On Mar 5, 9:16 am, "Chess One" wrote:

I think insight into Fischer still needs to be developed, but with a strong
editor capable of directing a clarity of insight into both the almost
invisible person, sorting that out from the background of the times, and
what celebrity does sometimes to especially performance artists - and who
better to write this than the combination Taimanov/Evans with possible
supplementary material by S. Polgar and -- well, Bent Larsen?

Is is unfortunate that any such work now can only benefit from
the better perspective of much time having lapsed, while of course
suffering from this same lapse of time. It is a truism that the
accuracy of recollections is inversely proportionate to the square
of the distance, or passing of time since the events.

Those likely to best know GM Fischer, the man, are those who
have long been close to him, and it is also unfortunate that only the
lowest of sycophants would qualify on this score due to the quirks
of the subject himself. Any rational observers would have been
driven off long ago, leaving behind the worst of commentators, the
sort whose commentary may serve only as amusement or to stir
up feelings of pity for themselves.

When it comes to painting an accurate portrait, the worst subject
is one who keeps squirming and won't sit still. When it comes to
the sort of portrait suggested here by IM Innes, the worst may well
be GM Fischer, the man, with the possible exception of a few
players long dead.

-- help bot