Shikwa/Lament

Big ``T``

Good to see that you are at it. I feel so out of my league when faced with most poetry that I cannot say anything meaningful. Particularly I have difficulty when urdu is written using Roman script. One or two phrases I can deal with but whole stanzas leave me cold. Any way I wanted to acknowledge your contribution. Keep up the good work.

...SR

#53 by dost-mittar:

abhi tamam jazeeray nahiN dekhay hain...lehaza caribbean safar nama tou nahin likh sakhtay haiN...haaN albatta is haaliya safar kay baray maiN kuch likh kar aap ki khidmat maiN zaroor pesh karaiNgay...thoRi muhlat dijiaye...

aur bhai rahee baat rum-shum ki...tou kya hum itna arz karaiN?...kya hum rum-shum, single malt, blended, aged waghera oosi tarah nahiN discuss kar sakhtay haiN jaisay lakhouN log anjeel, qur`an, gita paRhay baghair muzhab ko discuss kartya haiN? ;)

...t

temporal:
Kya aapse caribbean ke safarnaame kee umeed rakh sakte hain? Rum-shum say tau shayad aap door hee rehte hain, samunder aur ret (beach!) kay baare main hee kuchh byaan kar dein!

Warning: long post

thanks for those who read, skipped and commented...


#1 by soundmeister:

you`re a good guy and so is aamir ;)


rozaiba:#2 & 13:

`Bus vaikhee Ja!`

jub kashti saabit–o-saalim thee saahil ki tamanna kis ko thee
as aisis shikaasta kashti main saahil ki tamanna kaun karay


sameerjb various:

aap tou chupay rustam haiN…aap ka kya kehna ;)


#20 by dost-mittar:

aap ko ahmedabad maiN darya kinaray gandhi ashram yaad hay?…wahaaN entrance ki bayaiN taraf teen bandar haiN…;)


#21 by ShirinAhmed:

kahaaN ghayab ho?…shukria and welcome back…


#22 by Banjaara:

aap ka shukria…aap say kya chupana kay yaad-daasht humari kaisi hay…khair…who chacha kya keh ga’aye haiN?…aa’g’hee daam-e-shunaidan…….;)


#46 by DRUMZ:

“A good poem is a journey to self, a bad one merely leads us to appreciate the cognitive processes the poet went through. (internal vs eternal)”

a poem could be both…

a poem that strikes a chord with the reader is one where the personal experience/s of the poet resonate with those of the reader…in this cyber medium (or on the printed page) words reverberate thoughts and feelings…in themselves words are nothing but nuts and bolts…it is with their selection and arrangement that the poet attempts to convey the thoughts and feelings…and on those rare occasions when s/he succeeds in conveying it …when the readers feels the pulse and thoughts...then that poem works for both of them…

…otherwise the effort is wasted…however…for every one poem that resonates…there are thousands that do not…agree with you there…


#3 by Saminasha:

What are you hoping to acheive in this piece?
How do you see the abstractness working in here?
What do you want to reader to take away from this?

some of it is covered in the preceding reply to drumz…and some in the following reply…


#8 by FarzanaVersey:

if the imagery and words used in this poem did not convey my feelings then i take full responsibility…let me take a moment and try to redeem…

…hopefully...it is clear that this is a lament of shikwa….zamanay say, khuda say, halaat say…when all efforts come to naught…dead end…when one cannot do anything more to alleviate the sense of impending doom…

sailing anchorless
pier to pier
shoulder to shoulder
smile to smile

ships do have anchors…for sailing the waters they need sails or engine power: for steering the course rudder: and for stopping or parking other than at a pier they have to use anchors…as in life’s journey…the daily grind does stop at dusk to begin again at dawn…

in smoke filled rooms
and open skies
navigating help
non existential

…mentioned zindagi ka safar…the daily grind…in this journey how do we take measure of progress?…what distance have we covered?…we need markers around us to navigate…to measure distance covered…or yet to be covered…think of yourself in a plane (open skies), or a submarine (smoke filled rooms has a social set up allegory in-built) or in your own home blindfolded…if you cannot see any markers or landmarks or milestones you will have a tough time walking, navigating, traveling and arriving at your chosen destination…hence the despair highlighted…and the inability to ascertain our exact position at a given time in this journey…

…what part of this the poet attributes to his sealed lips and his blocked hearing and to others sealed lips and blocked hearing is left at the discretion of the individual reader’s perception and experience (this for you also dost-mittar)


rgds, lve, bspnd


t

ps: wonder where are anNy, bina, sobia, ana and shandy?

Pps: hey shandy did you know they have named a drink after you in the carribbean…sorrel, ginger ale or seven up and alcoholic or non-alcoholic beer?

DRUMZ:
[I think ur making a HUGE stretch by suggesting that this constant bickering about patriotism on this site is a journey to self. Your assuming that because u are of a religion or nation, u are obligated to defend it. I am of a nation, I dont defend it at all. What difference does it make to someone searching for self what others deem him/her? Who cares if i dont fit into islam or desi culture? I dont view any of u as gatekeepers of any of those things.]

Rubbish. I have not suggested that the bickering about patriotism is a search for the self. But one`s nationality gives one a background from where we can take off. What one defends is a choice -- and that could include the nation or religion. Your constant assertion about who cares whether you fit in or not reveals that you are aware and conscious of going against the grain and not being a gatekeeper etc... some of us don`t fit in anyway and it happens as a natural course... and hey, we are the ones who do live in isolation (and no one even notices, which means our journey of the Self is a success!).

Anyway, I do enjoy debating...whether it is for the sake of debating (one loves for the sake of loving, scratches because it itches etc...), to raise genuine points, or just because the poem was so inspiring...:) I guess this is it...

Farzana: I think ur debating for the sake of debating. I am not suggesting that we live in isolation, rather that we break free from these inherited roles (or atleast see the flaws in them). The self is who we are, the other three items come from the field of psychology and are used to explain human behaviour in groups. (im not explaining human interaction. That involves which societal roles one adheres to. Im talking about removing ones SELF attachment from these roles, because who self has nothing to do with nation or religion).

I think ur making a HUGE stretch by suggesting that this constant bickering about patriotism on this site is a journey to self. Your assuming that because u are of a religion or nation, u are obligated to defend it. I am of a nation, I dont defend it at all. What difference does it make to someone searching for self what others deem him/her? Who cares if i dont fit into islam or desi culture? I dont view any of u as gatekeepers of any of those things.

For Points one and two I was not talking about every possible example, but for most of them. Fighting for environment or concepts like justice and love are things people select. There is a truth to them for they are not given to us (those everything is to a degree, i concede that).

DRUMZ (#45):

[By the way, do u not find it a lil odd that u are getting personal messages and i am not? I suppose hes gonna switch our names in the will too...]

The simple fact is too bland, which I shall come to later. I am using this statement of yours to further discuss allegiances and the self. If one has shaken off one’s inherited baggage, then expectations of role-playing and the done thing ought not to be there. Perhaps, it was assumed that I would pass on the msg more readily; maybe the poetic sensibility shared is what defines us and make you not a part of that/or it is your asumption? Why do people have to be shackled by what is given, even in relationships? Mind you, I have used your comment to talk about the larger picture. (Fact is that I was requested to post the msg when the poem had just come up on Chowk; I did not get special personal msgs – though one often does!)

The self cannot exist in isolation. To use an analogy for nationality/religion…suppose one lives in an apartment block, Building X. Each house has a different number, is decorated in varied ways, the habits of its residents will differ and their social, economic, psychological states will be unique to themselves, the last different for those even in the same house. But for the postman, one would be merely a resident of X bldg; to the guy living across the females may be hot/mousy/arrogant etc…and vice versa; the grocer, the newspaper guy, the dhobi, the pizza delivery man…each will have a simplistic take on the people residing there. And the people might assume that they are being seen as such. So, the self is made up of four aspects. Where/what we are, how others see us, how we assume others are seeing us, and how we see ourselves.

For some of us, the last is the most relevant, but do you realise that in many ways it is the other three that have got us to realise ourselves? I may decide to cover up the horrendous marble flooring with a Persian carpet (so I have changed what I am to some extent), the way the guy across sees me may make me react (“who the hell are you, you gutter snipe” or “yeah, thanks, I do not give a damn”), my assumption about whether the pizza fellow thinks I keep having the same darned Woodcutters may make me rethink (“Hey, he might think I am staid…I should try out the new thin-crust Honey chicken”)…so slowly, I am discovering aspects of myself. But I remain the resident of Building X through it all. The internal dialogue – the socialised self with the personalised one finally gives me a fair idea of what I am. But that too is not static.

I might move to Bungalow Y, where I am not defined by a number, but a name. (Jannat, Mannat whatever). I still belong somewhere, though it is more isolated. And then one will be asked, so where were you earlier? And I will say I was in Building X; I may venture to describe some things from there too, for my formative years were spent thee…that is when I realise I have only moved out, not moved on. I may read something more profound than I did back then, but again I am finding my self through another’s discovery…which is fair enough because I identify with it.

Therefore, some people identify with religions and countries. See, it is possible to change one’s religion (having gone through the thought of conversion to Christianity, Buddhism and settling for atheism, and yet not quite knowing what suits me – these happened not because I knew a lot more about them than about Islam, but because the Other always seems to have more potential simply because we know NOTHING about it), but one cannot change one’s national origins. In either case, if you are a convert, you will be seen as such and your assertion of the new self will most likely be an attempt to over-reach and be accepted by it/understand it better… if you migrate to another land you will be deemed of Indian/Pakistani origin because you do go with your baggage, or the generation before you did. And you cannot change your genes.

The internal journey of the self has to perforce come with these inbuilt factors. Even in the arena of what we see as our real selves, we may have unconsciously acquired things. Am I a bohemian? Nomads have been like that for centuries. So, I am merely pitting myself against a small faction of my urbanised existence when I say I am different, I have broken free.

What one is ‘taught’ and what one ‘teaches oneself’ need not be at such odds…one could well replace the other in different circumstances. You are taught to eat with a fork and knife; you choose to use chopsticks…but when you go to a Chinese restaurant, you are doing what you would have been taught anyway.

Now to your points:
1.When one repeats a point, it could mean it is still valid and your audience may be different…you can say ‘I love you’ to several people in the course of your life, for different reasons.
2.Emotional attachment need not always be ignorance. One is only debating the ignorant quality of the attachment, specially among those who do not belong fully!
3.Yes, people have no say in the creation of concepts and yet fight over them…is it not possible that sometimes you return to that which you had rejected? And forget nation/religion…we have not created the world, so why fight about the environment, karma, death, life, ways of living?

Dost-mittarji (#40):
I guess the reply to drumz will explain. However, you say, “The only way one can get rid of that tag is by converting to another religion and change one`s name and the identity that it carries.”

That would lead to another tag…

Look at #47 as a case study. Dosts post has nothing at all to do with attacking anyones religion, yet studebaker feels attacked and provoked because he foolishly aligns his self with that of islam.

The fact that he feels vulnerable after dost`s comments results in him lashing out at India and Hinduism. The same scenerio plays out on a grander scale every day on this site.

Muslim says something, hindu defends it, muslim mentions kashmir, hindu mentions jinnah, muslim mentions gandhi, chowk IQ drops 10 points.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Sameer: ``Whatever abstract there was in sister is lost to another imagination of twisting and playing with words.``

Precisely. And that is the mark of a good poem vs a bad one. A good poem is a journey to self, a bad one merely leads us to appreciate the cognitive processes the poet went through. (internal vs eternal)

Farzana: You made some good points. The central question is who is self. If we are defined by what identifies us, then our concept of self is given through external powers (of socialization etc). Simply we can ask everyone on chowk ``who are U.`` I bet my life most if not all will regurgitate some silly labels given to them by others like ``muslim, Indian etc.``

I have inherited the same religion and nationality as some of u, but if someone attacks islam or india/pakistan, the attack doesnt shatter my very being. I dont feel compelled to debate the attacker, mainly because had that person been born in X country, s/he would share in the opinions of most of the people in X country. Also, I have had very little to do with the progress of any of those countries/religion and even i am not arrogent enuff to consider myself a gatekeeper for any of them.

People tend to follow a similar path in finding self. They first align themselves with what they were taught self should be, then at some time they align themselves with a more universal concept, then some look deeper within... and start all over and completely redefine everything they believe as they take into account external influences.

Why on earth would an indian or pakistani whine about patriotism? Perhaps you people would have to come from the outside looking in to appreciate the utter foolishness of these arguments.

1. I can come to this site in 2010 and the same people will be talking about the same things. (if u have to go over it more then 1nce, either u didnt say it properly, or they didnt read it properly).

2. There are only a handful of free thinkers here. The rest will blindly defend their country because they feel connected to it, (as u say, they cant distinguish between eyes and vision). Why debate with someone on a topic they are foolish enuff to claim emotional attachement too? They will never concede a damn thing because their ignorance will prevent it.

3. The roles of country and religion in the world are hardly valid, unless one aims to analyze the extent of human stupidity. We can only imagine how much destruction has been caused when foolish people decided to fight for the sake of concepts they had no say in creating.

By the way, do u not find it a lil odd that u are getting personal messages and i am not? I suppose hes gonna switch our names in the will too...

Samina: Im listening to Talib Kweli along with raga at this time. LOL, someones msn name is ``at the touch of love, everyone becomes a poet``....

Ansari: I agree. That birthright can be considered a universal concept which is far more honourable (in my opinion) in defending as opposed to the idiots on chowk who find honour in talking about Kashmir while living in the states.

Saminashah:
Covalent is a term for sharing electrons between two atoms, a type preferred by carbon containing bonds and therefore all living matter. Lets get back to the topic.

I have no problem with abstract thoughts but its pivotal role in poetry, often professed by poets, is exaggerated. Every discipline and every profession like to overstate its importance and unique characteristics. Lawyers, politicians, soldiers, scientists, teachers, professional all do it.

Anstract thoughts often claim to result in flash, though person might be thinking about the topic consciously or subconsciously. But it is the product development that makes all the difference here. If the sole purpose of poetry is to express abstract thoughts, then the product should be out in a flash or quickly. The poetry is really a function of expressing thoughts in best marketable ways, such as use of metering, melody, vocabulary, words combinations, polished language and so on. In doing so, the hypothesis, theory, research, conclusions and abstract thoughts become secondary issues. The building is judged by its appearance and by its foundations. Same goes for poetry. A good poetry has little to do with abstract nature of thoughts, though abstract thoughts might have initiated the process of composing poetry. Abstract thought is like Big Bang of physics but natural beauty, world we live in, our interactions and actions have little to do with Big Bang. Big Bang has no relationship with PMS (``P`` for pre in men and post in women).

That is why, I express my abstract thought in poetry as quickly as a flash. Hands on the keyboard and within 5-10 minutes product is developed and in the cyber market of chowk. That is why, the quality is very poor but abstract thought is honestly put forward. The last one was a ridicule of understanding common sense through long process of religion, like going from JFK to Newark via Los Angeles LAX.

The summary is: if abstract thought is most important then it must be delivered with honety; if quality of presenting it is more important, then presenting abstract thought is not the primary goal of producing poetry. If I want to call you sister (just as you call us bhai), I should do so instead of sitting for an hour and coming up with, `` meray aklotay chacha ki bhateeji, saminshah`` forcing people to think that if sameer has only one uncle, uncle`s niece would be none otehr than sameer`s sister. Whatever abstract there was in sister is lost to another imagination of twisting and playing with words. What do you say, my dear uncle`s wife`s son-in-law`s mother-in-law`s husband`s daughter...;))

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

correction to my post #38...``and if he takes a hard line then they accuse him of being just a poet... `` should read as...and if he takes a hard line then they ask him, ``Now where are your poetic sensibilities?``

Drumz: as James Baldwin (and Farzana) wrote, it`s about distinguishing between your inheritance and your birthright. Freedom may not be part of your inheritance but it sure as hell is your birthright, as is the right to attack any oppression you witness. We are who we strive to be.

Drumz,

Its amazing how progressive a lot of the great poetry is. (and we`re not talking about Mr. Rumsfield`s, either)

What are you listening to nowadays?

Sameer,
My goodhumored troublemaking friend! :) Pliss explain your example...what is the meaning of covalent?