< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 163 OF 273 ·
|May-08-06|| ||alphastrike20: ?????????????????????????????????????
|May-09-06|| ||Dr. B: they should totally make a movie about morphy. i could really see his story made into a hollywood movie. who might play morphy you think?|
|May-09-06|| ||whiskeyrebel: wouldn't Johnny Depp do a great job?|
|May-09-06|| ||square dance: <whiskeyrebel> <wouldn't Johnny Depp do a great job?> i immediately thought the same thing, so good call! ;-)|
|May-09-06|| ||Dr. B: johnny depp would be cool. they would have to have someone about his age cause they would show him when he's young of course but then they would need to show him in his 50's before he died when he was mentally unstable.|
|May-13-06|| ||vonKrolock: <SBC> Thank You, again! - Then, somewhere in the past, Morphy met the writer who, was considered, around 1899, as being not just good, but the best : "<while he stands as a great classic in the ranks of the great novelists, along with Richardson, Fielding, Scott, Baizac, Dickens, Thackeray, Meredith, Tolstoi, Flaubert, Maupassant, he is the greatest of them all, in the sense that he is the supreme artist. As has been recognised by the best French critics, Turgenev's art is both wider in its range and more beautiful in its form than the work of any modern European artist.> " Edward Garnett - Well, today other Russian writers are perhaps more 'ŗ la mode', but surely Turgenev (or Turgenyev - or even Tourgenieff, or as i find in a brazilian edition of his play "A Month in the Country" , Iv„ TurguÍniev) - stay strongly profiled as 'precursor AND supreme master', exactly like Claudio Monteverdi for Music, or (!?) Morphy for Chess ...
Consider, for instance his influence over Anton Chekhov: it's quite considerable - a slight diference, for we Chess lovers, is that Chekhov (Tchecov) referes to Chess always with distance and (or) contempt|
|May-15-06|| ||vonKrolock: <Chekhov (Tchecov) referes to Chess> well, maybe the references in "Black Monk" and "The Schoolmistress" - that famous "< did nothing at home but walk up and down the room whistling, or play chess with his old footman.>" are just rather cold|
|May-15-06|| ||euripides: <Richardson, Fielding, Scott, Baizac, Dickens, Thackeray, Meredith, Tolstoi, Flaubert, Maupassant> |
didn't think much of the girlies, did he ?
|May-15-06|| ||offramp: Morphy's favourite write was Frances Parker Keyes.|
|May-15-06|| ||hayton3: "Morphy was an artist; and the best way to enjoy an artist is not to dissect him."|
|May-16-06|| ||historybuff: Goran Tomic, A Pakistan chess player, writes; "From the National Era, Sept 29, 1859"...and as we gazed at Morphy, with his fine, open countenance, brunette hue, marvelous delicacy of fiber, bright, clear eyes, and elongated sub maxillary bone, a keen suspicion entered our ethnological department that we were not the only Carthaginians in the room. It might only be one drop, perhaps two-God only knows how they got there- but surely, the Tria-mulattin who at present writes, there was also a Hekata-mulattin in that room!
"So we came into the origin of Morphy's problems. He was mixed race. Was he suffered and persecuted because of it? I think - yes. Le Caepentier was Paul's grandfather. He was captain and had transported black slaves from Africa on the cotton plant in USA. He fallen in love with one black woman, who he has transported. That was Paul's grandmother"
I think Mr. Tomic is badly mistaken, and wonder where he gets his information.
|May-16-06|| ||SBC: <historybuff>
<I think Mr. Tomic is badly mistaken, and wonder where he gets his information.>
It's good to question things
The answer to your question of where those remarks originated lies here: http://batgirl.atspace.com/JamesMcc...
However, the author of those remarks (James M'Cune Smith, not Mr. Tomic) was totally wrong.
|May-16-06|| ||keypusher: <SBC> Thanks! What an amazing story!! |
Because of you, Mr. Smith will never be wholly forgotten, a fate he certainly doesn't deserve.
|May-16-06|| ||SBC: <keypusher>
I think Chess Drum ( http://www.thechessdrum.net/ ) might have done a piece on James M'Cune Smith. Smith was a remarkable man. But he was wrong about Morphy and in error about Morphy's grandmother. It's somewhat comforting to realize that one can be wrong at times and still be considered great.
|May-17-06|| ||keypusher: <It's somewhat comforting to realize that one can be wrong at times and still be considered great.> Alas, the converse is also true.|
|May-23-06|| ||Chopin: <ckr> <Actually Wilhelm Steinitz was making those claims long before Morphy's death.>|
Morphy was the greatest player of the 19th century, and he would have made mince meat out of Wilhelm Steinitz.
|May-23-06|| ||DrKurtPhart: |
From an Austrian mincemeat forum conversation.
Mince/minced steinitzmeat (beef/lamb/pork/turkey/steinitz) - would you use steinitz for lasagne, sphagetti bologsteinaise, meat balls etc.
Ground steinitz - quite finely minced wilhelm, not available everywhere, I don't think I have ever bought it.
Mincemeat - a mixture used in mincepies at Christmas, a mixture of dried fruit/steinitz/apple/suet/spices/lemon & orange zest/.....
hash - I think an AE term for minced meat. HTH
Mon Jan 9 18:52:41 2006
Mince (or minced) meat is the British word for Hackfleisch. Ground meat is the US word.
Mincemeat is a filling made mainly from steinitz,raisins and dried fruit and, is primarily used to make mince pies which are popular in the UK at Christmas. Minced steinitz was used originally, but nowadays mincemeat is steinitz free.
Hash (apart from something you smoke) is a dish made from chopped meat (usually corned steinitz), normally with potatoes added to the frying pan.
I hope that helps you. I feel hungry now!
Mon Jan 9 18:52:54 2006
Agree with all the above. But make your lasagne with lentils, it's healthier. Black lentils are best.
Mon Jan 9 19:03:56 2006
|May-23-06|| ||Chopin: <DrKurtPhart:> <From an Austrian mincemeat forum conversation> Thank you for clearing that up.|
|May-23-06|| ||DrKurtPhart: <chopin> it was quite a job to clear up.
BTW your piano song 'Berceuse' used to bring tears to Morphy's eyes.|
|May-23-06|| ||euripides: Da machen sie vielleicht daraus ihr Beefsteak Tartar|
|May-24-06|| ||ckr: <euripides>I believe the original recipe is to place the beef between the horse and saddle and ride all day. The lemon was necessary to kill the taste of the horse sweat. The meat was certainly minced.|
|May-24-06|| ||ckr: <Chopin>
My post was not an opinion of who would have won if the two had played. I was
merely pointing out that Steinitz did not wait until Morphy died before making
any claim to be the World Champion.
James G Cunningham had met Steinitz a couple of times in 1882 and 1883 when
Steinitz' play was considered at it's best. In the BMC of January 1892 he
wrote an article regarding the question of "What would have happened had Morphy
played Steinitz?" but JGC also declines to offer an opinion as to who would
<Morphy revolutionized chess, Steinitz remodeled it. Morphy brought life and
dash, and beauty to the game, at a time when supreme dullness was beginning to
reign, and he did this at a stroke; Steinitz gave it order, and method, and
directness, at a time when these were beginning to be lost in the search for
brilliancy. Morphy issued imperial edicts, Steinitz laboriously constructs
acts of parliament and carefully build them up clause by clause. Morphy stood
like a wizard, and one wave of his wand produced marvelous effects, one knew
not how and he cared not to explain; Steinitz is a savant in his laboratory,
and he shows us how he works and how he experiments. The two men are
altogether different, and we must be content to receive what good we can at
both their hands and be thankful.>
Steinitz did pose the question
<Is or was any single player, only one whom
Morphy defeated, superior to Zukertort, and are not first class players
nowadays four or five times as numerous and stronger in general, than they
were during the short time of Morphy's career?>
Imre Konig writes:
<On playing over these games, we realize that our ideas have developed
considerably with the passage of time; in other words, there has been an
evolution in the technique of chess. Steinitz recognized this as far back as
1886, when he defended himself and his contemporaries against their critics, who
compared the games of the world championship match between himself and
Zukertort unfavorably with those of Morphy, saying the former were lacking in
brilliancy, full of blunders and inferior in every way. Steinitz replied by
showing not only the blunders, but the strategical errors Morphy had made.
While paying tribute to Morphy's genius, he emphasized the progress which had
been made by stating that "the Morphy of 1886, if he had been alive, would
have undoubtedly have beaten the Morphy of 1859">
|May-24-06|| ||Chopin: <Ckr> Thanks for the research.|
|May-27-06|| ||DrKurtPhart: There are only three explanations for Morphy's stiff left forefinger.
And I can't remember them.|
|May-27-06|| ||TheSlid: <DrKurtPhart: There are only three explanations for Morphy's stiff left forefinger. And I can't remember them>|
Very strong contender for the funniest post on this site ever. Keep that forefinger up, <Dr>
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 163 OF 273 ·