Wednesday, January 31, 2024

A Day Well Spent

On the very last day of the 2nd “机器人谷杯” (“Robot Valley Cup”) China City Chess League, on Wednesday, January 31, 2024, in 青岛 (Qīngdǎo), 山东省 (Shāndōng province), China, four-time Women’s World Chess Champion 侯逸凡 (Hóu Yìfán) (pictured above and below) had the last word in the final for fifth-sixth place against 苏州棋协队 (Sūzhōu Chess Association), when, by virtue of her victory over 陈宏森 (Chén Hóngsēn), she secured the fifth place finish for 济南银丰队 (Jǐnán Yínfēng). Photos: 璐璐 (Lùlù).

Gone to the Stars

Mud and stars

Giorgio Agamben, Quodlibet, Jabuary 29, 2024

Everyone remembers the anecdote, narrated by Socrates in Theaetetus, of the Thracian servant girl, “witty and graceful”, who burst out laughing as she observed Thales who, keeping his gaze fixed on the sky and the stars, does not see what is under his feet and falls into a well. In a note from Quaderno genovese (Genoese Notebook), Montale somehow vindicates the philosopher’s gesture, writing: “He who drags his feet in the mud and his eyes in the stars; he is the only hero, he is the only living one”. The fact that the twenty-one-year-old poet summarises and anticipates in this note the essence of his future poetics has not escaped the critics; but nevertheless important is that this poetics, like any true poetics, implies, so to say, a theology, albeit a negative one, which a careful scholar drastically summarised in the formula “theology of the crumb” (“Only the divine is total in the sip and the crumb” — one reads in Rebecca, “Only death triumphs if you ask for the whole portion”).
The theology that is in question here, as is already evident in the “mud/stars” dualism of the youthful note and in the “dark forces of Ahriman” evoked in a 1944 intervention, is certainly Gnostic. As in all gnosis, the principles — or gods — are two, a good one and an evil one, one absolutely alien to the world and a demiurge who instead created it and rules over it. In the most radical Gnostic currents, the good god is so alien to the world that he cannot even be said to exist: according to the Valentinians, he is not existent, but pre-existent (proon), he is not the beginning, but pre-beginning (proarche), not father, but pre-father (propator). And just as he is alien to the world, he is also alien to language, comparable to an abyss (bythos) intimately conjoined to silence (sige): “Silence, mother of all things that have been emitted from the abyss, that which it is inexpressible, it was silent; that which it has understood, it has called incomprehensible”. Negative or apophatic theology, so dear to Montale already starting from Ossi (Cuttlefish Bones) (“We can only tell you today, / what we are not, what we do not want”) is, in this sense, nothing else than the other side of gnosis. Indeed, according to all evidence, the pre-existing god nominates the stage prior to the revelation and the event of the language that defines the human condition (anthropogenesis). Christianity tries to sort Gnostic dualism out by identifiyng the good god, the Father, with the creator, but, to deal with the removed evil element, it must then suppose the incarnation in a son, who, like Christ, i.e. Messiah, has the task of saving and redeeming the world.
The great Gnostic theme, to the extent that it still certainly concerns us, shows that in man an element alien to the world and a mundane one live together, a good principle and an evil one, and that human life is therefore determined, from the beginning to the end, by conflict and by the possible conciliation of these two opposite elements. It is an arduous and onerous task, because the two principles — mud and stars — are so intimately tangled in earthly existence that it is practically impossible to untangle them. According to Gnostic theology, which Christianity inherits at least in part without the benefit of inventory, the world is the fruit of a dejection or a casting down (katabolé or probolé) from the superior celestial sphere into the material and inferior one. Origen, taking up Gnostic traditions, specifies that “in Greek katabolé rather means throw (deicere), i.e., throw down”. Souls were thrown, against their will, from the upper sphere to the lower one and “coated in ticker and harder bodies (crassioribus et solidioribus)”, and for this reason “every creature groaneth, to delivered from corruption” (the reference is to Rom., 8, 20: “the creature was subjected to vanity, not willing it”... and waits and groans in the hope of being freed from corruption); but for the Gnostic, freeing oneself can only mean patiently picking up the sparks and parcels of divine light that have been confused in the darkness, separating them, one by one, from the mud, and leading them back to their celestial homeland.
That modern culture, of which Montalian gnosis is here only an exemplary case, is permeated and interwoven by Gnostic motifs, is evident in the far from obvious fact that also the masterpiece of twentieth-century philosophy defines the human condition with the term Geworfenheit (being thrown), which according to all evidence is nothing but a translation of the Origenian katabolé and the Valentinian probolé. But a Gnostic motif was somehow also present in Platonic philosophy, not only in the image of the two different horses which make driving the soul’s chariot uncomfortable and painful in Phaedrus, but also in the anecdote of Theaetetus from which we began, and in the myth of the cave in the Republic. The problem every time is for man to somehow reconcile incompatible elements, black and white, mud and stars, the darkness of the cave and the splendour of the sun. The good is, indeed, always intertwined with evil and can only give itself as a parcel, an interstice or a crumb of light confused in the darkness: like an iris in the mud, according to the perspicuous image of one of Montale’s supreme poems, L’anguilla (The Eel). Not only that, like l’anguilla (which in Italian is, on the other hand, a perfect anagram of “la lingua”, i.e., the tongue), the “spark” or the “brief rainbow” of good exists only “squirming through / stones interstices of slime”, through “drought and desolation”, but here the risk is that the Gnostic, who must separate the sparks of light that remained imprisoned in the slime, ends up, against his will, transforming the darkness from which he had to escape into an idol.
The fact is that, given originally together the dualism of good and evil and their confusion, neither of the two principles is capable to sort the other out. The spark of light has got so stuck in the mud that it cannot completely separate from it, nor does the mud know how to disjoin itself entirely from the iris that so affectionately surrounds it. In the Gnostic paradigm they form, as they say, a system, and the unwary who strives to return them to their supposed original separation can only be left empty-handed. Thus the poet with his feet in the mud, who heroically tries to keep his eyes fixed on the stars, is no longer able to separate them from the slime, of which they are just an iris or a glimmer. He is no longer capable of pulling himself out of the well into which, like Thales, he has slipped. Zanzotto was rightly able to define Montale’s universe by writing that for him “human destiny is to ‘inter oneself’, to be reduced to sediment, to ‘less than what / the silted ditch took away from you’, it is discovering oneself as viscous and painful inertia... in the frightening matrix of a truth that is entirely and only earthly. Indeed, it should be called ‘earthy’, just as earthy is the man of Montale, made of a mud almost randomly springing up in life, but always tending to fall back into himself”. The angel who should redeem this interred life is now only, as in the eponymous poem of 1968, a “black angel”, “neither heavenly nor human”, “of ash and smoke” or, as in a later poem, just an “inexpungible typo”. And it is significant that the motivation of the Nobel Prize in Literature awarded to the poet in 1975 explicitly mentions “a vision of life without illusions” — the illusion in question being that stars can ever be separated from slime. Perhaps it would have been better for the poet — as for every man — to reverse the youthful motto into keep feet in the stars and eyes in the mud.
The evocation of the “poor / bewildered Nestorian” in Iride (Iris), the poem that opens the section Silvae of La bufera (The Storm), allows to specify the particular nature of Montalian “gnosis”, which we are interested in defining with greater precision here. The followers of Nestorius, Patriarch of Costantinopole from 428 to 432 and condemned as a heretic at the Council of Ephesus (431), asserted the presence in Christ of two natures, the divine one and the human one, but deny that they were united hypostatically, i.e., ontologically in one only person (or ypostasis). Unlike the Monophysites, who recognised in Christ only the divine nature, Nestorius asserted, like his opponent Cyril, Patriarch of Alexandria, diphysitism, but did not intend the union of the two natures, according to the model that Cyril managed to impose on Rome, kath’ypostasin, that is, ontologically in one only essence, but only in a moral sense, so to speak, through the person (prosopon) of Christ, distinct from ypostasis. Thus duality, in some way, prevails over unity, which, entrusted only to the moral person of Christ, is somehow weakened; and this is why Nestorians were accused, wrongly, of professing two people in Christ.
One understands, then, why Montale was fascinated by the “poor Nestorian”: the union between human and divine, mud and stars, is never accomplished once and for all, but only, instantaneous and imperfect, “in the sip and the crumb”. In Imaginary interview of 1946, Montale asserts it without reticence, when commenting on the female figure in Iride (Iris), “continuer and symbol of eternal Christian sacrifice”: “He who recognises her is the Nestorian, the man who knows best the affinities that bind God to incarnated beings, not the silly spiritualist or the rigid and abstract monophysite”. The affinity is not a hypostatic union, by essence and nature, but a difficult and never definitive affinity “in the night of the world”, “because — finishes the poem, defined in the interview as “key to it all, terribly so” — His work (which into yours / is transformed) must be kept up”. The redemption, recognition and tracing back to the origin of the sparks of light mixed in the mud never ends, it must be constantly resumed. At least until, from Satura onwards, the poet abandons his Gnostic theology and confesses himself openly skeptical, if not desperate. If there is a God, it is a God “who doesn't lead one to salvation for he knows / nothing about us and obviously / nothing about himself”.
For this reason theologians carefully postpone, but not without a good dose of hypocrisy, their ultimate detachment from the paradise to come, when the resurrected body, having become spiritual, will show its glory and the iris will no longer be more than a halo around what was once the slime of the flesh. It is not a question here of a lack of faith, with respect to which men are always at fault. If faith is, indeed, according to the apostle, “the existence of things hoped for”, the poet, like perhaps every man, does not believe enough in the things that do not seem to exist and are instead more real than those that seem to exist and, as theologians suggest, must defer the things hoped for in another world.
Against this impossibility of gnosis to sort its own irreducible dualism out, one must first raise a political objection. And if the strategy must be political, a first tactical move will be to move here and now all that theologians refer to the future paradise. If the glorious body will exhibit all its organs in paradise, including those of reproduction and defecation, then it will be better to snatch this hypothetical glory from the future to bring it back to its only possible place: our body, here and now. The glorious body is not another body, it is the same body, freed from the spell that separates it from itself, splitting mud from stars, light from dark. Everything, as Chassidim teaches, can be a spark of divinity and, as the crude, sneering language of the Talmud suggests, “Three things are akin to the world to come, and they are as follows: the sun, the Sabbath, and tashmish”, a word that means both sexual intercourse and defecation.
If good is mixed with evil, if the iris cannot be separated from the mud, this does not mean that they exist only negatively. On the contrary, iris and mud are both modes or modifications of God, each expression — differently, but on the same footing — of his substance. Gnostic dualism falls and cancels itself out in the formula Deus sive natura, in which sive does not cancel the difference, but transforms it into a political task, so to say. Sive is etymologically connected to the conjunction sic, which means “so” (hence the Italian “sì” as an expression of assent). The ways are the “so” of the divine substance, its simple giving itself, its consent to itself. But the place of this sive, of this “so” and of this assent, is in each man, who alone can confer existence here and now to the things hoped for. God is nature, the stars are mud not because of an absurd, impossible identity, but because man offers them the place of their mutual consent, of their arduous but simple coming together. Darkness – as has been suggested by another poet – is the work of the light and nothing of what happens in the world can do without their collaboration, of which each man is a guest and middleman. In this sense, we need to reread the precious Piccolo testamento (Little Testament) which concludes La bufera and contains perhaps the least elusive, even if contradictory, testimony of Montalian political creed. If the iris is here the “testimony / of a faith too often fought for, / of a hope that burned slower / than a green log on a fire”, then it cannot be true, as yet the poet immediately seems to suggest, that “a story doesn’t last / except in ashes and persistence / is only extinction”. In the verses that conclude the Testament, Montale indeed finds, for the first, and perhaps last time, the core of an explicitly political assertion: “Each knows his own: his pride / was not an escape, nor was humility / mean, and the tenuous ray that glimmered down / there was not a spark from a match”.

(English translation by I, Robot)

M. C. Escher, The 4th Day of the Creation, 1926. Courtesy of WikiArt.

Dragon at the Gates

On the third and last day of the 2nd “机器人谷杯” (“Robot Valley Cup”) China City Chess League came the supreme opportunity for four-time Women’s World Chess Champion 侯逸凡 (Hóu Yìfán), in representation of the chess pros, to deliver her celebration speech: “Thank you everyone who has contributed to the success of this City League. A successful format which groups together women, men and juniors through all its stages of qualification up to the final. A true carnival of chess where people of different extraction and background, both professionals and non-professionals, did their best for the success of our meeting. As for the Final, once again I would like to congratulate the champion team of 杭州银行队 (Hángzhōu Bank), the runner-up team of 青岛城阳队 (Qīngdǎo Chéngyáng), and everyone who lent their time and skills to the competition. The new year is coming soon, and I wish everyone peace and happiness”. Photo: Sina Sports.

Tuesday, January 30, 2024

A Wind from the Sea

On the second day of the 2nd “机器人谷杯” (“Robot Valley Cup”) China City Chess League “青岛城阳总决赛” (“Qīngdǎo Chéngyáng Finals”), on Tuesday, January 30, 2024, in 青岛 (Qīngdǎo), 山东省 (Shāndōng province), China, there are already winners and losers: 杭州银行队 (Hángzhōu Bank) leads the ranking, followed, in the order by 青岛城阳队 (Qīngdǎo Chéngyáng), 中化学生态环境西安队 (CNCEC Ecological Environment Xī’ān), 网易海口队 (NetEase Hǎikǒu), 济南银丰队 (Jǐnán Yínfēng), and 苏州棋协队 (Sūzhōu Chess Association). 济南银丰队 (Jǐnán Yínfēng) was not able to defend its title (2021), despite the exceptional presence of four-time Women’s World Chess Champion 侯逸凡 (Hóu Yìfán) (pictured above and below), who set a record with five consecutive draws! For further details and information, click here. Photos: 璐璐 (Lùlù).

Monday, January 29, 2024

Uncanny Valley

The six-team knockout “青岛城阳总决赛” (“Qīngdǎo Chéngyáng Finals”) of the 2nd “机器人谷杯” (“Robot Valley Cup”) China City Chess League kicked off today (Monday, January 29, 2024) at Four Points by Sheraton Hotel in 城阳区 (Chéngyáng District), 青岛 (Qīngdǎo), 山东省 (Shāndōng province), China. The teams participating are: 济南银丰队 (Jǐnán Yínfēng), 杭州银行队 (Hángzhōu Bank), 青岛城阳队 (Qīngdǎo Chéngyáng), 苏州棋协队 (Sūzhōu Chess Association), 中化学生态环境西安队 (CNCEC Ecological Environment Xī’ān), and 网易海口队 (NetEase Hǎikǒu), featuring stars such as four-time Women’s World Chess Champion 侯逸凡 (Hóu Yìfán) (pictured above and below), 卜祥志 (Bǔ Xiángzhì), 徐俊 (Xú Jùn), 马群 (Mǎ Qún), 翟墨 (Zhái Mò), 郭琦 (Guō Qí), 刘庆南 (Liú Qìngnán). Time control is 30 minutes plus 15 seconds per move. Photos: 璐璐 (Lùlù).

Message in a Bottle

This afternoon, while walking along the Mugnone, I came across a message written by chalk on a gray trash bin. As far as I understand, it is written in Japanese, and whoever the recipient is, now she or he can be sure that it will never fade away.

Sunday, January 28, 2024

A World of Change

No doubt the composition of the podium of the 86th Tata Steel Chess Tournament reflects the geography of chess superpowers changes over the very last few years as old superpowers decline and new ones emerge. And so hats off to China’s 韦奕 (Wéi Yì) (first prize), India’s Dommaraju Gukesh (second prize), and Uzbekistan’s Nodirbek Abdusattorov (third prize). Photo © Jurriaan Hoefsmit.

Hypermodern Times

韦奕 (Wéi Yì) – Santosh Gujrathi Vidit
86th Tata Steel Chess Tournament; Wijk aan Zee, January 27, 2024
Colle System D05

Comments in quotation marks by Irving Chernev, “Logical Chess: Move By Move: Every Move Explained”, Batsford, London, 1998, pp. 47-53.

1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. e3. “Indicating his design: obviously White is preparing the typical Colle formation of Bishop at d3 and Knight at d2, to control the key e4-square, a jumping-off point for the pieces in this attack”.
3. ... c5 4. c3 e6 5. Bd3 Nbd7 6. Nbd2 Bd6 7. 0-0 0-0 8. Re1 Qc7. “An ideal location for the Queen. From c7 the Queen bears down on the centre, especially e5, and exerts great pressure on the c-file”.
9. e4! “The key move in the Colle! With this move White intends to blast the position wide open and release all the stored-up energy of his pieces in a searing attack”.


“The immediate threat is 10. e4-e5, a simple, brutal attack on two pieces”.
9. ... cxd4 10. cxd4 dxe4 11. Nxe4 b6. “Intending to mobilize his c8-Bishop. Somewhat more to the point was 11. ... Bf4 restraining one of White’s menacing Bishops”.
12. Bg5. “The Bishop joins the attack, and vacates the c1-square. The a1-Rook will swing there, drive the Queen off and assume complete control of a beautiful open file”.
12. ... Nxe4 13. Rxe4 Bb7 14. Rc1! “A fine ‘in-between’ move! The Rook is developed effectively on the open file, while the Queen is banished to the first rank. There she interferes with the a8-Rook, preventing its development for a long time — forever, as it turns out!”.
14. ... Qb8. “There is nothing else as 14. ... Bxe4 15. Rxc7 Bxf3 16. Qxf3 Bxc7 17. Qc6 wins a piece for White”.
15. Rh4! “The point! White’s threat of 16. Bd3xh7+ forces one of the Pawns in front of the King to move forward. White gets an advantage, no matter which Pawn advances [...]”.


15. ... f5. “If Black tries defending the h-Pawn by 15. ... Nf6, then 16. Bxf6 gxf6 17. Bxh7+ wins the Pawn just the same. Or if Black advances the h-Pawn by 15. ... h6, then 16. Bxh6 gxh6 17. Rxh6 is an obvious sacrificial combination which shatters the cordon of Pawns and exposes the King to a mating attack”.
Finally, if 15. ... g6 then 16. Bb5! Qe8 17. Ne5 Bc8 18. Rxc8! Qxc8 19. Bxd7 Qc7 20. Ng4! h5 21. Nf6+ Kg7 22. Nxh5+ gxh5 23. Qxh5 Rh8 24. Bh6+ 1–0 Przepiórka – Prokeš, Szén Memorial, Budapest 1929.
16. Bc4 Qe8. No better is 16. ... Re8 17. Qd3 Be4 due to 18. Rxe4! fxe4 19. Qxe4 with a vehement attack, M. Knežević – Dizdar, 54th Czechoslovak Chess Championship & International Tournament, Trenčianske Teplice 1985.
17. Qb3 Kh8? Probably overlooking White’s next move. Comparatively better is 17. ... Bxf3 18. Qxf3 Qg6, though after 19. Bf4 Bxf4 20. Rxf4 Kh8 21. Re1 White keeps the upper hand.


18. Re1! Be4 19. Bxe6 Qg6 20. Bd2 Nf6 21. Ng5. Threatening Be6-f7.
21. ... f4


22. Rxh7+! The brilliant point of White’s attack: the e4-Bishop is well worth an Exchange!
22. ... Nxh7 23. Nxe4 f3 24. g3 Be7 25. d5 Rad8 26. Qa4 a5 27. Qc6 Bb4 28. Bxb4. Not yet 28. Qxb6?? because of 28. ... Rxd5! turning the tables.
28. ... axb4 29. h4 Ra8 30. Nd6 Ra7 31. Qxb6 Rxa2 32. Qc7 Nf6 33. Nf7+ Kh7 34. Ne5 Qh6 35. Qc2+ g6


36. Nxg6! The finishing touch. If now 36. ... Qxg6 then 37. Bf5 ends matters.
36. ... Rfa8 37. Ne5+ Kg7 38. Qc7+ 1–0.

Today 韦奕 (Wéi Yì) gave proof of both his tactical strength and chess culture. Photo © Jurriaan Hoefsmit.

Saturday, January 27, 2024

Crescendo

居文君 (Jū Wénjūn) – 韦奕 (Wéi Yì)
86th Tata Steel Chess Tournament; Wijk aan Zee, January 27, 2024
Dutch Defence A90

1. d4 e6 2. c4 f5 3. g3 Nf6 4. Bg2 d5 5. Nh3 Bd6 6. 0-0 0-0 7. b3 dxc4 8. bxc4 c5 9. e3 Nc6 10. Bb2 Qb6 11. Qb3. If 11. Ba3 Black can reply 11. ... Qd8 offering a draw by repetition.
11. ... cxd4 12. exd4 Na5. Not 12. ... Nxd4?? because of 13. Qxb6 Ne2+ 14. Kh1 axb6 15. Re1 trapping the Knight.
13. Qxb6 axb6 14. Rc1 Bd7 15. Nd2 Rac8 16. Bf1 Rc7. 16. ... Bb4 17. Nf3 Rfd8 also gives Black comfortable equality.
17. Nb3 Ra8 18. f3 Nc6 19. c5 bxc5 20. Nxc5 h6 21. Nxd7 Rxd7 22. Nf2?! A little better is 22. Bb5 Rc7 with roughly even chances.
22. ... Ba3!


23. Rcb1? This loses a Pawn, which might have been avoided by 23. Bxa3 Rxa3 24. Bb5 Rxd4 25. Bxc6 bxc6 26. Rxc6 Kf7 leaving Black with an easier ending — but no certainty of a win.
23. ... Bxb2 24. Rxb2 Nxd4 25. f4 Ra3 26. Rab1 Nd5


27. Nd3. After 27. Rxb7? Rxb7 28. Rxb7 Rxa2 White has no decent defence against the threat of 29. ... Nf3+ 30. Kg2 Ne1+ 31. Kg1 Ne3 winning material.
27. ... Nc3! 28. Ra1. 28. Rc1 is also answered by 28. ... b5! with a dominant advantage.
28. ... b5! 29. Nb4 Nd1! 30. Rg2. If 30. Rxd1 then 30. ... Nf3+ 31. Kf2 Rxd1 32. Be2 Rd2! winning.
30. ... Ne3 31. Rb2 g5! Black’s crescendo is irresistible.
32. fxg5 hxg5 33. Bg2 Rc7 34. Re1 Rc4 35. Bb7 Kg7 36. Kf2 f4! 37. gxf4 gxf4 38. Rg1+ Kf6 39. h4


39. ... Rxb4! 0 : 1. For mate follows after 40. Rxb4 Rxa2+ 41. Ke1 Re2#.

Thanks to today’s win, 韦奕 (Wéi Yì) can still hope for the happiest ending. Photo © Lennart Ootes.

Friday, January 26, 2024

Going Viral

High-speed trains are lined up after undergoing maintenance in preparation for the annual Lunar New Year travel peak, at a base in 武汉 (Wǔhàn), 湖北省 (Húběi province), China. Photo: AFP/Getty Images.

Downfall

Nodirbek Abdusattorov – 居文君 (Jū Wénjūn)
86th Tata Steel Chess Tournament; Wijk aan Zee, January 26, 2024
Two Knights Defence C55

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. d3 Be7 5. 0-0 0-0 6. Bb3 a5 7. c4!? (7. c3 d5 8. Nbd2 Be6 9. Re1 dxe4 10. dxe4 Qc8 11. a4 Bc5 12. Nc4 Bg4 13. Bg5 Nd7 14. Ne3 Bh5 15. Nf5 Kh8 16. Ng3 Bg6 17. Nh4 Ra6 18. Bc4 Rb6 19. Bb5 h6 20. Bc1 Nf6 21. Nhf5 Ne7 22. Be3 Nxf5 23. Bxc5 Nxg3 24. Bxb6 Rd8 25. Qb3 Ngxe4 26. Be3 Ng4 27. Bf1 b6 28. Qb5 f6 29. Qe2 Nxe3 30. Qxe3 Nc5 31. Bc4 Qg4 32. Be2 Qe6 33. Red1 Rf8 34. b4 Nb3 35. Ra3 Bc2 36. Re1 Rd8 37. h3 c5 38. bxa5 Nxa5 39. Qc1 Bb3 40. Ra1 Qd7 41. Bd1 ½ : ½ Yudasin – Kupreichik, International Tournament, Minsk 1982)
7. ... d6 8. Be3 Nd7 9. Ba4 Nb4 10. a3 Na6 11. Nc3 c6 12. Bc2 Nac5 13. b4 Ne6 14. Qd2 Nf6 15. Na4 axb4 16. axb4 b5 17. cxb5 cxb5 18. Nb6 Rxa1 19. Rxa1 Bb7


20. Bb3!↑ d5 21. Ra7 dxe4 22. Nxe5 Qc7


23. Nxf7! Kxf7 24. Qa2!? (24. dxe4! Rd8 25. Nd5!)
24. ... Qc6? (24. ... Rd8! 25. Bxe6+ Kf8)


25. Rxb7! Qxb7 26. Bxe6+ Ke8 (26. ... Kg6 27. g4!+−)
27. dxe4 Qxe4 28. Nd5! Bd8 (28. ... Nxd5 29. Qa8+ Bd8 30. Qc6+ Ke7 31. Bg5++−)
29. h3! Rf7 30. Qa6 Nxd5 31. Qc6+ Kf8 32. Qd6+ Ke8 33. Bxd5 Qe7 34. Qc6+ 1 : 0.

居文君 (Jū Wénjūn) could not resist the attack which Abdusattorov carried out with brilliance and boldness. Photo © Jurriaan Hoefsmit.

On the Picket Line

Regina Wender Fischer (right), mother of 11th World Chess Champion Bobby Fischer, on picket line outside Grunwick Plant in the London suburb of Willesden, Wednesday, June 29, 1977. The Grunwick dispute was an industrial dispute involving trade union recognition at the Grunwick Film Processing Laboratories which led to a two-year strike between 1976 and 1978. Photo: ANL/Shutterstock.

Wednesday, January 24, 2024

A Hard Nut To Crack

居文君 (Jū Wénjūn) – Parham Maghsoodloo
86th Tata Steel Chess Tournament; Wijk aan Zee, January 24, 2024
Queen’s Gambit Declined D44

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 dxc4 5. e4 b5 6. Nxb5. 居文君 (Jū Wénjūn) is not in the mood for what she may consider superstition; 6. e5 Nd5 7. Nxb5 Nb6 8. Be2 Nc6 9. 0-0 Be7 10. Be3 0-0 11. Nc3 Rb8 12. b3 cxb3 13. axb3 Bb7 14. Qb1 Nb4 15. Ne4 h6 16. Rxa7 N6d5 17. Bd2 Nc6 18. Ra1 Ndb4 19. Be3 Nd5 20. Bc1 Ra8 with a dynamically balanced game, 居文君 (Jū Wénjūn) – 雷挺婕 (Léi Tǐngjié), Women’s World Chess Championship 2023, 上海 (Shànghǎi) 2023, match game 4.
6. ... Nxe4 7. Qa4 c6 8. Nc3 Nxc3 9. bxc3 Ba6 10. Bxc4 Bxc4 11. Qxc4 Bd6 12. 0-0 Qc7


13. Rd1!? A “mysterious” Rook move! White usually prefers to put the Rook on the open e-file.
13. ... 0-0 14. Qd3 Nd7 15. c4 c5 16. Be3 Rfd8 17. dxc5 Bxc5 18. Bxc5 Nxc5 19. Qe2 f6 20. Nd4 e5 21. Nf5 Ne6 22. Qg4 Kh8 23. h3 g6 24. Ne3 Nd4 25. Nd5 Qg7 26. Qe4 Rac8 27. Rac1 f5 28. Qd3 Ne6 29. Qa3 e4 30. Ne7 Ra8 31. Rxd8+ Rxd8


32. Rb1! Not yet 32. Qxa7 because of 32. ... Re8 33. Nc6 Qxa7 34. Nxa7 Ra8 recovering the Pawn with equality.
32. ... Nf4 33. Qxa7 Qd4. Black estimates, or hopes, that without the Queens, he might be able to hold the ending despite his Pawn minus.
34. Qxd4+ Rxd4 35. Rb8+ Kg7 36. Rb7 Kf8 37. c5 Rc4 38. c6 Ne6 39. g3 Nd8 40. Rc7 Rc1+ 41. Kg2 Rc2 42. Kf1 Ke8. Obviously Black cannot play 42. ... Rxa2? due to 43. Nd5! winning material.
43. a4 Ne6 44. Rb7 Kd8 45. Rd7+ Ke8 46. Ng8 Rxc6 47. Nf6+ Kf8 48. Nxh7+ Ke8 49. Nf6+ Kf8 50. Rd1 Ra6 51. Nd7+ Ke7 52. Ne5 Kf6 53. Nd7+ Ke7 54. Ne5 Kf6 ½ : ½.

Tuesday, January 23, 2024

Bric-à-brac

Rameshbabu Praggnanandhaa – 居文君 (Jū Wénjūn)
86th Tata Steel Chess Tournament; The Hague, January 23, 2024
Two Knights Defence C58

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6!?Steinitz considered this to be an unsound sacrifical continuation”, Bobby Fischer wrote in his “My 60 Memorable Games”, Simon and Schister, New York, 1969, p. 280.
4. Ng5.Tarrasch branded this a ‘duffer’s move’ and Panov called it ‘primitive’. But there is no other way for White to try for an advantage”. (Fischer, ibidem).
5. ... d5 5. exd5 Na5 6. Bb5+ c6 7. dxc6 bxc6 8. Bd3?! A clumsy move, favoured by Isidor Gunsberg, which is clearly inferior to 8. Be2.
8. ... Nd5 9. h4. 9. Nxf7? Kxf7 10. Qh5+ g6 11. Bxg6+ hxg6 12. Qxh8 Qg5 gives Black a crushing attack. Moreover, 9. Ne4 would offer an historic reference point for questioning the soundness of 8. Bd3: 9. ... f5 10. Ng3 Nf4 11. Bf1 Bc5 12. c3 Bb6 13. d4 Ng6 14. Bd3 0-0 15. b4 Nb7 16. Bc4+ Kh8 17. d5 Nd6 18. Bb3 f4 19. Nf1 Ne4 0 : 1 Castaldi – Keres, 7th Olympiad, Stockholm 1937. What a comical conclusion! All White’s pieces came back home!
9. ... Qc7 10. b3. Praggnanandhaa is not interested in a pacific settlement of the question: 10. Nc3 h6 11. Nxd5 cxd5 12. Qh5 Bc5 13. Nxf7 0-0 14. Nxe5 Rf5 15. Qe8+ Rf8 16. Qh5 Rf5 17. Qe8+ Rf8 18. Qh5 Rf5 ½ : ½ 赵骏 (Zhào Jùn) – 卢尚磊 (Lú Shànglěi), 15th Chinese Chess League, 沈阳 (Shěnyáng) 2019.
10. ... h6 11. Ne4 f5 12. Nec3


12. ... Nf6. Very interesting is 12. ... Nf4 13. Bf1 Bb7 14. g3 c5 with comfortable equality for Black.
13. Bb2 Bd6 14. Na3 e4 15. Qe2 0-0. If, instead, 15. ... Qe7 then 16. Nc4! with advantage to White.
16. Ba6 Be6?! Easier was 16. ... Bxa6 17. Qxa6 Ng4 with plenty of play for the Pawn.
17. Nc4 Bb4 18. 0-0-0 Nb7 19. Bxb7 Qxb7 20. f3 Rae8 21. Ne5 c5?! 21. ... Nh5 might have been preferable, though after 22. Qf2 Bd6 23. f4 White still stands better.
22. Rhe1


22. ... exf3? By allowing White to open the g-file, Black digs her own grave. 22. ... Kh7! was here called for.
23. gxf3 Nh5 24. Rg1 c4 25. Nxc4 Qe7 26. a3 Bxc3 27. Bxc3 Qxh4? This allows White to pursue his Kingside assault, but otherwise Black would be left with just two Pawns less and in a completely lost position.


28. Qe5 Qe7 29. Rde1 Qd7 30. Nd6 Re7 31. Qh2 Nf6 32. Qxh6 Qxd6 33. Bxf6 1 : 0.

居文君 (Jū Wénjūn) was taught a bitter lesson. Photo © Jurriaan Hoefsmit.

Monday, January 22, 2024

Method acting

Theatre and politics

Giorgio Agamben, Quodlibet, January 19, 2024

It is at least singular that one does not question oneself about the fact, no less unexpected than disquieting, that in our times the role of political leader is more and more often taken over by actors: it is the case of Zelenskyy in Ukraine, but the same had happened in Italy with Grillo (gray eminence of the 5 Star Movement), and even before in the United States with Reagan. To be sure, it is possible to see in this phenomenon evidence of the decline of the figure of the professional politician and of the growing influence of the media and propaganda on every aspect of social life; it is nevertheless obvious in any case that what is happening implies a transformation of the relation between politics and truth which needs to be reflected on. That politics had to do with lies is, in fact, obvious; but this simply meant that the politician, to achieve goals that he believed to be true from his point of view, could tell falsehoods without too many scruples.
What is happening before our eyes is something different: there is no longer a use of lies for political ends, but, on the contrary, the lie became, in itself, the very end of politics. Politics is, i.e., purely and simply the social articulation of false. One then understands why the actor is today necessarily the paradigm of political leader. According to a paradox that has become familiar to us from Diderot to Brecht, the good actor is not, indeed, the one who passionately identifies with his role, but the one who, maintaining his coolness, keeps it, so to say, at a distance. He will seem all the more true, the less he will hide his lie. The theatrical scene is, i.e., the place of an operation on truth and lie, in which the truth is produced by exhibiting the false. The curtain rises and falls just to remind spectators of the unreality of what they are seeing.
What today defines politics — which has become, as has been effectively said, the extreme form of the spectacle — is an unprecedented reversal of the theatrical relation between truth and lie, which aims at producing the lie through a particular operation on the truth. The truth, as we could see in these last three years, is not, indeed, hidden, but rather it remains easily accessible to anyone who wants to know it; however, if earlier — and not only at theatre — the truth was reached by showing and unmasking the falsehood (veritas patefacit se ipsam et falsum), instead now the lie is produced, so to say, by exhibiting and unmasking the truth (hence the decisive importance of the discourse on fake news). If the false was once a moment in the movement of truth, now the truth is worth only as a moment in the movement of false.
In this situation the actor is, so to say, at home, even if, with respect to the paradox of Diderot, he must somehow double himself. No curtain anymore separates the scene from reality, which — according to an expedient that modern directors have made familiar to us, forcing spectators to participate in the play — becomes it itself theatre. If the actor Zelenskyy sounds so convincing as a political leader it is just because he always and everywhere succeeds in uttering lies without ever hiding the truth, as if this were nothing but an unavoidable part of his recital. He — like the majority of the leaders of NATO countries — does not deny the fact that Russians have conquered and annexed twenty percent of Ukrainian territory (which on the other hand has been abandoned by more than twelve million of its inhabitants) nor that his counteroffensive completely failed; nor that, in a situation in which his country’s survival depends entirely on foreign financing which can cease at any moment, neither he nor Ukraine have any real chance ahead of them. This is the decisive reason why, as an actor, Zelenskyy comes from comedy. Unlike the tragic hero, who must succumb to the reality of facts that he did not know or believed to be non-real, the comic character makes one laugh because he never ceases to exhibit the unreality and absurdity of his own actions. Ukraine, once called Little Russia, is not, however, a comic scene and Zelenskyy’s comedy will only turn at last into a bitter, very real tragedy.

(English translation by I, Robot)

Man Ray, Noire et Blanche, 1926. Courtesy of WikiArt.

Guess Who Came to Dinner


14th World Chess Champion Vladimir Borisovich Kramnik and four-time Women’s World Chess Champion 侯逸凡 (Hóu Yìfán) enjoying dinner and socialising backstage on the first day of the 3rd “Zakovat-Gambit” Blitz Tournament, Monday, November 18, 2023, in Tashkent, Uzbekistan.

侯逸凡 (Hóu Yìfán) amid flowers and golden garland. Photo: Hulkar Tokhirjonova.

Sunday, January 21, 2024

Of Stone and Steel

居文君 (Jū Wénjūn) – Dommaraju Gukesh
86th Tata Steel Chess Tournament; Wijk aan Zee, January 21, 2024
Bogo-Indian Defence E11

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Bb4+ 4. Bd2 Be7 5. Nc3 0-0 6. e4 d5 7. Bd3 dxe4 8. Nxe4 c5 9. Bc3 cxd4 10. Nxd4 e5 11. Nf3 Nc6 12. 0-0 Bg4 13. h3 Bh5 14. Ng3 Bxf3 15. Qxf3 Bb4 16. Bxb4 Nxb4 17. Be4 Nxe4 18. Qxe4 Qc7 19. a3 Nc6 20. Rad1 g6 21. c5 Rfd8 22. b4 f5 23. Qc4+ Qf7


24. Qxf7+. 居文君 (Jū Wénjūn) feels confident enough to exchange Queens and defend a slightly more uncomfortable ending, rightly assessing it as a likely draw.
24. ... Kxf7 25. Ne2 e4 26. f4 exf3 27. Rxd8 Rxd8 28. Rxf3 a6 29. Re3 g5 30. Kf1 f4 31. Rc3 Rd1+ 32. Kf2 Ne5


33. g3! The key of White’s plan of defence.
33. ... f3 34. Re3 Ke6


35. Nf4+! The tactical corollary to her 33rd move.
35. ... Kf5 (35. ... gxf4 36. gxf4 Rd2+ 37. Ke1 Rd5=)
36. Nh5 Rd2+ 37. Kf1 Rd1+ 38. Kf2 Rd2+ 39. Kf1 Rd5 40. g4+ Kg6 41. Ng3 Nc4 42. Rc3 Ne5 43. Re3 a5 44. Nf5 Kf6 45. Nd6 axb4 46. axb4 Rd1+ 47. Kf2 Rd2+ 48. Ke1 Rb2 49. Ne8+ Ke6 50. Nc7+ Kf6 51. Ne8+ Ke6 52. Nc7+ ½ : ½.

Once again 居文君 (Jū Wénjūn) showed her extraordinary nervous strength and endurance. Photo © Jurriaan Hoefsmit.