orange showing through a star-shaped hole. Turn to the inside cover, and a brilliant supernova explodes, the titanium ship narrowly escaping at the corner of the page. Merrill Anderson apparently patented this effect in 1931. He called it:

"a method and means for conveying information or a message to a reader in a striking and unusual way, so that an idea, impression or selling point is brought to the reader's attention to cause it to stand out in a clear-cut manner."

Foreshadowing using transparencies. It was, of course, invented for marketing. Check out Anderson's great examples: (click to enlarge)

There's an element of deja vu in reading each panel. It's akin to reading a comic book after a lobotomy. Or the opposite of that. Here's more: (click to enlarge)

Notice the "Fig. 1"? The first example had a Gasoline-Alley-ish font, while here were are in the sleek, modernist world of Art Deco New York. A close up:

This next one is my favorite. It was the Depression, after all.

(click to enlarge)

"The reader, in looking at the obverse side of the sheet, as in Fig. 7, gets a primary impression to the general effect that it would be impossible to buy a new car this year, but his curiosity is aroused by seeing the car somewhat faintly from the other side of the sheet, and he is prompted to turn the sheet over, the result of which is that a supplementary impression is created to the effect that he will, by using a certain time payment plan, be able to buy a new car in spite of bills and hard times."

I love thinking about some poor guy explaining to his wife that he bought a car on no money down because of a clever transparent ad.

Here's the patent (pdf).