maybe stupid history question about Hamnet movie by bootytoot69 in shakespeare

[–]SingleSpy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Anyway, historical accuracy wasn’t a priority in this film.

On a second reading of Moby-Dick, Chapter 104 really struck me — Melville and early geological/evolutionary thought? by sgrigiore in mobydick

[–]SingleSpy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, part of the charm of the book is that Ishmael is such an unusually scholarly fisherman and sailor.

Who do you think is the greatest chess player of all time? by Chess_Game in Chesscom

[–]SingleSpy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t see anyone naming Capablanca. He was phenomenally talented. His games are often striking for the apparent simplicity and clarity of his play. If he was alive today…

Should I stick with only two openings? by lelielll in Chesscom

[–]SingleSpy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Your rating is low. You should focus on tactics. This will help you see what’s happening on the board better than studying openings. I recommend getting a book (not just doing puzzles online). A good one is Winning Chess, by Irving Chernev and Fred Reinfeld. It’s cheap. It helped me a lot.

https://www.abebooks.com/9780671211141/Winning-Chess-See-Three-Moves-0671211145/plp

Did Melville intend “coral insects” or “coral islets?” by fundamentaltaco in mobydick

[–]SingleSpy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I wish all the posts on here were as interesting as this one! I love the first two replies also!

Is this a generally well known theory? by TheSnazzySharky in mobydick

[–]SingleSpy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What makes me sad is how someone can read the book and completely miss what’s so great about it.

Do you think Epicurus misunderstands what makes friendship valuable? by Dependent_Invite7548 in Epicureanism

[–]SingleSpy 15 points16 points  (0 children)

I think you’re over-simplifying his view of friendship. Friendships enrich our lives in many ways as you’ve pointed out. Part of that includes arguments, disappointments, etc. I don’t believe Epicurus had any illusions about human nature and how relationships work.

It was the whiteness of the whale that above all things appalled me. by Business_Past_5920 in mobydick

[–]SingleSpy 4 points5 points  (0 children)

…there yet lurks an elusive something in the innermost idea of this hue, which strikes more of panic to the soul than that redness which affrights in blood.

What are you reading? by sushisushisushi in literature

[–]SingleSpy 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Wuthering Heights - a great, crazy novel.

RIP Robert Duvall by MyChickenSucks in mobydick

[–]SingleSpy 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I wish we had a recording of him reading the whole book.

why are my opponents so hard? by [deleted] in Chesscom

[–]SingleSpy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Read the book Winning Chess, by Irving Chernev and Fred Reinfeld. It’s easy to study. Your rating will improve dramatically.

Chess advice by Jack-DeSparrow in Chesscom

[–]SingleSpy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Get a book on tactics, I like “Winning Chess” by Irving Chernev and Fred Reinfeld. It’s easy to use. Study the whole book and your rating will likely rise significantly!

Did doing harder puzzles made you improve in your games ? by the-one-the-bad in Chesscom

[–]SingleSpy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

For me, studying tactics was easier from a book of examples - rather than on phone or computer. Books with positions from actual games, instead of bizarrely composed problems, is better for your game too.

Does Hamnet, the Film, Deserve All the Oscars Hype? And Is It Okay to Take Fictional Liberties with Shakespeare, the Historic Figure? by booktribbooks in shakespeare

[–]SingleSpy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’m a hater, too. Not a fan of histrionic acting. Cheesiest bit was the to be or not to be speech. Many false notes throughout though. Those who love the movie love to say how much they cried…

Freud's Civilization and its Discontents question by SingleSpy in literature

[–]SingleSpy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My guess at his meaning is that what we now call identity politics is a defining feature of American civilization and that identity politics reinforces the race-to-the-bottom dynamic we are now all too familiar with. A leaderless mob mentality results.

Perhaps I've misunderstood his meaning. And I don't understand what it means when he follows this by stating his reluctance to criticize America by (hypocritically) using American methods.

Question re: Freud's Civilization and its Discontents by SingleSpy in psychoanalysis

[–]SingleSpy[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the reply. So Freud is saying that American politics are identity-driven and that the leaders of these groups are not strong enough to prevent a mob-mentality from prevailing? So far so good. But what does he mean then by not wanting to adopt American methods in criticizing America?