READ ALONGSIDE THE SOURCE
Maelzel's Chess-Player — Edgar Allan Poe (reading text) — reading text
Part 4 of 7. These parts divide the reading text for browsing; they are not the source document's page numbers.
Complete local reading text and source notice
Reading transcription · Review label: Known limitations
Compare this copy with the preserved source. Review labels describe the recorded status of this file; they do not guarantee that the text is error-free. Spacing and line breaks are retained, with long lines wrapped to fit the screen.
the Turk either shake his head or roll his eyes. It is only when
his next move is obvious, or when the game is so circumstanced that to a
man in the Automaton’s place there would be no necessity for reflection.
Now these peculiar movements of the head and eyes are movements customary
with persons engaged in meditation, and the ingenious Baron Kempelen would
have adapted these movements (were the machine a pure machine) to
occasions proper for their display—that is, to occasions of
complexity. But the reverse is seen to be the case, and this reverse
applies precisely to our supposition of a man in the interior. When
engaged in meditation about the game he has no time to think of setting in
motion the mechanism of the Automaton by which are moved the head and the
eyes. When the game, however, is obvious, he has time to look about him,
and, accordingly, we see the head shake and the eyes roll.
5. When the machine is rolled round to allow the spectators an examination
of the back of the Turk, and when his drapery is lifted up and the doors
in the trunk and thigh thrown open, the interior of the trunk is seen to
be crowded with machinery. In scrutinizing this machinery while the
Automaton was in motion, that is to say while the whole machine was moving
on the castors, it appeared to us that certain portions of the mechanism
changed their shape and position in a degree too great to be accounted for
by the simple laws of perspective; and subsequent examinations convinced
us that these undue alterations were attributable to mirrors in the
interior of the trunk. The introduction of mirrors among the machinery
could not have been intended to influence, in any degree, the machinery
itself. Their operation, whatever that operation should prove to be, must
necessarily have reference to the eye of the spectator. We at once
concluded that these mirrors were so placed to multiply to the vision some
few pieces of machinery within the trunk so as to give it the appearance
of being crowded with mechanism. Now the direct inference from this is
that the machine is not a pure machine. For if it were, the inventor, so
far from wishing its mechanism to appear complex, and using deception for
the purpose of giving it this appearance, would have been especially
desirous of convincing those who witnessed his exhibition, of the simplicity
of the means by which results so wonderful were brought about.
6. The external appearance, and, especially, the deportment of the Turk,
are, when we consider them as imitations of life, but very
indifferent imitations. The countenance evinces no ingenuity, and is
surpassed, in its resemblance to the human face, by the very commonest of
wax-works. The eyes roll unnaturally in the head, without any
corresponding motions of the lids or brows. The arm, particularly,
performs its operations in an exceedingly stiff, awkward, jerking, and
rectangular manner. Now, all this is the result either of inability in
Maelzel to do better, or of intentional neglect—accidental neglect
being out of the question, when we consider that the whole time of the
ingenious proprietor is occupied in the improvement of his machines. Most
assuredly we must not refer the unlife-like appearances to inability—for
all the rest of Maelzel’s automata are evidence of his full ability to
copy the motions and peculiarities of life with the most wonderful
exactitude. The rope-dancers, for example, are inimitable. When the clown
laughs, his lips, his eyes, his eye-brows, and eyelids—indeed, all
the features of his countenance—are imbued with their appropriate
expressions. In both him and his companion, every gesture is so entirely
easy, and free from the semblance of artificiality, that, were it not for
the diminutiveness of their size, and the fact of their being passed from
one spectator to another previous to their exhibition on the rope, it
would be difficult to convince any assemblage of persons that these wooden
automata were not living creatures. We cannot, therefore, doubt Mr.
Maelzel’s ability, and we must necessarily suppose that he intentionally
suffered his Chess Player to remain the same artificial and unnatural
figure which Baron Kempelen (no doubt also through design) originally made
it. What this design was it is not difficult to conceive. Were the
Automaton life-like in its motions, the spectator would be more apt to
attribute its operations to their true cause, (that is, to human agency
within) than he is now, when the awkward and rectangular manœuvres convey
the idea of pure and unaided mechanism.
7. When, a short time previous to the commencement of the game, the
Automaton is wound up by the exhibiter as usual, an ear in any degree
accustomed to the sounds produced in winding up a system of machinery,
will not fail to discover, instantaneously, that the axis turned by the
key in the box of the Chess-Player, cannot possibly be connected with
either a weight, a spring, or any system of machinery whatever. The
inference here is the same as in our last observation. The winding up is
inessential to the operations of the Automaton, and is performed with the
design of exciting in the spectators the false idea of mechanism.
8. When the question is demanded explicitly of Maelzel—“Is the
Automaton a pure machine or not?” his reply is invariably the same—“I
will say nothing about it.” Now the notoriety of the Automaton, and the
great curiosity it has every where excited, are owing more especially to
the prevalent opinion that it is a pure machine, than to any other
circumstance. Of course, then, it is the interest of the proprietor to
represent it as a pure machine. And what more obvious, and more effectual
method could there be of impressing the spectators with this desired idea,
than a positive and explicit declaration to that effect? On the other
hand, what more obvious and effectual method could there be of exciting a
disbelief in the Automaton’s being a pure machine, than by withholding
such explicit declaration? For, people will naturally reason thus,—It
is Maelzel’s interest to represent this thing a pure machine—he
refuses to do so, directly, in words, although he does not scruple, and is
evidently anxious to do so, indirectly by actions—were it actually
what he wishes to represent it by actions, he would gladly avail himself
of the more direct testimony of words—the inference is, that a
consciousness of its not being a pure machine, is the reason of his
silence—his actions cannot implicate him in a falsehood—his
words may.
9. When, in exhibiting the interior of the box, Maelzel has thrown open
the door No. I, and also the door immediately behind it, he holds a
lighted candle at the back door (as mentioned above) and moves the entire
machine to and fro with a view of convincing the company that the cupboard
No. 1 is entirely filled with machinery. When the machine is thus moved
about, it will be apparent to any careful observer, that whereas that
portion of the machinery near the front door No. 1, is perfectly steady
and unwavering, the portion farther within fluctuates, in a very slight
degree, with the movements of the machine. This circumstance first aroused
in us the suspicion that the more remote portion of the machinery was so
arranged as to be easily slipped, en masse, from its position when
occasion should require it. This occasion we have already stated to occur
when the man concealed within brings his body into an erect position upon
the closing of the back door.
10. Sir David Brewster states the figure of the Turk to be of the size of
life—but in fact it is far above the ordinary size. Nothing is more
easy than to err in our notions of magnitude. The body of the Automaton is
generally insulated, and, having no means of immediately comparing it with
any human form, we suffer ourselves to consider it as of ordinary
dimensions. This mistake may, however, be corrected by observing the
Chess-Player when, as is sometimes the case, the exhibiter approaches it.
Mr. Maelzel, to be sure, is not very tall, but upon drawing near the
machine, his head will be found at least eighteen inches below the head of
the Turk, although the latter, it will be remembered, is in a sitting
position.
11. The box behind which the Automaton is placed, is precisely three feet
six inches long, two feet four inches deep, and two feet six inches high.
These dimensions are fully sufficient for the accommodation of a man very
much above the common size—and the main compartment alone is capable
of holding any ordinary man in the position we have mentioned as assumed
by the person concealed. As these are facts, which any one who doubts them
may prove by actual calculation, we deem it unnecessary to dwell upon
them. We will only suggest that, although the top of the box is apparently
a board of about three inches in thickness, the spectator may satisfy
himself by stooping and looking up at it when the main compartment is
open, that it is in reality very thin. The height of the drawer also will
be misconceived by those who examine it in a cursory manner. There is a
space of about three inches between the top of the drawer as seen from the
exterior, and the bottom of the cupboard—a space which must be
included in the height of the drawer. These contrivances to make the room
within the box appear less than it actually is, are referrible to a design
on the part of the inventor, to impress the company again with a false
idea, viz. that no human being can be accommodated within the box.
12. The interior of the main compartment is lined throughout with cloth.
This cloth we suppose to have a twofold object. A portion of it
may form, when tightly stretched, the only partitions which there is
any necessity for removing during the changes of the man’s position, viz:
the partition between the rear of the main compartment and the rear of the
cupboard No. 1, and the partition between the main compartment, and the
space behind the drawer when open. If we imagine this to be the case, the
difficulty of shifting the partitions vanishes at once, if indeed any such
difficulty could be supposed under any circumstances to exist. The second
object of the cloth is to deaden and render indistinct all sounds
occasioned by the movements of the person within.
13. The antagonist (as we have before observed) is not suffered to play at
the board of the Automaton, but is seated at some distance from the
machine. The reason which, most probably, would be assigned for this
circumstance, if the question were demanded, is, that were the antagonist
otherwise situated, his person would intervene between the machine and the
spectators, and preclude the latter from a distinct view. But this
difficulty might be easily obviated, either by elevating the seats of the
company, or by turning the end of the box towards them during the game.
The true cause of the restriction is, perhaps, very different. Were the
antagonist seated in contact with the box, the secret would be liable to
discovery, by his detecting, with the aid of a quick car, the breathings
of the man concealed.
14. Although M. Maelzel, in disclosing the interior of the machine,
sometimes slightly deviates from the routine which we have pointed
out, yet reeler in any instance does he so deviate from it
as to interfere with our solution. For example, he has been known to open,
first of all, the drawer—but he never opens the main compartment
without first closing the back door of cupboard No. 1—he never opens
the main compartment without first pulling out the drawer—he never
shuts the drawer without first shutting the main compartment—he
never opens the back door of cupboard No. 1 while the main compartment is
open—and the game of chess is never commenced until the whole
machine is closed. Now if it were observed that never, in any single
instance, did M. Maelzel differ from the routine we have pointed out
as necessary to our solution, it would be one of the strongest possible
arguments
