Monday, June 1, 2009
Obliterated History
May 10, 2009 passed without any official or unofficial event in Pakistan to remember that historic day of May 10, 1857 when a last, ill-planned, and fatal attempt was made to get rid of the overweening English traders who were becoming de facto rulers of the vast subcontinent. What began on that Sunday morning in the town of Meerut would be later called "Ghadar" (Mutiny), "the Great Rebellion", "the Indian Mutiny", "the Revolt of 1857", "the Uprising of 1857", the "Sepoy Mutiny" by those who wrote its history for the colonized people of India and inserted this appellation in the textbooks which were to be used for generations.
When we went to school, we read about the "Ghadar" and Sayyid Ahmad Khan's account of the "Reasons for Ghadar". The appellation may have now changed to "India's First War of Independence", but there is certainly very little public discourse on the larger and long-term changes which followed that historic day.
Crushed with brutal force, this last armed resistance against the occupation of India came to an end on June 20, 1858, when Gwalior fell. A reign of terror followed. Men were tied to the mouths of cannons and blown to pieces, as Richard Holmes has vividly described in his 2005 book, Sahib: The British Soldier in India 1750-1914. A note from General Montgomery to Captain Hudson, "the butcher of Delhi" exposes how the British military high command approved cold-blooded massacre of general populace of Delhi, reminiscent of Halagu Khan's massacre of the residents of Baghdad in 1258: "All honour to you for catching the king and slaying his sons. I hope you will bag many more!"
A policy of "no prisoners" was adopted, whole villages were wiped out on the flimsiest rumours of sympathy for the local soldiers.
An estimated ten million Indians lost their lives, as Amaresh Misra describes in his two volume work, War of Civilisations: India AD 1857, published in 2008. Back in England, the accounts of atrocities of the British "Army of Retribution" were generally considered justified in the wake of exaggerated press accounts of Indian "savagery" against the "Europeans and Christians". During a year of terror that followed the events of May 1857, and for a long time to come, India went through a gigantic transformation which must be considered as one of the largest and most cruel experiment in social reengineering in modern history.
First the Company and later the British Crown, through its representative in India, the Viceroy, attempted to remake India in their own image. A society that had lived in a certain manner for centuries was remodelled from ground up. Memoirs, chronicles, letters, and personal accounts of the time describe cataclysmic events. "My dear sir," wrote Mirza Ghalib to Nawab Anwar al-Dawla, "what shall I say about the destruction of houses and mosques! The builder of the city might not have exerted so much planned effort for building them as the owners of the country [meaning the English] have for their destruction. My! my! Almost all buildings from the times of Shah Jahan within the walls of the fort and most of these in the city were demolished painstakingly and where picks and shovels and other tools did not suffice, tunnels were made and explosives were used to demolish them."
Aristocratic families of old were ruined, thousands were killed, imprisoned, or sent into exile, a whole new administrative was imposed, and new institutions were implanted which changed everything in the vast subcontinent--from the judiciary to education. The ill-fated effort also led to the insertion of the Jewel that India was, into the Crown of the British monarch, thus conveniently shifting the exploitation of Indian resources and people from the control a trading company that had come begging for concessions from the then mighty Mughals to the British monarch.
Ninety years later, when the British finally left the Indian subcontinent, they had produced so many brown sahibs that there was no further need for their physical presence; now they could achieve what they wanted remotely, although now they had to share their profits with a newly emerged tyrannical power. This shift would be so drastic that all previous history will be quickly obliterated to make room for an entirely different public discourse.
People who lose their history, simultaneously lose their future. We are such a people. Any attempt to reclaim history is simultaneously an attempt to reclaim future. Yet, it is neither the details the armed resistance against the occupiers nor the heart-wrenching accounts of those who were blown to pieces which make this attempt meaningful; it is in understanding the present in the light of the past that makes this act of recall a meaningful process of reconstruction and reassertion. Those who refuse to see their present in the light of their past, have no understanding of the extent of transformation Pakistan is now undergoing. They cannot imagine the new history of our people which will be written fifty years from now. That history will transfigure not only the May 1857, but also May 2009.
The writer is a freelance columnist.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Quantum Note
by Dr Muzaffar Iqbal
Email: quantumnotes@gmail.com
When we went to school, we read about the "Ghadar" and Sayyid Ahmad Khan's account of the "Reasons for Ghadar". The appellation may have now changed to "India's First War of Independence", but there is certainly very little public discourse on the larger and long-term changes which followed that historic day.
Crushed with brutal force, this last armed resistance against the occupation of India came to an end on June 20, 1858, when Gwalior fell. A reign of terror followed. Men were tied to the mouths of cannons and blown to pieces, as Richard Holmes has vividly described in his 2005 book, Sahib: The British Soldier in India 1750-1914. A note from General Montgomery to Captain Hudson, "the butcher of Delhi" exposes how the British military high command approved cold-blooded massacre of general populace of Delhi, reminiscent of Halagu Khan's massacre of the residents of Baghdad in 1258: "All honour to you for catching the king and slaying his sons. I hope you will bag many more!"
A policy of "no prisoners" was adopted, whole villages were wiped out on the flimsiest rumours of sympathy for the local soldiers.
An estimated ten million Indians lost their lives, as Amaresh Misra describes in his two volume work, War of Civilisations: India AD 1857, published in 2008. Back in England, the accounts of atrocities of the British "Army of Retribution" were generally considered justified in the wake of exaggerated press accounts of Indian "savagery" against the "Europeans and Christians". During a year of terror that followed the events of May 1857, and for a long time to come, India went through a gigantic transformation which must be considered as one of the largest and most cruel experiment in social reengineering in modern history.
First the Company and later the British Crown, through its representative in India, the Viceroy, attempted to remake India in their own image. A society that had lived in a certain manner for centuries was remodelled from ground up. Memoirs, chronicles, letters, and personal accounts of the time describe cataclysmic events. "My dear sir," wrote Mirza Ghalib to Nawab Anwar al-Dawla, "what shall I say about the destruction of houses and mosques! The builder of the city might not have exerted so much planned effort for building them as the owners of the country [meaning the English] have for their destruction. My! my! Almost all buildings from the times of Shah Jahan within the walls of the fort and most of these in the city were demolished painstakingly and where picks and shovels and other tools did not suffice, tunnels were made and explosives were used to demolish them."
Aristocratic families of old were ruined, thousands were killed, imprisoned, or sent into exile, a whole new administrative was imposed, and new institutions were implanted which changed everything in the vast subcontinent--from the judiciary to education. The ill-fated effort also led to the insertion of the Jewel that India was, into the Crown of the British monarch, thus conveniently shifting the exploitation of Indian resources and people from the control a trading company that had come begging for concessions from the then mighty Mughals to the British monarch.
Ninety years later, when the British finally left the Indian subcontinent, they had produced so many brown sahibs that there was no further need for their physical presence; now they could achieve what they wanted remotely, although now they had to share their profits with a newly emerged tyrannical power. This shift would be so drastic that all previous history will be quickly obliterated to make room for an entirely different public discourse.
People who lose their history, simultaneously lose their future. We are such a people. Any attempt to reclaim history is simultaneously an attempt to reclaim future. Yet, it is neither the details the armed resistance against the occupiers nor the heart-wrenching accounts of those who were blown to pieces which make this attempt meaningful; it is in understanding the present in the light of the past that makes this act of recall a meaningful process of reconstruction and reassertion. Those who refuse to see their present in the light of their past, have no understanding of the extent of transformation Pakistan is now undergoing. They cannot imagine the new history of our people which will be written fifty years from now. That history will transfigure not only the May 1857, but also May 2009.
The writer is a freelance columnist.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Quantum Note
by Dr Muzaffar Iqbal
Email: quantumnotes@gmail.com
Sunday, May 31, 2009
I don't see you, but there is your nymph-smile
Ae Ajnabi from Dil Se, in English:
O love! You too, call me from somewhere.
I live here, broken-hearted
You spend your life, somewhere. Incomplete.
Everyday, a satin-like wind.
The satin-like wind, tells me
That pure, innocent child.
Where is she, where is it?
Where is the light, where is the life-spirit?
Incomplete, alone - we spend our life.
I don’t see you, but there is your nymph-smile
I see no face, but I see a shadow.
Where are you, where?
Where do I find you?
Where is my world?
Incomplete, you and I - wasting our life.
Friday, May 29, 2009
Marketing, Virtual Friendships and of course, Facebook
"...an average Facebook user with 500 friends actively follows the news on only 40 of them, communicates with 20, and keeps in close touch with about 10," according to an article at BusinessWeek.
Going by that, and given that I have 1272 friends, it means I actively follow the news on 101 friends, communicate with 50 (and a half, heh?), and keep in close touch with 25? But I only closely follow maybe 1-3 people! But I definitely communicate with more than 50 - through status comments, quiz comments and what not - apart from wall posts. Well, I guess it's a fair generalization still.
I'm most interested to know if the researchers can really come up with algorithms to friendships, or at least virtual friendships, because I believe that is impossible. It's all just random!
Another concern for me is, how do the researchers get their guinea pigs - the people they carry out research on? Like, let's say they want to study me because I'm such a "Facebook whore", would they just get access to my information without my consent? How many people I stalked, clicking through pictures, and viewing people's wall-to-walls and what not...
Or would they ask me first? If they do, and let's assume I say yes, does that mean I will be giving them access to my friends' information as well? Because - I think I raised this question before - who owns this data?
Naturally, Facebook terms and conditions stipulate that the users have no rights over the information, but still, it is information about ME! And while I still own the content, the statistical information could be useful too. If anyone else has a right to view it, I should be able to view it first! I also want to learn more about me and my habits!
Yes, after going through the Facebook principles, I think that any information that is provided to advertisers and marketers should be provided to me first.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
And I Thought I was Good at Brainstorming
It has always come so naturally to me. To get a few people together into one place and then have everyone throw their ideas around. I would dominate, using others' ideas and improving them (or reducing them, heh), and also jumpstarting the discussion by throwing in some stupid ideas at the beginning.
Alex Osburn, who came up with the idea of brainstorming in 1957, suggested such throwing around of ideas have only four rules:
The issue they need to understand is that creativity comes ad libitum: by being spontaneous and impromptu. A person can't sit alone at his desk and generate slogans, tag-lines, new names for products or services, or company names, or design. In this regard, I'm curious myself about how creative people function - especially in a corporate environment. Now, you can't book the meeting room each time you have to send one idea high up and can't decide between 20 ideas (only to receive a disdainful no every time).
But I'm confused, and as usual, this post doesn't serve to explain but to confuse further. I think great ideas come to you when your concentration is at its peak. Your concentration is at its peak when your presence of mind is at its height. And when it is at its height, you are most likely to be in the shower or taking a dump. You've gotta be peaceful!
On a similar note, here's a list of AMAZING tools to feed our creativity.
Alex Osburn, who came up with the idea of brainstorming in 1957, suggested such throwing around of ideas have only four rules:
- Don't criticize.
- Quantity is wanted.
- Combine and improve suggested ideas.
- Share ALL ideas that come to mind.
- Listen.
- Be positive. (until later, much later, when you have more than enough ideas.)
The issue they need to understand is that creativity comes ad libitum: by being spontaneous and impromptu. A person can't sit alone at his desk and generate slogans, tag-lines, new names for products or services, or company names, or design. In this regard, I'm curious myself about how creative people function - especially in a corporate environment. Now, you can't book the meeting room each time you have to send one idea high up and can't decide between 20 ideas (only to receive a disdainful no every time).
But I'm confused, and as usual, this post doesn't serve to explain but to confuse further. I think great ideas come to you when your concentration is at its peak. Your concentration is at its peak when your presence of mind is at its height. And when it is at its height, you are most likely to be in the shower or taking a dump. You've gotta be peaceful!
On a similar note, here's a list of AMAZING tools to feed our creativity.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Friday, May 22, 2009
I never wanna be Alone
Alone by Creed And Tool
Download now or listen on posterous
creed and tool - miscellaneous - alone.mp3 (3642 KB) Download now or listen on posterous
It's been a long day at the bottom of the hill,
she died of a broken heart.
She told me I was living in the past,
drinking from a broken glass.
Chorus
I'm alone [I never wanna be alone],
now I [now I] try to face the cold.
I'm alone [I never wanna be alone],
now I [now I] try to travel home.
I walked down to the other end of the day,
just to catch those last few waves.
I held out my hand and slowly waved goodbye,
I turned now my eyes up to the sky.
Chorus
I'm alone [I never wanna be alone],
now I [now I] try to face the cold.
I'm alone [I never wanna be alone],
now I [now I] try to travel home.
She'll come back to me. [She'll come back to me.]
She'll come back to me. [She'll come back to me.]
All alone in this mystery.
She'll come back to me.
I held out my hands into the light and I watched it die,
I know that I was part to play.
My god, my time to die.
Never want to spend my life alone.
Chorus
I'm alone [I never wanna be alone],
now I [now I] try to face the cold.
I'm alone [I never wanna be alone],
now I [now I] try to travel home.
Django Reinhardt - Duelling Banjos (deliverance)
Duelling Banjos (Deliverance) by Django Reinhardt
Download now or listen on posterous
django reinhardt - reinhardt - 01.mp3 (4800 KB) Download now or listen on posterous
Don't you just love musical instruments talking to each other?
Amazing Pakistan: A picture hidden from the World (Part-1)
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Yes, You Are Right
One of the most beautiful phrases to hear for any human being out there is: "Yes, you are right."
Everyone wants to be right about things they do or say - or they like to be told that the things they do or say are right. In the past week, I've been told I am right more times than my close group of friends and family have told me in a year. It's just fascinating.
I guess that is the main difference between a social and professional environment. Often, in social environments people are more prone to think that their righteousness supersedes everyone else's, and no one likes to be corrected. But in professional environments, people tend to be more ethical and more open to suggestions, feedback and critiques.
Of course, there are exceptions in every generalization (and this is a generalization).
Whatever the case, I haven't donned some kind of coporate suit to fit into this professional environment (or taken off my social suit). I am still very much myself. I must've been right all along. About most things at least, if not all.
Ah self-confidence, thou art a heartless bitch!
Everyone wants to be right about things they do or say - or they like to be told that the things they do or say are right. In the past week, I've been told I am right more times than my close group of friends and family have told me in a year. It's just fascinating.
I guess that is the main difference between a social and professional environment. Often, in social environments people are more prone to think that their righteousness supersedes everyone else's, and no one likes to be corrected. But in professional environments, people tend to be more ethical and more open to suggestions, feedback and critiques.
Of course, there are exceptions in every generalization (and this is a generalization).
Whatever the case, I haven't donned some kind of coporate suit to fit into this professional environment (or taken off my social suit). I am still very much myself. I must've been right all along. About most things at least, if not all.
Ah self-confidence, thou art a heartless bitch!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)












