Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” – Benjamin Franklin
Introduction
Playing has been around since the time humans have existed. It is through games and storytelling we make sense of the world around us. From phenomenological perspective, the act of playing goes beyond recreation. The player actively interacts with the game and thus becomes a site of expression and meaning making. This stays extremely relevant in the case of board games as the player is engaged in an endless world of rules, possibilities and decisions that they inhibit through the game. Each game has its own alternate world with its own internal rules and logic. Thus, board games are often structured by narratives, where they are not just texts, but unique individual experiences shaped by meaning making and temporality.
When you engage with a board game, you are not merely playing; you are entering a structured space where you actively reimagine, embody, and perform history, memory, and culture. They go beyond rules and pieces; and are dynamic modes of storytelling where the player has the agency to co create the narrative of memory. And because they exist as narrative systems, board games have the agency and power to transmit cultural memory across players and generations. While memory studies have extensively dealt with literature, films and other forms of passive media, game studies remain relatively unexplored. One of the few scholars who have explored the intersection of cultural memory and board games is Jason Begy, whose essay “Board Games and the construction of Cultural Memory”, argues that board games construct memory through procedural rhetorics. Applying Begy’s framework to the postcolonial Indian context of Goa’s liberation, this essay examines how the board game ‘Goa Kranti’ transmits the cultural memory of Goa’s liberation through its mechanics and narrative architecture. Despite being work in progress, the existing game’s prototype allows for a significant examination of a game’s role in simulating cultural memory.
Cultural Memory and Play
In her book ‘ Memory in Culture’, Astrid Erll defines cultural memory as an interplay of past and present in socio cultural contexts. (Erll 7) Unlike communicative memory (informal, everyday communications), this memory is rather structured, institutionalised and often stored in different forms of media. She argues that cultural memory is not simply preserved but actively constructed through cultural artifacts. Jan Assman, one of the foundational in Memory Studies, describes cultural memory as a form of collective memory that preserves and transmits a society’s identity, values, and historical knowledge across generations. (Assmann 109–110). Begy argues that games construct memory through procedural rhetorics, a term coined by Ian Bogost. Bogost defines procedural rhetoric as “the practice of using processes persuasively… [It] entails authoring arguments through rule-based representations and interactions rather than the spoken word, writing, images, or moving pictures” (Bogost, 2007, p. 28). It refers to the way games persuade, communicate, or express ideas through their rules, mechanics, and the procedures they require players to follow. Interactive games stimulate historical events by enabling the player in a constructed historical framework. They act as dynamic repositories of historical and cultural memories. While there are several studies arguing that simulations are inaccurate forms of historical representation, Begy’s paper states that the mode of remembering that are unique to games has the capacity to simulate historically situated structural metaphors (Begy 2015). Contrary to passive media, where a fixed narrative is imposed on the audience, board games, through the dynamics and rhetorics of gameplay, enable the player to become an active participant rather than a passive observer.
Goa Liberation – History versus Memory
In historical context, Goa’s liberation refers to the end of 451 years of Portugal’s colonial rule and annexation by India on December 19, 1961. This day is celebrated annually as Goa Liberation Day. This is not merely a celebration of a historical event, but a rich and embedded cultural and collective memory. Goa was under the Portuguese rule for four and a half centuries. The day marks the success of “Operation Vijay”, a military operation by the Indian Armed forces. While popular memory has reduced Goa Liberation to a mere military operation, there is a lot more in context. Various political and communal groups played a key role in the freedom struggle. The national Congress (Goa) advocated for a non-violent struggle, while The United Front of Goa wanted an independent nation of Goa. The Goa People Party (GPP) professed a communist ideology and maintained strong links with the Communist Party of India. Apart from these political formations, the Azad Goantak Dal (ADG) and the Goa Liberation Army, engaged in a guerrilla style struggle against the Portuguese administration. The nationwide demands and protests forced the Nehru Government to undertake military action, which finally ended the colonial rule on 19th December 1961.
Like any other institutionalized memory, the 1961 annexation also follows a formal structure. The memory is primarily kept alive through rituals, folklore, and literature. Change of Guard’, a book written by Ralph de Sousa, is a collection of memories shared by people documenting the incidents during “Operation Goa”. Every personal account offers a unique, varied version. Similarly, various stories and folklores recount Goa’s transformation under different rulers. The multiplicity of narratives on the topic reveals that Goa’s liberation is not just a historical narrative, but a collective space of memory where stories intervene, overlap and contradict. Unlike passive memorialization, Goa Kranti transforms the memory into a participatory ritual, where history is not just narrated but reenacted.
Goa Kranti as a Memory Artifact
Goa Kranti, designed by Andy D. & Deepak M, deals with the Goan Freedom struggle. It is a strategy-based game set during the period of Goan Freedom struggle. The gametime is around 60 minutes and each player plays as different freedom fighters, canvas their local areas to gain resources and ultimately wins when they liberate Goa from the Portuguese rule. The players start by choosing the violent or non-violent (Satyagraha) path, and gather support from the locals in order to win the game. There are multiple “events” spread across the game where each player has to complete missions in order to move forward. All players start with a fixed number of “locality” cards that contains a mix of resources. There are also “Event” cards that depict a major event as well as the mission that is to be completed. For example, a certain event card can ask the players to gather crowds or even invade administrations. Apart from event and locality cards, there are also “character” cards that show the current state of the player’s canvas. If the player draws a card with too much “noise”, they are at higher risk of getting caught. The player has to push their luck while deciding when to stop drawing cards.
The fighters can also pool in their resources in order to corporate and complete the mission cards. The “morale” of the Goans and “power” of the Portuese are also tracked and confirms the winning or losing the missions. There are also aspects of “Arm”, Intel”, and propaganda that the players can use to advance in the game.
Memory and Embodiment
In Goa Kranti, the players embody real personalities from the Goan freedom struggle. Paul Connerton in his book, “How Societies Remember”, states how recollected knowledge of the past is conveyed and sustained through rituals and further stating that performative memory is ritual. While engaging with the game, players feel the history (Connerton). The tension in push your luck decisions and collaborative strategies parallels the real-life struggles of Goan freedom fighters. For example, players need to decide when to stop canvassing for resources in order to not get captured. The physical act of drawing cards causes adrenaline of underground organizing. This mirrors the real world parallel of Goan freedom fighters smuggling pamphlets underground. Similarly, at several points in the game, players face the dilemma of deciding between the violent or the non-violent way. This embodies the opposing ideologies of Mahatma Gandhi’s Satyagraha versus Armed Revolt. Instead of passive media where one just read about them, players are forced to actively committed to one.
This transmission includes a physical aspect as well. Connerton further expands on habitual memory. He explains that images and knowledge of the past is transferred to the present through a series of habitual rituals and practices (Connorton). As Connerton claims, ‘Many forms of habitual skilled remembering illustrate a keeping of the past in mind that, without ever adverting to its historical origin, nevertheless re-enacts the past in our present conduct. In habitual memory the past is, as it were, sedimented in the body.’(Connorton). Goa Kranti reinforces history in the bodies of players, subtly and metaphorically training the bodies to reenact the events of the past. The pooling of resources through the physical act of trading cards is sedimented as a communal muscle memory. When the players flip between the non-violet and violent ideologies, they physically feel the tension, even without a formal textual explanation. The hands clenching while drawing cards, hunching of shoulders in anxiety and collective flinches when the players get caught,shows that even if the player is not aware of colonial resistance, they embody the habits of the same. They don’t just think about the risk, but instead feels it in their hands.
Memory and Identity
Assman, further remarks about the relationship between cultural memory and identity. In his book Collective Memory and Cultural Identity, he explains how societies preserve and transit their knowledge across generations. According to him, cultural memory is ‘the faculty that allows us to build a narrative picture of the past and through this process develop an image and an identity for ourselves’ (Assman). Fixed “figures of memory” like the Goan Liberation is institutionalized and reaffirmed. This contributes to shaping a “collective identity” for the society through certain “artifacts” and “rituals”. This identity is not fixed, differing between various odes of remembering.
Goa Kranti can be seen as one artifact as it is a simulative narrative. They rather act as portals into interactive narratives where the player’s actions narrate the course of the story. The game codifies history through game mechanics and mirrors how rituals formalize memory. The Event cards ritualize real life historical events as “memory anchors” and narrates pivotal moments in history. The players role playing as freedom fighters forces them to navigate between identity conflicts. Each identity has their own distinct ideologies and when committing to one identity, players are in reality, committing to an entire ideology. The game’s resource-pooling mechanic mirrors the historic solidarity between Goan Hindus and ,Catholics during the liberation struggle, fostering a shared collective identity that transcends communal divisions through collaborative gameplay. The players live the identities of Goan fighters and prove that identity can be performed rather than learned. Players with no lived memory of the Goan struggle become identities of freedom fighters through play, constructing the past in the present.
Memory and Materiality
In Board Games and Construction of Cultural Memory, Begy analyses games through the lens of material culture. Material Culture, as defined by Jules David Prown, uses artifacts to explore the beliefs, values, and assumptions of a specific group at a certain time, highlighting the cultural importance of physical items. Erll’s term “objectivations” describes how memories become embedded within media objects. Goa Kranti clearly shows that its game cards aren’t merely gameplay tools, but also symbolize historical events. The game’s physicality and interactivity create its associated memories. Goa Kranti is filled with symbols of resistance. Every card, character and pawn symbolize historic significance. They act as tangible “objectivations” of resistance. According to Begy, board games simulate historical memory as the material culture embodies history. Goa Kranti simulates the material culture of the liberation struggle. Mission cards, Resource Tokens and Loyalty cards carry out this function. For example, a mission card that demands the player to “gather crowd” mirrors freedom fighters like Tristão de Bragança Cunha, holding secret organized rallies. Arms and Intel’s resource tokens symbolize resistance tools. Loyalty cards, on the other hand, reclaim the Goan Space, adding new localities from the Portuguese control. The cards simulate historical metaphors by embedding memories of resistance and liberation. Begy says that rules and player choices determine how the game remembers history in such instances. The game shapes players’ memories of Goa’s liberation.
Conclusion
Board games like Goa Kranti transform the game board into dynamic sites of cultural memory. Rather than passive narration, the interactive nature of the game through procedural rhetorics, memory embodiment and materiality, makes history more collected and alive in the imagination of the players. The embedding of the past into playable rituals simulate historical contexts like the dilemma of Goan freedom fighters, collaborative resistance and performative identity. Unlike traditional media, the game forces players to feel history rather than to merely learn it. Rules become rituals and players become embodiments of freedom and resistance. When players enter the world, they enter a space where history, culture and narratives intersect. This immersive structure becomes a vehicle of cultural memory. It doesn’t just tell history, but constructs the framework and invites players to come join. Goa Kranti does not simply narrate events; it constructs an interactive framework where players become co authors of history.
References
Assmann, Jan. Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism. Excerpt. In The Collective Memory Reader, edited by Jeffrey K. Olick, Vered Vinitzky-Seroussi, and Daniel Levy, pp. 209–15. Oxford University Press, 2011.
Begy, Jason. “Board Games and the Construction of Cultural Memory.” Games and Culture, vol. 12, 2015, doi:10.1177/1555412015600066.
Bogost, Ian. Persuasive Games: The Expressive Power of Videogames. MIT Press, 2007.
Connerton, Paul. How Societies Remember. Cambridge University Press, 1989.
de Sousa, Ralph. Change of Guard. Self-published, 2024.
Erll, Astrid. Memory in Culture. Palgrave Macmillan, 2011, doi:10.1057/9780230321670.
Erll, Astrid. “Introduction.” Cultural Memory Studies: An International and Interdisciplinary Handbook, edited by Astrid Erll, Ansgar Nünning, and Sara B. Young, Walter de Gruyter, 2008, pp. 1–15.
Erll, Astrid. “Literature, Film and the Mediality of Cultural Memory.” Cultural Memory Studies: An International and Interdisciplinary Handbook, edited by Astrid Erll, Ansgar Nünning, and Sara B. Young, Walter de Gruyter, 2008, pp. 389–98.
Goa Kranti, Andy Desai, and Deepak M. Work in Progress. Personal communication.
Prown, Jules David. “Mind in Matter: An Introduction to Material Culture Theory and Method.” Winterthur Portfolio, vol. 17, 1982, pp. 1–19