Damn if I do, damn if I don't!

Malala Yusafzai

October 11, 2013 is the day marking one year and two days since I first heard the name Malala Yusafzai.  Before that date last year, I had no clue and no need to know Malala. It reflects poorly on me since BBC Urdu, for which Malala wrote her diary under the pseudonym ‘Gul Makaee’, is the home page for my laptop but I use it for headlines and more than often, bypass the opinion pages.  October 11, 2013 is also the day when Malala Yusafzai did not win the Nobel Prize for Peace and AFP reported that TTP (Tehreek-e- Taliban Pakistan) is "delighted over Malala's Nobel missing".

Malala Yusafzai did not win the Nobel Prize for Peace. Good for her! As it is, these are not the best times to be associated with (arguably) this most esteemed and coveted honor, primarily because of the controversial nature of its two previous winners. US president Barack Obama and the European Union will certainly go down in history as the worst decisions ever made by the Nobel Peace Prize Committee.

Just a day before the announcement by the NPC, Dhiya Kuriakose in her article for The Guardian, wrote “...the Nobel is a prize, and prizes should be handed out at the finish line... 1

I almost agree. If only Kuriakose would adjust the finality of her statement by replacing ‘at the finish line’ with ‘for achievements’ she'll have my vote because surviving an assassination attempt with the help of good quality modern medicine and after care is perhaps similar to reaching a finish line but not an achievement; neither is having a will strong as steel to survive. The latter however, is certainly an extremely worthy trait which can be employed very usefully for achieving greater goals but an achievement on its own it is not.

The fact is that from the day Malala started writing Gul Makaee’s Diary for BBC Urdu Online until she received a bullet in her head, she was a ‘nobody’. For most Pakistanis she was just another eleven years old in terror stricken Sawat of 2009.  Incidentally, until that time the terror stricken Sawat of 2009 was also just another city in the Taliban ravaged North West Frontier of Pakistan. In other words, before the bullets entered Malala, Pakistani public and media did not find her interesting enough to mention in their conversations, their publications or in their heated social media statuses. The public specially was oblivious of BBC’s eleven years old reporter and the severed heads hanging in public squares in Sawat Valley.

But lo and behold; as soon as the "western media" picked the story about Taliban targeting a teenage girl, all hell broke loose and opinions, criticism, analyses and mysterious background revelations found their way to the forefront turning Malala into a heroine overnight… at least for a few days.

I do not like to judge or rush to conclusions but humans in general and Pakistanis in particular have a history of honoring the dead and ridiculing the living. Had she succumbed to the attack, Malala would have stayed a heroine, BUT she survived; and her glory became controversial. During the first four days in which she went through a decompressive craniectomy at CMH Peshawar, was shifted to AFIC/NIHD Rawalpindi and transported to Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, the media overflowed with real time updates and reports. Parallel to that was another kind of overflow; or something more like a race on social media to prove the following:

• The attempt on Malala’s life is a set up.
• It is the doing of an ‘outside hand’ with a ‘hidden agenda’.
• Her father is a CIA agent.
• Malala is a CIA agent.
• The shots were not real.
• The bullets were not real.
• The Taliban were not real.
• The girl who got shot was not Malala.
• The girl who was flown to Birmingham was not Malala.

... so on and so forth.

Malala recovered.  Not only did she recover she started voicing her thoughts through interviews. BUT the Pakistanis/Pakistani media had once again receded into their shells. Why would you allow airtime and print space to someone/something which was simple but not intriguing, which was sensible but unceremonious and which was relevant but not sensational?

And then somebody's mad, semantically challenged idea of recommending Malala for the Nobel Peace Prize sent everyone amuck again. Once again the media and the sociopolitical glitterati in Pakistan rattled with a multi-speaker x ∞ debates. The points of concern this time were:

• Western media is using Malala to forward their own agenda.
• Her speech in the UN was rehearsed.
• Malala's interview with Jon Stewart was scripted.
• Why doesn’t she talk about the ‘drones’?

... and my favorite from a dear one’s Face Book status

• If Malala is Peace Prize worthy then what about the children who have been a casualty of the same terrorist war?

Malala responded to some of these ‘points’ to Abdul Hai Kakar in an interview for The Atlantic(2) but here is what I have to say.

• If one is able to look beyond black, white, pink AND west, east, left, right, top and bottom, one would discover that all media has some agenda and it comes forth in all they do. Accusing the ‘west’ of using Malala is simply venting out the regret that the ‘east’ (??) failed to use her first.
• Even the mightiest of the mightiest rehearse before opening their mouths in the UN.
• Jon Stewart is a delightfully mean host and it just makes sense for a sixteen years old to write down her thoughts specially when she’d be speaking in a foreign language.
• She doesn’t talk about drones because her subject of choice is female education.
• And last but not least; being a casualty is certainly different from being a target. Many die in wars with causes and their sacrifice is by no means trivial but only those are honored who contribute a little extra and have a slight edge. Malala was and remains a contributor and that gives her that ‘slight’ edge.

  For more on Malala Yusafzai and Sawat From 2007 to 2009:

Diary of a Pakistani School Girl (english)
Diary of a Pakistani School Girl (urdu)
Malala Yusafzai
Sawat 2007

Sawat 2009

Can We Listen to Your Bleeping Music Please?

My son raps! He's pretty darn good (if I may say so myself). His subject matter and lyrics are quite substantial and he raps it out with significant ease. Last week he brought home his first amateure recording. We listened to it on the car stereo. Through rendition he kept his quick fingers on the skip button on his IPod and uttered the bleep sound every time he had to press it. The recording was two minutes long and he bleeped three times in all; not bad for a seventeen years old rapper writing his lyrics towards the end of 2013.

BUT, what do I know of Rap and Hip Hop? I entered this scene only through my kids. Before them I was limited to the classical lyricism of Indo-Pakistani singers and, to a minute extent, western duos and bands of the 70s & 80s like The BeeGees, ABBA, Simon and Garfunkel and The Carpenters. The common denominator here was not the kind of music but the choice of lyrics. 

Traditional Indian and Pakistani singers do not sing songs; they sing poetry. To me Paul Simon's 'the sound of silence' is poetry; poetry sung beautifully well. So is 'Eventide' by Karen and Richard Carpenters (though not as beautifully sung).
But no parallels can be drawn when it comes to the frequency with which the Indo-Pak singers choosing from traditional poetry. If I were to put in a number I'd say that over 90% of Indian & Pakistani (not Bollywood) songs are, in fact, poetry. Penned by the master poets through the long history of Hindi and Urdu literature, these verses are, to say the least, 'serious stuff'. That is precisely why  serious listeners gauge qualitative merit of a singer by his/her selection of poetry. In other words the choice of poetry determines the 'artistic intellect' of a singer; and it doesn't end there. Think Spider Man... having found a great poetic piece brings with it the great responsibility of creating a strong and suitable musical composition for rendition. For most singers the first step is easy, thanks to the extremely rich and abundant poetic content of Indo-Pak literature. However, a substandard musical composition and/or a listless rendition doesn't just receive a bad review, it sends forth a message that the singer obviously lacks the intellectual finesse required to understand the depth of his/her poetic selection and therefore unworthy of any serious consideration.

With such a poetry focussed orientation in vocal music, who can blame me when X-Bitches leaves me shell shocked, speechless and surprised... perplexed, perturbed and puzzled... alongwith alarmed and appalled. Those of you who are not familiar with this 1998 Ice Cube number from the album 'War & Peace (vol 1)'.  For better understanding, below is a picture of the first 1:30 minutes of this track ... the full song runs five minutes:

Please note the ninth line which is 39 seconds into the song... apparently the singer has a problem with 'cussin'!

Yes I do recognize how relativity contributes towards each and every aspect of human life, be it science arts or philosophy. Therefore the atypical lyrics, as in the example above, might very well be liked, appreciated and enjoyed by many who are not me. BUT, I also understand that it doesn't take very long for the 'atypical' to become the norm; especially in a society governed by political correctness. How this political correctness actually allows and nurtures political incorrectness in a debate for another time. Right now my dilemma is that my son raps very well but, owing to the usage of certain words which have become typical to rap, he remains uncomfortable about sharing his talent to the fullest with his parents and grandparents.

My parents and my parents in law are all in their eighties. They'll probably not be around long enough to witness profanity laden music become the norm. A less sentimental person might suggest that maybe its not for them and thats that, which could be (debatably) true; but that also means that they won't be enjoying their favorite grandson's talent, which, to me, is a shame. My son on the other hand is seventeen and hopefully has a lifetime ahead but does that give him enough time to become comfortable with something which has a certain negative connotation in his moral makeup? I'm afraid that a less sentimental person will have the same suggestion for him too... which, to me, is double shame!

Profanity in Vocal Music is a debate that can involve a lot of 'should've, would've, could've' but its not a debate that I intend to start here. All I intend doing through this little write up is to ask a simple question. The most beautiful thing ever said about music is that it has no boundaries. Going by that isn't it ok if one questions the authenticity of such music which has to be scanned, controlled, edited and blocked depending upon the social territory it is within?

Three Things

9/11, Shahzeb & Game Show Prize Babies

I haven't been writing much. That's because I've been painting. Our small town has four small art galleries where local and touring artists take turns displaying their works all year round. I'm going to turn fifty in less than two months and the desire to have my first exhibition before that is strong these days.
BUT, there are things transpiring every moment of every day and some of them I just cannot let pass without comment.

1st Thing:
Yesterday marked twelve years since two aircrafts were flown into the WTC buildings in Manhattan, New York. I watched it on TV while cooking breakfast for my kids. I was only three years new in the US, had recently moved to the then famous and fabled Silicon Valley & had no clue that what I was watching was not special effects. Not until my brother called from  Bangkok asking the same question, "is it for real"?  I hope everyone understands that the doubt in our heads was for no other reason but the sheer unexpected  bizarreness of the tragedy. However, through the twelve years since then, an actual group of people has emerged who not only doubt the 'bizarreness' but also the motive and the roleplayers. This group dismisses the US version of the act of terror (they do not believe it was an act of terror at all) and present a theory which can be bullet pointed as follows:

• The 9/11 'happening' was orchestrated by the US Government itself for the purpose of waging war over peace loving Muslims.
• The twin towers did not collapse because of the two Boeings 767 crashing into the structures but because of monitored explosions at the base of each tower. 
• The entire Jewish population of the two towers was 'mysteriously' absent on the day of the 'so called attack'. 

I cannot give you the details, reasons or purpose of either the theory or the theorists behind it simply because I have never tried finding out. But I can tell you this that some of my 'friends' on Facebook are whole hearted supporters. These are the same people who question the authenticity of Holocaust but conveniently keep a blind faith when it comes to their God, prophet and religion. One of such 'friends', who is pretty irked by President Obama's recent declaration of 'move to strike Syria' posted this:

I do not go looking for public opinion declarations on the net but since this showed up in my notifications, I commented as follows:

 .....disagree that Afghans, Iraqis & Pakistanis are not 'accessory' to the crimes committed in the name of Islam. Even by Islamic law, withholding knowledge about a wrongdoing, being complacent in a criminally/militantly driven society and keeping quiet while watching the aggressor act is being a partner in crime. ..... the past few years have seen me speak out loud about the atrocities committed by MUSLIMS to prove that only them and none else is in the right. AND those who'd want to retort with the hackneyed cliche "(these people) are not Muslims" & that "Islam is a religion of peace", 2 things:

1. They ARE as much Muslims as u or anyone else ... probably more because they ... follow their belief. The fact that their belief is absolutely absurd is notwithstanding. 
2. If there were more scholars of Quran instead of 'hafiz-e-Quran' the facts and details of violent instructions would be clearer (to) all.

 I dare ... all to read the book (and) the history to find out what u have been pledging your allegiance to and then decide if u have what it takes to follow religion/s OR show the (dignity) to choose human rights over religion.

Which brings me to the 2nd Thing on my list. On Christmas eve last year, Shahzeb Khan, a twenty years old young man from Karachi, was gunned down by one Shahrukh Jatoi on the behest of his friend Siraj Talpur. The killing was the result of an argument over the servants of the killers making suggestive passes at the victim's sister, to which he objected angrily. What made this murder a 'contemplated cold blood killing' was the fact that the verbal 'fight' was broken up & resolved but a few hours later the killers returned with a 9mm gun and shot the unsuspecting Shahzeb four times while he sat in his parked car outside a mosque in a popular upscale market area.
What followed was a series of events in which the killers (belonging to powerful and wealthy feudal families of Sind) escaped to Dubai defying all law enforcing and security agencies, the victim's friends and family effectively used the social media to get attention, the Chief Justice of Pakistan 'took notice' and the authorities were directed to register a case against the suspects and produce them for first hearing. In less than a month four accused were arrested (including Shahrukh Jatoi in dubai), remanded and the trial was on its way. By June 6, 2013 the court wrapped up its proceedings by awarding two death sentences and two life imprisonments to the four accused.
Three months later, on 9/9/2013, Pakistani media went berserk airing the news that all four convicted were "pardoned by the victim's family in the name of Allah".
Since the Pakistani Law on murder conforms to Islamic 'Sharia' it does talk of 'blood money' in exchange for 'death' however, I have not come across 'absolute pardon' being a part of this law. Neither have I been able to find such a precedent (in a murder case after sentencing) in the history of the Pakistani court system so my comment on this is: "Go figure"!
Interestingly though, this 'pardon by the family' did not sit well particularly with those involved in turning this case into a 'cause for justice' in Pakistan. This includes journalists, witnesses and Shahzeb's friends. For a common man taking on the feudals in a criminal case takes courage with a capital C. It is therefore, not surprising if these people feel terribly disappointed, let down and cheated.
But why is the general public pissed? Is it that average Pakistanis have come to a point where their craving for justice has overcome their need for religion? I don't know if they are ready to point out how the "Islamic Law" leads to lawlessness but, for once, many more than a few have openly criticized the massive loophole therein.

And talking of loopholes, it looks like religion in Pakistan is actually the loophole helping everyone and everything slide out of sticky situations.
The 3rd Thing is one such sticky situation about which I must comment before it fizzles out of our forgiving minds.

This is Amir Liaquat Hussain, 

a televangelist turned game show host holding an abandoned baby which he will award to the couple who answer correctly his questions on religion. According to the information available, more than two babies have been given away as 'prizes' and there are more in line awaiting their turn.

I have already shared with you my comments on the first two things. My comment on this last one is: "I would like to believe that Amir Liaquat Hussain, his game show and the 'prize abandoned babies' do not exist". I would like to believe this just like the facebook friend I mentioned and others who believe that holocaust didn't happen, 9/11 was staged by the US government & blind faith in a religion is the key to salvation.

PS. If ever I was interested in seeing public comment on articles on this blog, its now.