Love in the 90’s

....huh?

oh! now I get it!

``rhyme is the name of the game

sometimes meaning can be absent as shame``

this is poetry!!??!!!

hmmmmmmmmmmm

Hello all,

I am impressed that some people do get time to read this kind of stuff and engage themselves in debates and discussions. I consider it a healthy exercise even though such ``mind-boggling`` intellectualism often comes from people at educational institutions across the river from where I am. As a scientist, I am more used to expression that is as clear and concise as possible, peeling away layers of subtlety and confusion. But then again, I am just one worker in a colony of workers and everybody has a different job to do.

Congratulations to the writer for cultivating interest in a group of people who really need and want a freedom of expression. I might not be making any grand statements here but every statement counts, right?

Keep the ball rolling. In social realms, the momentum often counts more than the mass itself. A summation of small fluctuations can sometimes force the system to re-equilibrate.

Re: Mohammad Faisal

``...There is inherent irony in most modern concerns; the accused becomes the accuser, the oppressed becomes the oppressor etc (REF: Martin Heidegger on action/inaction paradox). ``

Alas, political correctness is the orthodoxy of today.

Politically incorrect views are censored, banned, edited out. Individuals expressing such views are seen to have no right to speak their minds. We are told it is wrong to judge. Only the politically incorrect can be judged by the self-appointed spokesmen and spokeswomen of the politically correct group, who of course, are insulated from criticism of any kind ... since they are so PC.

Anita

While i do seem to have this amazing knack for ending discussion at this site, I`m going to give it another shot, regardless.

What I really enjoy at Chowk, is the vital `reparte` the articles tend to engender. Even as my blood begins to boil (!!!) at some of the responses, the multiplicity of opinions and the logic that drives (most of them) invariably brings me back to earth ... thinking.

Thanks!

RE: BG- On personal attacks, judgments and other such dilemmas.

Recently Paul Theroux published what in my opinion is his best work: memoirs concerning Sir Vidia S Naipaul titled ``Sir Vidia`s Shadow.`` The literary community in the US disregarded his work, considered it belligerent ranting of a lesser writer. Yes, there are discrepancies of historical facts, but that is beside the point. The book, with all its shortcomings, was most enjoyable, especially for an aspiring writer such as myself. It also gave me great insight into the making of VS Naipaul, one of the best writers of the English language. What Theroux achieved by supposedly defiling the character of a legend is debatable; and while we are on this topic, I would like to invite other chowkwallas to elaborate, especially Rana Ransher.

There is inherent irony in most modern concerns; the accused becomes the accuser, the oppressed becomes the oppressor etc (REF: Martin Heidegger on action/inaction paradox). Iconoclast Saab has explained this much better. If Theroux followed your injunctions then probably we would have missed this gem. Maybe its time to be less politically correct (REF: Shandana`s admiringly bold stances in all her work).

And where is that culprit, that poem we were not supposed to digress from- Irony?

Faisal

re iconoclast
``When you first saw the hyperlink to ``love in the 90s`` by Shandana Minhas, What was your reaction
?.


Did you think that ``wow, there must be some good stuff from a good author``.


actually, no. i admit i was pleased to see a new post by shandana, but i did not automatically assume it would be stuff i would like. and when i read it, i did not automatically get frustrated. this is my honest reply.

as i said, i agree that judging and expecting is not always wrong but it depends on what is being judged/expected and whether it is negotiated or imposed.

and, finally, i have no problem with people criticising the content or the style of something that has been written -- so if you want to say, `rubbish!` that`s fine -- i have a problem when the attack is on the person. ideally the criticism should engage the author. if not, it should at least be restricted to the content or style of the article. it doesnt matter if the personal attack is direct or dressed up in pretty language or intelligent-sounding allusions. if it is an attack on the person and not the argument or the style, then it is not constructive.

that`s just my opinion.

regards

iconoclast

i was making a general point about `expectations`, it wasnt directed at one individual in particular, and let me clarify that if i seemed to be personalizing the issue.

here`s my problem with `expectations`:

i find that they are often a tool to force/pressurize people to act/work in certain ways, based on assumptions that others` make about the individual. shandana has every right to write what she likes and you have every right to not like it or disagree with it. but, what`s up with saying she is trying so hard to be `shandana minhas`? whether she writes a masterpiece or a piece of rubbish, she IS who she is. and if that doesnt fit with anyone else`s idea of who she should be, well then its just too bad.

its that element of self-proclaimed chaudrahat that bothers me: ``i have decided you are capable of this or you are that and if you dont adhere to my notions of who you are, then there is something wrong with you/what you do!``

in real life `expectations` very often refer to roles and responsibilities. those that are mutually negotiated are fine, but those that are imposed are not.

Re: BG

Let me ask you a question and all it would take you is to answer it honestly to yourself.

When you first saw the hyperlink to ``love in the 90s`` by Shandana Minhas, What was your reaction ?.

Did you think that ``wow, there must be some good stuff from a good author``. Well , I did . and if you did think so, then you too would be guilty of expectations by your arguments. Here i and others have expectations of Shandana Minhas as a writer not as a person. The same way i would have expectations of a Spielberg`s movie. if Spielberg happens to direct a ``rubbish`` movie, in my opinion my expectations of Spielberg as a director would come down......... I as a viewer, have the right to criticise both the movie as well as the director. Having expectations and being judgemental are not wrong...it depends on when and where and how .... do read Saad`s reply again....

And since you pulled in the line ``trying too hard to be Shandana Minhas`` you might want to read Faisal`s reply again.

if you want to write what you will and do not want to be judged by people , then pray do not publish your writings......if it makes you happy to be praised as ``as usual, a good piece from a fine author`` then be prepared to face a critique as ``don`t try too hard to be``.

-

Iconoclast

The poem started like this:

When you were one,

my little son. . .

We shall never know how it went on; the infant ode was cut off in its cradle by the then literary editor of DAWN, who had printed even its opening lines only as a specimen of the dire amateur verse that pours in on the holders of posts like his. I will not question his judgment; what followed may well have been fit only for infanticide. But I wonder what the editors of chowk have to say about the buckets of dire verse-and still more of dire non-verse- that have been poured out by supposedly good poets of this community.

Regards.

Hey now folks,

I think this piece has a lot to say. At least the way I see it.
Freddy and Susan have some sort of a relationship in which they have cerain roles. For whatever reason, she is envious of Freddy`s position in the relationship (symbolized by having tickeled pink hair). She whacks him and takes his place, complete with `finding herself a new girl to while away her time`. She now `becomes` for this new girl what Freddy was to her. And the cycle continues.
You know a reforming `sect` opposing a `Church` but over time just becoming the same `Church`. This time very aptly illustrated with characters in a relationship.
As usual, a very well written piece.

regards
RanaRansher

RE: BG

```expectations` are just another excuse for being judgemental. ``

Weird, by labelling us as judgemental, aren`t you doing the same.

like, the accuser becomes the accused by accusing the accused of accusing.............

could`nt help that

iconoclast

re iconoclast:

i did not take issue with the criticism of my poem,as you pointed out, your right to do that is as strong as my right to write. i responded to what i felt was an unfair evaluation of my attitude.
the `morbid` comment was directed at myself and not at you or any other reader.

re rishi:

i wrote this poem about a year before any of the other stuff that has been published on chowk with the exception of `showt` is what i was trying to say.

shandana,

you are absolutely right! you have the right to write whatever it is you want. if people dont care for it, they are welcome not to read it or to read something else.

all you critics, you need to chill.

`expectations` are just another excuse for being judgemental.

RE Shandana,

I apologize if my remarks offended you. This was not a judgement on Shandana `the person,` but a critique on Shandana `the writer` we have come to know in this public sphere. If I was unable to resolve this difference in my opinion, again, forgive my laconic attitude.

You are of course free to write as you please. Reminds me of Salman Rushdie`s comment on Tasleema Nasreen: ``Everyone has freedom to write, even bad writers do.``

My two paisas gone, my kashkol revitalized.

Regards,

Faisal

Re: Shandana.

beats me....? what are you trying to say ? .

Re: Saad.

I concur that parts of the poem have a lovely arrangement of words.. but then parts normally do not make the `whole`.

Re: Faisal

yeah, some of her work have been pretty good that we do tend to have high expectations of her work.

Now probably we could start on ground zero.

Re: Sabrina.

``There is a merit to gut feelings``

hmmmm, pretty neat...

Re: Shandana

Does`nt most people write because they like what they write and it is because it is fun to write (and that would include Rushdie too !).

We do get a plethora of poems which we could criticize as `rubbish` in this forum, but then it was only natural to find a piece written by you which was devoid of the usual witticism, subtle nuances and the grand play of words as one below your standards (or atleast the standards that we subconsciously set for you based on your earlier works..) . If that offends your sensibilities, we would probably just refrain from criticizing it.

So I suppose, I or Faisal or anyone else in this forum do not deny you this right to write (not that we could even if we tried ).

But if you would continue to write `rubbish` then so be it....This is no forum for judging whether one`s penmanship is right or wrong. It is your choice , as much as it is mine to criticize it. But then i shall indeed try only to criticize the poem and not the author .

However, i also would not go to any lengths to catagorize you as a ``morbid person`` just for writing this poem , even if that involves you labelling your readers as one....

Your reply only ended up alienating atleast some of your readers if not many......

-Iconoclast