| November 27, 2007 | Tuesday | Ziqa’ad 16, 1428 |
The continuing fall of Urdu humour
Hasty decisions continue to backfire on Pakistan
ABOUT three decades ago, Urdu humour basked at the height of its glory. Those were the days. Stalwarts such as Shafiq-ur-Rehman, Col Mohammed Khan, Ibn-e-Insha, Mohammed Khalid Akhter, Zameer Jafri, Siddiq Salik and Ibrahim Jalees in Pakistan and Fikr Taunsvi, Ahmed Jamal Pasha and Kanhaiya Lal Kapoor across the border were alive and creating delightful humour.
EUROPEAN Union leaders are set to hold a series of high-level meetings with their counterparts from China and India next week in a bid to upgrade the 27-nation bloc’s relationship with Asia’s key rising economic powerhouses.
Prospects for a qualitative leap forward in EU-Asian relationships are good. Leaders in both regions are in buoyant mood, sparking hope that the upcoming meetings will be more than purely routine and symbolic.
Much still divides Europe and Asia, however. As such, giving real substance to Europe-Asian relations will require hard work, patience and vision.
Certainly, the omens for success have never been better. Having resolved their bitter wrangles over reforming the bloc, EU leaders will be heading for talks with increasingly assertive Asian nations in confident mode.
EU policymakers want discussions at all three upcoming encounters to focus on the bloc’s demands for stronger Asian moves to end political repression in Burma, European concerns at continuing political upheaval in Pakistan and EU insistence that Asian countries must take on binding commitments to cut gas house emissions to fight global warming.
Asians too are in better shape to stake out their positions than ever before. China is even more self-assured after the 17th Peoples Party Congress while India has entered the 60th year of independence with a flourish, basking in international recognition of its newfound economic strengths and its growing role both within the region and on the global stage.
However, while the political mood on both sides is conducive to forging stronger political and economic bonds, much still divides the two regions.
For one, for all their renewed political self-confidence following last month’s agreement on a reform treaty, the 27 EU nations remain consumed by doubts and anxiety over the future economic direction of the bloc. Discussions on the impact of globalisation on European jobs and investments invariably focus on the threat posed by the rising economic might of Asian countries, especially China and India.
The EU-China summit in Beijing on Nov 28 risks being a specially acrimonious affair. As China’s trade surplus with the European Union grows by $20 million an hour, EU governments are stepping up complaints that an undervalued yuan threatens their economies by hurting exporters.
The lobbying for a stronger yuan has intensified with Luxembourg Prime Minister Jean- Claude Juncker and European Central Bank President Jean-Claude Trichet joining forces to demand a re-evaluation of the Chinese currency.
China’s commitments “regarding exchange-rate flexibility should lead to an accelerated appreciation” of the yuan, say EU officials, adding that failure to change “risks triggering protectionist tendencies that mayaffect EU-China economic relations.”
The disparity in trade between China and Europe is already fanning tensions. The EU is investigating whether to impose tariffs on Chinese exports ranging from mandarin oranges to bolts amid accusations they are being sold in Europe below domestic prices or production costs. European steelmakers are also asking regulators to tax steel imports from China.
EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson is demanding that Beijing make a “major change” on investment restrictions, red-tape barriers for EU companies, and counterfeiting, or risk tougher action by Brussels.
“We do not intend to turn away from dialogue and cooperation. What we will do is treat China as a normal trading partner in the future, especially by enforcing rules where necessary,” Mandelson said in a statement before leaving for the EU-China summit on Nov 28.
“We need a major change in China’s approach to our trading relationship in order to achieve tangible results on market access, intellectual property rights enforcement and curbing overcapacity,” Mandelson said in a statement.
“We do not intend to turn away from dialogue and cooperation. What we will do is treat China as a normal trading partner in the future, especially by enforcing rules where necessary,” he added.
So far the EU has been less active than the US in suing China at the World Trade Organisation. But Mandelson has suggested on several occasions that Europe’s patience is wearing thin as its trade deficit with China soars and European exporters complain of a range of barriers to doing business in the Asian powerhouse economy.
The EU-India summit on Nov 28 will also highlight that EU patience with Indian trade policy is wearing thin. Delhi’s refusal to slash industrial tariffs in the Doha Round trade negotiations remains a major source of tension in EU-India relations. In addition, EU officials are angry about Indian non-tariff barriers, licensing requirements and complicated customs procedures which they say keep out European products.
Key divergences exist in European and Asian approaches to dealing with regional and global hotspots. EU governments want China and India to use their influence to press for democracy in Burma. Officials in Brussels recognise that China has worked behind the scenes to wreak a change in the military junta’s hardline rule.
But there is enormous dismay at the failure of India, as the world’s largest democracy, to take a tougher stance against repression and human rights violations in Burma.
The over-arching EU concern is that Asian governments, with their huge military budgets and traditional focus on US “hard power”, do not really understand — or respect — Europe’s “soft power” crisis-management tools of trade, aid and diplomacy.
Bridging this gap and easing rising EU-Asia trade tensions will not be easy. Clearing up misunderstandings, improving contacts, building mutual trust and respect will take time and effort. A stronger relationship between Europe and Asia with its potential for easing global economic and political tensions will be worth the effort, however.
Some other notable Urdu humorists such as Mushtaq Ahmed Yousufi in Pakistan and Mujtaba Hussain and Yousuf Nazim in India were also contributing towards raising the standards of Urdu humour with their crisp writings. Today, the last three are just about the only ones carrying the burden.
Urdu humour has a long history. It attained its current status and standards of refinement gradually and over the centuries. In the last quarter of the last century, Urdu humour touched the pinnacle of its glory but the humour being written today is only a shadow of its former self.
Other than the names mentioned earlier, there are hardly any humorists today about whom it can be said without the fear of being contradicted that they are writing good humour or raising the standards of Urdu humour. And in Pakistan, Yousufi is perhaps the best humorist ever produced by the Urdu language, and is the only humorist to reckon with but it’s been about 17 years since he published his last book Aab-i-Gum.
Of course, there are some other good humorists but they do not write good humour consistently. A few praiseworthy newspaper columns or essays and they are back to their usual mediocre humour written under compulsion for newspapers. Some of them take vulgar jokes to be a substitute for humour. Such jokes not only adorn their so-called humour columns but even in the mushairas, these self-appointed humorists proudly recite versified dirty jokes in the name of humorous poetry, totally ignoring the presence of women and children. It is not only bad humour or bad poetry, it is bad taste bordering on vulgarity.
Aside from the mediocrity of the writers, there are other reasons behind the falling standards in Urdu humour. In one of his articles, Vazeer Agha wrote some 20 years ago that “rapidly changing social and political circumstances have made it more difficult to write humour as the jocularity of the ridiculous has become uncertain. The humorist is aiming with the bow and arrow but cannot shoot the arrow as the target is moving fast.”
What he said two decades ago is even more relevant in today’s world. Commenting on an issue has become riskier because there is a paradigm shift before the humorist even takes a stance. The end of the cold war era brought about a drastic change in the world. The enemies of yesterday are today’s friends. Yesterday’s Mujahids are today’s terrorists. What was once hilarious is a cold reality today. The jokes about communism have become duds as former communist societies have opted for market economies.
What used to be the butt of jokes and an easy target for humorists is either extinct today or has changed so much that some humorous essays of the past now need editorial notes since most of new readers are unaware of the backdrop against which these pieces were written.
There are quite a few good Urdu humorists of the younger generation but they do not quite reach the standards set in the last 50 years or so by their predecessors. Dr Younus Butt is amongst the most promising but he depends heavily on word-play and pun. As if copying English one-liners was not enough, Younus Butt has started plagiarising from Mushtaq Ahmed Yousufi. A recent critical study of Mushtaq Ahmed Yousufi’s works, tracing Yousufi’s influence on Butt, has mentioned this plagiarism in unambiguous terms.
Some other good modern humorists of Urdu are prey to exactly the same ailments that plague those who compose humorous poetry: mistaking explicit sex content for decent humour, as it is a sure-fire way of provoking mirth which in turn guarantees popularity at mushairas.
Today’s Urdu humour rests on the shoulders of Yousufi who has traditionally written well, albeit sparsely. His Indian counterpart, Mujtaba Hussain, is rather more prolific and as a result, suffers from occasional lapses in quality as well.
— drraufparekh@yahoo.com
THE early morning tremor on the final day of the first Test was real scary stuff as the ground under my hotel rumbled and the walls of my room appeared to swing. Luckily, no damage was done and things normalised after twenty life-threatening seconds.
For the Pakistan cricketers, however, the tremor at Feroz Shah Kotla had already rocked them a night earlier as they squandered a golden opportunity to add substantially to their 167-run lead with five wickets in hand on the fourth morning.
From the very first over, when Kamran Akmal played an unwarranted slash off Zaheer Khan, to the silly run out of lastman Danish Kaneria, it was a most reckless display by a team already short on firepower in every department of the game.
We all know that the present lot depends entirely on three men - Mohammad Yousuf, Younus Khan and Shoaib Akhtar. The batsmen failed but Shoaib did go on to prove that with little bit of discipline and controlled aggression, he could still be a force.
He bowled beautifully in both the innings to pick up four wickets in the match but unfortunately without much support except from debutant Sohail Tanvir on the second day. What I fail to understand is that why Pakistan chose to play seven batsmen and only four bowlers of which one was a debutant and another making a rusty comeback to international circuit after almost a year?
The captain, Shoaib Malik was not in the frame at all as a bowler as he kept himself away knowing well that he would make little impact when it mattered most. As a batsman too, he has a chancy existence and is very lucky indeed to be the captain of Pakistan.
I firmly believe that if six batsmen can not deliver the goods, playing the seventh one is a lottery. Rarely do such tactics work at Test level.
One really wonders what sort of planning the tour selectors have in mind about the team composition.
What is more baffling to me is the fact that a man of Shahid Afridi’s ability was asked to pack up and go home. Another mindless decision was to send back talented youngster Fawad Alam who could have been a useful backup on the tour. And why a man of Asim Kamal’s quality is constantly shoved aside on such an important tour is just anybody’s guess. In matter of selection of the team, national interest should be paramount rather than personal grudges.
The extension of captaincy for Shoaib Malik was rather a hasty decision. One swallow does not make the summer and the officials of the board should have had a bit of patience and waited for the right moment.
For a keen eye, Pakistan’s defeat was not unexpected. Test cricket we know is a hard grind and only those succeed who choose the right path to walk on.