Things I've Learnt

Good Evening, and Welcome Back.

A few months ago, I watched The Queens Gambit on Netflix. As ever, I wrote my own life into the story: when representation is absent, it will be created by those interpreting the narrative.

There are spoilers for the 2020 Miniseries so if you’re yet to enjoy, I suggest binging the show immediately and come back to this. Not only will you almost certainly have a good time, but it will help provide context. I will be intentionally vague where possible so this may come across as wishy-washy but I’d rather people watched the content. However, I do definitely talk about the results of The Big Title Game so consider this your warning.

To summarise, The Queen’s Gambit is based on a 1983 novel with the same name by Walter Tevis. It follows young Chess Prodigy Beth Harmon (played by Anya Taylor-Joy) as she suffers with childhood trauma and addiction, and a range of other themes. I truly don’t want to ruin everything about it because I do highly recommend the show if not solely for Taylor-Joy’s performance, then for Scott Frank’s beautiful direction and some of the incredible ensemble cast.

Speaking of Ensemble cast, let’s talk about the ones that matter for this post:

Harry Melling as Harry Beltik, Jacob Fortune-Lloyd as Towne, Thomas Brodie-Sangster as Benny Watts, Matthew Dennis Lewis and Russell Dennis Lewis as Matt and Mike, Max Krause as Arthur Levertov, and Ryan Wichert as Hilton Wexler.

At different stages of this show, multiple individuals could be considered potential sexual or romantic partners for Beth. Some unrequited and requited connections occur and that leads me to the main point of this blog post: had The Queen’s Gambit ended in a Non-Monogamous dynamic, it may not have been out of the realms of possibility.

Many of the aforementioned men were direct competitors at different points over the show, and not even for low stakes. It’s how most of them come across Beth and cannot forget her. But by the end of the show, not only do they come together for Beth, but they also come together as a group of likeminded individuals to help support her success. It’s one thing to see a group of men support and uplift a woman in any content, but it was particularly wholesome in this considering you see the compassion Beth’s group have for her and how much they invest their time into her success, especially considering her fight with addiction and other self-destructive behaviours.

Not all non-monogamous dynamics must include sex, romance, or some combination thereof. Equally, there is no base expectation that the various individuals involved in a non-monogamous dynamic be necessarily involved with one another. The beauty of non-monogamy is that it allows for complete and utter tailoring of personal relationships, including queerplatonic relationships, a term used to represent relationships which are often more intense and have deeper bonds than the perceived “standard” of relationship boundaries, but fall short of sexual/romantic intimacy. Remember the memes from a few years ago about “kissing the homies goodnight”, regarding physical intimacy between (presumably cisgender) straight men without the assumption of being attracted to them? Well, if that’s what you want, good news! It has a name!

Back to The Queen’s Gambit. There’s a distinct scene which sits in my head. It’s morning before part 2 of a BIG match we’ve been waiting for: Beth vs Vasily Borgov, reigning global champion of chess. The night before, Towne arrived to support her in person — prior to his arrival, she was in Russia alone. In the morning, she takes a phone call. The call begins with Benny, progresses to Harry, and then the rest of the group reveal themselves to be calling Moscow from New York City, where it is 7am. The group of men assists her, both in game strategy and in moral support. Beth’s tone and facial expression shift differently and lovingly with each person she meets: from when she sees Towne arrive, to the moment she connects via telephone to Benny, to Harry, and to the wider group. It is clear to the viewer that they care as deeply about her as she does for them.

There will be those reading this who have watched the show thinking “well some of those 7 men are solely friends she has no close connection to” and I agree, I’m just trying to keep people guessing so I don’t only list the people involved in the relationships/drama elements of the plot. Spoilers coming!

Later, when the group learns that Beth has won the Moscow Invitational, the group of men immediately begin screaming, hugging, and jumping in complete elation: showing again the appreciation, respect and love they have for Beth. This is especially meaningful knowing that Beth has been physically and/or emotionally intimate with several of the men in the past which led to pretty difficult ties being cut and furthered the trauma behind her addictive lifestyles.

This leads on to my final point which the most subjective viewpoint of non-monogamy: a specific plot point in the show is frequently discussed as a positive in non-monogamous circles. Just past the midway point of the show, Beth engages in very toxic behaviour due to grief and loneliness. Seeing this, Harry Beltik offers to support her, and they begin cohabitation. This relationship evolves from professional training for an upcoming championship to a physical reasonably smoothly, but when Harry confesses his feelings for Beth, he realises she’d always value her career in chess more than any romantic relationship they might develop. In my experience, non-monogamy openly supports the concept of multiple relationships beyond the obvious. A relationship between 2 people is secretly 3 connections which all need balancing and nurturing simultaneously: one connection between the individuals, and the two separate connections each individual has with themselves. Beth would always prioritise her obsessive connection with chess over her connection with any others. It’s up to you whether that’s healthy or not, or whether that’s a topic you agree with. Like I said, this is solely based upon my experience.

My past experiences of traditional monogamy have assisted - almost encouraged - the concept of losing yourself for your connection with another. Two halves of a whole, as if a person were ever only a half awaiting completion like a wave in desperate search of the sand or a mysterious puzzle piece without a puzzle. A peeve of mine is that when I entered a relationship with Matt, people started asking me what he was up to, and if he was busy. People had done so when I was in prior relationships, but most of them were so dysfunctional that I rarely registered this frequent occasion. Sometimes, I have to do this with our friends as it’s usually easier to ask them both the same question, or one has been active online more recently than the other. But if I can avoid it, I will. Monogamy taught me that as romantic relationships develop, the individual parties connect and intertwine their personhoods, losing elements of their individuality in order to combine as one. Funnily enough, when Matt and I were solely “friends with benefits”, people wouldn’t automatically assume we know every movement of one another in real time. This only began as our relationship became “legitimate”. Also, FWB is a Non-Monogamous Relationship Dynamic that everybody knows but nobody remembers when discussing non-monogamy, but I digress.

Non-monogamy allows for such relationships as Beth and the boys of interest. She could have a relationship with chess as her “primary” and consider intimacy of any capacity with the men who have shown interest and genuine compassion towards her wellbeing. It cannot be denied that she cared for them, and they cared for her, even if it wasn’t always as they wanted or at the same time. Like ships at night.

This is all my individual perspective and I’d love to hear from you. Have you watched The Queen’s Gambit? Can you see this being a potential possibility? If you haven’t watched it, have I persuaded you? I’d love to chat about it!

I’d like to give a shout out to Bri Anne who edited this and put up with my overcapitalisation. It’s just who I am, okay?!

For now,

Rhyana