<Comment deleted by user>
In french the tower have a female article. Not a big point, languages have their quirks. I always wondered what it did to my subconscious to assign gender to things as in French. Is "la porte" being female? In English boats and trucks are assigned personalities sometimes, and I think they would become female. In French "un camion", "un bateau". What does it do.
I do think I have been projecting into my pieces, maybe not as much as their own personas, but something sentient having preferred vision and motion abilities. For me "it" was it all the time.. or me, in them. Or pets. I guess I might try making them more people that can talk back to me. I would still not need to assign gender consciously.
The bishop being a clown, from my French first exposure to chess.. "Le Fou".. it makes the board more fun too.. but in reality I just see them as living on their geometric subspace of the board.. living but not full persons.. yet. I should try that.. I think the point is to animate them and have internal model and high attention to their ways. Anyone can morph your proposed ideas into their own version...
It might also be about making stories and associations, stories with arcs on the board, that are not just about moves, but how they site while other siblings move.
I just don't get the insistence about not doing the same thing to pawns. They just have their OCD ways, picky about where they move (there better be nothing there ni front), or that they capture in diagonal... and can not look back ever. It might be about being prudent or not being concerned too much for board awareness priorities? for the moving decisions, I mean. But as sitting pieces of material (hehehe!) they need some care in the mind's storyboard... they are just quirky, slow, and have 3square slab front tunnel vision.... Maybe cows looking at train passing? and making philosophical comments about how stressed those speedsters might be...
I do think I have been projecting into my pieces, maybe not as much as their own personas, but something sentient having preferred vision and motion abilities. For me "it" was it all the time.. or me, in them. Or pets. I guess I might try making them more people that can talk back to me. I would still not need to assign gender consciously.
The bishop being a clown, from my French first exposure to chess.. "Le Fou".. it makes the board more fun too.. but in reality I just see them as living on their geometric subspace of the board.. living but not full persons.. yet. I should try that.. I think the point is to animate them and have internal model and high attention to their ways. Anyone can morph your proposed ideas into their own version...
It might also be about making stories and associations, stories with arcs on the board, that are not just about moves, but how they site while other siblings move.
I just don't get the insistence about not doing the same thing to pawns. They just have their OCD ways, picky about where they move (there better be nothing there ni front), or that they capture in diagonal... and can not look back ever. It might be about being prudent or not being concerned too much for board awareness priorities? for the moving decisions, I mean. But as sitting pieces of material (hehehe!) they need some care in the mind's storyboard... they are just quirky, slow, and have 3square slab front tunnel vision.... Maybe cows looking at train passing? and making philosophical comments about how stressed those speedsters might be...
@dboing said in #3:
> It might also be about making stories and associations, stories with arcs on the board, that are not just about moves, but how they site while other siblings move.
I think this is a key point. If you allow the piece to "come alive," then you're more likely to be in tune with the most important aspects of the position or game.
As to the "pawns aren't people" mentality: yes, it's supposed to be a bit tongue in check. But in terms of priorities, you should be ranking your piece activity much much higher than pawn structure. And often piece activity is more important than the number of pawns you have too. So, the phrase "pawns aren't people" is much more about prioritizing what you to consider on the chess board, than any sort of attempt to degrade pawns or make any deep philosophical comment.
> It might also be about making stories and associations, stories with arcs on the board, that are not just about moves, but how they site while other siblings move.
I think this is a key point. If you allow the piece to "come alive," then you're more likely to be in tune with the most important aspects of the position or game.
As to the "pawns aren't people" mentality: yes, it's supposed to be a bit tongue in check. But in terms of priorities, you should be ranking your piece activity much much higher than pawn structure. And often piece activity is more important than the number of pawns you have too. So, the phrase "pawns aren't people" is much more about prioritizing what you to consider on the chess board, than any sort of attempt to degrade pawns or make any deep philosophical comment.
Very good guide, I believe this is a key part of my middle game that I have to improve. Appreciate the work put into this, and thank you!
Ok Goodyear.
Pardon me ok Goodyear
Pardon me ok Goodyear
nice blog very useful
You are awesome! Thanks a ton for your efforts for these lessons!