Back to Coleridge

THE imaginative literature of the early part of the nineteenth century is usually described as ‘romantic’. The English poets who wrote between 1798 and 1837 are called romantic poets. They include Wordsworth, Coleridge, Byron, Shelley and Keats. They are considered masters of emotion and imagination. They preferred ‘spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings’ to eighteenth century reasons and common sense. It was, therefore, nice to see our local English Literary Society hold a session on Coleridge (1772-1834) in Chaupal, the new gathering place of writers in Nasser (or Gol) Bagh.

An intimate friend of Wordsworth’s, Coleridge was not only a poet but also a critic, philosopher and dramatist. In 1798 when Wordsworth came up with Lyrical Ballads, Coleridge collaborated with him and included The Rime of the Ancient Mariner in it. He used the simplest words in the poem as he believed it to be the demand of purest poetry. But after the publication of Lyrical Ballads, Coleridge parted ways with Wordsworth in poetry. He differed from him because of his love for the weird and the supernatural. At the same time where Wordsworth was caught in the web of the present, Coleridge was lost in the ‘memories of the distant past and the dreams of strange and unearthly figures.’ It goes without saying that the poems by Coleridge, The Ancient Mariner, Christabel and Kubla Khan stand out in the history of English literature.

At the Chaupal that evening that president of the society spoke about the spiritual emancipation, supernatural elements, dramatic truth, human passions and intellectual realism in Coleridge. In her turn, Rubia Jilani called Coleridge an impassioned poet who had retrieved humanism in poetry. His best poetry, she added, was fragmentary, descriptive and reflective.

Others who expressed their views on Coleridge, and read out some of his poems, included Ashfaq Rasheed, Prof Bashir Chaudhry, Anil Haider, Wasif Mujtaba and Shamshad Shafique.

ISRAR Zaidi is not only a senior poet of the city but also one who is extremely popular.

He is almost a trendsetter in poetry and fresh arrivals in the field feel proud of accepting him as their mentor. It was, therefore, out of respect for him that Asfaq Rasheed of the Lahore Writers Club arranged an evening with him in a local restaurant. The function was presided over by Dr Wazir Agha, while Prof Dr Khawaja Zakariya was the chief guest. Most of the speakers invited to express their views on the occasion were present which again speaks of the popularity of Zaidi Sahib. Even Saira Hashmi of the Bazm-i-Hamnafsaan fame, who had gone into hibernation, was there to express her gratitude to Israr Zaidi for encouraging her when she initially took to writing short stories.

Other speakers included Abdul Karim Khalid, Asghar Nadeem Syed, Mustanser Hussain Tarar, Dr Akhtar, Azhar Javed, Saleem Shahid, Azhar Ghori and Amjad Tufail. They contended that progressive thoughts and religious values were amalgamated in the poetry of Israr Zaidi. Contemporary issues also found mention in his verses. Saleem Shahid was of the view that since poetry demanded responsibility Israr Zaidi despite being a committed person, was fully aware of it.

In his presidential remarks, Dr Wazir Agha lauded Israr Zaidi for being equally at ease with all genres of Urdu poetry. This proficiency, he added, could only be achieved after an extensive and in-depth study of literature.

Bouquets were presented to Israr Zaidi on the occasion with one from Iftikhar Arif, chairman of the Pakistan Academy of Letters.

THE monthly meeting of the literary organisation, Adab Serai, came close to a major tragedy which had taken place in the city. The popular writer and poet, so active in the literary circles, Hussain Majrooh, lost his wife under most tragic circumstances. Coming home at night, she switched on the light of a room where gas had probably been leaking. The result was a blast. Enveloped by flames, she was critically burnt. Majrooh also suffered burns trying to rescue her.

However, he survived but his wife succumbed to her injuries the next day. Taking note of the tragic happening, the proceedings of the Adab Serai started with the passing of a condolence resolution on the sad event and offering fateha for the deceased. — ASHFAQUE NAQVI

The euphoria over Saddam’s capture

THE unbridled euphoria and elation at the capture of ex-Iraqi president Saddam Hussein displayed by the mainstream American media exposed its inability to be an unbiased chronicler of events.

Watching CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and others gloat over the capture of the former Iraqi president with sheer joy written over the faces of its anchors prompted one to believe that the American media was part of the Bush administration’s army of occupiers.

Four days after Mr. Hussein’s capture, the video tape of his capture, his examination, and his interrogation was still being shown. This is overkill, which leave basic issues unexamined.

Senator Robert Byrd made this point in a recent speech. The capture of Saddam Hussein will not be “the keystone for peace in that volatile region. It does not lessen the danger that the Bush doctrine of pre-emptive strike poses to international peace and stability.”

Senator Byrd, a most eloquent speaker who along with a handful of US law-makers opposed the resolution passed by the Congress authorizing President Bush to wage war as he deemed fit, made a statement after Mr Hussein’s capture which deserves a read. Here are some excerpts from his speech:

“As each day passes and as more American soldiers are killed and wounded in Iraq, I become ever more convinced that the war in Iraq was the wrong war at the wrong time in the wrong place for the wrong reasons. Contrary to the president’s rosy predictions — and the predictions of others in the Bush administration — the United States has not been universally greeted as a liberator in Iraq. The peace — if one can use the term “peace” to describe the chronic violence and instability that define Iraq today — the peace is far from being won. Iraqi citizens may be glad that Saddam Hussein is no longer in power, but they appear to be growing increasingly resentful that the United States continues to rule their country at the point of a gun.

“What a huge price we are now paying for the president’s bullheaded rush to invoke the unwise and unprecedented doctrine of pre-emption to invade Iraq, an invasion without provocation, an invasion without the support of the United Nations or the international community.

“It would be tragic enough if the casualties of the Iraq war were confined to the battlefield, but they are not. The casualties of this war will have serious repercussions for generations to come. Truth is one casualty. Despite the best efforts of the White House to contort the invasion of Iraq into an extension of the war on terror, there was never a connection between Saddam Hussein and September 11. There was never a connection between Iraq and September 11. Not a single Iraqi was among the 19 hijackers of those four planes. Despite dire warnings from the president, Saddam Hussein had at his fingertips neither the means nor the material to unleash deadly weapons of mass destruction on the world. Despite presidential rhetoric to the contrary, Iraq did not pose a grave and gathering menace to the security of the United States. The war in Iraq was nothing less than a manufactured war. It was a war served up to a deliberately misled and deluded American public to suit the neo- conservatives political agenda of the Bush White House.

It should not come as a surprise, but US President George Bush candidly admits that he does no read newspapers. He relies on his staff to give him the news, he said.

He told ABC news anchor Diane Sawyer in an interview on Wednesday: “I get my news from people who don’t editorialize. They give me the actual news, and it makes it easier to digest, on a daily basis, the facts.”

When asked by Ms Sawyer whether it was “just harder to read constant criticism or to read”, Mr Bush responded: “Why even put up with it when you can get the facts elsewhere? I’m a lucky man. I’ve got, it’s not just Condi (Condoleezza Rice, National Security Adviser) and Andy (Andy Card, the Chief of Staff), it’s all kinds of people in my administration who are charged with different responsibilities, and they come in and say this is what’s happening, this isn’t what’s happening.”

However, wife Laura Bush, who joined in the interview, said: “I read the newspapers.” But she prefers not to read columnists who are constantly criticizing the Bush administration.