On Feb 20, 2010, at 5:37 AM, jansymello wrote quoting Poincare on chess-play:
To understand the game is wholly another matter; it is to know why the player moves this piece rather than that other which he could have moved without breaking the rules of the game. It is to perceive the inward reason which makes of this series of successive moves a sort of organized whole. This faculty is still more necessary for the player himself, that is, for the inventor."*Poincare seems to back me up in my "insistent" questioning. You find another reference where in a letter to VN his then friend Wilson refers to his habit of making sets such as powder/red wop and jump to the conclusion that this must explain "why the player moved this piece rather than that". I am looking for a more satisfying explanation. I still (insistently) fail to see why this is "wonderful", what it has to do with Hazel, or in what way it could be interpreted as a "dig" at Wilson.
If no one can come suggest another explanation, perhaps best not prod it further and just drop it for now?