Qualsys Blog

Qualsys Blog

Shared via AddThis

How two people from 2 different backgrounds can still be the same piece

I am writing this for the sake of showing how two completely different people from two different backgrounds can still be classified under the same piece. (Collectivistic & Individualistic). This builds on previous topics that I have written

A recap on basic characteristics of a given piece:

Pawn = simple, limited, hard working.

Rook= logical, straight forward and broad movement like a cannon

Bishop = Very calculated and targeted, focused much like a sniper

Knight = L-shaped, creative, has the mind of an explorer

Queen = multi-tasker, typically has strong presence in their environment, like a general or CEO

King = Delegator (president), the game hinges on this one individual

Ok that's the basic concept. From this point on I want to provide practical examples that would help make any given piece more dynamic with more individual applications. Please don't get distracted by the small sub points. I only write them to show how far reaching a piece can be in one direction, by no means limiting it to such small points.

Point 1 - There are two mindsets to compare for now; individualistic & collectivistic. I will be using the broad definitions of the words. As an example, the first will be those who often live alone or live a rogue type life. I have met hundreds of you now. You are the lone guitar player I gave a ride to once that planned on doing some night gigs in Portland to make it by. You are the kids I know that ran away from home. You are the one I met traveling alone through remote regions of Venezuela or various parts of Ireland & Holland. You live mostly alone in your apartment or townhouse.

Sub A - Yet as much as you live alone I know there are times when you have felt the need for company. This feeling somehow comes out of some demand from within you. So you think of others to call, mostly family or close friends, just to see how they are doing. The paradox comes when you don’t always relate to them as before. Yet you do so out of a desire to feel like you did when you were a kid when you had that sense of belonging.

Sub B - Some of you may never have had that. Others try and tell themselves that they’ve never had it, somehow wanting vindication for pain they once felt as a child. Whatever the case may be, the point is that you find yourself responding to life's circumstances in a direct and open way, much like a rook would do in chess. This character that you are looking at is the first mindset, i.e. individualistic in nature.

Point 2 - Ok now to the opposite perspective; the person that always seems surrounded by a ton of people all your life. I’ve met you in lots of places throughout South America, Europe and parts of Africa. I’ve also met you a lot here in the US. To be surrounded by people is just part of life, its normal, it’s expected.

Sub A - Truthfully, I admire these cultures. But life isn’t always perfect. Many of you know what it feels like to have gone hungry. Many may find themselves surrounded by drama and wish to be alone sometimes, or feel alone in a crowded room for one reason or another. Whatever the circumstance might be, the point is that you find yourself responding to life's circumstances in a direct and open way, much like a rook would do in chess.

Transition - When you consider two different people from two different backgrounds they can still have a lot in common. Both the individualistic and collectivistic mindsets can still be classified under one piece. Both can come from completely different backgrounds yet share many things in common.

Concluding thought - Looking at an average game you may notice that the rook (for example) is constantly being moved the entire game. Then in another game you’ll notice that it stays most of the game in one place as a defender, watching everyone around them. Regardless of what mindset they come, be it a lone traveler or surrounded by people, they still have the same common characteristics of thinking in straight, open lines, differentiating themselves from a knight or bishop in their approach. So also, both the individualistic and collectivistic person, though different, still can hold the same common characteristic of approaching things in a direct and open way as a rook would.

This is just an example that I am working on and has yet to fully be expanded. My hope is that you can see where I am going with it and see its wide applications. Can you come up with other seemingly polar opposites that can now be used as a framework for variations within a given piece?

Thanks,

Josh