Lahore's Shahid Bhagat Singh

What do names of places mean? Is it an honour? Is it a sop? Why has Pakistan woken up to name a square in Lahore after Shahid Bhagat Singh? This has nothing to do with India. There was no Pakistan then. Bhagat Singh is, therefore, as much Pakistani as Indian.

Pakistani rights groups and members of civil society have demanded that the place in Lahore where freedom fighter Bhagat Singh was hanged should be named after him to commemorate his role in the movement for the independence of the subcontinent. Speakers at the rally described Singh as one of the pioneers of the struggle for an independent subcontinent.

So, what has this got to do with the present? The activists held a candle-light vigil (yes, one more) to get this done. These people are promoting themselves as anti-establishment, which is a bit strange. The freedom struggle had different dimensions. If they want to remember the place where he was hanged, then try and recall where so many public murders take place in Pakistan today for upholding values. He was hanged in 1931 along with Rajguru and Sukhdev, the latter two seen as satellites in both countries.

One cannot give it a nationalistic or even a religious or regional bias, for Bhagat Singh was quite publicly an atheist. This might seem unusual in Islamic Pakistan, but they have honoured a courtesan (real or imagined, no one knows) Anarkali with a tomb and also Malik Ayaz the slave-lover of Mahmud of Ghazni in bustling Lahore. As I have seen both, it gives an interesting insight into how history can lie in a corner without disturbing new conservative ideas.

The place most prominently in the news last year was Abottabbad, named after Major James Abbott who founded it. Kim’s Gun is, of course, named after the character from Rudyard Kipling’s novel.

I had a rather emotional moment when I visited the mausoleum of Allama Iqbal. We still sing “Saare Jahaan Se Achcha” written by him for ‘Hindostan’, but he is theirs. It is just so difficult to explain these apparently minor aspects that have made a home in our hearts.

It is true that as societies change, they want to sometimes wipe out the past. But we still remember places by their old names. I get particularly irritated when people say, “Oh, it will always be Bombay for us” about the city being renamed Mumbai. These same people refer to Beijing (originally Peking), Myanmar (Burma), but have problems adapting to our own cultural name changes – Chennai (Madras), Kochi (Cochin), Bengalaru (Bangalore), Odisha (Orissa). Many of these were in fact merely mispronounced by the British, so why do we get attached to bad inflections?

In cases where people have contributed to society, I do understand the need for commemorating. We have far too many Gandhi chowks, roads, memorials and those named after the Nehru family. That is the reason I was a bit jubilant when Mayawati performed her megalomaniac act. But are there no other ways to honour people?

Will Pakistanis discover the virtues of Shahid Bhagat Singh only because there is a chowk named after him? People don’t discover the past by walking down streets. The young depend on books, and those should give a true picture. And adults carry baggages that have to be lightened. 

(c) Farzana Versey

Footnotes from the ledge

From the film 'The Sweet Smell of Success'

Years ago, a web portal I wrote for in the nascent stages of news and views on the Net in India, decided that it needed a footnote for its columnists. I was accustomed to ones that simply said I was “a freelance journalist” (I crack up when I read “independent columnist” – independent from what, of what, by what? Is that not to be taken for granted?) to the smart “refuses to sit on the fence” (it worked against me after 11 years of continuous writing of that column when I was told I was too independent and don’t take briefs!) to a phrase taken from my blog: “has a healthy disregard for objectivity”.

So, back to that e-portal. As some of you know, I could not imagine ‘writing’ for anything that did not scrunch in my hands. I did not even have a computer. One day, out of curiosity, I was at a friend’s office and casually mentioned this column. We reached the destination and as I scrolled down on my discovery trip, I reached that precious footnote. It was in red, italicised. It said that I, FV, was an “iconoclast”.

I froze. Images of me as Che Guevara flashed on several T-shirts. This was serious, and after a few seconds I was pretty much on the floor laughing, and ROFL was not yet known to us. From that vantage position where I had to look my iconoclastic best, I asked my friend whether he agreed with me that it was a stupid idea; he did. And made it sound more ominous: “It might appear as though you are saying it.”

This is the problem. It is more likely that publications decide. However, the newer lot ask you to send “two-three lines describing yourself”. I once wrote a horribly cheeky one and was told it did not go well with the content.

Sealing my fate!

When I became a serious op-ed addict during college, I recall reading pieces that were written with care for both language and thought. Some were ponderous, no doubt, but many were challenging. For me, this is the purpose of a good edit piece. There was space enough to explore ideas, and not the need to compress because there has to be place for ‘likes’, ‘share’, ‘send’. I understand this is the way to connect, but when some publications ask you to send SMSes to say whether you liked or did not like the column, it is a bit much. The writing becomes another product. Unfortunately, these days it often is.

But I did not know who those writers were. Celebrities and those from other fields had not taken over the business of holding forth on what they were doing. This does not work as ‘inside’ information or adds any authenticity, for they too are writing for an audience and have their own biases.

Do readers care about the qualifications of the columnist? It is a bubble theory. It looks good until you prick it. And the pricking is just giving it a good look-over.

However, mostly the footnote works as a promo for people in different professions. I had once taken a swipe at someone mentioning how his CV exceeded the word limit. It was, therefore, good to read on the ‘Self importance of names and titles’ in Pakistan’s Express Tribune as to how the whole description business has gone overboard. When I was writing for them, I had half a mind adding, “The writer has a degree in Vampirism from the University of Dracula”. (Incidentally, third-person descriptions are supposed to look objective; they make me feel schizophrenic.)

Quite a few publications have these long rambling bottomlines, and most of their columnists are so darned third-degreed, all from the best universities. A good university ideally teaches you to explore, not flaunt knowledge.

We never read any mention of a degree from Gujranwala or Chhatisgarh. Reveals our colonial mindset and, dare I say, adds weight to the publication's reputation. They could probably have a roll-call of Oxford/Cambridge/Harvard types, all with halos. If they can take global roundabouts and quote Greek mythology in Latin phrases with a slight nod to desi lingo, then chances are that more people will notice because snob and blob value go together. They are like the always-open KFC outlets.

The other peeve regarding "X is a former something or the other" reveals our absolute obeisance to the past. Instead of wondering why s/he even at the prime has been rendered redundant, it imbues the individual with the gravitas required of a know-it-all. Much like a divorce might make a discussion on marriage legitimate. If the 'formerhood' has been achieved after much toil, then it works like a tiger's head poking out of the wall.

Now, chances are that if the writer were not a "political economist" or some such and just another bloke with something to say, a piece questioning such self-importance would not have gone through the thinker's pose of editorial discretion.

PS: I posted the last three paras at the website with a footnote that said “~A former ET columnist with several degrees of separation”. It’s still awaiting moderation after hours! (Finally published after 12 hours.)

© Farzana Versey