Chess is an infinitely complex game, which one can play in infinitely numerous and varied ways.
In chess one cannot control everything. Sometimes a game takes an unexpected turn, in which beauty begins to emerge. Both players are always instrumental in this.
Even if you play perfectly, a fault of your opponent's can destroy the entire beauty of the game.
When I speak of the beauty of a game of chess, then naturally this is subjective. Beauty can be found in a very technical, mathematical game for example. That is the beauty of clarity.
Okay, when you start to fight for equality, like Anand did in 1995, you could end up losing game 10, like he did, without putting up any kind of fight.
Only he, who penetrates into the depth of the game, can express his personality in it.
No - I'm quite calm inside during the game for most of the time - not 100%, but generally very calm.
Once he had selected the path he was going down he really had to stick with it in a 16 game match. He had to try and hit in the one direction but unfortunately for him - though fortunately for me! - he hit in the wrong direction.
I don't know whether computers are improving the style of play, I know they are changing it. Chess has become a different game, one could say that computers have changed the world of chess. That is pretty clear.
My very first book was a games collection of Anatoly Karpov. On the whole I was attracted by positonal play with some tactics, and already then I was aiming for universality.
Every month I look through some ten thousand games, so not as to miss any new ideas and trends.
When I was a child I liked the games of Capablanca, and later I was captivated by Alekhine's play.
Part of my preparation for the World Champion match against Kasparov was to be ready for his off-board tactics. I did not to react to them at all. Once you start thinking about these things during the game, even analysing them, you're caught.