BTW, remember I was trying to remember the <Kundera> collection of short stories?

Funny neither of us could remember THE BOOK OF LAUGHTER AND FORGETTING.

that's the one.

I read it in Montreal. It is either a "loose" novel or a cycle of very closely connected short stories...

They are all about the beauty and inexorable failure of sexual love, the impossibility of fusing with "the other."

<Sartre> wrote something very similar about romantic love-- illusion of the "other become one"-- so did <Freud> as you probably know. <Buber> wrote more optimistically about it, but he wasn't talking about "sexual love," but "love" in general.

<Sartre> also employed his version of the "other" trope in his <Anti Semite and Jew>...

The Book of Laughter and forgetting reminded me of <Hiroshima Mon Amour>, but a lot less harsh and certainly more "accessbible."

Funny I didn't remember the Fischer quotes from the book!!

Or the name of the dam thing.

Well it's got 'forgetting' right in the title!!

BTW, if even just ONE FILM gets the chess board/pieces/moves right in a "chess scene" , just ONE FILM...

<Official challenge>

Find me one that is accurate.

You know, the board and the description of the moves isn't even accurate in the climactic final game of <Searching for Bobby Fischer>, eh?

And <Pandolfini> was directly involved as technical advisor and everything.

Tonight's sad case:

An interesting murder mystery <The Bone Collector>.

<Denzel Washington> is playing against his computer and calls out <Ng6+> correctly- IF HE WERE PLAYING THE WHITE PIECES THAT IS. (he's actually playing the Black pieces).

THEN-- if you can believe it-- after his opponent moves, he pushes his pawn forward to what should be f7 but actually calls out "c2"

WHICH WOULD BE THE CORRECT SQUARE <C2> IF THEY HAD THE BOARD TURNED AROUND THE RIGHT WAY OR THE RIGHT COLOR PIECES.

For cripe sake. This would never happen in a <Kubrik> film.

Interestingly, there aren't any chess scenes in <Kubrik> films.

A BIG PRIZE TO SOMEONE WHO CAN TELL ME A TOTALLY ACCURATE DEPICTION OF CHESS MOVES THAT DON'T END IN "CHECKMATE" IN THE DAM OPENING OR MIDDLE GAME.

wELL I mean I was enjoying the dam film and all.

OK that's my rant for tonight.

<Eyal>, thank you so much for your analysis. It combines lines with psychological insight and accurate assessments of positions.

you have been HUGE, and continue to be HUGE, in helping me learn to play chess better.

Thanks so much for your ideas on my sad game.

I was seeing phantoms about the <Nc4>, as you accurately point out, and certainly <b3?> was a very poor move. I felt discombobulated already by how many tempi I had already thrown away with my fumbling around in a line I"d never tried before.

<Freud> I can't tell you which volume the concept is from but it's ringing a rather loud bell.

For <Freud>, the "love-object" is not evaluated on the actual characteristics of the object, but rather on what the "lover" projects on to the object, == that is, the lover's psychic image of the object.

These projections, of course, would originate from the lover's unconscious template-- Making the "overevaluation" two-fold.

1. The lover is overevaluating the characteristics of the love object due to her narcissism- really, the lover is projecting her own feelings/ideas/fantasies on to the love object-- opposite to what a Buddhist "love" would entail-- to see the object solely in-and-of-itself- for what it really was.

2. Not only is the process of projection unnoticed- that is, the overevaluation is unnoticed, but, also, the CONTENT of the projection is unconscious and thus, by definition, hidden from the lover's ken--

There obtains, therefore,, a kind of double overevaluation, or at least distortion, of the actual properties of the love object.

More prosaically, like as in a teen-sex romp movie--

The Nerd has an inflated image of what the HOt popular Girl really is, making his "love" for her illusory.

He is unconscious of how retarded his ideas are.

However, without the benefit of Freudian psychotherapy or substantial cocaine use, he has an EPIPHANY!!

He sees his much less attractive best friend for what she actually is, rather than for imagined overevaluated and illusory qualities.

Then he falls for the ugly, sensitive girl, who is his "best pal."

Interestingly, the California-bred thoroughbred <Best Pal> was one of the greatest champions in Horse Racing history.

I hope this has been of some help.

Don't forget, I believe I may be barking mad, and everything I've read and seen and heard is all jumbled up in my head.

Try <La Diagonale du fou> aka "Dangerous Moves" (1984) - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087144/. It's loosely based on the 1978 Karpov vs Korchnoi match.

Reposting from the match page:

<Interestingly, the "defector" (Pavius Fromm, played by Alexandre Arbatt) was the younger man in the film, while his opponent (Akiva Liebskind, played by Michel Piccoli) was the older one. The final game between them is played (without a board) at the hospital, after the match was officially terminated because of Liebskind's failing health and Fromm was awarded the win. The moves are as follows [Dom should like that]: 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 c5 4. c3 Nc6 5. Nf3 Qb6 6. Be2 cxd4 7. cxd4 Nh6 8. Nc3 Nf5 9. Na4 Bb4+ 10. Bd2 Qa5 11. Bc3 b5 12. a3 Bxc3+ 13. Nxc3 b4 14. axb4 Qxb4. The film ends here; at this point, it is of course too early in the game to determine who will win.>

You win yet another Prize! I wish it was on streaming video so I could see it.

BTW, <Euripides> and I are trying to remember <Freud's> ideas on <overevaluation of the love object>.

Could you add any insight or accurate points about it?

I blithered on from memory, but my memory is notoriously unreliable.

For example, in class, when asked to name <two apostles of Christ>, I blanked out and panicked, yelling <DAVID AND GOLIAH>

heh.

That's actually an episode from a very, very, very, famous novel.

POINTS IF YOU CAN GUESS THE NOVEL

<Jess> I've wanted to ask you for quite a while now but kept forgetting:

<euripides> Well, those ideas are all over the place in Freud's writings - I think you can find a pretty good mapping of them in an essay called FREUD'S CONCEPTS OF IDEALIZATION (http://www.analysis.com/vs/vs79b.html).

Black to play and draw

click for larger view

A nice little theme is invoved here, just give it a look when you feel like it -- I liked this one...

PS. I responded to your post at my place.

I have read that Freud avoided reading Nietzsche because he was scared of being swamped by him. Delicate plant, Siggy.

<Tim> thanks for the explanaton about <Timman>

NOW DIDN'T YOU TELL THEM NOT TO PLAY QB3?????

7. a4 - If only white had time to prevent b5. But alas this doesn't seem to work. Also white's usual setup includes 0-0-0, which is now not possible. But more important, this is not your style (where have I heard that before?). You are messy girl who doesn't care what that noob throws out 'cause you are going to mess him up, dig?

8. Be2 - After a4, Be2 and Bd3 are about equivalent. Also consider Bobby's favorite place for this piece against the Sicilian, c4. 8. Bc4 Qc7 9. Qe2 looks thematic with a4.

9. Bf3 - Your first really questionable move. f3 is a necessary evil with the bishop on e3. It makes more sense with 0-0-0 to support a pawn storm. In a way this shows a4 to be a form of mixing metaphors.

15. f4 - Generally you should move Kh1 before playing f4. At this point I think you were upset and just wanted it to end as soon as possible.

You should have told them <You are my teammates and I love you. But don't ever take sides against the family again.>>

No truce is possible.