| Submit your comments on this article |
| India-Pakistan |
| Cultural boundaries: We are not them! |
| 2008-12-06 |
| By Hasan Zafar Back in 2005 I came to Pakistan in a time when ‘moderate enlightenment’ was much being taught and talked about, I was surprised to see how India was marvelled for her advancement in the IT field and not to say a couple of box office hits Bollywood had produced. It was mostly people who were associated with the fashion industry and the entertainment industry in Pakistan who spoke too highly of the Indian achievements. And why not, they were getting envious receptions and rewards for speaking of ‘no cultural differences’ between India and Pakistan. No cultural differences? That means the ‘Two Nation Theory’ upon which the creation of Pakistan was based, was false. No wonder such people got red carpet receptions and warm welcomes, not to speak of the ‘contracts’ given to them by the film industry in Mumbai. These people who spoke ‘their language’ and insisted that music could help ‘melt’ the geographical boundaries. I mean, frankly speaking, singers who probably never made well up to their high schools were making such statements. And overwhelmingly, they got applause from their Indian hosts for the ‘nice and humanistic approach’ they demonstrated. So, should I listen to these singers and comedians performing in India or should I listen to what Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, Allama Iqbal, Maulana Altaf Husein Hali, Maulana Shibli Naumani, Sir Agha Khan and Quaid-e-Azam Mohammed Ali Jinnah said on the cultural identity of the Indian Muslims? Here I am only taking an opportunity in the wake of the current scenario to talk about the Indian mindset that has surfaced in the aftermath of the Mumbai attacks and that supports my long standing argument on the way we need to approach our relationship with India. And I believe that needs to be done with this in mind that ‘they are not us’ and we must keep a check on ‘over excitement’ in terms of our relations with a country that has aimed to demolish our identity in peace times. This was Kuldip Nayyar (a veteran Indian journalist), meeting some friends at a private gathering in Lahore this summer where he pleaded the case of ‘friendship through linguistic ties’. Again, that we speak one language and that language is a binding force; hence geographical boundaries matter less when it comes to a shared language and therefore a common culture, nicely leading to ‘no cultural differences’. I asked Mr. Nayyar whether language was all we needed to form a common culture. And if so, how come Arabic speaking Middle East was divided into so many countries/nations? How come Polish and Russians were different nations since they could understand each other or why did not British and Americans become just one nation since they spoke the same language or by that definition why did not the English and the Irish people become one nation? Or for that reason if the basic notes of the music played in India and Pakistan are the same we are the same nation? If that is so, by drinking tea in the morning instead of lassi (yogurt shake) we can become British according to this theory! And where were the linguistic ties when the trains full of Muslims migrating from Indian to Pakistan in 1947 were looted and mass massacre was carried out? Where was this shared culture when Pakistani cricketers received empty bottles and abuses from the spectators in the Eden Garden Stadium in Kolkata? Or why did not it work when the same culture Indians sent their army in the East Pakistan? Sure, we need to look forward to a better future but must we forget all that? But how can I believe in all that, when recently Samjhota Express (the friendship train between India and Pakistan) was attacked in the Indian territory during the peace talks? And why cannot those Pakistani artists see the Indian films engaged in demonising Pakistan’s image or the hatred and prejudice shown by the Indian television media in the last few days and even before? The Indian character as displayed by their film industry and television media and the human rights record of the largest democracy of India in terms of handling of its minorities (both Christians and Muslims in India) is a bit too ugly to be treated as a model. Friendship is a nice sounding notion but how does one progress in this area when one party is constantly busy in demolishing and challenging the other’s identity? Mr Nayyar insisted that friendship was important and he came up with the idea of a United South Asia on the pattern of the European Union. It was a time when there were reports of India nearing the inauguration of the Baghliar Dam on the River Chenab and I asked Mr. Nayyar if that was a good way of making advancement on the path of friendship by stopping our water? Or was that a right way of promoting friendship by giving a few bucks to the singers and other artists from Pakistan to make statements against the ‘Two Nation Theory’ (that there are no cultural differences between India and Pakistan) in the programmes on Indian television channels? I was finally told by him that I had spoken much and now others should be given an opportunity. The rest of the evening I was a silent spectator. Faiz Ahmad Faiz said, ‘If we begin our history from Mohenjodaro, we will be compelled to own the succeeding periods of history which include the periods of Barhama culture, and the period of Greek culture, and in consequence we will have to accommodate Ashok, Chandra Gupt, Alexander the Great, Raja Porus and Raja Risaloo among our heroes’. My point of view is that Pakistan’s history starts from August 14, 1947, with Quaid-e-Azam Mohammed Ali Jinnah stating that a ‘new nation is born’ and later Faiz affirming this point of view by saying that “With the partition of the Subcontinent a new country came into existence and a new nation was born — Pakistani nation”. And I maintain that our culture must be defined in terms of the sense of separation upon which the division of the Subcontinent took place. The formation of a nation is based on a shared experience of history and a collective past, and the experience which the Muslims of the Subcontinent shared in terms of the prejudice of the Hindus against the Indian Muslims laid the foundations of Pakistan. One needs to refresh in mind the events that led to a distancing of the Muslims from the Indian National Congress in 1906. Events like the Hindu dominated Congress’ stand against the Persian language as the official language of India because it was written in the same script as the Holy Quran, or the opposition to any such developments that in anyway benefited the Muslims in India during the British Raj. ‘Mr. Nayyar’, I said, ‘I understand your nostalgia for the past when you lived in Sialkot (now Pakistan), that is your reality. But I am born in Pakistan and that is my reality. And my reality does not allow me to be linked with the Indian culture in anyway by means as absurd as music or a common language. The writer holds an M Phil degree in film and television and teaches at various universities |
| Posted by:john frum |
| #2 "The writer ... teaches at various universities" Can't hold a steady job, huh? |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2008-12-06 21:56 |
| #1 Philosophy degree? In film and television? That's like drawing a vacuum. There's a lot of noise and commotion going on, but in the end all you have is nothing! I guess all the basket weaving and laundromat economics classes were full of the of the football scholarship kings. |
| Posted by: AlmostAnonymous5839 2008-12-06 10:09 |