Sunday, 22 November 2009

INDIAN GAMBLER KILLED OVER 6p BET

I came across the article the other day, and no sooner had i finished reading it, thoughts of Clifford Geertz’s writing came to me. The headline read ‘Indian gambler killed over 6p bet’. It was about three young men; aged 22, 26 and the other 29. All of whom were From the Sunder Nagri area of New Delhi in India. It stated in the article how the three men had consumed alcohol and began gambling playing cards, but when one of the men wins the bet, it ends in a fight and the winner was killed by his two opponents – all for a winning of just six pence. I felt this story strongly related to Geertz account of the Balinese men gambling; the pair of men allegedly smashed the man’s face with heavy stones in order to kill him. I cannot be certain if the gambling was compulsory for men to participate in as it is in Bali, but it shows how something that can be seen as so trivial to us, can lead to such a horrific consequences in poorer countries. This makes me wonder whether violent events such a cock, bull or dog fighting really is a way of men channelling their aggression...

References: Daily Express (2009) [online] Indian gambler killed over 6p bet. [accessed 19th November 2009] Available at:
Posted by at

2 comments:

  1. Fallon Pryce22 November 2009 at 09:44

    some of the refernce got cut off in the last post. it is available at: http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/141276/India-gambler-killed-over-6p-bet

    ReplyDelete
  2. c.scott27 November 2009 at 07:21

    this act of violence doen't seem to be obligatory like in balinease cultures the reason they particpated in the gambling was because hey were drunk which is exactly why the voilence ended up being a killing, in other cultures the people identify and are represented by the acts of violence e.g the cock in the cock fights are the men so when they lose the man loses a sense of pride but only for a moment because the next fight so the emotions are circulated which stops the build-up of hate hence violence. in the example you gave the hate came from the oppostion of winer and loser and the winer lost his life which doesn't compare to the ambigous situations Baudrillard finds to support his 'code' theory.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)