A novel on Karachi
The Progressive Writers’ Movement was at its height in the decade that preceded the subcontinent’s partition.
If a sensitive young person were living in Lucknow — one of the major centres of the movement and the cultural capital of northern India— there was a good chance that he could be bitten by the literary bug. This is what happened to Shaukat Siddiqi. He started with poetry, besides continuing to pursue his other interest — the writing of short stories.
A couple of weeks ago, a group of writers went to see Shaukat Siddiqi at his residence in Karachi. Lately, he was hospitalized and was convalescing. During the chit-chat, he disclosed that his first love was poetry. Incidentally, a day before, he had received a photocopy of one of his verses published in a prestigious monthly “Shahrah” of 1950.
But, poetry was not his cup of tea. In any case, he didn’t expect to get paid for writing poems. A family man, uprooted and resourceless, he needed hard cash to survive in Karachi. Employed by a city daily, he began writing the serialized novel “Khuda ki Basti” in order to supplement his meagre salary. He continued writing stories and got acknowledged as a popular fiction writer. His insight into the socio-cultural life of southern Punjab helped him to write a novel called “Jangloos”. He also wrote a story about tribal Balochistan.
Most of his characters belong to Karachi and its underworld.
Despised by some, the poorly governed and virtually ungovernable city of Karachi offers an inexhaustible source of material that supplies the impulse for the writing of fiction. So Shaukat Siddiqi is looking forward to write another novel, as soon as he recovers.
Meanwhile, another writer, also a poet, Anwer Ahsan Siddiqui, has produced a novel “Lahoo phir tapka”. He too was a witness to the rapid growth of the sleepy sea-side town of Karachi into a mega city. Chronologically, it starts more or less from where Shaukat’s novel concluded — from 1948-49 to 1971-72. Korangi, Orangi, Banaras Chowk, Bihar and Aligarh Town and the living quarters of the migrant Bangladeshi population supply material for the novel’s new chapters. It introduces, besides selfless persons, characters familiar to most of us, like a greedy land grabber and a petty officer running after money.
A lot of stories have been written on Karachi, particularly of the days when riots and killings were the order of the day.
Dr Jamil Jalibi at a function once remarked that the ‘dastaan’ of Karachi would always remain untold. He, too, has been a witness to the demographic explosion of the city, and its environmental degradation. Every street and corner of the city has a story to tell, of love, toil and tears.
A prolific poet, critic and a literary journalist, Mr Jazib Qureshi launched his collection of ghazals a few days back. His writing career spans over 50 years, and one should not suppose that ‘Jazib ki ghazlain’ is all that he has to offer. A couple of years back, he came out with two separate omnibus collections of his poetry and prose writings — Pehchaan, his poetry book, and ‘Takhleeqi Awaz, compilation of critical writings. Each volume, spread over more than 1,000 pages, was supposed to be his (unfinished) collected works.
Bulky as these volumes are and not easy to handle, he has now thought it proper to republish the original lightweight volumes possibly with some additions — hence, the present book. Other books are in the offing.
Leafing through a literary journal, published from Karachi, I came across the following lines by a writer based in New York:
“Perhaps you might be knowing that the procession of Muharram marches through Park Avenue in Manhattan, exactly like the jaloos in Karachi. This practice here is traditional, going back 14 years.
“Iraq is being constantly attacked. People with foresight are against it. A few months ago, Mrs Bush invited poets to the White House to recite their poems. The poets said that they would recite poems opposing the war. The invitations to the poets were withdrawn. The poets soon after held their programmes at other place under the title — Not fit for the White House”.
An example of resistance poetry!
Visit of security experts an exercise in futility
THE very nature of terrorism makes a strike or an attack unpredictable. Terrorism is now global and it is impossible to determine which country or city is more dangerous. The United States issues a daily terrorist alert, rather like the weather report. Yet no sports tournament has been cancelled. The US Open concluded only days ahead of the second anniversary of 9/11.
I write this in the context of visits of security teams who come to Pakistan to determine themselves whether a venue is safe or not. It is really an exercise in futility. Security is the responsibility of the host. During the World Cup 2003, England refused to play in Zimbabwe and New Zealand in Nairobi.
These were shamelessly political decisions. In England’s case, the safety of its players had nothing to do with its decision not to play in Zimbabwe. It was political, a sort of anti-Mugabe statement. I had written at that time that teams refusing to adhere to the World Cup programme should be disqualified.
As I write this a team from South Africa is in Pakistan checking up on security arrangements particularly in Karachi and Peshawar. What will such a team learn that our own security people don’t know? Recently there were two major bomb blasts in Mumbai. Does this make Mumbai an unsafe city for hosting a Test match or a One-day International? I don’t think anyone will suggest this.
Why then should Karachi and Peshawar be made a special case for scrutiny? If it wasn’t such a serious business, the exercise in futility would also be pretty silly. The ICC which has set up an anti-corruption unit could also set up a security unit and it would save the various boards from sending their own teams.
The ICC remained pretty silent when Australia had refused to tour Pakistan. The perceived security threat was bogus. Australia is a part of the ‘axis of good’ in the war on terror, the US and Britain being the other two. In the wake of 9/11 the terrorist threat had to be magnified and Islamic militancy had to be vilified. Pakistan is a Muslim country and, therefore, under suspicion.
The refusal of Australia to play in Pakistan was a part of the propaganda to highlight global terrorism. It was a political decision and cricket got caught in the cross-fire.
The Bangladesh tour is drawing to a close and contrary to expectations, Bangladesh proved to be tough opponents and can consider itself somewhat unlucky. One does not want to comment on umpiring decisions for the mystique of cricket still rests on the proposition that the umpires are the best judge of whether a batsman is out or not out. If doubts begin to creep up about the integrity or competence of umpires then cricket becomes a different ball game.
But TV technology makes it possible to see and hear what the umpire may not but then that technology is not available to the umpire. In the Faisalabad ODI, one felt that Yousuf Youhana was caught behind when he was on 77. I can’t vouchsafe for it, so did Youhana. The batsman always knows when he gets a nick. Should he have walked?
I would have answered this question differently when I first started to do cricket commentary. But times have changed and though I may not approve of some of the changes, they have be accepted as part of the present day morality. If he had walked, he would, in a sense, be undermining the authority of the umpire and in other circumstances might have been guilty of bringing the game into disrepute.
Bangladesh will return home richer for the experience. What about Pakistan? There was a certain ambivalence about our attitude to the tour. We saw it as an opportunity to blood young players, at the same time knowing that against South Africa we would have to play our best team irrespective of the policy to carry forward the re-building process.
As far as the team is concerned, as a combination or a unit, we will be at square-one. Shoaib Akhtar will be back and he will team up with Mohammad Sami. Saqlain Mushtaq cannot or should not be left out and Mushtaq Ahmed is back in the frame. Azhar Mahmood, Shahid Afridi and Imran Nazir have been chosen for the Hong Kong Sixes and this presumably means that they are not in contention.
I think there is a need to go back to the basics of selection. This means that first of all we have got to get the balance of the team right and it has nothing to do with personalities. We have to decide how many specialist batsmen have to be played, how many fast bowlers, how many spinners and decide whether an all-rounder can be gainfully employed to do more than one job.
The nature of the wickets too have to be taken into consideration. England is a case in point. It has selected its best team for the tour of Bangladesh and 34-year old Graham Thorpe has been included as well as two specialist spinners. For the Sri Lanka leg of the tour, a third spinner may be flown out. The selection is not based on any fixed formula nor on the mandatory selection of some ‘sacred cows’. Darren Gough has been left out.
The re-building process has to be carried out outside the Test or the ODI arena. Surgery is not left to interns. It is the surgeon who does the operation. Some young players who were given a chance against Bangladesh will not find a place in the team against South Africa.
At a certain development level, the experience gained is perishable. When these players are re-picked, if they ever are, they will be starting all over again. A selector’s job is to pick the best team. It is someone else’s job to groom talent. We should keep it simple.