I've never playeD Go either. A friend has the game and from what I can gather
it's just an open board and unmarked (although no doubt differentiated by
colour?) pieces. Deleuze says it's pure strategy, I think. My assumption is
that the aim is to surround opponents pieces, but I'm not sure that I'm not just
remembering something else - that kind of game.
I was wondering, on reading the chapter, if those little tricks that people do
with coins are a different example - you can only move one or two to make a
particular shape, or you have to make a shape by moving the coins while they
always meet two others (something like that)- they always sound so easy, but take
a bit of working out - no doubt this is a smaller scale, but it remains uncoded,
in that the move is a relation in space - making several unmarked/coded pieces
operate towards a goal (winning the game/ working out the puzzle-trick)??? Where
Chess would be more like a card trick - perhaps? The pieces in the game are
coded????
I'm not sure if this makes sense.
I think the differentiation is in the coding of the tools used to play the game.
I think it's interesting to note that there seems to be another game played among
chess players (and poker) that becomes gestural - doesn't this work as a kind of
attempt to deterritorialize - bluff the openent into not looking properly at the
board - diverting attention etc.. Would this 'other' game be the body without
organs of the chess game (as event)??? ( just a thought...)
Shaun Rawolle wrote:
> Chris,
>
> Rather a mundane question, I'm afraid, but on reading 'Nomadology: the war
> machine' I find myself missing some basic cultural capital: what is the
> game Go? Can someone describe the tactical and strategic axioms of the game?
>
> Bye, Shaun
>
> ____________________________
>
> Shaun Rawolle
> Doctoral Candidate
>
> Graduate School of Education
> Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences
> The University of Queensland
>
> Phone: 07 3365 6508
it's just an open board and unmarked (although no doubt differentiated by
colour?) pieces. Deleuze says it's pure strategy, I think. My assumption is
that the aim is to surround opponents pieces, but I'm not sure that I'm not just
remembering something else - that kind of game.
I was wondering, on reading the chapter, if those little tricks that people do
with coins are a different example - you can only move one or two to make a
particular shape, or you have to make a shape by moving the coins while they
always meet two others (something like that)- they always sound so easy, but take
a bit of working out - no doubt this is a smaller scale, but it remains uncoded,
in that the move is a relation in space - making several unmarked/coded pieces
operate towards a goal (winning the game/ working out the puzzle-trick)??? Where
Chess would be more like a card trick - perhaps? The pieces in the game are
coded????
I'm not sure if this makes sense.
I think the differentiation is in the coding of the tools used to play the game.
I think it's interesting to note that there seems to be another game played among
chess players (and poker) that becomes gestural - doesn't this work as a kind of
attempt to deterritorialize - bluff the openent into not looking properly at the
board - diverting attention etc.. Would this 'other' game be the body without
organs of the chess game (as event)??? ( just a thought...)
Shaun Rawolle wrote:
> Chris,
>
> Rather a mundane question, I'm afraid, but on reading 'Nomadology: the war
> machine' I find myself missing some basic cultural capital: what is the
> game Go? Can someone describe the tactical and strategic axioms of the game?
>
> Bye, Shaun
>
> ____________________________
>
> Shaun Rawolle
> Doctoral Candidate
>
> Graduate School of Education
> Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences
> The University of Queensland
>
> Phone: 07 3365 6508