< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 10 OF 10 ·
|Oct-03-17|| ||OhioChessFan: "A game of chess is a visual and plastic thing, and if it isn't geometric in the static sense of the word, it is mechanical, since it moves. It's a drawing; it's a mechanical reality."|
|Oct-07-17|| ||Domdaniel: <Rose Selavy> - To be honest, I don't fully trust *either* set of biographers/scholars where chess is concerned. This makes sense, of course - they have presumably spent years studying art and/or literature, with little time to delve deeply into chess. The exception is FM Allan Savage, who posts here as Duchamp 64, has published on Duchamp, and who clearly knows chess.|
I once discussed Beckett's play 'Endgame' with a leading Beckett scholar, well aware of the role played by chess. But it transpired that he thought the 'endgame' was just the final moves of any game, whether a mating combination or a pawn promotion. When I explained the normal chess meaning of 'endgame' he was surprised.
Similarly, I've read articles on Duchamp that had little feeling for his interest in chess.
You may be right, though, that we'll never know whether Duchamp and Beckett played. Although one can dream... a few years ago, a friend of mine bought a car which had been owned by Sam, complete with Beckettian ash in the ashtray. Is it too much to hope that some other relic might reveal the score of a chess game?
Incidentally, aren't there two R's in Rrose Selavy?
|Oct-08-17|| ||MissScarlett: Re. Wikipedia: <During this period his fascination with chess so distressed his first wife that she glued his <pieces> to the board.>|
At first blush, I thought it said <penis>.
|Oct-08-17|| ||MissScarlett: Belfast News-Letter, February 9th 1928, p.10:
<The tournament at Hyeres has just concluded in a triple tie for first prize, the leaders being J. J. O'Hanlon (Ireland), V. Halberstadt (Russia), and M. Duchamp (France). The three will jointly hold the Philidor Challenge Cup for 1928. In the final round O'Hanlon lost to Duchamp through accidentally touching a pawn, which his opponent insisted upon his moving. A draw in this round would have made the Ulster player a clear first.>
|Oct-08-17|| ||JimNorCal: I read recently about Duchamp’s scientific ventures into visuals created by spinning disks. His work had real scientific value. |
I was amazed.
|Oct-15-17|| ||Domdaniel: <Jim> Yeah, Rotoreliefs. I saw a set of them at an art exhibition about ten years ago.|
|Oct-15-17|| ||Domdaniel: Duchamp's biographer, Calvin Tomkins, wrote that Duchamp wanted to show that, at least in chess terms, the artistic mentality could match the scientific engineering mentality which was dominant in chess.|
Unfortunately, wrote Tomkins, "The Memory Boys were tougher".
Great line. I love that idea - Marcel vs the Memory Boys.
|Oct-16-17|| ||Stonehenge: http://laregledujeu.org/arrabal/fil...|
|Oct-18-17|| ||JimNorCal: Here's a snip from something I read about Duchamp. "The Richness of Life" (collection of writings by Stephen Jay Gould, edited by Steven Rose, from pgs 61-62
"Although Italian scientists (unaware of Duchamp's work) found and named this particular form of illusion as the "stereo-kinetic effect" in 1924, Duchamp apparently discovered this perceptual phenomenon in the early 1920s and completed his first set of disks in 1923. ... a viewer would see the resulting pattern as a three-dimensional form even through one eye alone, without the supposedly necessary benefit of stereoscopy. ... art museums invariably exhibit these discs as framed, static objects on a wall -- whereas they have no meaning, either artistic or scientific, unless they spin."|
|Oct-18-17|| ||JimNorCal: The book notes that Duchamp explicitly regarded the RotoReliefs as scientific not artistic work in correspondence with others.
One medical doctor, for example, used Duchamp's RotoRelief discs to help retrain 3D capability in soldiers that had lost one eye in WWI.|
|Oct-20-17|| ||Domdaniel: <JimNorCal> Fascinating, thank you. I thought I'd read most of Gould's books as well as many by or about Duchamp, but I wasn't aware of that one.|
|Oct-20-17|| ||JimNorCal: And do check out Stonehenge's link, very artistic!|
|Oct-20-17|| ||zanzibar: <JimNorCal>, yes, but don't forget the PG-13 rating when checking out the set (the Max Ernst chess set, of course).|
|Oct-21-17|| ||JimNorCal: <zanzibar>: good point.|
|Oct-23-17|| ||epistle: "But of course, the brilliance of Étant donnés is that it was conceived as a puzzle. It will never have a fixed meaning, only an ever-evolving body of interpretations."|
|Oct-23-17|| ||JimNorCal: <epistle>: Fascinating. Thanks.|
|Jan-10-18|| ||MissScarlett: Marcel Duchamp walked into a bar. The barman asked him: <Why the long face?>|
|Feb-10-18|| ||OhioChessFan: "It's a product of two poles - there's the pole of the one who makes the work, and the pole of the one who looks at it. I give the latter as much importance as the one who makes it."|
|Mar-26-18|| ||OhioChessFan: "I do not believe in painting per se – A painting is made not by the artist but by those who look at it and grant it their favors. In other words, no painters knows himself or what he is doing – There is no outward sign explaining why a Fra Angelico and a Leonardo are equally 'recognized'. It all takes place at the level of our old friend luck."|
|May-01-18|| ||Malachi: According to this scholar - http://toutfait.com/opposition-and-... - there's pretty solid documentation that Duchamp and Beckett did play.|
|May-27-18|| ||OhioChessFan: Nice pic:
|May-07-19|| ||OhioChessFan: https://d32dm0rphc51dk.cloudfront.n... |
Playing chess with Raoul de Roussy de Sales.
|Aug-13-19|| ||OhioChessFan: John Cage and Duchamp play chess:
|Jan-11-20|| ||OhioChessFan: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0...|
|Jan-11-20|| ||OhioChessFan: Wow, just clicked the link in <Stonehenge's> post, in the middle of the public library. I was definitely blitzing my next move back!|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 10 OF 10 ·