‘Pakistan is at the meeting point of Central Asian, Iranian, Arab, Indian and African cultures. Therefore, we must be proud of our diverse heritage and make the most of it,’ says Dr Adam Nayyar
PAKISTAN already has a cultural face; we just have to unveil it in a purposeful way. Since this face is not the countenance of a Na mehram, we can do away with this hijab, says cultural anthropologist, ethnomusicologist and Director of Lok Virsa, Dr Adam Nayyar.
Strange as it may sound, Dr Nayyar is a trained engineer. But while he was at Heidelberg, he realized the rich cultural diversity of his own country and decided to concentrate on cultural studies, the field in which he now specializes.
In an interview with Dawn Magazine, Dr Nayyar talked about current cultural issues facing Pakistan. The following are the excerpts:
Q. It is said that culture creates a bond between communities. What should be done so that culture could be appreciated more widely in this country?
A. Unfortunately, culture can also break bonds between communities. We need to support and enhance those aspects of culture that create these bonds. We also need to nurture the vulnerable and marginalized parts of our culture and show our strong displeasure for obscurantist policies and practices that denigrate our culture. European Christians used to burn heretics, the Chinese used to bind the feet of their women and we have the horrid and reprehensible custom of karo-kari, among many others. Let’s get rid of these through state power. Chinese women are now happy without bound feet and heretic-burning is not common in Europe anymore. As a result, people are happier.
Q. How would you define culture? Is it there to impose uniformity, considering that there are misconceptions and controversies about the subject?
A. There is no quick answer to the definition of culture, and you will find hundreds of definitions. A concise definition of culture is the human response to nature, history and environment. The world conference on cultural policies in 1982 adopted the definition that culture was “the whole complex of distinctive spiritual, material, intellectual and emotional features that characterize a society or social group. It includes not only arts and letters, but also modes of life, the fundamental rights of the human being, value systems, traditions and beliefs.” Fortunately, there is always controversy in culture, because culture cannot survive without stimulating controversies. Imposition of uniformity is not the purpose — the real purpose is to create unity in diversity. I remember several years ago, a Turkish singer sang an Urdu song here in Islamabad: Rang barange phoolon ka guldasta Pakistan (Pakistan is a bouquet of many-coloured flowers). We are at the meeting point of Central Asian, Iranian, Arab, Indian and even African cultures. We must be proud of our diverse heritage and make the most of it. In fact, Pakistan could become an enlightened moderator between these cultures by virtue of its history, openness, sensitivity and geo-strategic position.
Q. President Musharraf, while opening the Lok Virsa Ethnological Museum said that Pakistan needed a cultural face. I assume he was asking for a well thought out cultural policy. So, does Pakistan have a cultural policy? In case it has one, do you think culture should be state-directed, or should the state restrict itself to funding cultural activities?
A. I would say that Pakistan already has a cultural face; we just have to unveil it in a purposeful way. Since this face is not a Na mehram, we can do away with this hijab in any case.
As far as cultural policy is concerned, I’ll take the lead from Article 28 of Pakistan’s Constitution, which says that any section of citizens having a distinct language, script or culture shall have the right to preserve and promote the same and subject to law, establish institutions for that purpose. There you have it; unity in diversity enshrined in our Constitution. People who try to kill our diversity through sectarian, linguistic or ethnic arrogance are defacing our culture.
Cultural policy as a specific subject for the government of Pakistan has only three main documents:
1. The first and only reasonable document to emerge on cultural policy in Pakistan’s history is the Faiz Ahmed Faiz report released in 1975. Faiz was also the person who laid the foundations of the Heritage Museum almost three decades ago and his dream has come to fruition through a generous grant for the museum by the president.
2. Twenty years later in 1995, there was the “cultural policy of Pakistan”. This slim document has very enlightened parts, but is shot through with polemics, bombast and reactive statements. Its prescriptive elements are fairly disorganized and fragmented, and its implementation fell victim to procedural and internal wrangling.
3. Most recently — early this year — there was a national seminar on cultural tourism, to which cultural policy was added on as an adjunct. The document emanating from the seminar provides very little as far as the development of a cogent cultural policy is concerned. What it does provide is a policy on cultural tourism, apart from being a very valuable reference work on a few specific elements of culture. But cultural tourism is not all about culture, as culture is much more than just commerce.
I personally believe that culture is not fast food. There are certain aspects of culture that the public sector must own and support, particularly the vulnerable parts of our heritage. Culture is a delicate plant that has to be nurtured through progressive public policy, which should include elements of culture for education, cultural diplomacy and fostering philanthropy in the field of culture.
Cultural policy is not static, but must evolve adaptively and be dynamic, refining itself with each iteration. All this — and much more — can be done only by a standing committee on cultural policy, which has inputs from all the stakeholders.
Barring a few exceptions, our corporate sector lacks maturity. I also believe that giving our cultural treasures in an unregulated manner to the corporate sector will cheapen them severely and expose them to rank commercialism. If you want the Lahore Fort festooned with advertisements for tobacco and coffee, then do go ahead and privatize culture without regulation.
What can be done is to encourage good taste in entrepreneurs, to show them that it is more prestigious to sponsor a cultural event or a museum than to add yet another Pajero to their fleet; to show them that it is more elegant to modestly indicate their contribution in a small space than to flaunt their munificence in massive banners. This must be encouraged by the state by specifically providing generous tax rebates for cultural inputs by the corporate sector.
The cultural de facto policy is, for all practical purposes, alienated from the people. The aspirations of the community, the wishes and opinions of the people, are interpreted by various mediators, while the people themselves and the communities they live in, still constitute the raison d’etre of cultural institutions and have no say in the matter whatsoever.
The alienation of cultural policy from the people and their communities is further aggravated by the practice followed by budget-administrative agencies and political forums, which make decisions as anonymous and amorphous bodies hidden beneath the general authority of the state, and do not have to be accountable to the public for the policies they pursue. In the hierarchy, these agencies are considered much more as being responsible to higher administrative instances and political forums than to society or the community in which they function. Final decisions on awards for art and culture are often made by officials with no training in either art or culture.
Such a situation has a direct bearing on the assessment and evaluation of cultural actions and artistic results. The creative effort, which is the heart and soul of any culture, is thus exposed to strong subjective influence, because evaluation is carried out without any public control or influence in a ‘closed forum’ and administrative circles on the basis of undefined criteria on which the public is inadequately informed. Any concrete decisions made by forums and administrative bodies, relative to culture, ranging from those laying down cultural policy and determining its priorities or specific development plans, to those financing individual cultural institutions, cultural initiatives, performance of musical concerts, allocation of grants, are of an authoritarian, insensitive and unsensitzed nature.
The long-term solution for both federal and provincial governments is to bring culture and education together under one ministry, as is the case in most advanced and developed countries. Given that most of our population is under 18 years of age, this will ensure that our future generations will be more enlightened and tolerant, rather than becoming bigoted professionals with no cultural training.
Q. Again, President Musharraf has been asking for enlightened moderation. You have also recently written an article on the issue. So, in your opinion, does culture have a role to bring about this enlightenment, and how do you suggest this could be achieved?
A. I think some progress has been made in the recent past that we can be cautiously optimistic about. A major potential breakthrough for culture is the new Local Bodies Ordinance, which I think needs to be amended and refined by parliament on the advice of a panel of cultural experts, particularly in Section 41. You will have to excuse me for getting technical here, but we’re talking about a very serious issue.
Baseline cultural databases are essential for community life in the districts of Pakistan. The Local Government Ordinance 2001, Section 39(j) provides for the administration of cultural events and Section 76(a) provides for socio-economic surveys. Building on these provisions, a district cultural resource mapping unit under the provincial government may be instituted for support to the districts. Cultural activity and sustained cultural action in a district would form the nucleus of a variegated and diverse national culture.
PTV National is a new channel that builds bridges of understanding between our diverse cultures and languages. This channel has the potential for becoming an enlightened moderator that breaks down linguistic and cultural prejudices. Right now, this channel is feeling its way across the cultural landscape, and needs more of a guiding light by social scientists. And I believe that the state should come down with a heavy hand on individuals and groups of individuals that militate against the creators of traditional culture, as has recently been happening in the NWFP. These are delicate and vulnerable subcultures of society that will disappear if suppressed, taking with them the profound and unique heritage that has taken centuries to evolve.
Q. What has been the place of folklore in determining the cultural outlook of its people? Is the new Ethnological Heritage Museum a promise towards redeeming cultural heritage? Is the museum all inclusive or is there something missing?
A. Folklore — both secular and devotional — is the living expression of the people of Pakistan. The Heritage Museum has the national task of storing, preserving, documenting and presenting the folklore of Pakistan, both as an affirmation of national identity and as a projection of our image internationally. Much remains to be done, but it is a good beginning. Most importantly, this museum must primarily have an educational function with strong state subsidies, and should never be viewed solely as a profit-making enterprise, which some quarters are proposing. That defeats the purpose of education and research and is not the purpose of a National Heritage Museum. “National” cannot be “private”.
We have a wealth of folklore that would also enhance our international outreach. For example, African-Pakistanis are a million-strong community in Balochistan and Sindh that could be instrumental in cementing our ties to African countries. Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan’s Punjabi qawwali broke through international boundaries and showed that Pakistan is a creative nation and not a gun-toting culture our enemies purport us to be.
Q. What should be the people’s contribution to that process? It is a known fact that only the rich are able to contribute to that process, considering that there are vast underprivileged hinterland in Pakistan and we have not been able to rehabilitate the old purveyors of culture, like musicians or itinerant folk singers or the village artisans, who do not have an outlet for marketing their products? What should be done about them? Do you have a plan for assessing the country’s arts products?
A. This is a great dilemma. It is true that most of our dancers, musicians and artisans live in poverty and something drastic needs to be done about their rehabilitation. However, there is a danger: the minute we begin to encourage marketing of cultural products, we shall be at the mercy of market forces which will penetrate and transform the traditional culture into something that sells better, but is no longer either authentic or Pakistani. But people cannot eat or live off authenticity — authenticity needs support.
I believe preserving the best examples of the original form through government subsidies is one of the solutions. Equally important is to change the mindset of people poisoned by a caste-like disdain for artisans and performers, who are the most enlightened and moderate cultural citizens of Pakistan and real soldiers in the fight to preserve our culture against daunting odds.
Q. Globalization is going to affect Pakistan in a big way. What should Pakistan propose as far as intangible culture goes? How do we preserve it?
A. Pakistan has voted in favour of Unesco’s International Convention on “Intangible Cultural Heritage”. The proposed convention defines intangible heritage as oral traditions, music, verbal expressions of language, performing arts, rituals and celebrations, craftsmanship, and systems of folk knowledge about nature and the universe. The aim of this convention is to extend support to local cultural traditions so that they can survive and thrive despite rampant globalization. For the convention to become international law, another step remains: at least 30 nations must ratify it and Pakistan is going to do so.
The convention would require Pakistan to treat our intangible heritage on completely equal footing with our material cultural heritage. However, the situation on the ground is very different: the document that launched the national seminar on cultural tourism and cultural policy is biased in favour of archaeological sites, historic buildings and monuments and gives short shrift to our intangible heritage — a disquieting imbalance.
However, there is light at the end of the tunnel, at least for classical music. At the closing of the national seminar on the revival of classical music in Pakistan held in December 2003, the then finance minister — now our prime minister — promised to liberate resources for a proposed Roshan Ara Begum Fund. I sincerely hope that now that he is our prime minister, he will keep his word and ensure a very generous contribution to this fund to sustain this threatened art of ours.
‘Pakistan is at the meeting point of Central Asian, Iranian, Arab, Indian and African cultures. Therefore, we must be proud of our diverse heritage and make the most of it,’ says Dr Adam Nayyar 
