The other day I was pre-autographing a box of squeezable Dilbert characters at my restaurant. We buy them with the restaurant information printed on their backs, as promotional items for potential banquet customers. (Yes, I pay for the squeeze toys.)
Anyway, as customers and employees were lusting after them, I lined them up for optimal viewing and noticed something interesting: They map perfectly into chess pieces. Check out this picture.
Imagine Asok the Intern instead of Catbert.
Here's how I see it mapping:
Alice = Queen. The most powerful and capable piece.
Boss = King. He’s in charge, but largely helpless.
Dilbert = Rook. He moves in a straight path. Dilbert’s head shape and bumpy hairline even resemble a rook.
Bishop = Wally. He always has an angle, and he has a little bald head.
Dogbert = Knight. It’s the sneakiest chess piece. You never see it coming. And it’s the only animal.
Pawn = Asok the interns. He’s small and powerless and expendable.
I played some chess as a kid. When I created Dilbert, was I subconsciously influenced by the chess characters? Would any random group of six characters have a good chance of mapping to chess pieces? Is this just a routine coincidence? Is it more evidence I am a hologram programmed by my past self, and I reused code? Are the chess pieces based on some sort of universal archetype that I instinctively tapped into?
Beats me. I just think it’s freaky.
Since I know you’ll ask, the squeezable Dilbert characters are just about the coolest Dilbert-related items ever. They have that inexplicable x-factor thing where you can’t keep your hands off them. You can get them at Amazon.com, without printing on their backs.
Or order direct from the company, Parle, if you want your company name on the back.
http://parle.com/frameset.html
Or book a banquet at my restaurant and get a signed one for free. Just ask. www.eatatstaceys.com. (The web site will be redesigned in a few weeks. We’re working on it.)
Yeah, I'd be interested in one of those chess sets, price permitting & all.
Posted by: Mishlai | September 15, 2007 at 03:16 PM
When you ask, what is the probability that any random set of characters from a fiction would resemble chess pieces, you should have asked, what's the probability that they would resemble pieces from chess or any other popular game?
I would not buy a Dilbert Chess set, but if you can make Go stones that look like dogbert and catbert...
Posted by: Warfreak2 | September 15, 2007 at 02:58 PM
Scott, the Dilbert characters are tired one-dimensional stereotypes. That is why the fit in so nicely with chess pieces.
Posted by: Bob | September 15, 2007 at 12:54 PM
Yeah Scott, when are the chess pieces coming out?
And how come no 'plush' Asok? Interns always get screwed :(
Posted by: Anthony | September 15, 2007 at 06:24 AM
A damn good idea! I'd buy a set, when do they reach the stores? How much?
Now for some wierd news/information.
Did you know that scientists studying suspended animation have discovered that smelly farts (smell = hydrogen sulfide) might be able to put you into suspended animation?
try here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspended_animation
and here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_sulfide
Imagine if this really happens. Really, think about it..."Mr Adams, we need to put you under to save your life, do you like beans?". The mind boggles.
Posted by: SadCase | September 15, 2007 at 05:01 AM
-
Lol....
that
Chess-set
is
really
great!
i'd buy it too...
------------------
http://href.hu/x/2sv1
-----------
Posted by: vasco0 | September 15, 2007 at 04:48 AM
Ok, I'm hooked. Go create those chess pieces, and tell me where I can buy them in time for christmas. I need quite a few... ;)
Posted by: Frank Koehntopp | September 15, 2007 at 01:23 AM
You can't be a very good chess player if you think that the pawns are powerless and expendable.
Posted by: Bob | September 15, 2007 at 01:18 AM
I will pay you $500 for a dilbert chess set... of course I am only saying that I will so when they sell poorly at $500 a pop I can pick it up for $10 at kmart >:D
Posted by: Shannon Knowles | September 15, 2007 at 12:50 AM
I'm not sure this is too much of a coincidence. Afterall, chess pieces are based on a particular kind of hierarchy, which is often recreated in organisations including business, families etc. It isn't surprising that there's an analogy.
The large number of existing themed chess sets makes me think that analogy isn't too hard to make. For example, a Simpsons chess set might have Homer as the king (same sort of criteria as PHB), Marge as queen (she makes the family function due to her hard work), Bart as knight (same criteria as Dogbert) and so on. Or maybe you'd have Lisa as the queen. Which proves my point: there are at least two good analogies between the Simpsons and chess, which suggests its quite an easy analogy to make.
Cool chess set,by the way.
Posted by: latsot | September 15, 2007 at 12:33 AM
Knight : Topper - innate ability to leap over the competition.
Posted by: Gishu | September 14, 2007 at 10:01 PM
The squeeze toys are cute...but aren't they a bit out of synch with the ambience of Stacey's? White table cloths and Dilbert? Fine dining and Catbert? I just don't see it.
I nominate Burger King for even better sales of your new line.
Posted by: ms neal | September 14, 2007 at 09:47 PM
where's asok?
Posted by: null | September 14, 2007 at 07:48 PM
I too agree with Dave, that the two sides should be something like company vs. employees. Dilbert should be the king; after all, the strip is called "Dilbert".
One point that I don't think anyone else has made, though. I was always told that chess pieces decrease in height away from the king. The ing is always the tallest, then the queen, bishop, knight, rook, and pawn.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_piece and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staunton_chess_set
In general, I think the idea of a Dilbert chess set is superb! I hope to see it soon.
Posted by: Kenneth | September 14, 2007 at 06:30 PM
So when is the chess game coming out???
Posted by: Ankit | September 14, 2007 at 06:29 PM
Scott, forive me if someone already mentioned this (I didn't all of the comments), but would you make a dilbert chess set? I would totally buy it. I love chess and Dilbert, and would much rather take Asoks with a Dogbert than pawns with a knight.
Posted by: Phillip | September 14, 2007 at 06:21 PM
I would pay for that chess game
Posted by: Keenan | September 14, 2007 at 06:17 PM
Ummm...can I get a free set of your squeaky toys?
Posted by: Bobby C. Jones | September 14, 2007 at 05:35 PM
Sorry, the king is always the tallest piece on the board.
Posted by: bfd241 | September 14, 2007 at 05:23 PM
I'm in a college lit class, and we had to read, "How to Read Literature Like a Professor." One chapter describes something called intertextuality, which means that all authors at one point borrow something from another work. Sometimes it's on purpose, and sometimes, it's subconcious. Once you realize it, you can't see a movie or read a book the same way again. That character reminds you of Opheilia, that scene looks reminds you of Alice in Wonderland, etc.
To argue your hologram theory, you are a guy living in the 21st century. Before you, millions of books, movies, historical events, and cultual events were made and will still be made. What are the chances that you could possibly make something that is completely original with absolutely no references to anything in the past? It's impossible.
~~ Roby Bang
Posted by: Roby Bang | September 14, 2007 at 04:59 PM
Cheap.Mean.Not the Scott I thought I knew.
I was just waiting for the post today and you terribly disappointed me by doing cheap marketing.
Posted by: PrashanthJ | September 14, 2007 at 04:40 PM
I've never worked in an office really but I study business so I understand most of the Dilbert comic jokes. Anyway, I'm doing some work experience at an engineering company and one of ur comics about "how to keep an intern busy" struck a cord with me. when i was standing at my bosses desk and he said "ok..u must be looking for something to do.." i felt like asok! lol. i wanted to tell him i should buy him a book called "how to keep an intern busy"
Posted by: Luke | September 14, 2007 at 04:29 PM
Those are neat. And, I do need another chess set.
Posted by: Sometimes Saintly Nick | September 14, 2007 at 04:23 PM
Man, you've got your fans drooling over a non-existent chess set. Tell me you're not just sitting there in your chair, smiling at your success in further manipulating the masses (that's what I am doing). I bet you never realized that doing a daily blog could be SO much fun (and how much power over people / holograms) it provides.
Up and at'em, Atom Ant!
Posted by: Rompin' Ronny | September 14, 2007 at 02:53 PM
Scott--
(You didn't post my comment to your last posting--Wahhhh!)
Anyway, I am saving my pennies for the Basic Instructions chess set, which should be interesting since there seems to be only two maybe three Basic Instructions characters available to play all of the pieces.
BTW--Off point, but what the hell, in Southern New Hampshire in the 1960s and early 1970's there was a modified chess game made and manufactured locally. In the game you played strictly with just the pawns and the knights. The board had a slightly different layout for the squares. It was the greatest game I have ever played. For the life of me I cannot locate this game. If I could I would buy all of the rights and market it myself. Anyone ever heard of anything like this?
Anyone?
Anyone?
Anyone?
Bueller?
Hello, is this thing on?
Posted by: Bri | September 14, 2007 at 02:30 PM