The Death of Edward Said -- A tribute

I second Urstruly`s tribute to Nawabzada Nasrullah Khan. This should come as an eye opener to feudals bashers in support of military or mullah or both. NNK was a feudal with his family history of supporting Unionist party. NNK was much more an absentee landowner than many other feudals, yet he steadfastly backed constitution, rule of law and democracy. One should be judged on merits and not the profession of the ancestors.

Urstruly:
Thanks for that tribute to, and info on, Nawab Nasarullah. You`re a swell guy when not trying to defend religion on rational grounds. No, not looking to re-start the dogfight here. Take that comment as a compliment.
rgds,
PM

Romair:
``If you follow the actual thread, you will notice that interactors were comparing Said to others, including to Hoodbhoy. I just added to the discussion. I did not set up the, “strawman.” It was already set. ``

Point taken. My mistake, and apologies.

That said, I will re-express my frustration at the inane discussion on the inane comparison that is going on between Edward Said and Hoodbhoy, Tariq Ali..or someone else. Next thing we know, there`d be discussion on Edward Said vs Imran Khan ...

``There is nothing wrong with comparing individuals, whole have put themselves in the public arena, if someone starts a discussion about them. As long as it is not done in a humiliating tone. ``

One would indeed compare Waseem Akram to other bowlers, and that`s a valid discussion. However, it is the hobby of fools to compare him with Viv Richards, or even worse, with Dhyaan Chand. And that is what has happened here. Pervez Hoodbhoy is not an intellectual, does not claim to be one. He is a good -- but by no means superlative -- Physicist. He is no Abdus Salam. Yet some idiot full of hot air decides to drop his name into this discussion, and the next thing we know it`s open season on the poor man. It is similar to say brining in Abdus Salam in a follow-up to an article on Einstein and then pronouncing with pompous authority that Abdus Salam`s work as inferior, insignificant, and his genius incomparable to Einstein`s. That`s still true. Even Salam would have agreed. But bhai what`s the point?

That said, don`t take it to mean that I cannot stand someone being criticized. Feel free to trash Hoodbhoy or shoodbhoy or dadabhoy. It is your right and you should be allowed to do so. But that does not mean that I cannot tell you that this whole line of discussion is quite stupid.

Call me an intellectual pygymy, but if Said did indeed read all the sexual undertones into that passage on thar`wa (yes, yes, even allowing for Lewis`s political agenda, and withholding benefit of doubt from Lewis for his purported Arab-hate), the good man had some issues.
Or maybe that is what Samina means when she says ``ALL interpretation is agendaed``. Clearly, Said`s was in this instance.
This is not to say I admire the man much less, of course.

MNIPhirSay #50: “You first set up a straw man (that comparison between Edward Said and Hoodbhoy is somehow warranted) and then go on to say that Hoodbhoy says nothing new.”

If you follow the actual thread, you will notice that interactors were comparing Said to others, including to Hoodbhoy. I just added to the discussion. I did not set up the, “strawman.” It was already set.

If you were to write an article about Wasim Akram, someone would compare him to other bowlers. And then others would point out whether they agree or not. If you wrote an article on Ghalib, he would be compared to other poets in replies (I say this from personal experience), even if the article itself, did not do any comparisons. And then those replies would develop a life of their own, with some people discussing Waqar Younis and others discussing Mir Taqi Mir.

There is nothing wrong with comparing individuals, whole have put themselves in the public arena, if someone starts a discussion about them. As long as it is not done in a humiliating tone. There is nothing humiliating about stating that one does not consider such and such a writer to have good command of the English language. Once anyone publishes a book, they have opened their skills for criticism. That is very normal. People who come out in the public eye, deliberately, like Hoodbhoy or Said or anyone else, become open game for critique. That comes with the whole package.

So I hope you are not suggesting people should not discuss them? Why not? Just because you don’t like it? That is not enough of a reason for me.

If everyone stopped giving their views, on such issues, then this site would cease to exist. People should have the freedom to discuss Hoodbhoy or Dadabhoy or anyone else who willingly places himself or herself in the public arena. In fact, these guys themselves are known for giving their views on others who are in the public arena. Should we stop Hoodbhoy from presenting his views on Ghazali, just because someone does not enjoy a critique of Ghazali?

tahmad

``despite his undemocratic title``

The titles like ``nawab``, ``nawabzada``, and ``sardar`` were Mughal legacy which British Raj continued. Some of these titles were also given by the rajas of princely states to their subjects. British gave such titles to some of those who reneged on their on people and sided with british colonialism; that attached a sort of disrespect and even disgust to these titles in the eyes of common man, even if the recipient had nothing to do with colonialism. British installed people with large Pagris as door-keepers to the their hotels and clubs (a tradition that continues even today) and we started looking down upon our own heritage.

It is true that Nawabzada Sahib was born in a feudal lord family but he did not inherit any of their qualities. He even attended that wretched institution called Aitchison where hate for the fellow human beings is indoctrinated into the elite of the society and they are taught how to look down upon rest of the humanity, but even Aitchison failed to leave an impression on Nawabzada Sahib. He was the renegade of the elite feudal lord club of Paksitan. He was the Moses of this time who just happened to have born in Pharo`s palace.


Dost Mitter

Thanks for the words of comfort - we really need some at this time. Unfortunately, most of the Pakistanis have no clue what they have lost.

Urstruly:
Nice tribute to Nasrullah Khan. My sympathies to Pakistanis, particularly those fighting for democracy.
May his sould rest in peace.

TAhmed: With re to Nnawabzada Nasrullah Khan...I believe he also stood up to those civilians who misused their power while in government. What political party did he belong to and did he ever serve in an administration?

TAhmed:

I don`t know anything about Said therefore am not in a position to comment. But the knee jerk reactions to the criticism tell me a lot.

MNIPhirsay`s response is specific and to the point and I would like to see Fuzair`s response.

I agree about your being honored with a comparison to Fuzair. That really is something. I am surprised though to see Fuzair`s depth of reading, given that he was a professional soldier. I wonder what rank he retired at and the subsequent career path he chose to follow.

STUKA #54 I see that dionysus lumps me with fuzair, the ``rambling, waffling, attention-seeking IDIOT``. I am indeed honored to be grouped with fuzair, given that he is one of the most knowledgeable and rational people on chowk.

My thanks to dionysus for the honor.

There still remains the little matter about the Emperor Said not wearing any clothes. Seems to have infuriated saminasha and now dionysus too. Saminasha told us that we could not see the Great Arab Emperor Said`s clothes because we were Intellectual Pygmies. Now dionysus assures tells us the reason is because we are IDIOTs (in capitals). I guess I better stop ``rambling, waffling, attention-seeking`` on chowk and do some work now...

Urstruly #49 Amen. Nawabzada Nasrullah, despite his undemocratic title, was indeed a veteran champion of democracy in Pakistan. The man who stood up to one military dictator after another, decade after decade. May God bless his soul.

``fuzair #24 #42

My Dear fuzair,
You are a complete and utter rambling, waffling, attention-seeking IDIOT.

My Dear tahmed32,
Please refer to the above. ``

Thus spake the great Dionysus and his word is law!!!

Talk about inflated egos and perverted opinions...lol!

#20 by Ralph on September 28, 2003 3:09pm PT

That`s not the focus of this board. No point derailing people`s tributes to a Ed Said.

Taking a cheap political shot at mullahs and military in a tribute is not an honorable thing to do. The author did a fine job of derailig the tribute himself.

more on said vs. lewis by another paki. (not recommended for people with close minds). and lewis btw openly acknowledges that he receives funding from zionists. and whatever you say about said, you certainly cannot accuse of being corrupt. also interestingly enough, ibn warraq has made an appearence in op-ed pages of wsj today. (surprise, surprise).

http://www.counterpunch.org/alam06282003.html

fuzair #24 #42

My Dear fuzair,
You are a complete and utter rambling, waffling, attention-seeking IDIOT.

My Dear tahmed32,
Please refer to the above.


MNIPhirSay #37

Another great post!

One cannot stop critiquing anyone, just because you like or dislike him or her. It is quite unfortunate to see, on this board, the tendency of people to attack others, just because they do not agree with the views of Said, or do not consider him or someone else to be as big an intellectual as others do. This is quite childish.


If you picked at Pervez`s views and ``critiqued`` them, that`d be one thing. At the worst I`d have responded like I responded to fuzair; by addressing the actual critique. But that`s not what you are doing. You first set up a straw man (that comparison between Edward Said and Hoodbhoy is somehow warranted) and then go on to say that Hoodbhoy says nothing new. Did Hoodbhoy say he was saying something new? Did he ever say that he measures up to Edward Said? This is not critiquing. This is hot air.

As an unrelated aside, Hoodbhoy is not an extraordinary writer. (Again this is something he has never claimed to be.) But compared to you, or people with similar qualifications I wouldn`t say he is below average...or even average.

Say what you mean and mean what you say.