Scattered Thoughts on Memory
Isn't it remarkable that memories can stay intact in tiny, tiny cells atop your spine for 70 or 80 years and longer, when so many things in the world have much shorter spans. That's as amazing as all the heavy-duty work that our hearts do for similar epic lengths of time, and that's not to mention all the other working parts of that truly remarkable structure, the human body. We should be highly grateful that those mechanisms don't weaken any sooner or more often than they do.
In speaking of Vidal's "Julian" yesterday, I wanted to say how great it is that over time the memory weakens just enough that books and movies can be read and viewed a second time exactly as if they just came out yesterday. So you can get double and even triple duty out of those creations -- a good argument for holding on to books especially.
One of my computer activities is to crank into www.buzztime.com. It offers samples of their interactive trivia bar games. You're given a choice of five answers, and you're scored on how quickly you can pick the right answer, and after each question and at the end of each round of 15 questions, a window appears in which the 10 highest-scoring players are listed.
I play a game called Countdown. The questions repeat, but as Countdown's database seems to consist of at least 6,000 questions, you may see some quite often and others not for months or even years at a time.
Some of us who have been playing for several years can get perfect games now and then and even quite often -- that is, by answering all 15 questions instantly and correctly. But once in a while we are criticized for not "having a life" by playing a game in which every question -- after various periods of time -- eventually becomes a repeat. My particular answer is that getting the right answer the first time is good, but there's an equal delight in being able to test and exercise one's memory this way. And there's some utility in it, too, with Alzheimer's being the threat that it is to so many.
A good memory is integral with being a serious chess player. When you are really into it, even a very long game can stay in the mind long enough that some time later you can write down the whole of it verbatim.
Once, in the Air Force, playing blindfold, that is, without sight of the board, I easily beat a guy who was looking at the board, in a game that lasted for 35 or 40 moves. He had never heard of such a thing, and he was extremely impressed. He thought I had used some sort of trick. He didn't know how for someone like me it was child's play.
But playing a bunch of games all at the same time is another thing altogether. Another time I tried playing five blindfold games simultaneously. I managed to keep things going till about the 15th move, but then something happened. I can't remember now what it was.
It used to be fashionable for chess grandmasters -- some of them -- to make money by giving blindfold simultaneous exhibitions. That is, they would play a large number of games all at the same time with their backs turned to the players and the boards. That's a prodigious feat of memory, considering that you not only have to keep the constantly changing positions of 20 or 25 different games in your head all at the same time, but also you have to make calculations in each so that you can win. Of course the latter consideration means that it's best and even necessary to have only a bunch of scrubs for your opponents.
Two grandmasters, the titan named Alexander Alekhine, and the less illustrious Miguel Najdorf, were especially noted for these incredible displays of memory, and the last I heard the record was 53 games!
But, also when I last heard, today's Russians, who, collectively, are the world's foremost chessplayers, frown on that kind of activity. They scornfully dismiss blindfold simultaneous exhibitions as being "mental masturbation."
At first I thought that sounded good, but later I decided that the Russians had made a bad choice of terms or the term they used had been mistranslated. There can be no doubt that holding such a large number of games in your memory all at once and without sight of the board is pain to an excruciating degree, and the same is not often said about masturbation.
In speaking of Vidal's "Julian" yesterday, I wanted to say how great it is that over time the memory weakens just enough that books and movies can be read and viewed a second time exactly as if they just came out yesterday. So you can get double and even triple duty out of those creations -- a good argument for holding on to books especially.
One of my computer activities is to crank into www.buzztime.com. It offers samples of their interactive trivia bar games. You're given a choice of five answers, and you're scored on how quickly you can pick the right answer, and after each question and at the end of each round of 15 questions, a window appears in which the 10 highest-scoring players are listed.
I play a game called Countdown. The questions repeat, but as Countdown's database seems to consist of at least 6,000 questions, you may see some quite often and others not for months or even years at a time.
Some of us who have been playing for several years can get perfect games now and then and even quite often -- that is, by answering all 15 questions instantly and correctly. But once in a while we are criticized for not "having a life" by playing a game in which every question -- after various periods of time -- eventually becomes a repeat. My particular answer is that getting the right answer the first time is good, but there's an equal delight in being able to test and exercise one's memory this way. And there's some utility in it, too, with Alzheimer's being the threat that it is to so many.
A good memory is integral with being a serious chess player. When you are really into it, even a very long game can stay in the mind long enough that some time later you can write down the whole of it verbatim.
Once, in the Air Force, playing blindfold, that is, without sight of the board, I easily beat a guy who was looking at the board, in a game that lasted for 35 or 40 moves. He had never heard of such a thing, and he was extremely impressed. He thought I had used some sort of trick. He didn't know how for someone like me it was child's play.
But playing a bunch of games all at the same time is another thing altogether. Another time I tried playing five blindfold games simultaneously. I managed to keep things going till about the 15th move, but then something happened. I can't remember now what it was.
It used to be fashionable for chess grandmasters -- some of them -- to make money by giving blindfold simultaneous exhibitions. That is, they would play a large number of games all at the same time with their backs turned to the players and the boards. That's a prodigious feat of memory, considering that you not only have to keep the constantly changing positions of 20 or 25 different games in your head all at the same time, but also you have to make calculations in each so that you can win. Of course the latter consideration means that it's best and even necessary to have only a bunch of scrubs for your opponents.
Two grandmasters, the titan named Alexander Alekhine, and the less illustrious Miguel Najdorf, were especially noted for these incredible displays of memory, and the last I heard the record was 53 games!
But, also when I last heard, today's Russians, who, collectively, are the world's foremost chessplayers, frown on that kind of activity. They scornfully dismiss blindfold simultaneous exhibitions as being "mental masturbation."
At first I thought that sounded good, but later I decided that the Russians had made a bad choice of terms or the term they used had been mistranslated. There can be no doubt that holding such a large number of games in your memory all at once and without sight of the board is pain to an excruciating degree, and the same is not often said about masturbation.
posted by Carl (aka Sofarsogoo) | 11:42 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home