in Russian (with photographs):

<Pogonina>'s link works OK, but I can't help but make note of a couple of items in her review...

<Many top players consider “Journey to the Chess Kingdom” to be one of the best chess books ever written.>

This strikes me as a little odd, of course I'm not a "top" player, but I do know that most the lists of "best chess books ever written", at least those that I've seen, tend to omit this book. Perhaps it's because an English translation has been so long in the coming?

Furthermore, she writes shortly thereafter:

<The book is primarily intended for children and has thus been written in a light and captivating style. Both kids and adults will feel themselves as heroes of a fairy-tale while flipping the pages of “Journey to the Chess Kingdom”. >

In my experience, most lists of "best chess books ever written" tend to omit books aimed at beginners.

<If you have ever wondered what the secrets of the Russian chess school are, then this is the right place to find an answer. By reading the text carefully, solving the exercises and playing some games you should be able to progress from not knowing how the pieces move to Expert level (roughly FIDE 2000).>

However, if this single volume of a chess book really can deliver on the promise to take a reader from rank amateur to Expert, then I might have to reassess my opinion.

But then, I do wonder why its praises haven't been sung loader and more often...

For those who'd like to read an excerpt and decide for themselves:

New In Chess blurb:

https://www.newinchess.com/Journey_...

Excerpt:

http://chess-evolution.com/download...

By the way, you can see the original Soviet cover artwork here:

http://www.amazon.com/Puteshestvie-...

<
[From the first set of interviews]
[SovSport] Where did your acquaintance with chess start?

There’s a wonderful children’s textbook, probably the best in history – “Journey to the Chess Kingdom”. My dad, who really loved the game, began to go through a diagram a day with me.>

But even then, the book didn't immediately win him over (or did it?), as he continues with this:

<One evening I told him that I wanted to study something else. Well, he thought the boy had cooled towards the chessboard and pieces. He told my mum that chess hadn’t interested Boris.>

Ah, but then there's this:

<My dad couldn’t even imagine that I’d gulped down the whole book in one day and therefore wanted something new. Unfortunately my father didn’t live to see my victory. We lost him one and a half years ago…>

<One such book is Journey to the Chess Kingdom written by Yuri Averbakh and Michael Beilin.

Yuri Averbakh is the oldest living GM, a legendary former Soviet Champion and candidate for the World Championship. He also wrote the most important endgame manual in the history of chess. <Michael Beilin was a famous lawyer, trainer of the Soviet National team and a prolific chess writer.>

Journey to the Chess Kingdom has been reprinted many times and translated into a number of languages. Though quite surprising, the fact is it hasnever before been translated into English... until now!

It´s hard to say which chess book is the absolute bestseller but clearly there are two favorites - Robert Fischer's "Bobby Fischer - "How to play Chess". and Averbakh/Beilin's "Journey to the Chess Kingdom".>

https://www.newinchess.com/Journey_...

I also found mention of him in my research on <URS Cup 1970>, where he's mentioned as having a prominent bureaucratic role in Soviet Chess of the era:

<M. Beilin, Head of Chess and Checkers Committee for Physical Culture and Sport at the Council of Ministers.>

<М. Бейлнным, начальником отдела шахмат шашек Комитета по физической культуре и спорту при Совете Министров СССР.>

From <64 No31 (109) Aug 6 1970 p2>

I wonder if Soltis mentions him more in his <Soviet Chess> book?

<Former head of Chess and Checkers Department, Physical Training and Sport, USSR Council of Ministers Committee, 1967-1971>

Sources:

<Bobby Fischer Goes to War>, David Edmonds and John Eidinow,
Faber and Faber, Sept 2011
xv, p59

Only marginally, most notably imo are:

"Based on Stockholm, Kotov should have been considered a favorite. <But Mikhail Beilin, a member of the Soviet delegation>, felt Kotov had no aspirations in Switzerland beyond the gold watch he received for the brilliancy prize. The other way Kotov distinguished himself was with his addiction to a daily routine. At the closing ceremony, the most an arbiter could say of Kotov was that "in 28 rounds he ate exactly 28 ham sandwiches"." (page 212)

and

As a pivotal member of the Soviet chess apparatus, Beilin offers several insights about Spassky, in particular:

p59
<[Spassky's] game's entering a trough coincided with turmoil in his relationships. In 1960, he parted from Tolush. Mikhail Beillin [...] remembers, 'Tolush was quite depressed after this episode - he didn't have children of his own and he had spent a lot of time with Boris. He could emphasize with bad boys and he taught Spassky a great deal.'>

Also,

p72
<According to Mikhail Beilin, 'Spassky without doubt did things no one else was allowed to do. The higher you reached in chess, master, international master, grandmaster, the more you were allowed to get up to mischief. Others would never have been permitted to go abroad if they acted in the same way as Spassky. He had a very independent character.">

and from p86:

<The chess apparatchik Mikhail Beilin feels generally warm towards Spassky as a person, 'He was nice, sympathetic, and most people felft well disposed towards him. I think people liked him for his human qualities but disliked him if they judged him on the upholding of Party values. [...]>

p88
<Mikhail Beilin says that it was in Spassky's nature to delight in outraging others, even at the risk of offending them.>

And some of his strategy politically, from p152:

<The balance of power had shifted to the chess champion. 'Heads down' became the rule in the Sports Committee. 'Why risk intervention?' muses Beilin. 'Pavlov was no idiot. This was now Demichev's and Spassky's responsibility. OK, so you guys take responsibility">

Of course the reader must refer to the book to get the complete context of this statement.

Finally, from p163: