In a game of Carrom, what do you look for? The rules of the game are blatantly simple. To play the game, one has to pocket the pieces belonging to him splattered all across the board. What do you do with your opponent's pieces? They should ideally remain untouched by you, for if you pocket their pieces you are definitely to have a penalty against the blasphemy. So the player ideally should mind his own business. But that's the fallacy for all the ideal cases, which is a simplification of the practicality of mundaneness in almost everything in this life. Be it a game of Carrom or life as such. No doubt the opponent pockets his pieces but he also manipulates yours to benefit maximum points in the game.
I like this game. I used to play when I was in hostel and although not a player, a word that they use in almost everything at which one excels at- be it in a game of carrom or a game of winning a transitory partner or any other supposedly meaningful game!
I admired the game very much when I used to play and hence when I chanced upon a conversation with a colleague of mine, I asked him whether he liked the game or not. Grammatically speaking the usage of the word "or not" is a redundancy that people use with the word "whether". People love to use redundant things and dislike minimalistic approach to anything.
But I digress. So, I asked him about Carrom because I like asking questions to people. Most of the times I get unique responses and this leads me to ponder about those responses, which is a favorite avocation of mine. Now, I like this guy. He is a rare person who really minds his own business, remains introvert for most of the time and that's a treat for me to initiate conversations. An introvert has more to answer about my weird questions than a pretentious extrovert. Yes they are pretentious and full of show offs and I am generalising, based on my experiences so far.
Anyway, coming to the topic, he smiled at me and in a unique introverted voice said that he doesn't like the game. But that was fine with me. People have various likes and dislikes and who am I to impose my likes and dislikes on anyone. However, I asked him the reason for his dislike and he with the same characteristic tone of introversion replied that he dislike the game because he doesn't play it well and what's the meaning of playing a game if one only loses each and every time at it.
Now, now, now. I didn't say anything to him for in real life I do not like to extend conversations and also I have no idea on presenting my views on topics with clarity, it is as if the inner conversations that I have do not transduce well to an amplified version as an output to the outside world. Such a tragedy of an introvert, I tell you.
But I hate to disagree with him, but yet I must. It is not about winning or losing. It is not about playing well or not. It is about enjoying the process. Why would anyone not play any game, also the game in this life- the game called life, just because one is not good enough to play it? What is this philosophy of playing only to win? What is this idea of winning and losing? We are losers, we all are losing our time by the tick of a second - second by second, minute by minute and hour by hour. We are deemed to die and that's the loss of interpretation of misinterpretation that most of us have in this life.
I feared losses once upon a time. I thought I should be invincible to any losses and tragedies. But time can do wonders to a person's philosophy!
All I would say is to play a game if only to enjoy and experience the process and not to win and lose. Winning and losing, as the great philosophers say, is a part and parcel of life. Life goes beyond such diminutive misguided definitions and somehow we tend to coil our wings around those societal definitions.
But that's just me and my random musings. I am not imposing it. How can I when I am a puppet of the loser.