Saarc book fair: not many titles to pick: DATELINE DHAKA

IT was expected to be a great event for the Dhaka readers, but it did not turn out to be one like that. It was the first Saarc book fair, held here in the last week of September. The fair that took place between Sept 26 and 29 disappointed many serious readers of the town as there were not many titles to choose from. Besides, the publishing houses from other countries, except from India, brought in books mostly in languages incomprehensible to the Dhaka readers.

Books were stacked tightly on the shelves. At some places they were even piled on the floor. Some people were seen thumbing through the pages to see if they really needed to buy the books. Some others, who had already a fair understanding of the titles or had visited the place before and made up their mind, were seen drawing out the books and approaching the cash counter. But for many serious readers, there were books, books everywhere, but not many titles to pick.

Forty-six publishing houses or publishers or booksellers’ associations from the Saarc countries took part. The Maldives and Bhutan were absent. There were 16 houses from India, including big names like Sahitya Akademi, Ananda Publishers and the Publication Division of the government of India.

Pakistan was represented by only two houses: the Oxford University Press and the Quran Calligraphic Research Project. There were six others — publishing houses or associations — from India, Pakistan, Nepal and Sri Lanka.

Bangladesh was represented by 22 publishing houses — Sahitya Prakash, Bangla Academy, Nazrul Institute, Islamic Foundation, University Press Ltd, Mowla Brothers, Student Ways, Shilpakala Academy, National Book Centre, etc.

The fair featured books of short stories, fiction, non-fiction, poems, biographies, computer science, taxation, primers, social development, etc, in Bangla, English, Hindi, Urdu, Nepali and Sinhalese.

According to a brochure, published by the organizer, India is the largest book-producing countries and the third in the production of books in English, after the USA and the UK. According to a recent survey, it produces about 60,000 titles every year in 18 languages. There are about 11,000 publishers in India.

The brochure describes Bangladesh as the only country in South Asia with a comprehensive national book policy, and said it produced 21,450 titles in 1996. The Pakistan book industry is reported to be just taking off, with 426 publishers. It produced 124 titles only in 1994. Sri Lanka produced 4,115 titles in 1996.

However, the contents and language of the foreign books brought in the fair showed that the publishers in other Saarc countries have no idea of the growing size of the Dhaka readership that looks for serious books by some world-class writers from India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka or the world-class writers of the subcontinent for that matter. “There is hardly any English- language book, fiction and non-fiction, by famous writers from Pakistan and Sri Lanka in the fair,” a disappointed reader murmured while getting out of the fair premises.

The Indians, however, brought a number of classics that received positive response from young readers. But the number was not adequate, given the number of aspirants for the books. The publishers, however, had explanation for this. “The fair was arranged on very short notice; but such an enterprise needs preparation,” as Tapas Roy, a member of the Federation of Indian Publishers, put it.

In addition, as most publishers said, there are hassles in taking books across the borders, specially due to customs procedures. “This is why we do not take as many books as we want across the borders. When we go to book fairs in India, we mostly do with the stock we have with our Indian partners. The same is the case with the Indian publishers. Most of the time they display the stock lying with the Bangladeshi partners here,” said the chief of a local publishing house.

Ahmad Ali Sheikh, convener of the Pakistan Publishers and Booksellers Association, said: “The arrangement of the fair was quite good, and we brought about 300 titles on Islamic studies, Pakistan studies, Quaid-i-Azam and other current affairs, but half of them remained unsold.”

It was only obvious specially when more than half of the Pakistani books were in Urdu, which could attract only a very few readers. There were English-language books, but they were hardly about Pakistan politics, culture or society of the day. There is a market in Dhaka for serious studies on Islamic politics, culture and feminist literature. But there were not many titles in English from Pakistan on the subject.

“The problem lies with the wrong assessment of our readers by Pakistani or most other foreign publishers. This is either their failure to understand the Bangladesh market, or a sort of indifference on their part,” observed a young Dhaka University teacher. “They brought mostly books printed in their own languages. Had they brought the works of their best writers, certainly the books would have been sold. Considering this, Indian publishers have done a good job.”

The Federation of Indian Publishers did not sell any books; they displayed them and, at the end of the fair, donated them to the University of Dhaka.

There were, however, certain positive aspects about the book fair. The organizer of the fair on the third day adopted the ‘Dhaka Declaration 2002 of the Saarc Book Development Council’ that resolved to work to facilitate trading in books among the Saarc countries.

It also resolved to help promote feminist literature, to help formulate and enforce laws to protect copyright and to ask the governments of the Saarc countries to exempt books from any kind of levies, duty or VAT, for free flow of books among these countries.

The Bangladesh Publishers Council, the organizer of the event, held seminars on the ‘access for book trade in South Asia’ and ‘disseminating South Asian feminist literature’ on Sept 27. The next day it held two seminars — one on the ‘awareness of the copyright act in South Asia’ and the other on ‘role of libraries in Saarc book development’ at the same place on Sept 28.

The second Saarc book fair will take place at New Delhi from Aug 23 to 31 next year.

No more than a state-of-the-art typing machine: DATELINE ISLAMABAD

WE are being made to believe that computers have become the in- thing in Pakistan, and the country is well on the way to an information technology revolution. Offices, no less so in the government sector, are increasingly being equipped with the latest state-of-the-art computers, servers and printers. The government has listed among its IT achievements the expansion of the Internet facility across the country and the establishment of new IT universities and new IT departments in the existing universities.

But, in reality, the IT revolution has yet to arrive in the country, and it is a deception to make the people think otherwise. Merely equipping an office or department with the latest computers and making the Internet facility more widely available to the public hardly constitute an IT revolution as such.

Even though the modern computer was first introduced in the country in the mid-’80s, and computer technology developed rapidly in the world through the ‘90s, the sad fact is that in many of our government offices the state-of-the-art computer has merely replaced the age-old manual typewriter. And apart from its use as a state-of-the-art typing machine, the office computer is also popular for such personal Internet use as e-mailing to relatives and friends, chatting and reading newspapers. This is a gross under-utilization of the modern computer, in addition to being a waste of precious national resources.

The Internet, whether surfed at home, in offices or in cyber cafes, is only an incidental use of the modern computer. The computer was invented mainly to help compute complex problems and organize mass and intricate databases. It was meant to be used as a tool for efficient office management. But until this day our government departments have not been able to develop the kind of computerized management system to help organize the mass of data, thus increasing efficiency and making information easily accessible to all those who need access to it.

Walk into any government department or local bank, and one will find a distinct lack of dependence on the computer in its dealings with the general public or among other departments. Be it the income-tax or immigration department, the electricity or gas department, government hospitals, the education sector or the police department, local banks or other finance organizations, apart from the computer that is usually found on “sahib’s” table, the computer has not become the necessary database in the working and running of these offices, as it is the case in many countries the world over and in some local private organizations.

Government offices generally are still dependent on the antiquated system of hard copy ledgers or registers to keep track of records. There are usually tens of such registers on the desks and stacks of them on the floor which the clerks or officers have to rummage through, in some cases hundreds of times every day, in order to check or update records, especially of members of the public with whom they deal with. These kinds of scenes are pathetic in this modern day and age where it is unthinkable for any modern office or finance institution to function at all, let alone efficiently, without computerized records.

Computerization has made it possible in this global IT age for monthly bills to be paid through cheques or better still through the giro system whereby money for utility bills is automatically deducted from the consumer’s bank account, as well as for purchases to be made with all kinds of credit card facility. Yet here Pakistanis have still to go physically to the bank to make each and every utility bill payment, resulting in long queues of people outside the bank, come rain or shine, waiting to pay their bills on the due dates every month.

The education sector, particularly tertiary education, which should have been one of the first sectors to experience the IT revolution, has been one of the slowest to computerize. Computers in our public sector universities are few, and worse still, many of these few computers are either not working or are not connected to the Internet.

No information about the universities can be retrieved on the computer because all records are still kept on manual files, be it student records, admission or examination results, or library references. As in many other government offices, the computer’s use in the academic sector is nothing more than a state-of-the-art typing machine.

Government hospitals are also badly in need of computerization so that the identity and information about the millions of patients that seek treatment there can be accessed and retrieved at the touch of the mouse. With authenticated records of the patients’ identity available on the computer, government service personnel and pensioners will not need to go through the lengthy and cumbersome procedure of referring to one department after the other, e.g. the ministry of health, their own offices and the AGPR, for reimbursement of medical treatment at government hospitals.

Nadra is the only government department that has undertaken the mammoth task of computerizing the National Identity Cards, although it has been confronted with a host of problems that reflect a lack of administrative understanding and management of the whole computerization process.

No attempt has been made by any other government office to computerize its data and records for smooth and efficient functioning. Yet government offices, state utility departments, hospitals and schools / colleges / universities particularly need such computerization since they deal a lot with the public and among each other and, therefore, handle a mass of data and information which can best be managed and organized through computerization.

It is not that government offices lack computers. There is actually a race to procure the latest Pentium IVs and PIV 2.2 GHz PCs. But had these computers been properly utilized as tools for efficient data storage and office management, the results would have been clearly visible by now in our government offices.

Young guns good for future of Pakistan: SWINGING DRIVES

ONCE ONE had got over the disappointment, a huge disappointment for Pakistan had come tantalisingly close to winning, one felt good for the future of Pakistan cricket. A new generation had arrived, young legs, fresh minds but most of all, self-belief.

One had expected something special from Shoaib Akhtar and being the showman that he is, he chose to encapsulate it in one over, the best single over I have seen bowled by a Pakistani fast bowler, Ponting, Mark Waugh and Adam Gilchrist blown away and the Test match turned on its head.

But it was Faisal Iqbal who played the shot of the match when he arrived at the wicket in the first innings. He took two steps down the wicket and he hit Shane Warne over the top for a one-bounce four. It was a shot that had pedigree written all over it.

One could imagine his uncle, Javed Miandad jumping out of his chair. It was the sort of shot that Miandad himself would have played to scatter the gloom that hung over the Pakistan innings.

For too long has Faisal Iqbal carried the baggage of being Miandad’s nephew. It has worked against him. Being cynical and an uncharitable lot, we could not accept that he was an immensely gifted batsman in his own right. He has now broken free and the young lad is here to stay. Had he had someone to partner him after Younis Khan was out, Pakistan might have won the Test. He was my man-of-the-match.

The Test match had begun badly for Pakistan because the team selection was flawed. If, for whatever reason, Shahid Afridi was not in Colombo but Danish Kaneria was there. Pakistan was one spinner short and one fast bowler too many.

In the end, it did not prove too costly but Australia did look like getting to 600 and Saqlain Mushtaq had to do a dual job, attack as well as contain. Just as well he was on song and he teamed up with Shoaib Akhtar to mop up the tail. But this is now history and we should concentrate on the positives. Pakistan’s problem has been the absence of reliable openers. In the first innings, Imran Nazir and Taufiq Umar were a bundle of nerves and they both failed to get off the mark.

In the second innings, it was a different story. Admittedly Imran Nazir had his share of luck. The Australian slip fielders, indeed proved to be good samaritans in both the Pakistan innings.

But once he had settled down, Imran Nazir looked good. Taufiq Umar was not just solid but he was, at times, magnificent. He has the making of a fine opener, in both versions of the game.

I fail to understand why Abdul Razzaq has to be made a sacrificial lamb. His rightful place in the batting order is in the middle. There is no reason at all why Younis should not be coming at one-down. In that batting line-up, he is the most accomplished. That’s where he should be batting.

In the second innings, the openers had given Pakistan an excellent start. Younis should have come in and Razzaq saved to bolster the middle. After such a heartwarming performance, this may seem to be nit-picking. But there are two Test matches still to be played. Pakistan must get the basics right. Pakistan will feel more at home in Sharjah and it’s a happy hunting ground.It will still be hot but the humidity factor will not be that high and it’s not likely to rain. There may even be more people at ground to watch the matches. The Colombo test match deserved a full house.

It was a terrific game of cricket and the Australians were certainly surprised how hard a young and inexperienced side fought and come so close to toppling them off the pedestal.

Wasim Akram and Saeed Anwar chose not to play in the series against Australia because they needed ‘rest’. I was, therefore, a little surprised to see that both of them had scooted-off to Cardiff to play in an indoor match with some ridiculous format.

This would not be my idea of rest. Saeed Anwar may well have lost his place in the team to Taufiq Umar. I cannot say that Wasim Akram too has lost his place but I would certainly like him to be further ‘rested’ when Pakistan tours Zimbabwe next month.

There is some disappointment that Misbah-ul-Haq did not make too much of a contribution. But he will have to learn the hard way. He may have tonked Shane Warne for a couple of sixes in Nairobi but that was a one-day game and this was a Test match.

But he’s a good player, good enough, one hopes, to learn from his mistakes. The same would apply to Imran Nazir. He should be made to look at the video of the way he got out in both the innings. May be Pybus will have more luck with him than Mudassar Nazar did.

A vote for self-reliance or civil society!

THE WAVE of despondency is so widespread today that it is quite pertinent to ponder on the question whether our writers and intellectuals were really aware what the elections — particularly tomorrow’s elections — signify.

It is one thing to regard the elections-2002 under the shadow of the LFO and hence going to elect a parliament whose sovereign character has been trimmed, but it was heartening to listen to the arguments put forward by some writers and intellectuals at Hamdard Shoora’s session on elections the other day that there was no need to be congenitally pessimist and start imagining the skies to fall.

I was enthused by the fact that some men and women of goodwill went to the extent that the parties which have been promising everything under the sun should be questioned about their ‘resource-mobilization’ plan to implement their programme. They should be inquired about the hidden magic wand which they intend to press into service. It is quite comic to imagine that an alliance of religious parties has promised marriages of all the marriageable girls hoping that the majority of the affected population would surely feel attracted to this provision. They hope that out of the plus 70 million voters, more than 20 per cent votes will be in the bag of the Alliance by virtue of this gimmick alone.

I searched for the views of our well-known writers and intellectuals on the Elections. Starting from the booklet on Basic Democracy which had the views of Maulvi Abdul Haq, Qudratullah Shahab, Majeed Mufti, Shahid Ahmed Dehlavi, and Ibne- Insha etc. etc. it was really depressing that some writers ignored the fact that the 1956 and the 1962 constitutions were based on the principles of inequity. They sought to convert the majority of East Pakistan into a minority through the clever device of Parity — which was nothing but a grave injustice — and all those writers who had endorsed the Basic Democracy had, in a way, paved the way for the thinking behind the book Friends Not, Masters written as a rebuttal to Friends, Not Masters. One could see what a great difference a comma could do if placed after Not instead of after Friends.

I vividly remember Habib Jalib’s famous lines on the 1962 Elections and some other writings of truly democratic writers of the country and a thesis entitled Pakistani Shaeri Ka Mutalea Samaji Maashi Aur Siasi Tanazur Mein approved for doctorate by the University of Karachi in 1992, does full justice to the spurt of anti-Basic Democracy System. Later on, the electoral college was expanded from 80,000 to 150,000 but the scars which it created burst open and became unmanageable in 1971.

We should not try to find scapegoats for the creation of Bangladesh. The constitutions of 1956 and 1962 should serve as the monuments of our apathy to national unity. Even the creation of One-Unit — the linchpin of 1956 Constitution — served to provide more seats to the minority provinces of the newly formed province of West Pakistan and the comic situation is that the anti-One Unit agitation in West Pakistan lacked one slogan: “we reject the ‘gift’ of additional seats which have come to us at the expense of national unity.”

I believe that we could pay some attention to what some progressive writers thought along with a voice from a camp which was neither Right or Left. That voice believed in the Right or Wrong. I have late Hakim Mohammed Said in mind. It was a plea to treat elections as a mark of beginning of Pakistan’s reconstruction and an appeal to cast our votes in 1997 Election only for the learned, only for a true human being and a believer in equity and justice with a view to bringing about a social revolution. What was said for the 1997 elections was said, albeit differently, by the Shoora Think-tank the other day and the voters instead of sitting back home, should definitely cast their votes to someone from their constituency who, according to them, should be shade better than the others.

What I am sharing with my readers holds true, perhaps, for all. I have gone through certain publications — even the periodicals upholding progressive thought seem despairing of the Elections 2002. In fact, there is no use throwing up our arms in despair and say ‘Who to Vote for’. Someone having the least resources could possibly appear to be the one who could be good enough to deserve our vote but lacking the resources to reach us.

My thought also goes to Ashfaq Saleem Mirza — a well-known social scientist, who has asked us to beware of the guiles of the advocates of Civil Society. He says in his paper the Civil Society, A Re-Examination that it was yet another euphemistic expression for a dyed-in-the-wool capitalistic society. The term was first introduced in Germany by Hegel. Germany of those times, being a predominately agrarian society, was fast emerging into a phase of early industrialization. Before Hegel, Adam Ferguson wrote an essay on ‘History of Civil Society’, where the expression Civil Society was used as an antithesis of primitive society and Adam Smith had used the term ‘Civilized Society’ in this context.

My plea — in respect of the coming elections — is that the candidates using the term ‘Civil Society’ would like to make us believe that we were, perhaps, an uncivilized society and hence they would seek to tame us — try to make us civilized. Not so is the case really. I would like to believe that if our parties, all along believing in the social transformation through a drastic equitable system, had the organization, methodology and cadre to take the voters along, we could be nearer to the desired change. Alas, the opportunity offered by the 1971 Election was frittered away and some of the measures — particularly the nationalization (which was a euphemistic expression for bureaucratization) took the hope of economic emancipation far, far away from us. As a consequence we fell into the mire of economic chaos brought about by the conscious choice of wrong priorities.

I started with Hamdard Shoora’s session on Elections and am ending up on Ashfaq Saleem Mirza’s criticism of the concept of Civil Society which some candidates are using as the best argument in their bag.

Could we then bring about an end to poverty as some notable parties and alliances are claiming to achieve if they were voted to power through promoting the cause of Civil Society? I am sure that the elections will be over by tomorrow morning but our writers and intellectuals should give a serious thought to the question and try to know what this wonderful coinage of the term ‘Civil Society’ in our election Campaign 2002 seeks to achieve.

More poverty, perhaps through globalization!