Connect with us

Opinion

Subtle Realism

Avatar

Published

🕒

on

IST

Only recently, when I finished reading HasanManzar’s book Habs, did I understand the term ‘writer’s writer’.
As Madeleine L’Engle, author of A Wrinkle in Time, said, “A self is not something static … a self is always becoming.” So it is with one’s creativity. It keeps changing — with time, with fame and perhaps with readers’ and publishers’ demands. But writers keep their pace; they are always very careful (although not always mindful) of their writing.
They write because that’s what they love to do; they write exactly what they want their readers to read. There will never be any bias; neither will they put in extra effort to be sympathetic if they are not feeling it. They will tell you exactly, without undue harshness, what they believe in, what they think is true, and their insistence on writing their mind and soul is what makes them a writer’s writer.
Reading a writer’s writer is not easy. One must have a good grasp of history or the background of what they are writing about, otherwise one can feel like a fish out of water. The work may well be difficult to understand, so the reader should be learned or educated enough to understand the writer’s point of view.
Manzar may fittingly be called a writer’s writer, because even after having written for so long, and having published six novels and several short story collections, he manages to continue breaking the rules and keeping his writing free from general expectations. As critic and translator FaruqHasan rightly said, Manzar is very much a realist, inclining towards a traditional, old fashioned view of plot, character and narrative in his storytelling. But his realism is so subtle and his stories so true to life that while reading him, one often forgets to notice that a story is behind told. Manzar’s distinctive realism and broad range of characters and settings distinguish him from a host of other writers of realistic short stories in the subcontinent.
One aspect of Manzar’s fiction, noted by all his critics, is variety. Critical consensus of his work is that of all the Urdu-language writers creating short stories in Pakistan and India today, his canvas is the largest. A well-travelled man, he derives the plots and characters for his stories from his experience of the world at large. There are tales set in Pakistan, England, Scotland, South Africa, Nigeria, Iran, India, Sri Lanka, Indonesia and East Pakistan (now Bangladesh). There are stories whose locales one recognises as distinctly non-South Asian, but that remain unidentified or unnamed often for thematic reasons. There are indeed few writers in Urdu who can make the world contiguous with home through the geographically creative setting of their stories.
It is this skill which makes Manzar’s novel Habs — a fictional account of the last eight years of former Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon’s life, as he lies in a vegetative state at the Chaim Sheba Medical Centre — approachable for Pakistani readers.
The novel begins with a brief introduction of Sharon. Born to Jewish parents but a complete antitheist, the red-haired, brown-eyed boy is called a ‘bulldozer’ by his friends because of his immense size. Manzar then takes readers directly to Sharon’s hospital room where, despite his physically immobile state, his brain continues to function. He can feel and perceive the living world around him and ponder on his health, his thoughts, his feelings at seeing his family photos hanging crookedly on the walls and the doctors and nurses taking care of him. Although the ‘Sleeping Giant’ — as he was known — is confined to his bed, he continues to open his eyes and is propped up daily to ‘watch’ television.
Clips from this television and snippets from newspapers form the theme and lay the groundwork for the story’s progression, as the writer imagines Sharon’s reflections on his past actions. As the novel moves forward, Manzar — himself a psychiatrist by profession — enlists the help of psychological analyses to revisit Sharon’s childhood memories and let readers know why and what circumstances lead to the rise of people such as him, who exhibited such dreadful fierceness in massacring Palestinians that Dutch film director George Sluizer claimed he had witnessed Sharon killing two Palestinian toddlers in 1982 near the refugee camp of Sabra and Shatila. According to Sluizer, the toddlers — merely two or three years old — were shot from a distance of 10 metres with a pistol, as one might shoot rabbits. As such, there is no possibility of pardoning Sharon for his heinous crimes, but knowing of his inner thoughts on his difficult childhood, as narrated by Manzar, does give rise to a very faint flicker of sympathy.
Interspersed with this narrative are scenarios from the vast history of the Jews, and how anti-Semitism led to notable instances of persecution, such as the Rhineland massacres in 1096, expulsion from England in 1290, the Spanish massacre in 1391 and expulsion from Spain in 1492, various anti-Jewish pogroms in the Russian Empire between 1821 and 1906 and the Holocaust in Germany.
In addition, the novel covers the dreadful sufferings of the Palestinian Muslims since civil war broke out in 1947, when the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted a resolution recommending the partition plan for Palestine. While this move was not initiated by native Palestinian Muslims or even Jews, it did turn them against each other. There is also mention of how the self-interest of countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom and to some extent Russia, made them reluctant to bridge the gap between the two nations living in Palestine. All this information helps give readers a detailed background of the historical events and places that make Palestine so important for both Muslims and Jews, and also makes compelling arguments as to why the Jews cannot be the only rightful authority over this land.
Manzar’s novel is a lesson in history as well as one in human nature. At the end, it is a realisation that everything ultimately comes to naught: Sharon departs from this world and despite his grandiose delusions, his obituary in the newspapers — provided by his son, Gilad — reads, “He has gone. He went when he decided to go.”
Habs
By HasanManzar
Scheherzade, Karachi
367pp.


Advertisement
Loading...
Comments

Opinion

Not in the Mahatma’s name

The Kashmir Monitor

Published

on

By Apoorvanand

The recent uproar over the glorification of Mahatma Gandhi’s assassin, NathuramGodse, by the BharatiyaJanata Party’s Bhopal candidate Pragya Singh Thakur has forced her party to tick her off. It should be a solace for us that there is at least one non-negotiable in Indian politics, that the political cost of the celebration of the murder of the Mahatma is formidably high! But now we would be told to let the matter rest as she has been chided even by her mentors.

Let us look at the implication of this approach, that Ms. Thakur, sans this statement, should be acceptable to us as a potential representative in Parliament. She continues to be the ‘symbol of Hinduism’, as she claimed Prime Minister NarendraModi had said of her. Our satisfaction over the condemnation of Ms. Thakur makes us forget that she is being audaciously presented as the most fitting answer to secular politics, which holds that a person accused of attacks on Muslims cannot be a people’s representative in India.

 

The idea that a Hindu can never indulge in a terror act is, in fact, another way of saying that terror acts are always committed by non-Hindus. Or, by Pakistan, which for BJP leaders is a proxy for Muslims. Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh, while talking about the Samjhauta Express blast case acquittals, claimed that it was unimaginable to accept that Hindus could be involved in such acts, and that he believed that in all such crimes there was the hand of Pakistan. A crime has been committed, and since the Hindu suspects cannot (being Hindus) do it, it can only be Muslims even if they are not caught — this is the underlying assumption.

It is this theory which is being thrown at us by the BJP by presenting Ms. Thakur as its choice for the electorate of Bhopal. It has another sinister aspect. She was selected knowing well that she could not be a choice for Muslims. Her selection is therefore a message to Muslims that by not voting for her, they disregard the sentiments of Hindus, thus showing intolerance towards the majority.

By supporting her, the ‘symbol of Hinduism’, they have a chance to endear themselves to the Hindus. If they don’t, they would always be a suspect.

This argument is not new. Many pundits, while accepting that Mr.Modi was a divisive figure, urged Indians to choose him as he was the best bet for the economic development of India. So, can Muslims be so sectarian as to think only about themselves while the greater national interest is at stake?

The swift and determined move by the BJP to reject her statement on Godse is a clever ploy to make this issue irrelevant while judging her. It is as if we are asked to judge Godse, setting aside the act of murder of Gandhi by him. There are ‘respectable’ people who feel that Godse spoilt his case by murdering the Mahatma. They regret this folly as they believe that there was strong merit in his ideological stance. According to them, he rightly opposed the Muslim appeasement of Gandhi, his anger at the dangerous friendliness of Gandhi towards Pakistan is correct, and his impatience with the unwise and impractical pacifism of Gandhi is to be understood if we want to make India strong.

We are asked to understand that there was a reason Godse was forced to kill Gandhi. We are asked to not treat him as a simple criminal. He was driven by high ideas. To make him a man of ideas, he is constantly humanised. We have seen over the years people talking about his childhood, his education, his editorship. Gandhi must have done something really horrible to provoke a thoughtful human being to turn into an assassin. If anything, they imply, he was a just assassin!

So, we are asked to move away from the trivia, that is the act of the murder, to the substantive, the issues raised by Nathuram in his ‘brave defence’ in the court, which had moved people to tears even then.

The RashtriyaSwayamsevakSangh (RSS), unlike the Islamic State and the Maoists, understands it well that an individual and identifiable act of violence makes it abhorrent and repulsive for the masses, whereas anonymous acts of violence are always more palatable. It was therefore important for Savarkar to distance himself from his disciple, Godse, to remain respectable. For the RSS it was necessary to disown Godse to be able to keep working on the majoritarian ideas he shared with or had learnt from Savarkar and the RSS. No known RSS hand soils his hands with blood; yet it is the politics of the RSS, not at all different from Godse’s, which makes blood flow.

Gandhi had said again and again that it would be better for him to die if India were to become inhospitable to Muslims. He was talking to those who were objecting to the recitation from the Koran at his prayer meetings. Death he could accept but not the narrowing of his heart! Neither bowing to threats or force! In the same invocation, he said, if you ask me to recite the Gita at gun point, I would refuse to obey you.

Gandhi told his audience, your heart is also large. Don’t constrict it. It is this challenge which needs to be accepted. It requires immense bravery of intelligence and humanity to be able to hear Gandhi. This intelligence would tell us that the distancing from the murder of the Mahatma by the co-travellers of Godse is in fact a strategy to enlarge the space for majoritarian ideas and draw more and more Hindus towards them, thus making Gandhi irrelevant while keeping his facade decorated.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Why I want Pragya Thakur to win

The Kashmir Monitor

Published

on

By Saba Naqvi

Regardless of whether NarendraModi remains Prime Minister or not I want terror accused Pragya Thakur to win from Bhopal. The esteemed leadership of India’s pre-eminent political party chose a terror accused as a candidate and they must endure her tenure as MP.

Pragya may be a poisonous vendor of hate and violence but she is not a hypocrite. Ever since she spoke her mind on describing NathuramGodse, the individual who shot MK Gandhi to death, as a patriot, the BJP national leadership has claimed to be disturbed. The Prime Minister spoke up after her statement, saying, he would never forgive her for what she had said and the party stated that it had initiated disciplinary action against her.

 

But by the time the party took this position, many members of the BJP had come up with twisted arguments somehow justifying Pragya’s validation of the assassin of a figure many revere as a Mahatma or Great Soul. Party members exposed their own problematic ideological heritage that included non-participation in the freedom movement led by Gandhi. Some of them could not help but reveal their own natural impulse to drop the veneer of falsehood and come clean on how they do indeed believe that Godse was a patriot despite having killed Gandhi.

The Godse remark in just two days exposed the ideological underbelly of the ruling party that does indeed have members who believe that Gandhi was a villain who loved Muslims and Pakistan. That’s why Godse, by his own account in a famous trial, shot him. A must-read for those who wish to engage with this debate is the book titled “The Men Who Killed Gandhi” by ManoharMalgonkar.

Seventy-one years after that crime on January 30, 1948, we have come to the point where a candidate contesting in an election for Parliament embraces the Godse world view. What’s more, a member of Modi’s council of ministers, AnantkumarHegde, endorsed her position. The MP from Karnataka had earlier kicked up a storm when he had said that “we are here to change the Constitution”. Yes, the same Constitution he took an oath to protect.

Hegde’s also received a show-cause notice to explain his position and on May 17 BJP president Amit Shah said the party’s disciplinary committee would submit a report on the matter in 10 days, after the election verdict, that is. There was more: the BJP media cell chief in Madhya Pradesh, the state from where Pragya is contesting, was brazen enough to say that Gandhi was the father of the nation of Pakistan. The BJP suspended him.

So how do we read the ideological contortions ever since Pragya uttered the “Godse is a patriot” words? One could say that the BJP is trying to occupy the space of both extreme and moderate in a national ideological pendulum that has shifted right-wards. It’s not a bad ploy—the ideological family plays to the more core beliefs, that are to be revealed step by step, and just in case some voters find them unpalatable, there are the “reasonable” elements as well.

And, voila! Modi becomes a moderate who is being stern with the fringe! That is a useful projection at a time when there is the possibility of needing some allies post-23 May. The BJP has made this ideological journey before, of being all things to all men. Earlier, former Prime Minister AtalBihari Vajpayee was offered up as the moderate to LK Advani, the architect of the Ram temple movement, who brought the BJP to national prominence. Today Modi today is the moderate who is speaking up against the hardliners, who are called “fringe” by those who believe it’s all part of a great national purpose.

It’s not. The “fringe” has been mainstream for some years now. Much before Pragya was presented to the nation as a candidate for parliament, the BJP leadership chose an unabashed Muslim-hating monk of a religious order to be the chief minister of India’s most populous state. All these debates about ‘moderate’ and ‘hardliner’ are a farce designed to make the BJP constituency feel better about themselves. It’s part of the good cop/ bad cop tactic.

To conclude, therefore, I want a terror accused to win, just so that we can, as a nation, get a reality check on where we have landed up. And just in case someone wants to ask me about whether I am afraid, here is my reply: I am so certain about the courage of my convictions, that there is no fear, although I do feel some shame for those who have tied themselves into knots over something about which there should have been no ambiguity. Bring on Pragya and let’s see what happens next.

Continue Reading

Opinion

The ‘unpeople’ of India

The Kashmir Monitor

Published

on

By Abdul Khaliq

Muslims now have to live with the bleak truth that the most powerful political party and its ideological parent, with tentacles spread across the country, are pathologically hostile to Muslims.

I fear for our future as a secular, multicultural country that once celebrated a richness of culture and tradition. Till not long ago we affirmed our common humanity even as we celebrated our differences. Our nation represented diversity, kindness, compassion and a revulsion of extremist views. But, over time, our collective souls have been deadened by violence, deepening communal and caste divides and the most perverse thinking. The cosmopolitan spirit has been throttled by hyper nationalism, populism and a deep distrust of the liberal values of tolerance and inclusion. A creeping majoritarianism is spreading across the land.

 

In this overheated, protracted election season, Muslims are up against it, caught between a rock and a hard place. Theirs is an Orwellian world where they are the “unpeople”— a term coined by George Orwell in his scary masterpiece 1984, to define those whose names and existence had been erased because they had incurred “Big Brother’s” ire. Muslims now have to live with the bleak truth that the most powerful political party and its ideological parent, with tentacles spread across the country, are pathologically hostile to Muslims. What makes their plight infinitely worse, is the fact that even the major allegedly secular party has consigned Muslims to social invisibility. Can one trust a party that is afraid to even allude to the Muslims’ problems, let alone address them?

When the PM evoked the 1984 mass slaughter of Sikhs and quoted Rajiv Gandhi’s infamous justification about the inevitable effect of the falling of a big tree, why did the Congress president not hit back by recalling the 2002 Gujarat riots and Modi’s Newtonian observation justifying the killing of hundreds of Muslims as a reaction to an action? He refrained, not for any ethical reason, but simply for fear of being seen as empathetic to Muslims and their problems and of equating the two tragedies. Caught between the flagrant hostility of the right-wing and the fraudulent concern of the secular front, Muslims are India’s outcasts.

In today’s India, where all issues across the political spectrum are seen through the lens of identity politics, Muslims are vilified for their custom, dress and tradition. They are physically attacked for the food they eat, discriminated against in employment, housing, and even civic amenities, and, they are routinely victimised by law-enforcement authorities simply for being Muslim. Social media is awash with the most hateful, stereotypical portrayal of Muslims as terrorist sympathisers, baby producing factories and worse. Although India has been the home of Islam and its adherents for much more than a millennium, Muslims today are constantly pilloried about their loyalty to the nation.

All assessments about Muslims are universalised, in black and white and deeply problematic. In a conversation with two CRPF sub-inspectors who have recently returned from Kashmir (I did not reveal that I was Muslim), I was told that “these Muslims are a nuisance as even their women throw stones at us.” Please note that the stone-throwing by the disgruntled Kashmiris is perceived as a common trait of Muslims — all 190 million of them. Their other complaints were that Muslims support Pakistan and insist on eating only halal meat. When I asked how the civil unrest in Kashmir could be resolved, I got an answer that stunned me: “Make sure that the police force in Kashmir is recruited only from the Shia community and they will teach these Sunnis a lesson!” How well have the British taught us the art of “divide and rule” and of polarising communities! The conversation filled me with anguish at the gratuitous distrust and hatred for Muslims. The animosity runs deep and is expressed by ordinary citizens in a matter-of-fact tone that is unnerving.

I recall clearly the sense of cautious optimism among Muslims when NarendraModi assumed power in 2014. His swearing-in was a strikingly symbolic moment, epitomised by the presence of the Pakistani PM that signalled hope of rapprochement with Pakistan (Indian Muslims know through experience that their well-being is linked to this crucial relationship). The PM represented a more decisive polity that promised an equitable social order expressed most eloquently in the Socratic slogan, “Sabkasaathsabkavikas”. This slogan encapsulated this nation’s foremost mission of fostering social solidarity based on the principle that every human being matters. Minorities felt reassured by the PM’s emphatic assertion in 2015 that “my government will not allow any religious group, belonging to the majority or minority, to incite hatred against others, overtly or covertly.” He repeatedly made appeals to preserve our core values of diversity, tolerance and plurality, calling on Hindus and Muslims to work together to fight poverty instead of fighting one another. His stunning embrace of Nawaz Sharif on Christmas Day 2015 filled everyone with hope.

On the ground, however, India began witnessing a deepening cultural mutation as vigilante squads terrorised and lynched Muslims in the name of protecting the cow, launched “gharwapsi” campaigns that have all but ended the freedom to choose one’s faith and used “love jihad” to stifle any kind of solidarity between the two communities. Minorities began to believe that the present dispensation’s aim is to convert India into the Hindu Rashtra of Hindutva where Muslims and Christians would live as second-class citizens. The current election rhetoric has only exacerbated those fears. The BJP LokSabha candidate for Barabanki boasted that “NarendraModi has made attempts to break the morale of Muslims. Vote for Modi if you want to destroy the breed of Muslims.”

We are on the cusp of having a new government at the Centre. Opinion polls and the most reliable — the bookies — predict victory for the NDA, but with a reduced majority. Ironically, the return of Modi as PM is the best hope for peace within the country and the neighbourhood. Imran Khan was right when he said that only Modi could help resolve Kashmir. He is the only leader with the power to rein in the lunatics whose purpose in life is to polarise communities and engage in eternal war with Pakistan. In any case, the new government’s first task would be to combat the overpowering atmosphere of distrust and hate bedevilling society which constitutes the foremost threat to the nation, more so than terrorism. The creation of a truly secular society free of prejudice and discrimination must be the prime mission.

Continue Reading

Latest News

Latest News5 hours ago

VIDEO|Nahida creates history, becomes first Kashmiri woman to scale Mt Everest

Srinagar, May 22: History has been created after twenty three year -old Nahida Manzoor from Srinagar became the first Kashmiri...

Latest News9 hours ago

Black bear beaten to death in South Kashmir

A sub-adult wild black bear was beaten to death by locals in Zungalpora village in South Kashmir’s Kulgam district on...

Latest News10 hours ago

Chargesheet against Sumbal rape accused soon: Police

Srinagar: Jammu and Kashmir Police on Wednesday said that a chargesheet against the accused in Sumbal rape case will be...

Latest News10 hours ago

VIDEO | Second phase of Jehangir Chowk-Rambagh flyover thrown open to public

Srinagar:The second phase of the Jehangir Chowk-Rambagh flyover was thrown open for vehicular traffic on Wednesday. Jammu and Kashmir Governor...

Latest News10 hours ago

Two militants killed in Kulgam gunfight: Police

Srinagar, May 22: Two militants were on Wednesday killed in a gunfight with government forces in Gopalpora village of Damhal...

Latest News10 hours ago

Army soldier injured in accidental explosive during training: Defence spokesman

Poonch, May 22: The Jammu based defence spokesman of Army on Wednesday denied any IED blast had taken place in...

Latest News11 hours ago

No trace of two PDD employees who drowned in Dardekote Nallah Uri, Searches On

Baramulla, May 22: There was no trace of two Power Department Development employees who drowned in 500 feet long Jehlum...

Latest News20 hours ago

VIDEO | Militant killed in ongoing Kulgam gunfight

Srinagar, May 22: A militant has been killed in an ongoing encounter with government forces at Gopalpora area of south...

Subscribe to The Kashmir Monitor via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to The Kashmir Monitor and receive notifications of new stories by email.

Join 1,010,540 other subscribers

Archives

May 2019
M T W T F S S
« Apr    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  
Advertisement