This document serves to prepare a discussion about the future of go in Europe. As general manager of the European Go Centre, working for the Foundation Nihon Ki-in European Go Cultural Centre, I have of course a special position in such a discussion. But I want to make clear from the beginning the discussion should be open to all kinds of views made possible by all kinds of viewpoints. My purpose for the discussion is just only one possible outcome to aim for, other people interested may have different reasons to think and talk about the future of go. This makes a discussion maybe the more interesting!
My need for discussion is mainly to get some answers on three central questions.
1) What future of go is wanted in Europe?
2) How can the European Go Centre contribute to that future?
3) What partners will cooperate with us in realizing that future?
If we consider the European Go Centre as a certain position on a board, one could say it is a strong position. So for me we don't have to begin with an empty board. The future has already began. For instance the Foundation Nihon Ki-in European Go Cultural Centre has the right to exploit a building that suits international go events. We have space, furniture, playing materials and an organizational infrastructure designed for tournaments, trainings and demonstrations. Next to this we have human resources, both at work in the Centre and in our network, that can develop projects in the promotion of go. We have a strong position regarding the advantages of the building and its staff, especially in a surrounding in which many other stake-holders of European go operate. Located in the Netherlands the Centre largely benefited from cooperation, sometimes formally, sometimes informally, with one of Europe's oldest and relatively largest national associations (Dutch Go Association), with the largest distributor of go materials in Europe (Chess and Go Shop "het Paard"), with some very active communicators of go (Gobase.org
, 321go.org and Eurogotv.com). And of course, if the continuity of the upkeep of the building allows, money made by the exploitation of the building by renting it to mind sports organisations and (Japanese) communities will be made available for go projects, -some of our own, some of independent parties in Europe by giving them support via the European Iwamoto Award. In that respect we have a non-commercial business with a genuine ideal. But how to use this means and to what end precisely? What is the content of our ideals? Which future of go we do desire in Europe?
Besides, lately in the flow of the game our strong position was not an easy position to hold. Due to personal changes and actual reduction of the staff, internal changes had to be made. Due to the raising of energy-prices, in an old building, and the financial crisis that made renting out halls more difficult, we had to play some defensive moves. As Troy Anderson puts it, in his book The Way of Go, an important rule in go is to "take your medicine". “If you owe you gotta pay!†This means we had to invest more in management of the building and its exploitation first, before we could even think about go. That is why the Go Centre became silent in Europe, in the past few years. We had to play a vital point inside our position. One is never happy about such a duty as it is a play in owned territory and adding directly to what was already strong. But sometimes even strong groups need to make eyes when circumstances are surrounding dangerously. This was not always good understood by the players that wanted a fast development of positions or a fierce fight right at the front of the promotion of go. I won't say they were wrong, but we preferred a style that makes use of 'honte', ensuring tactics. So we have invested a lot of time in getting a big tenant to make better use of the building. Somehow we succeeded in playing at the vital points and we have now a better position to start attacks from.
Discussion about what go is really about
Below I give my personal opinion, open for any discussion, as the matter a fact just to start the discussion.
Using the first go rule that Troy Anderson explores -one shouldn't think neither locally alone nor globally alone, but always both at the same time- I would say it is wise to broaden up our minds about what go is. Especially in the opening of the game one should create options all over the whole board. Concentration on one specific area shows a bad style in fuseki. In my opinion this applies to the strategy of promotion of go itself. One may consider go as a form of art. Another will play go as a serious mind sport. A third person discovers go as just a nice game to enjoy. Maybe the fourth to enter in the discussion will admit his or her social life is somehow centered around go and argues go is all about a certain community in stead of a set of stones and a board to play. Therefore I prefer to see 'go' as possibly meaning four different things, albeit closely related things:
1 -Go as a form of art and, starting from that view, as some field of experience that can be comparable to other fields of life, work or even politics. Go as a source for culture, inspirational to human beings in their individual decision-making and even informative of how things seem to work generally. This kind of go will be of interest even to non-playing people.
2 -Go as a serious mind sport, in importance completely comparable to other mind sports such as chess or bridge, but with its own unique features. One can compete in go and show individual excellence in such a competition. In this meaning go is also significantly an economic business, for players and teachers to invest time and for some (professional) players and teachers to get in the end a living. Here we will find nods of material interests among go-players, but at the same time chances to connect go with the society by getting sponsorships or subsidies, or even by making go sell itself!
3 -Go as just a game to waste free time in a nice way. In fact this is the corner were probably most people would place go. Of course the beauty of the game is appreciated here, but then again only because of the way it puzzles the mind. Of course competition is also important here, but not as an end in itself, in stead as just fun to have. Go in its simplicity is not played by professionals nor explained by poets, but is the adventure of coming through a game or the sensation of playing another stone. This is the game that one learns to play in the beginning (so go is not learned as a sport or an art) and this kind of go motivates some people to keep interest and to explore higher meanings or purposes (artistically or ambitious). This is why I feel go as just a game would be the most important message to make it known to a broad public.
4 -Go as a centre to gather around with friends. Of course when one sees how go functions in Europe, one can immediately picture people standing, hanging, walking around the game. They are around the game but meeting together also in other ways than just playing go. Clubs and tournaments have a social function. You don't visit them just to play go, but maybe foremost to meet friends or at least people of your kind. Go is maybe the starting focus that is shared by all members of such communities, but in the end their bondship around the game cannot be reduced to an commonly shared hobby or profession. Apart from go go-communities have their own life and their own character. This means also that because of the social differences several go-communities may exist next to each other, more or less separately. Not all go-players are my friends. In tournaments different groups are formed and each will have its special side activity after or before the rounds. And clubs have an exclusive character not only because of its core business with go, but because of the forming of a group with members that suit each other and don't match with outsiders. One should realize that when one starts to think about the future of go, one is first and foremost eager to make this future just a good time for oneself in one's peer group. And that is just as it should be; as a starting point go is something to share and as such it serves communities. But in my work this starting point is not enough to reach the 'community' of the whole of Europe. Europe cannot be approached as a simple go-community. For that very decisive reason the promotional work of an international (or national) organisation cannot be compared to finding future opponents or club-members alone. At a fundamental level it should connect several communities even where they exist in fact separately.
Troy Anderson stresses the importance of efficient distribution. Where the future of go is still open, one may play in all four 'corners' -just mentioned above- some stones. Because in the beginning no-one knows were future opportunities will arise or were they will be of coincidence. At this point, playing the strategic game of approaching the future of go, no-one decides what will happen to be the most favourite concept of go. That is why we should scatter around our attention in those four 'corners' of go.
Of course there are already positions build in Europe, I think actually in all those corners, but maybe we should reconsider steps taken, also because we would like to see those 'plays' making sense together. Also we should admit those first positions are very thin, in any case not well established at all.
Thinking about the future of go in Europe is in my opinion completely different from thinking about the future of go in Asia. In many ways the strategy of spreading go in Asia is just a matter of end game or maybe late middle game. As Europeans we have to think according the stage we are in. In Europe we almost have to start from scratch, because go is not a part of European culture, nor even near an important economic factor in Europe. Even the rules of the game are not commonly known, as is the case with chess and checkers. Also go-communities are not known as such outside those exclusive communities. This is a fact even after almost a century of history of go in Europe. The promotion of go is in no way comparable to the import of a product or strategy. It has to root. I think one should see this opening stage as very positive. The relatively empty context of our future of go is our chance to take initiatives and make it completely our game.
But again, some stones are already played. European go has a landscape. We have our own players, our own organisations and even our own professionals. Great steps have been done. Go has its function in the western mind, albeit an example of an exclusive, 'a beautiful mind'. Go is recognized as a world mind sport and was organized at least once in that manner together with the other mind sports. At internet many people become aware of the game and start to learn and play go. And go-communities are getting there own heroes, that make their glory casting glow on the people around them. But once we do realize these steps forward, we miss at the same moment a direction to play. How should we build further on those achievements. In our stage we could loose those beginnings very easily. Also the European Go Cultural Centre should not be taken as an eternal 'powerhouse'. As a means to an end, it needs to be connected to other movements in European go, otherwise it dies. Pioneering is a hard business, when taken seriously, when taken to be the realization of a new, sustainable landscape. It is this matter that I want to discuss.
If I talk about go I want to talk about European go. How is this game of go possible? How can it be made better? -To these questions I immediately add the remark that this doesn't mean I have no interest in the Asian connection. To the contrary, I feel this connection is valuable in many ways. But getting to play go in Europe also means conquering the game, make it our own, both as something to benefit from and as a responsibility. Go has been a gift of the East, but therefore it should feed on the West. How can Europe itself be a board that fits to play go?
To the question what intelligence is some experimental psychologist answered "that is what I measure". In the same way I could answer the question about go and tell you that it is what I help to organize in one way or another. Wanting to contribute to the promotion of go I tend to see go as an object of marketing. I feel this is dangerous because it drives me away from the game itself. One can loose it in a completely other game, like that of strategic marketing or even efficient organizing events. One may never forget what purpose this work has: making the game of go happen. But then again we need those means of marketing and organisation, also to decide at what place and between whom we should make it happen. Determining ideals often means to get some distance to them, unattached, just to do the work properly. I am a player of go and an organiser of go, however I have always experienced these two never really meet, even within my own personality.
Just on second thought, maybe this is something to change. Lately I am beginning to think that we should seek and use the power of go itself, in all its features. For instance as a source of inspiration for 'marketing' and of information about 'organization' in general. Maybe turning these things around is in itself a good promotional act. This is another reason to discuss about the future of go. What is it that we want to organize precisely and how should it be accordingly organized? The question should not be alone how we should promote go, but also how our promotion should fit the game. Because we have some very, very special thing to promote. It is an ideal we wish to realize. In remembrance of Iwamoto Kaoru one even has to say it is a dream (of a man that had a grasp of the game in all its aspects) that we wish to realize.
What does this dream show? How do we look at the ideal future? -I am not talking about what is impossible or unrealistic, beyond this I ask how we picture the ideal situation of go in our part of the (real and non-ideal) world. How should it function?
This question is of no real interest if go was just another 'nice game' (opinion 3 above). At its best we could aim in that case for some hype to sell it. Here, for me, the other conceptions of go are important. Especially the first one, because in that view go is revealed as a unique (irreplaceable) source of cultural enrichment. So I want to organize such an intrinsic valuable thing in such a way that Europeans can really benefit from that intrinsic value. This doesn't imply necessarily I want it explained in this way. The game of go speaks for itself to the people that are in play. But Europeans should be made aware of this possibility to play this game and should have it as an actual option for investing their time. That would be the closest explanation of my ultimate personal goal in my work. Would it serve as a general mission for the European Go Centre? Who will have same or matching interests in the promotion of go? If this view (or another of the same level of scope) is shared we may consider more defined objectives and all kinds of concrete means to reach them. That would give us the starting point of further discussions, but I feel mutual reconsidering of ‘fundamentals’ in European go is needed first, to find partners with comparable sets of mind.
