Opinion: Settling a point with a clean, single blow
Mian Ijaz-ul-Hassan
Symbolism was out. How could a progressive writer hide behind a symbol? It was
like a warrior hiding behind his damsel’s skirts. Truth had to be out in the
open. And the more naked, the better, like a red painted terracotta pot resting
on unswept earth
There was a time when artists and writers got pretty worked up about what was
progressive and what was reactionary; what was literature and what was
journalism. What was poetry and what was propaganda? What was painting and what
was illustration? And so it went on. It was not easy. Everyone believed he was
right. No one would budge. Theoretical debates were the order of the day. The
left and the right were at daggers drawn. Often issues couldn’t be settled
with words alone.
Maulana Kausar Niazi once a Jama’at-e-Islami stalwart acquired notoriety when
he blatantly slipped through a contingent of army jawans who had been sent out
during the martial law to flush him out of the Wazir Khan Mosque, where
reportedly he was hiding. Maulana, a man of wits, hid in an empty deg of
‘halva’ and had himself transported out of the mosque without arousing any
suspicion. On another occasion I believe he got away in a shuttlecock ‘burqa’,
something which the artless Sheikh Rasheed of the PPP was not able to do with
success. Sheikh Sahib was a tall lanky person but tried to escape in the
‘burqa’ of a lady who was only five foot three. Sheikh Sahib did not notice
that his hairy ankles and big feet were visible to Zia-ul Haq’s secret service
agents when he tried to coyly amble through their ranks.
After leaving the Jama’at, Maulana Kauser Niazi became its bitter critic and
since he was an insider, he knew where it would hurt most. The Maulana published
the deadly weekly “Shahab” which was edited by Nazeer Naji who had
incredible invective facility, a skill rarely equalled and for which, and other
things, he has acquired fame. Shahab ruled supreme for almost a year, exposing
and demeaning reactionaries with colourful adjectives. The Jama’at was put on
the mat. Only a few months earlier it had been on a physical rampage against the
progressives. On one occasion, Maulana Niazi, popularly known as Maulana whisky
because he had so ingeniously whisked himself away from the Wazir Khan mosque,
was buying some groceries from the Tollington Market on the Mall. Maulana was in
the process of squashing some grapes in his mouth, which he had picked from a
ripe bunch, when Shorish Kashmiri, a loud right-wing stalwart hailed him.
Shorish edited the weekly “Chitan”. It never suffered his conscience calling
black green. He also had great talent in hurling abuse at his ideological
adversaries.
The Maulana and Shorish did not waste words in idle salutations and got down to
the business at hand. Often, as I mentioned earlier, differences could not be
settled with words alone. So as soon as the Maulana realised that he could not
prevail upon his adversary with mere words, he effortlessly picked up a tin of
cooking oil, resting on a rack with its other companions and let Shorish have it
on the head. Maulana had made his final point. The argument was instantly
brought to an end. Not the best way to settle scores, its only virtue being that
it was settled with a clean single blow.
It was perhaps for this reason that when ideologues admonished writers for their
lack of commitment, most writers preferred to exercise ‘their right to remain
silent’. But it was often not easy to take their bullshit. I remember in
meetings of the Halqa e Arbab e Zauq, a progressive literary organisation, no
one dared mention Iqbal or Manto because they were not considered kosher. The
Halqa held its weekly meetings in one of the dingy rooms lighted by a naked
bulb, across the inner courtyard at the YMCA on the Mall. I recall that on one
occasion a young writer who had recently passed her university exams was to read
a short story. She seemed a little nervous at first but soon got in step with
her narrative, hoping to make an impression by the end. It was not a big
audience, most of which was gathered around a long well-used pinewood table,
with a dark brown varnished surface full of graffiti. When she had read through
her manuscript she expectantly looked up to see the reaction. Since I had found
the story quite pleasant I joined others in giving a hand to applaud the effort.
Probably her first, at least in the Halqa. Little did we know that there was one
among us who had the sense to detect that things were not quite so well as we
had thought. He proceeded to point out where she had erred. There was a
character that was actually an imperialist agent, who had escaped our attention
and another who stood for the feudal class. Furthermore there were several other
matters, which were scientifically debatable. We were all suitably ashamed for
not having been able to see what was so very obvious.
Thanks to these ideologues who only dipped their nibs in red ink to correct
others but never dipped it in blue or black to their own creative pursuit. As a
result the Halqa Arbab- e- Zauq was split into two parts, Halqa-a-Siasi and
Halqa-a-Adabi. These ideologues and pamphleteers riding higher commitments,
writers were brushed aside and the revolution saved in an ideological
preservative, a skill, which the Mitchel Farms of Renala Khurd, has accomplished
with greater expertise over the decades.
Symbolism was out. How could a progressive writer hide behind a symbol? It was
like a warrior hiding behind his damsel’s skirts. Truth had to be out in the
open. And the more naked, the better, like a red painted terracotta pot resting
on unswept earth. Little did they realise that in literature and art things have
not only to be perceived and experienced but also to be recreated with
appropriate language and form before they can be transported across to the heart
and head. There is a wide chasm between knowing and having the ability to
capture it in words and images.
Presuming to know the truth is not enough, unless it can also be tested in a
heart lab. Actually, there is more to literature and painting than can be
fathomed by scholars and critics. Can you become a poet if you know all the
words in a dictionary or a painter if you have acquired the technique and craft?
No you can’t! If it was so simple then all the encyclopaedists and grammarians
would be writers and every student who has been through an art school would be a
painter. But this is not so. I have seen more artists getting killed in an art
school than wayward pedestrians.
Art and writing is not an accomplishment or a profession but a passion, a
natural endowment of some individuals that cannot be acquired through mere
practice or technique. Van Gogh’s drawings look so clumsy but why do they have
the ability to move our hearts. There are painters who can render crunchier
apples than Cezanne but what is it that makes Cezanne’s apples stay in our
minds while the taste of others is soon lost on the tongue? In the end, art
really is not a product but a by-product of an artist’s personal vision and
inner life which is forged out of his own everyday existence.
Coming to another point, I wonder if you have noticed that most ‘afsars’ of
the establishment betray a slight discomfiture in the company of artists and
poets. Ghalib is all right because he has been long dead. Moreover, he wrote in
the national language even before the nation, which spoke different tongues, was
born. The ‘regional’ poets who wrote in their ‘native’ tongues were
regarded too coarse to be even included in official literary discussions. The
less said about them the better. There was a rumour that one of them was a gay
and liked the companionship of a handsome boy who was not even a Muslim. After
decades of struggle when finally some of these regional poets were allowed on
the radio, and later on the TV, they were introduced not as poets but as Sufi
poets, which made their official acceptance less embarrassing. General Yahya
Khan and others never ceased to drool over the Melody Queen but never had a
moment for Khwaja Fareed and his lot. Without Fareeda Khanum, Iqbal Bano and
Abida Perveen, no one in the officialdom would have recognised Sufi Fareed of
Shakarganj or Sufi Bullah of Kasur and other sufis hailing from even more
distant ‘mufassalat’. I must say that inducting Madholal Hussain under the
garb of a sufi must have required some work.
But the situation could yet change for the better. Never underestimate the new
and the young. We all know that General Musharraf can pat a dog. He can also rap
a jehadi on the knuckles. His government can even seize young actresses on the
stage for flaunting their figures. But I wonder if he can whistle a tune in the
bath. Nawaz Sharif couldn’t whistle because he had his mouth always full of
sweet turnips, but I am told he could sing. Loved singing duets whenever he
could. Are we not glad that Nawaz and Musharraf did not sing one together? One
should never forget to count one’s blessings. But then there is this matter of
the Referendum. A wit observed that if Musharraf were to win the Referendum, he
would rule for five years, but if he were to lose it he would stay for ten. I
say he has been around all the time.
Prof Ijaz-ul-Hassan is Pakistan’s leading painter. He is a teacher, art critic
and political activist. He was awarded the “President’s Pride of
Performance” in 1992. He is currently the president of the PPP Punjab’s
Policy Planning Committee and Chairman of the party’s Manifesto Committee