A Game Of Carrom 

By Saqib Rasool

I assume that you all will read this. Let’s start with an assumption then. I think there is no harm in that. So, I assume that most of us, if not all, have played carrom or seen how the game of carrom works. During covid lockdown, carrom got a revival, if not a second life ( assuming that this game was dead or dormant before). During lockdown days I used to play carrom with my elder siblings ( who rarely had time before covid) and my nephew and little niece( jaun). Today, almost three years down the line I saw two students in the hostel basement playing the game with great focus and believe me they both were good players ( a contested fact). Before proceeding further, I would like to put things in some context. Carrom has its origin from Indian soil ( Soil : bollywood term ). Remember the origin of the game is important here. It will tell us a lot about the society from which it emerged. After playing the game back home ( Kashmir), I started to develop a keen intrest in the game. Initially, comprehending the game’s rules was bit of a challenge for me. Yet subsequently, it became apparent that this game serves as an intriguing avenue to grasp societal dynamics and the challenges it contends with. Aspects like racial bias, legal constraints, and gender discrimination are readily illuminated through this game, leading me to perceive it as a mirror to our society.

Presuming your continued presence, despite numerous suppositions, let’s delve into the earlier conversation to comprehend the points discussed.

Color Discrimination: Within the game of carrom, distinct point types exist—white, black, Queen, and Striker. Notably, claiming a White point yields 20 rewards, whereas a black point garners merely 10. Have you ever pondered the rationale behind this distinction? Given that both points share identical material and circumference, the basis for divergent point values solely rooted in color remains perplexing. Whether engaged in play or support, take a moment to question: why this differentiation based on color?

Being a student of law and society, a query emerges within me: “Is it feasible to confront this subtle (yet deeply ingrained) bias through legal means?” While law indeed tackles discrimination on societal and institutional scales, how would it respond to color discrimination within such a context? The approach to addressing such matters is less apparent. Law is often considered an instrument of change, prompting the question: to what extent does it bring about transformation?

State restrictions and law : If you see, there are some lines drawn on the game. I feel these lines determine our rights and limits. You cannot win a point if it’s on the line, but why ? Who holds the authority to establish such a principle? What these lines tell us about the nature of rights. To explain this, let me take the example of rights: Positive and negative. Negative rights compromise constitutional restrictions on the state. For example, Article 17 of the Indian constitution abolishes untouchability, removes a social evil. It hardly bestows a special privilege on the untouchables. While on the other hand ,Positive rights are those rights which are subject to constitutional restrictions. Right to freedom, right to acquire, hold and dispose of property and right to religion and cultural and educational rights fall in the category of positive rights.

Then comes the striker, onething must be noted that the striker is larger in circumference then the other points. It enables you to disturb/ move the points from their points.“It dictates you”. It’s reasonable to assert that the striker essentially “determines” the outcomes on behalf of the other points.

Sexism : Apart from points ( black and white) and striker, there is another point , it is termed as “queen” . The gender being alluded to can be deduced directly from the name itself. You can’t touch this point, be it black or white. There are conditions to it, you can change its position only by hitting it indirectly. And if one desires to win the queen. The process isn’t the same as winning other points. In order to win a queen, you have to sacrifice the other point ( black/ white). So, to win a queen, you need to sacrifice the other points. It is only this sacrifice which opens your way to win the queen. Think of it this way, the respect of the board (home) if affiliated to the queen. And to protect the respect, others have to give away their lives. However, it’s important to keep in mind that the Queen lacks independent agency. She possesses no inherent value; instead, her worth is derived from her association with others. The question arises: why is this the case?

When I shared this half-baked analysis with my friend, he replied, “Itni choti baat par dhyan mat diya karo” (Don’t stress too much on such trifles). However, I feel trifles say a lot ( assuming all this is just a trifle). Law doesn’t take account of trifles but literature does. Fyodor Dostoyevsky in his famous book “crime and punishment” writes “what matters people would remember it, and that would give them a clue for this business one should be as little conspicuous as possible…trifles, trifles are what matter! Why, it’s just such trifles that always ruin everything.” 

• The author completed his LLM from Azim premji university 

Follow this link to join our WhatsApp group: Join Now

MONTHLY	Rs 100
YEARLY	Rs 1000
LIFETIME	Rs 10000

CLICK FOR DETAILS