Apparently matrioshka dolls are all the rage right now, first appearing in the alcoholic beverage scene and now in the fashion scene. How great are these designer interpretations for the 10th anniversary of Russian Vogue? And the even cooler part – they’re going to be auctioned off for charity. Sweet! Check out the designers’ gallery here.

I’d just like to say that I pretty much drive the matrioshka bandwagon – I bought a set of blank wooden matrioshka’s last christmas for my sister, mom, and me to paint (my dad even got in there). If I remember, I’ll see if I can get a pic and I’ll load it up for all of you to compare with these great designers. (Unfortunately, mine will not be as good). And Shinead, I’ll have you know that my doll is painted in solstice colours.

Is it weird that I continually go off on personal tangents whenever I post? Anyway, without further adieu:

Intentaré armar un juego y cuando lo termine, pondré fotos de como quedo. Si te animas a armar la tuya, puedes mandar las imágenes de como te quedo.

Breve historia y descarga después del corte

Muy breve historia del orígen de la Matrioshka.

La matrioshka rusa llego desde Japón a finales del siglo XIX. Rusia experimentaba un boom económico y un crecimiento del sentido de cultura y de identidad nacional. Nuevas tendencias artísticas estaban en desarrollo, y el “estilo ruso” crecía y se enfocaba en el renacimiento de tradiciones que estaban en peligro de extinguirse.

En San Petesburgo, Rusia, en diciembre de 1896, abrió una exhibición de arte japonés. Entre las exhibiciones había una muñeca representando a un sabio budista llamado Fukuruma. El sabio era mostrado con la cabeza calva y un cuerpo de madera que se podía separar a la mitad por la cintura; adentro había imágenes de él cuando era más joven y aún tenía barba y cabello. La muñeca vino de la isla de Honshu; los japoneses afirman que ellos inventaron la matrioshka, pero también admiten que las primeras muñecas hechas en Honshu fueron talladas y pintadas por un monje ruso.

Sean rusas o japonesas, hoy en día las matrioshkas se consideran como símbolo y souvenir de Rusia.

Descarga: Matrioshka de papel

Visto en MasoliT

Ot co. Tak jakoś naszło. Jeszcze nieopisana TDN i niewycięta . “Za monitorem postać, w głowie siedzi pomysł pozwól mu się wydostać …” hehe .

Wypadałoby jakąś notke napisać. Zawsze tak jest (przynajmniej u mnie), iż przez długi czas nic się niedzieje, a potem w pewnym momencie tyle zdarzeń, że trudno spamiętać. Rozpisywał się nad tym nie będę, bo i tak nikt tego czytać nie będzie. Mam tylko nadzieję, że vlepa będzie cieszyć jeszcze nie jedno oko i w moim mieście nię będę osamotniony w tym kierunku. harashooo

Santo Deus, nunca demorei tanto!

Segue o processo de criação:

Agora é decidir pelo fundo branco ou preto, consertar um monte de erros, definir contorno, criar novas faces para todas as tampas que estão “discostas”, individualizar cada boneca em ilustrações menores e não verticais… Haja Hardware…

Direct mail for “1000 years of Russia”
Agency: Cossette, Quebec.
Via adgoodness

Esta monjita sí que esconde una sorpresa!

Podéis verla aquí en acción…

 o hacer click en esta imagen:

Se puede adquirir esta matrioshka o cualquiera de sus amigos en WoodyWillows por 10 libras

Si estáis interesadas en ellas podéis adquirirlas aquí por 35 dólares.

M. Superiora

Gary Kasparov, in a Wall Street Journal article last July, suggested that the West’s failure to come up with a model of post-Soviet Russia’s political system was due to the fact that it was looking in the wrong place. The best model, he suggests, can be found in books by Mario Puzo.

A chap I met who emigrated from the Soviet Union waxed rather emotional and, with the attendant loss of the definite article, explained to me that the West’s view of Putin was bullcrap. I suggested that it was perhaps unwise and heavy handed for Putin to reactivate deterrence patrols on Russia’s borders. His response was that Putin had no choice — NATO has expanded to include countries on Russia’s borders, and with the intended deployment of anti-missile defenses, Russia was threatened. He commented that Polish politicians publically stated that the missile defense system was not, as advertised a defense against Iran, but against Russia (of whom they have more immediate history). He stated that even US military experts have stated that the range and capability of the Iranian missiles make a very implausible threat against Europe. [While this may have been true in the past, it is unlikely to remain true in the near future.]

My comrade also pointed out that when the country was the Soviet Union, extended families lived in Ukraine and Russia, and that they traveled back and forth, but that after the democratization of the Ukraine, political considerations led to the curtailing of travel. His analogy was how would you feel if your grandmother lived in Indiana and a few people decided that Indiana should become an independent democratic country, yet because of political differences, your grandma could no longer visit you at Christmas. His contention was that 80% of the country was against the “revolution” and wanted to remain as part of Russia. Also asserted was that a few people were paying back their Western political masters for financial support of their Orange Revolution. Is this another case of Karl Rove’s evil?

I have read about Russia’s amore propre as being the root cause of Russian woes. A majority of the Russian people admire Putin because they do have bread to eat, and they do have a rising middle class, and there is a nascent rise in nationalism after what could only be called a humiliating surrender to the West. It is, however, reminescent of the same respect that New York Italian immigrants had for their Capo de la Familia. [Let's see: does democracy feed my family? Are the police going to catch the guy who's is ripping me off? Should I pay a little protection money to the KGB to insure that my mom-and-pop store survives (the KGB). Putin: "I just want to wet my beak a little".] From what the average Russian worker endured under the Soviet regime, the current situation must seem infinitely better. And if things go bad, everyone knows that America is out to get Russia, even though no American president ever banged his shoe on the podium at the United Nations and taunted “We will bury you“. None the less, it seemed that the person I talked to was more interested in defending the amore propre than Putin. It’s always interesting to solicit a view from the other side of the window.

So we have a country with a political system which can at best be described, according to Kasparov, as a oligarchy with some feudalism thrown in and a patina of democracy just thick enough to fool the G8. This allows us another interpretation of the missile defense issue. Think of drug distribution in any major city and the turf fights that occur when a competing family attempts to take over that market. The mafia isn’t concerned about “how it looks” to the international community — this is defense of territory and profits. When you read about some Russian action and say to yourself “How can Putin do this? Doesn’t he know how bad it looks?” — you have to reset your mind into the Mario Puzo novels.

To respond to Putin you have to either respond as family (e.g. assassinate a few close associates) or find some international equivalent to Elliot Ness.

Let’s see it.

IM Mark Ginsburg – NM David Filipovich (CAN) Chicago Midwest Masters 5/04

I first met my opponent in Quebec 1980, an infamous tournament where Sammy Reshevsky, in a bad position and in time trouble, riddled me with 5 consecutive draw offers – I got so annoyed I blundered and wanted to shake the little man very vigorously.

1. c4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Qc2 White is trying to avoid mainline Slav lines. Black can simply play 4….dxc4!? here with good chances of equality, or go for the Gruenfeld structure with 4…g6. In that case, the most testing move is 5. Bf4 and now black has the chance to play a very interesting move, 5…Na6!? A very interesting sideline. Let’s look at it in some detail.

Position after our Slav “Sideline” 5…Na6!? – What’s going on?

The “solid” but rather uninspiring 5… Bg7 can be met by the “also solid” 6. e3 O-O 7. Nc3 Na6 8. cxd5 Nb4 9. Qd2 Nbxd5 10. Be5! Bh6 11. h3 Be6 12. Be2 Qa5 13. O-O Nxc3 14. Qxc3 Qb6 15. Bc4 and white nursed a small edge to victory, 1-0 Tukmakov,V (2570)-Mariotti,S (2475)/Las Palmas 1978.

6. cxd5? A totally lame move. Also really lame was 6. Nbd2? as played in Ginsburg-Lower, Az. St. Ch. 2004 a few weeks before this game. I won that game, but it had nothing to do with the opening. I really hadn’t studied it!

Correct is 6. e3 Bf5 7. Qb3 and now we get to a key position.

Black can choose from

1. the “gambit” 7…Nb4?,

2. the “speculative” 7…Bxb1?!,

3. or the sensible and apparently new 7….Qb6! - is this really a novelty? No, it’s no novelty; as David Filipovich points out in his comments, 7…Qb6 didn’t do well in games he has seen.

We need to dismiss the first two.

The first thing we have to know here is that 7….Nb4? is totally unsound. The second thing is we have to know why!

Position after 7…Nb4? (Analysis). We have to deal with this tricky bad move.

7… Nb4? 8. Qxb4! The only way to refute something is to take what the opponent gives you.

8…e5 9. Qxb7

Now black has two tries, both of which are quite insufficient.

Position after 9. Qxb7. White is just winning.

Variation A. 9…. exf4? (loses more simply than the alternative)

Variation B. 9….Rb8

Variation A.

The rather primitive try 9…exf4? 10. Ne5! wins for white (remember this!) ,e.g. 10… Bd7 11. Nxd7 Nxd7 12. Qxc6 fxe3 13. Nc3! This is the most accurate. (Humans are tempted by 13. fxe3?! which is OK but less accurate; 13…Rb8 14. Qxd5 Rxb2 15. Bd3! with a white edge – but not 15. Be2? Bb4+ 16. Kd1? (16. Kf2! and white king is out of the danger zone; white is still better) 16…O-O with a huge black initiative, IM Richard Delaune-NM Alexopoulous Philadelphia 1994 and shortly white’s king expired …. 0-1. Black winning the cited game in an upset is an example of the shock and surprise value of placing the horse en prise on move 7.

But again, remember 13. Nc3! is strongest. Don’t be scared of the various hanging pawns. It’s more important to get the guys out of the felt box.

Position after 13. Nc3! Analysis. Remember, don’t worry about the f2-pawn!

Continuing,

13. Nc3! exf2+ (No better is 13… Rb8 14. c5 exf2+ 15. Kxf2 Rxb2+ 16. Kf3 Qf6+ 17. Qxf6 Nxf6 18. Bd3 Be7 19. Rhb1 Rxb1 20. Rxb1 O-O 21. Rb7 Bd8 22. Rxa7 and wins easily) 14. Kxf2 Qh4+ 15. Kf3 Qf6+ 16. Qxf6 Nxf6 17. c5 and black has a terrible game. 13… Rb8 14. Qxd5 (14. Nc3 Rxb2 15. c5 Rc2 16. Ne4 Qh4+ 17. Ng3 Qf6 18. Qxf6 Nxf6 19. Bd3 Rxg2 20. Be2 and the black rook is trapped! White wins.)

Variation B.

Let’s go back to 9….Rb8. 10. Qxa7! This is the right choice. 10. Qa6? is simply bad and 10. Qxc6+!? leads to crazy and unnecessary complications after the queen sac line 10… Bd7 11. Qxf6!? Qxf6 12. Bxe5 Qb6 13. b3 Bb4+ 14. Nbd2 (14. Kd1 is maybe best; 14… O-O 15. Bxb8 Rxb8 16. cxd5 and the computer likes white, but it looks scary to play!) and eventually black won in Alburt-Shabalov, Parsippany 1996.

So after 9….Rb8 remember that 10. Qxa7! is the best move. Now, the try 10… exf4 is refuted by our familiar 11. Ne5! and white wins easily. This may explain why this line is not seen nowadays. For example, 11…Bd7 12. cxd5! (white actually lost after 12. Bd3 fxe3 13. O-O Rxb2 14. fxe3 Bh6 15. Rxf6? A bad misstep by the Swedish GM Akesson in a game vs. GM Hector, Sweden 2004. The brutal 15. Nc3 is correct!

White is going to win after the cold shower variation 15…Bxe3+? 16. Kh1 O-O 17. Nd1!! and wins. It’s worth remembering that if white gets his king to safety, it is likely he’ll win in this set of variations – he can afford pitching pawns left and right because black’s structure is so compromised.

If black does not grab on e3, it transpires that his errant rook on b2 gets in trouble:

15… O-O 16. Rae1 Rd2 (what else?) 17. cxd5 cxd5 18. Qa3! Ng4 19. Qc1 Rxd3 20. Nxd3 Qh4 21. h3 Nxe3 22. Rxe3 Qxd4 23. Rff3, featuring a weird piece line-up, White wins.

Going back to the game, after 15. Rxf6? Qxf6 and poor Akesson was worse now; …. 0-1, Akesson-Hector Sweden 2004. Typical Hector to swindle/win with a very dreadful opening choice.

12… cxd5 13. Nc3! Another familiar motif. White gives up the b2 pawn to speed his agenda. 13…Rxb2 (13… fxe3 14. Nxd7 exf2+ 15. Kxf2 Rxb2+ (15… Nxd7 16. Re1+ Be7 17. Nxd5 wins) 16. Kg1 Nxd7 17. Re1+ Be7 18. Nxd5 O-O 19. Nxe7+ Kg7 and white will be able to convert the material edge into victory.

If the greedy pawn grab 13… Rxb2 14. Nxd7 Nxd7 15. Bb5 Bb4 16. O-O! This is a very important tactic to remember!

Position after 16. O-O! One of the winning tactics in white’s arsenal in this line!

16…Bxc3 (what else?) 17. Bxd7+ Qxd7 18. Qa8+ Qd8 19. Qc6+ Ke7 20. Qxc3! and with a nice bit of tactics, white wins this middlegame.

It is time to draw a conclusion: ater 6. e3 Bf5 7. Qb3, 7…Nb4? is totally unsound.

Let’s go back to 6. e3 Bf5 7. Qb3. We’ve seen 7….Nb4? is actually rather ridiculous and loses. Now let’s see 7…Bxb1?!, tested by Shabalov unsuccessfully: 8. Qxb7 Qa5+ 9. Nd2 Rd8 10. Qxc6+ Nd7 11. Qb5 (11. Rxb1! Nb4 12. Qb5! White wins easily!) and Epishin went on to win, but it took some time. … 1-0 Epishin,V (2465)-Shabalov,A (2425)/Tbilisi 1989.

Black of course can try the simple 7…Qb6!? here.  However, David Filipovich sent me some games where white did well:  8. Nc3 Nh5 9. Be5 f6 10. Bg3 Nxg3 11. hxg3 += and 1-0, 47, Spraggett, K. – Zysk, R. Dortmund 1984.  Or, 8. Nc3 Nb4?! 9. c5! Nd3 (9…Nc2+?? 10. Qxc2 wins) 10. Bxd3 Qxb3 11. axb3 Bxd3 12. Ne5 += and 1-0, 23, Skembris-Titov, EU-ch, 1992.

In my game, after the lame (but not new)

6. cxd5?, 6… Nb4 7. Qb3 Nbxd5 8. Be5 Qb6 9. Nbd2 was totally equal. White also tried 9. Qxb6 axb6 10. Nc3 Nxc3 11. bxc3 and got nothing after the game 11… Be6 (11… Bg7 12. e3 Bf5 or even 11…Ra3 are both very good for black as well). White actually won later but it had nothing to do with this position, 1-0 Kosic,D (2415)-Lazic,M (2495)/San Benedetto 1990.

9… Bg7 10. e4 Qxb3 11. Nxb3 Nb4 12. Bxf6 exf6 13. Kd2

Position after 13. Kd2. White has nothing.

I have zero here; even worse, the most obvious move 13…f5 is very scary looking. Strangely, white can hold the balance here in what appears to be a bad position: 14. e5 Be6 15. a3! Bh6+ (15…Nd5 16. Nc5 =; 15…Bxb3 16. axb4 =) 16. Kc3 Nd5+ (16…Bxb3 17. axb4 =) 17. Kc2 b6 (to keep a knight out of c5) 18. h4! and white is all right. Over the board it just looks scary and bad after 13…f5 but with accurate play white can neutralize the two bishops.

1/2-1/2

What conclusion? 5….Na6 is indeed somewhat dubious. After 6. e3 Bf5 7. Qb3, black’s relative best is 7…Qb6 and not one of the crazy gambit ideas.  Even so, he is not quite equal. In my game, 6. cxd5 promised zero.