Travellers Through Time

What was the vow? I asked Premanand, an elderly sage of the Karia tribe living in my town. Premanand had attended an ashram in his youth, at Badmer, run by a reverend Lohar woman called Mataji. Now all the Karias in this town were disciples of Mataji. Premanand had also recorded the legend of the Gadia Lohars in Hindi.

So what was the vow, and how did it come to be made? I repeated my question to the old man.

We, the Gadia Lohars (the name by which the Karias are known in India) originate from a notable high-caste Rajput clan of Mewar, began Premanand softly. Our tribe is broadly divided into groups called the Solanki, Parmars, Chohans, Borana and Bhagelas. When Allauddin Khilji attacked Chitorgarh to kidnap Rani Padmani, our people courageously defended the honour of the clan. It remained like that till 1567, when Maharana Partab Singh lost Chitor to Raja Man Singh, the commander of the Mughal forces.

Though Partab Singh was soundly defeated at the battle of Haldi_Ghat, he refused to give up, and took refuge in the jungle. All the chieftains of Mewar assembled before the Maharana, and made a vow that unless they were victorious in their efforts to take Chitor back from the Mughals, the tribe would not make houses, nor sleep on charpoys, nor eat in metal utensils; and neither would they wear gold or live in comfort. Since then our people have roamed in bullock carts from place to place, working as ironsmiths throughout north and west India for centuries and never breaking the vow, concluded Premanand.

how did you turn to ironsmithing, after being a fierce warrior clan? I asked him.

Well, some of our ancestors excelled in the art of weaponry. They made swords and shields for battle. Many in the clan knew the art. But after we left Chitor and began our new life as Tiyagis we didn’t want to beg, and so we adopted this new livelihood as a necessity for survival.

Premanand belongs to one of the many nomadic tribes which wander throughout the subcontinent. Known as Karias in Sind (which means black in Sindhi), they are called Gadia or Gadolia Lohars in the rest of the subcontinent. They originate from Mewar state of western Rajasthan, and still use a dialect of that area as their mother tongue. The legend of which Premanand spoke became the basis of a cult to which they have belonged for centuries, roaming in their bullock carts through Rajasthan, Gujrat, Sind, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh and even further south and east. Earning their livelihood as ironsmiths (hence the name Lohar) they are highly conspicuous the men with their long moustaches and parted beards, and the women with their arms full of bangles, hammering the hot iron as they produce and repair sickles, axes, machos, ploughs and other agricultural equipment for the rural peasantry.

The wandering tribes of the subcontinent can be divided into two main categories gypsies and nomads. Their origins date back to the dawn of human history, before the development of agricultural civilisations, when man lived by hunting animals and gathering together food from the wild plants of the forest and plain.

It was probably in the river valleys that the first human settlements were made, where the women developed a primitive mode of agriculture along the water channels, while the men continued to hunt. But many continued with their nomadic ways and some still maintain the tradition till today.

The category of wanderers whom we call gypsies are those who never found their environment conducive to a settled life. They are the oldest people of this land, descendants of the pre-Aryan age the Dooms, the Meers, the Naths, the puppeteers, the Darawars, the Jogis, the Shikaris, the Shamis, the Sanyasis, the Kucharas, the Gurgalas, the Jindawaras, the Changars, the Kanjars. Their dark pigmentation and short staturesupport the conjecture that they belong to a Dravidian or pre-Dravidian race.

They have no sense of property or ownership, and live from day to day, the most peaceable of people, earning their living by some form of art or craft. So-called civilised society has never sought to accommodate them, and they for their part have never found the business-minded, greedy and self-destructive urban society worthy of notice or communication.

These tribes have no sense of property or ownership, and live from day to day, the most peaceful of people. Killing, rape and murder are unheard-of among them. They earn their living by some form of art or craft toy-making, reed crafts, puppet shows, snake-charming, acrobatic performances, fortune or story-telling, singing, dancing, begging for alms and in rare cases, cheating. So-called civilised society has never sought to accommodate them, and they, for their part, have never found the business-minded, greedy and self-destructive urban society worthy of notice or communication. The two have remained untouchable for each other for thousands of years.

Interestingly, most linguists and sociologists now believe that the European gypsies, scattered from Spain to Latin America, are of Indian origin. They are said to have migrated to the West around the 10th century. Their language, grammar, culture and skin colour speak for their Indian antecedents, and they continue to live by the same means arts and crafts and to worship a deity, often known as the Black Madonna, who may be a version of the Hindu goddess Mata.

When the Mughals conquered the fort of Chitor, our tribe made a vow that until we were victorious in our efforts to take it back, we would not make houses, nor sleep on charpoys, nor eat in metal utensils; and neither would we wear gold or live in comfort. Since then we have roamed in our bullock carts, working as ironsmiths for centuries, and never breaking the vow.

The other category of wanderers the nomadic or semi-nomadic people has perhaps arisen through force of circumstances. For instance, once the prosperous agrarian civilisations developed in the river valleys, they attracted the poorer hill people and steppe tribes from the north-west, the Aryans, who poured in like locusts and pushed out the old, simpler folk. Having been pushed out of their natural home, these people roamed the wilderness, trying to regroup in order to recover their lands.

But the continuing invasions from the north-west did not allow them time for this. There was always a fresh Ghauri hard at the heels of a weary Ghazni. So, forced to flee and roam, they show signs of the bitterness of their wandering. Quick to anger, and often hostile, they are usually branded as criminal tribes. They have seen settled life in their past, and some of them were ruling tribes. They maintain a strong sense of historical identity, through their traditions, folklore and legends. They neither forget their past, nor do they forget the racial discrimination they have faced through centuries of caste oppression. These people, unlike true gypsies, have a strong sense of property, and are not always peaceable.

The Ahirs, Minas, Odes, Bhils, Kohlis, Ganwarias, Banjaras, Bagris, Rahbaris and the Gadia Lohars belong to this category. They, too are dark in pigmentation, and do not seem to differ much from the gypsies in culture. Most of the Minas and Ahirs, renowned for their prowess in cattle and grain-lifting, remained in India. The Ganwaria women, however, are often seen in Pakistan, as roadside hawkers. They carry their shops on their heads, and speak a Marwari dialect. The Kohlis, Bheels, and Meghwars now work as agricultural labourers, and are keen to settle down. The Meghwars, who also do leatherwork, are already settled in towns. Honest, strong and hard-working, they are now in popular demand as peasants in Sind.

Many Muslim Odes migrated to Pakistan during Partition. Their main skill was shepherding, in contrast to the Sindhi Odes, who build mud walls and houses. The Indian Odes wanted to settle down, and chose the fringes of the Cholistan desert in Bahawalpur state as their new homeland. They claimed and occupied 12 acres of land per family. But the bureaucratic feudal government of the early 50s, following the British colonial administrations guidelines as if they were sacred scriptures, maintained their old status as a criminal tribe, and ejected them from their land. The Odes turned to manual labour, working on building sites, in order to survive. Their hard-working, colourfully-dressed and robust women, with huge golden loongs and balis in their noses and ears, can often bee seen climbing a ladder with half a maund of bricks loaded on their heads. If that is the fate of a Muslim nomadic people, what happened to the majority of these tribes, who belong to the pre-Islamic, pre-Brahmanic tradition, is anyone’s guess.

The Karias, the tribe to which Premanand belongs, are no longer nomadic. Soon after Partition, the Gadia Lohars started settling down, breaking their ancient vow. Why? I asked Premanand. Has the vow been fulfilled?

He smiled gently, and his old eyes glinted. Yes, the vow has been fulfilled, he said. It happened in the early 50s. Nehruji, then Prime Minister of India, called a big sammelan of all the Gadia Lohars of India, and told them that the Mughal rule over Chitor finished a long time ago, and thus the vow has officially been fulfilled. Pandit Nehru paid a great tribute to the sacrifices made by the Gadia Lohars for the cause of liberation of their homeland by offering them free land and house-building loans for their settlements. But the Gadia Lohars insisted that unless they entered the fort of Chitor as conquerors they would not break the vow. And so a mock battle took place. A huge procession of Gadia Lohars, arrayed in battle dress, mounted on thousands of bullock carts, waving swords, and shields, charged and entered the fort like victors. And that was the end of nearly 40years of wandering.

We who happened to be on this side of the border, hearing the call of our chieftains, also started settling down at one of our favourite deserted camping sites, on the outskirts of towns. As the towns gradually spread we became part of them.

Are your people happy now with this settled life? I asked the others who had gathered around us. Old habits die hard, said Bhaggu, a Lohar who had been to Chitor some years ago. The general pattern of life remains unchanged, except that were not on the run any more. We still live in shanty huts, and even those who had the fortune to acquire a pucca house abandon it at night to sleep out in the open.

Meanwhile, Kewal, Krishan, Narayan and Prem, a group of dark, handsome youths, had entered the house very respectfully. Some of them were school and college-going students. Prem wanted to become an engineer. Most of them were interested in the history of Mewar, and I promised to bring them the Annals of Mewar from Todds Rajasthan. I left them sitting on charpoys, eating from copper utensils, golden rings dangling from their ears.

Posted by Faizan Bhatti 

The Islamic Perspective of Reading Harry Potter and Other Novels

In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.

Islam emphasizes to preserve and conserve one’s Iman. A Muslim’s Iman is his most important asset andshould be unwavering, steadfast and resolute. Anything that may compromise one’s Iman should be avoided.

Reading fiction/ fantasy is in itself not impermissible. However,

 it is an undeniable and incontrovertible fact that everything a person reads affects a person psychologically and at times even physically. Books and literature have the power to bring out all sorts of emotions and reactions in people; laughter, frowning, shrieking out, worrying, rejoicing, mourning and an array of emotions. Some books are so powerful that they leave an impression in a person’s life; the way one talks, acts and conducts oneself with other people. Reading takes people away from reality. It places a person in the middle of a situation so vivid that the person doesn't even know what is going on in the real world. They capture a person’s imagination and heart through a combination of captivating and engrossing plots and characters; so much so that the characters take up their own place in one’s head.

A well-written book has the ability to affect ones moral code; it can blur the lines between what is right and wrong, moral and immoral, acceptable and outright unethical. If a person feels that a book is impacting him in a negative way; affecting ones Iman or psychologically; the person should immediately stop reading the book. 

Harry Potter is a series that has its basis deep rooted in magic; something that is expressly prohibited to learn and practice in Shariah. It should be kept in mind that in Islam, there is no differentiation or separation in magic; no ‘good magic’ in contrast to ‘dark arts’. All magic is prohibited. If a person upon reading this series; or any other series; starts to revere, admire and become in awe of magic, he should stop as this is in conflict with a Muslim’s beliefs.

One may read such books to increase ones linguistic skills on condition the reading does not affect ones Imani (religious) values and thinking. If ones Imani values and thinking will be wrongly influenced, then it is prohibited to read such books.

And Allah Ta’āla Knows Best

Saanwalibn Muhammad, Student Darul Iftaa UK 

Checked and Approved by, Mufti Ebrahim Desai.

Role of Sociologists to Analysis and Solving Problems

What is the proper task of the sociologist?

Is it merely to observe human action with the calm, detached curiosity of the ecologist who counts the lemmings as they dive into the ea? Or should the sociologist rush into social action? Should the professor of sociology encourage students to develop a detached understanding of social phenomena or inspire them to man the barricades for social reform? What is the proper role for the sociologist in a changing society?

The Sociologist as Research Scientist

Like all scientists, sociologists are concerned with both collecting and using knowledge. They share in these tasks in various ways.

Conducting Scientific Research:

As a scientist, the sociologist’s foremost task is to discover and organize knowledge about social life. A number of full-time research sociologists are employed by universities, government agencies, foundations, or corporations, and many sociologists divide their time between teaching and research. Many university sociologists are engaged in “funded” research, with all or part of their salaries and their research expenses paid from research grants made by government agencies, foundations, or corporations. These grants are made to sociologists who submit an acceptable proposal for research on a particular topic. Since little research can be conducted without research funds, this gives the funding agencies great power to influence the direction of sociological research.

Radical critics of sociology (including some sociologists) claim that, behind a façade of ethical neutrality and objective, sociologists have prostituted their research talents to the support of the interests of the funding agencies, and have thus supported militarism, racism, and other forms of oppression [Gouldner, 1962, 1970; Frederichs, 1970 pp. 823 – 85; any issue of The Insurgent Sociologist].

Whether sociological research has been widely corrupted in this manner may be debated [Horton and Bouma, 1971]. What is indisputable is that problems of bias and partisanship are present in all research, and that research findings are often helpful to the interests of some people and damaging to the interests of other people [Becker, 1967]. Even the definition of a research problem may carry an implicit bias. For example if we state a research problem as, “What characteristics of poor people contribute to their poverty?” we imply that the responsibility rests mainly on the poor people themselves; but if we define the problem as, “What social arrangements produce poverty?” then the responsibility is placed upon “society”.

Throughout most of the history of sociology, sociologists were often accused of being radical subversives whose research and teaching were a threat to established institutions and vested interests. Many older sociologists today, still bearing the scars of the anticommunist witch hunts of the 1950s, are puzzled and hurt when students and younger sociologists accuse them of having been lackeys of capitalistic oppression all their lives! But the question to society is as old as science itself, and will not soon be settled.

Correcting Popular Nonsense:

Another task of the sociologist as a scientist is to clear away the intellectual rubbish of misinformation and superstition which clutters so much of our social thinking. Sociologists have helped to bury a great deal of nonsense about heredity, race, class, sex differences, deviation, and nearly every other aspect of behaviour. It is due partly to the findings of sociology that today we rarely hear an educated person argue that the white race is innately superior, that women are intellectually inferiorto men, that behaviour traits are inherited, or that rural people are less “immoral” than urbanities – ideas which nearly every educated person accepted a half century ago. By helping replace superstition and misinformation with accurate knowledge about human behaviour, sociologists are perhaps performing their most important function.

Making Sociological Predictions: 

Although the track record of sociologists in making social predictions is not impressive, someone must make social predictions. Every policy decision is based upon certain assumptions about the present and future state of the society. A legislator who says “We need more severe penalties to curb drug pushing” is predicting that more severe penalties actually will curb the narcotics business without creating even greater problems. Another legislator who says “Legalize marijuana” is making a set of predictions about the consequences of this action. Thus every policy recommendation inevitably implies a set of assumptions and predictions. What sort of predictions do sociologists offer? Here are a few samples, offered without explanation or documentation at this point, as examples of the kind of predictions sociologists can make:

The trend toward employment of women will continue until most women are working for most of their married lives.

Birth rates will fall to approach death rates, or death rates will rise to approach birth rates.

Despite some experimentation with alternatives, the monogamous nuclear family will continue to be the basic family type in the United States.

The present popularity of jeans and casual clothing among young people will be followed by a return to high-style clothing.

The recent trend onward early retirement will soon be replaced by efforts to lengthen the work career.

Most social science prediction consists not of predicting specific developments, as the astronomer predicts an eclipse, but of forecasting the general pattern of trends and changes which seem most probable [e.g., Bell, The Coming of Post-Industrial Society: A Venture in Social Forecasting, 1973]. All such predictions or forecasts should be offered with certain humility, for no certainty attends them. Instead, social scientists offer them as the best, most informed guesses available upon which to base our policy decisions and expectations for the future.

The Sociologist as Policy Consultant:

Sociological prediction can also help to estimate the probable effects of a social policy. Every social policy decision is a prediction. A policy (e.g. federal grants for Head Start) is begun in the hope that it will produce a desired effect (e.g. narrow he educational gap between poorer and more prosperous children). Policies have often failed because they embodied unsound assumptions and predictions. Sociologists can help to predict the effects of a policy, and thus contribute to the selection of policies which achieve the intended purposes. For example:

What effect does dropping out of high school have upon a youth’s future earnings? (Little or none, when other factors are equal).

What would be the effect of intensified law enforcementupon campus marijuana use? (Little or no reduction, with aggravation of other student-police problems).

Would low birth rates and a small-family norm increase marital happiness? (Yes; there is research evidence that smaller families are better off in every way).

Would publishing the names of juvenile delinquents help to reduce delinquency? (No; it would more likely increase it).

Would the suppression of obscene literature help to reduce sex crimes and sex immorality? (Our limited evidence suggests that it would not).

Would legal barriers to abortion strengthen family life? (No; most sociologists believe this would increase illegitimate births, unwanted children, child abuse, and family discord).

These are a few of the many social policy questions which sociologists could help to settle. One of the greatest services any scholarly group can offer is to show the society what policies are most likely to work in achieving its objectives. This is a service which sociologists are qualified to perform.

The Sociologist as Technician:

Some sociologists are engaged in planning and conducting community action programs; advising on public relations, employee relations, problems of morale or of “inter-group relations” within the organization; working on human relations problems of many sorts. Often these sociologists have specialized in social psychology, industrial sociology, urban or rural sociology, or the sociology of complex organizations.

Recently the term clinical sociologist has appeared to describe the work of the sociologist as technician [Gardner, 1978]. To some extent, this is a new name for what sociologists have been doing for a long time, but it also includes a considerable broadening of the range of sociologists’ efforts to be useful in society.

In such positions the sociologist is working as an applied scientist. He or she has been engaged to use scientific knowledge in pursuing certain values – a harmonious and efficient working force, an attractive public image of the industry, or an effective community action program. This role raises a question of ethics. When a sociologist accepts employment as a technician, pursuing values chosen by an employer, has scientific integrity been compromised? To make an extreme example, there is evidence [Monroe, 1962] that gambling operators engaged social scientists to find out why people do or do not gamble, so that the operators could learn how to attract more customers. (We do not know whether any sociologists were included). Would this be a form of scientific prostitution?

The radical critics of “establishment sociology” charge that sociologists have “sold out” whenever they serve as technicians or research scholars in any kind of effort to maintain or improve the efficiency of government, military, capitalistic, or welfare establishments. Thus, not only are sociologists (if any) working in war-related activities condemned, but even sociologists working in programs to improve the health of poor children in Mississippi, to increase agricultural output in Peru, or to teach birth control in village India are sometimes accused of supporting “oppression”. This is the classic view of the revolutionist – any attempt to make the present system work better, or to help people find better lives within the system is “oppressive” because it helps to perpetuate the system.

There is no simple answer to the question of what clinical appointments it is proper for the sociologist to accept. Each sociologist’s answer will be found partly in the prevailing views of the academic world at that moment and partly in his or her own conscience.

The Sociologist as Teacher:

Teaching is the major career of many sociologists. In addition to the concerns and problems of teaching in any field, the problem of value neutrality versus value commitment is a particularly acute question. For example, in a course on “poverty”, should the sociologist supervise an objective study of facts, theories, and policies – possibly sympathetic but as objective as possible? Or should the course be designed to produce dedicated advocates of a particular action program? Should the sociologist seek to convert students to conservatism, liberal reformism, or revolutionary activism? For some decades the ethics of university teaching have demanded that the teacher refrain from all conscious “indoctrination,” but this question is now under spirited debate.

The Sociologist and Social Action:

Scientists seek to discover knowledge. Should scientists also tell the society how this knowledge should be used? For example, the geneticists already know something about human heredity, and before very long it may be possible to control the genetic makeup of babies, and “order” babies according to a specifications list. Who should dedicate what sort of baby should go to whom? The scientists? The parents? The Government?

The basic question is whether science – specifically sociology – should be value-free. For example, sociologists know some things about population growth, race relations, urban development, and many other matters involving questions of public policy. Should sociologists become public advocates of birth control programs, legalized abortion, women’s liberation, legalized marijuana, racial integration, and many other programs which they may consider socially desirable?

Early sociologists gave an emphatic “yes” to this question. Without an adequate foundation of scientific knowledge, they rushed to support all sorts of public policies they believed wise. Between 1920 and 1940, many sociologists shifted to the view that sociology should be a more nearly “pure” science, discovering knowledge but not attempting to decree how it should be used. They sought to build sociology on the model of physics or chemistry, as a value-free science. As such, it should be committed to no values except those of free scientific inquiry. Sociologists generally avoided involvement in controversial issues and sought the status of “pure” social scientists.

More recently, this view has been challenged in both physical and social science. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists carries many articles by scientists urging their fellows to claim a larger role in deciding the uses of nuclear science discoveries. Many sociologists today believe that sociologists should claim a major role in making decision about public policy and should involve themselves in the major issues of our society [Lindesmith, 1960; Horowitz, 1964; Stein and Vidich, 1964; A. Lee, 1966, 1973, 1978; Becker 1967]. They charge that sociologists have buried themselves in “safe” research topics, leaving the really important questions to non-sociologists – questions such as “How can poverty be reduced?” “How can schools be integrated?” “How can communities be organized for more civilized social living?” “Should the goals and values of American society be altered to promote human welfare?” They feel that not only do sociologists have a duty to say what society might do about problems of race conflict, population growth, birth control, drug addiction, divorce, sex deviation, medical care, etc. but that sociologists have a duty to say what our society should do about such problems. Books like Shostak’s Putting Sociology to Work [1947] provide concrete examples of how sociologists are involving themselves in social issues and constructive social action and show what they have learned from these experiences.

Sociology today, in common with all the other social sciences, has some members who insist that, both individually and as an academic discipline, sociologists should openly and publicly support the “radical reconstruction of society” [Szymanski, 1970; Colfax and Roach, 1971; D. Horowitz, 1971; Sternberg, 1977]. This question is receiving much attention in sociological literature [Douglas, 1970; Lee, 1978; Harris, 1980]. Whether sociology should be value-free is an unsettled question, but sociologists are agreed upon the following propositions.

The Study of Sociology:

Students are sometimes delighted to find in sociology (or another social science) evidence that some of their parents fondest beliefs are outmoded superstitions. But when they find evidence that their own beliefs are scientifically unfounded, their reaction to this correction may not differ greatly from that of their parents. To separate sense from nonsense is one of the objectives of sociology. Only those who are willing and able to subject their beliefs, assumptions, and practices to objective scientific scrutiny will gain much from the study of any of the social sciences.

Posted by Faizan Bhatti 

Satiric Methods Used by Swift in Gulliver’s Travels

Swift, in Gulliver’s Travels, adopt different methods and devices of satire, which includes both comic satire as well as corrosive satire. The most distinguished and outstanding satirists were the Romans, Horace and Juvenal. They represent two different modes of satire. Horace used to write comic satires, while Juvenal distinguished himself by writing sever and lashing satire. The comic satire always creates laughter, while in the other one, laughter is at the minimum, or it may be completely absent. Swift employs the corrosive type of satire, and makes use of the comic ones in order torefresh his readers.

We find several examples of comic satire in Gulliver’s Travels. In the first part of the book, the passage dealing with High-Heel and the Low-Heels, while describing the political conflict between the two political parties ofEngland and the Big-endians and the Small-endiansproblem between the two religious fations are the bestexamples of a comic satire. In the same part, we read about Gulliver, who has deserved the highest gratitude from the Lilliputians, commits capital offence, when he urinates in the precincts of the royal palace in order to extinguish a fire, which breaks out in the place. Similarly “for refusing to seize all the ships of Blefuscu and put to death all the Big-endian exiles” is another example of corrosive satire in the first part of the book. Though the entire event creates laughter, but the court’s debate on how to dispose of Gulliver, basically belongs to the category of corrosive satire. This episode is the longest passage which deals with the climax of the first voyage, the attack is very bitter. In this passage, Swift exposes the hypocrisy, ingratitude and cruelty of the Lilliputian court, who gave a cruel verdict to blind Gulliver and to let him starve to death. That is why, the satire is extraordinarily bitter and corrosive. We also enjoy the scandal between Gulliver and the Lilliputian lady who is hardly six inches high and in his long defence Gulliver never mentions the difference in his own size with that of the Lilliputian lady.

In the second part of the book which deals with the Brobdingnag, we find quite interesting and mirthful descriptions, which increase the comic episodes and the corrosive satire carries far more weight than in part-I of the book. Because in this part, the comic effect is achieved, where people were like giants about sixty feet height, which is Lilliput in reverse. Everything was humiliating for Gulliver in this land. He was put in charge of a nine year old girl who grew very found of him. The girl was very good-natured. Her height was forty feet and she was considered to be undersized for her age. Gulliver, who is no bigger than a mouse in this land becomes famous throughout the country. In this way Gulliver is made a comic butt in several other episodes. The corrosive effect is achieved when the king of Brobdingnag discusses the mankind with Gulliver. The King describes the bulk of mankind as “the most pernicious race of little odious vermin that Nature has ever suffered to crawl upon the surface of the earth.” This is, without any doubt is a corrosive criticism, which the king of Brobdingnag ahs made against the mankind. It is definitely not comic. Gulliver positively expresses his great surprise and embarrassment, when he listens all this against his beloved country so abdly described. Even listening to these disgraceful remarks, Gulliver still suggests that the king may be given great allowance because he lives a scheduled life from the rest of the world. This comment further worsens the status of mankind. Swift does not stop with this much taunt and lashes another attack when Gulliver divulges the secret of gunpowder to the king who is completely horrified with its fatal results. He forbids Gullivers not to mention it again. Gulliver passes his most astonishing remarks that the king possesses short views and narrow principles.

When we turn over the pages of the book to its third part we find Gulliver in another strange country called Laputa. This is the funniest part of the book, especially when we come across “flappers” or servant who carry a blown bladder in their hands fastened to a short stick. It is done basically to attract the attention of their master who are intensely busy in their inventions and mathematical calculations. They can neither speak nor listen to others unless they are aroused by these flappers. This is all very comic and amusing. On the dinner table, there are different dishes, in which the mutton is cut into an equilateral triangle, pudding in geometrical shapes. What to speak of these descriptions, we are amused when the beauty of a woman is describe in geometrical terms such as circles and parallegrams. We are further surprised when their women indulge in extra-marital activities with the strangers in the presence of their husbands because they are so busy that they do not find time to make loveto their wives. It is a social hit and at the same time a more corrosive than comic satire. We are further amused when we read about various projects being experimented at the academy in Lagado where research work is carried out how to extract sunbeams out of cucumber and silk out of cobwebs. Similarly, how tobuild houses from the roof downwards. This is a satire on the kind of work which the Royal Society in Englandwas engaged in extremely stupid as well as uselessprojects in those days. Another corrosive satire is made by Swift when he tells us how a visitor wanting to meet the king had to creep on the floor and lick it when approaching the King. All this, in short is a satire on the human desire for immorality. It is passively a bitter satire.

The fourth part of the book is replete with corrosive satire deep and merciless. In his part, Swift divides the human nature in two parts. He shows Houyhnhnms (the horses) possessing reason and benevolence and on its contrary the Yahoos (the deformed human beings) as extraordinarily brutes. The satire would have been much less effective it the Houyhnhnms had been shown as a superior human race. The reader would not have felt himself inferior to Houyhnhnms.

Swift is realist in his approach, because there is more of the Yahoos in mankind than there is of benevolence and reason. Thus his attack becomes more forceful, when he knows and describes that there is much to be hated in the animal called man, but he never forgets that here are many loveable individuals among human beings. Gulliver’s physical sense of proportion was upset by his voyage to Lilliput and Brobdingnag, in the lands of midgets and giants, so in the land of Houyhnhnms and Yahoos, his intellectual sense of proportion is miserable overbalanced “The limited, simplified Houyhnhnms point of view is obviously better to him than the Yahoo state; and he clings to it. Swift can keep clear the double physical scale of Gulliver and giant; not so Gulliver. Similarly, Swift himself is convinced that he is a Yahoo.”

“A satire of Swift’s is…..an exhibited situation, or series of such situations… With a recognition of the situation as such comes a perception of the functional character of Swift’s favourite devices, which serve both in the creation of the situation and in the generation of the kinetic energy by which it is sustained. There at least five devices that strike us forcibly; drama by way of created characters; parody or at any rate the imitation of a specific literary genre; allegory the “myth”, and “discoveries, projects and machines.”

Posted by Faizan Bhatti

Swift, in Gulliver’s Travels, adopt different methods and devices of satire, which includes both comic satire as well as corrosive satire. The most distinguished and outstanding satirists were the Romans, Horace and Juvenal. They represent two different modes of satire. Horace used to write comic satires, while Juvenal distinguished himself by writing sever and lashing satire. The comic satire always creates laughter, while in the other one, laughter is at the minimum, or it may be completely absent. Swift employs the corrosive type of satire, and makes use of the comic ones in order torefresh his readers.

We find several examples of comic satire in Gulliver’s Travels. In the first part of the book, the passage dealing with High-Heel and the Low-Heels, while describing the political conflict between the two political parties ofEngland and the Big-endians and the Small-endiansproblem between the two religious fations are the bestexamples of a comic satire. In the same part, we read about Gulliver, who has deserved the highest gratitude from the Lilliputians, commits capital offence, when he urinates in the precincts of the royal palace in order to extinguish a fire, which breaks out in the place. Similarly “for refusing to seize all the ships of Blefuscu and put to death all the Big-endian exiles” is another example of corrosive satire in the first part of the book. Though the entire event creates laughter, but the court’s debate on how to dispose of Gulliver, basically belongs to the category of corrosive satire. This episode is the longest passage which deals with the climax of the first voyage, the attack is very bitter. In this passage, Swift exposes the hypocrisy, ingratitude and cruelty of the Lilliputian court, who gave a cruel verdict to blind Gulliver and to let him starve to death. That is why, the satire is extraordinarily bitter and corrosive. We also enjoy the scandal between Gulliver and the Lilliputian lady who is hardly six inches high and in his long defence Gulliver never mentions the difference in his own size with that of the Lilliputian lady.

In the second part of the book which deals with the Brobdingnag, we find quite interesting and mirthful descriptions, which increase the comic episodes and the corrosive satire carries far more weight than in part-I of the book. Because in this part, the comic effect is achieved, where people were like giants about sixty feet height, which is Lilliput in reverse. Everything was humiliating for Gulliver in this land. He was put in charge of a nine year old girl who grew very found of him. The girl was very good-natured. Her height was forty feet and she was considered to be undersized for her age. Gulliver, who is no bigger than a mouse in this land becomes famous throughout the country. In this way Gulliver is made a comic butt in several other episodes. The corrosive effect is achieved when the king of Brobdingnag discusses the mankind with Gulliver. The King describes the bulk of mankind as “the most pernicious race of little odious vermin that Nature has ever suffered to crawl upon the surface of the earth.” This is, without any doubt is a corrosive criticism, which the king of Brobdingnag ahs made against the mankind. It is definitely not comic. Gulliver positively expresses his great surprise and embarrassment, when he listens all this against his beloved country so abdly described. Even listening to these disgraceful remarks, Gulliver still suggests that the king may be given great allowance because he lives a scheduled life from the rest of the world. This comment further worsens the status of mankind. Swift does not stop with this much taunt and lashes another attack when Gulliver divulges the secret of gunpowder to the king who is completely horrified with its fatal results. He forbids Gullivers not to mention it again. Gulliver passes his most astonishing remarks that the king possesses short views and narrow principles.

When we turn over the pages of the book to its third part we find Gulliver in another strange country called Laputa. This is the funniest part of the book, especially when we come across “flappers” or servant who carry a blown bladder in their hands fastened to a short stick. It is done basically to attract the attention of their master who are intensely busy in their inventions and mathematical calculations. They can neither speak nor listen to others unless they are aroused by these flappers. This is all very comic and amusing. On the dinner table, there are different dishes, in which the mutton is cut into an equilateral triangle, pudding in geometrical shapes. What to speak of these descriptions, we are amused when the beauty of a woman is describe in geometrical terms such as circles and parallegrams. We are further surprised when their women indulge in extra-marital activities with the strangers in the presence of their husbands because they are so busy that they do not find time to make loveto their wives. It is a social hit and at the same time a more corrosive than comic satire. We are further amused when we read about various projects being experimented at the academy in Lagado where research work is carried out how to extract sunbeams out of cucumber and silk out of cobwebs. Similarly, how tobuild houses from the roof downwards. This is a satire on the kind of work which the Royal Society in Englandwas engaged in extremely stupid as well as uselessprojects in those days. Another corrosive satire is made by Swift when he tells us how a visitor wanting to meet the king had to creep on the floor and lick it when approaching the King. All this, in short is a satire on the human desire for immorality. It is passively a bitter satire.

The fourth part of the book is replete with corrosive satire deep and merciless. In his part, Swift divides the human nature in two parts. He shows Houyhnhnms (the horses) possessing reason and benevolence and on its contrary the Yahoos (the deformed human beings) as extraordinarily brutes. The satire would have been much less effective it the Houyhnhnms had been shown as a superior human race. The reader would not have felt himself inferior to Houyhnhnms.

Swift is realist in his approach, because there is more of the Yahoos in mankind than there is of benevolence and reason. Thus his attack becomes more forceful, when he knows and describes that there is much to be hated in the animal called man, but he never forgets that here are many loveable individuals among human beings. Gulliver’s physical sense of proportion was upset by his voyage to Lilliput and Brobdingnag, in the lands of midgets and giants, so in the land of Houyhnhnms and Yahoos, his intellectual sense of proportion is miserable overbalanced “The limited, simplified Houyhnhnms point of view is obviously better to him than the Yahoo state; and he clings to it. Swift can keep clear the double physical scale of Gulliver and giant; not so Gulliver. Similarly, Swift himself is convinced that he is a Yahoo.”

“A satire of Swift’s is…..an exhibited situation, or series of such situations… With a recognition of the situation as such comes a perception of the functional character of Swift’s favourite devices, which serve both in the creation of the situation and in the generation of the kinetic energy by which it is sustained. There at least five devices that strike us forcibly; drama by way of created characters; parody or at any rate the imitation of a specific literary genre; allegory the “myth”, and “discoveries, projects and machines.”

Posted by Faizan Bhatti

Comedy programmes sans humour — Syed Kamran Hashmi

Not that there is any harm in parody, but sadly, impersonation has become the only form of comedy on television nowadays

The duplicate prime minister 

was impressive. There were some minor differences in his facial expressions but overall he looked very similar; his voice was identical and his peculiar accent was copied magnificently. After a few minutes, I flipped the channel and watched President Asif Ali Zardari being mocked in a different comedy programme; then it was General (Retd) Musharraf, followed by Mian Nawaz Sharif and the list went on. In short, all the prominent political leaders had their dummies in the programmes and surprisingly, they all looked very close to their real counterparts. That Friday evening was no different in its primetime programmes; there were numerous political comedy shows being televised and they all looked similar, based collectively on caricature and impersonation, without any exception. After watching just a few, I was quickly bored and turned off the television.

We all know that before the liberation of the current media policy in 2003-04, it was impossible to contemplate a comical representation of the president of Pakistan on television while he was wearing a military uniform. But after the policy was relaxed, one of the news channels took the initiative and introduced a comedy programme on the weekends. Being the only one for a while, it turned out to be a huge success. It was hilarious, tremendously realistic and incredibly sarcastic. The programme was also recognised internationally by The Washington Post and was appreciated for its ingenuity and creativity. After its success, almost every major news network has added one or more weekly comedy shows. With some minor rearrangements, most of these programmes are based on mimicry. Not that there is any harm in parody, but sadly, impersonation has become the only form of comedy on television nowadays. Sometimes, a social class is imitated, and at others a profession, but mostly it is about a renowned political personality. In these programmes, regrettably, very little is focused on the actual writing of the script and the success of the show is fundamentally based on their copying skills.

Even though it is a freshman in the Pakistani electronic media, political satire has a long history in comedy. The Greek playwright Aristophanes, who is considered to be the father of comedy, used sarcasm in his plays and ridiculed the great philosopher Socrates in The Clouds. According to Plato, that caricature of the sage was so immense that it might have played a role in the persecution of Socrates. Aristophanes also lampooned the Greek statesman Cleon for his pro-war ideology in The Knights and The Babylonians. He may actually have also been tried for his work but his real fate eludes history and his contribution remains a source of motivation for many of us today.

In the US, many successful and internationally recognised political comedy programmes are aired regularly. The most noteworthy of them include the HBO series Real time with Bill Maher and The Daily Show with Jon Stewart that are entirely political and absolutely hilarious, yet they remain impersonation-free and parody-less in their presentations. There are many other night shows in the list that have an element of political satire in them, including The Tonight Show with Jay Leno and Late Night with David Letterman and in these programmes as well there are no caricatures. They just follow the original script. Only the legendary Saturday Night Live has some element of mimesis occasionally, but that also is directed carefully, occupies only a small fragment of the show, and is commonly presented by the distinguished guest himself.

The reasons for our considerable dependence on these programmes are evident. We do not have enough writers who specialise in political satire to back up the escalating number of comedy programmes every week. Caricature is certainly an easy way out of the difficult task of humorous script writing. It relies upon imitation instead of ingenuity and hence the same subject is copied over and over again in almost every show with some minor changes in the structure of the programme. The scriptwriters in these shows depend on certain clichés like corruption, fake Bachelors’ degrees, the NRO and the issue of contempt of court. They mix these clichés with current events and the whole programme is prepared in just a few hours. It does not require any more research, training, practice, innovation, creativity or even a script.

As a nation, we realise that we have lagged far behind in the fields of science, research and technology and just like these, we have also undermined the significance of culture, art and literature in the progress and success of society. We have ascertained that any young person who has some potential to write or create should get overwhelmed in making two ends meet and ultimately be pushed out of society to settle abroad. Their peculiarities are condemned; their unique capabilities are disregarded; their creativity is disrespected and their talent is underestimated. They are quarantined. This strategy is ultimately paying off as we are witnessing a ‘brain drain’ in front of our eyes.

The writer is a US-based freelance columnist and can be reached at skamranhashmi@gmail.com

THE SATIRIST:

                   This article is an attempt to clarify "satire" and related words. It is understood that didactic attempts like these are themselves vulnerable to satirical skewering, but there are times when the desire to clarify surges more powerfully than the desire to attack human foibles.

A satire is a literary piece or other work that holds up the follies of man to ridicule, often with the professed motivation to improve the world thereby. Because s/he attacks follies, the satirist usually betrays a superior attitude towards his or her subject, usually a moral or intellectual superiority (or both). Satire uses many different techniques to achieve its purposes, including ridicule, irony, as well asparody, burlesque and travesty.

Satire has generally taken one of the two forms of comic satire or tragic satire (these definitions come from John Dryden).

Comic satire is usually written from an urbane perspective, whereby folly is seen everywhere, but the author’s attitude is one of laughter. Indeed, from this perspective, the writing of satire portrays itself as the sane response to a world gone astray.

In tragic satire, the author’s perspective is one of moral rectitude, and s/he is horrified by the failings of fellow humans. Tragic satire often aims to improve the contemporary situation, but still may employ humor in the process.

Here at The Satirist, our spirit is more one of comic satire, that the horror of the world should be combated with sharp understanding and with laughter. At times our effects may peer over the edge of the abyss into tragic satire, but always with black comedy nearby. We laugh so we don’t cry. Our main target is pretentiousness. We are skeptical, and so feel compelled to serve the world by deflating the irresponsible utterances of others—those who are blindly confident that their outlook is inherently correct and commonsensical.

#

The word satire is often used loosely now to describe humorous attacks of any kind. Although there is considerable overlap between these related literary modes, it is helpful to keep in mind some related terms:

Irony is the use of words to mean something other than or even opposite of what is usually meant by those words. Irony usually conveys a gap: between what is and what is meant, between what is and what ought to be, or, in dramatic irony, between what the audience knows about the play and what the characters know.

Sarcasm is mocking irony intending to wound. Sarcasm is ironic in that the attacker utters word s/he doesn’t mean.

In a parody, the author uses a style similar to an existing work in order to ridicule it. The best parodists betray their own intimate knowledge of their subjects, and the purpose is almost always for comic effect, and so lacks the moral component often found in satire.

A burlesque is a comic imitation that relies on an extravagant incongruity between a subject and its treatment. A burlesque tends to rely more on exaggeration, while a parody is often more effective by following the style of the ridiculed work as closely as possible.

A travesty trivializes the dignity of its subject by using light effects. Anything that takes itself too seriously is vulnerable to the technique of travesty.

An Example: Chuck and Di's Wedding

Suppose you wanted to make fun of the pomposity or hype about the marriage of Prince Charles and Lady Diana, often touted as the "Wedding of the Century", in a skit, such as those performed on shows like Saturday Night Live:

An ironic strategy might focus on their vows, especially their vows of fidelity. The actor playing Charles might utter the fidelity vow in a tone which shows he doesn't at all mean it. And because the audience knows of his later infidelity, and Diana at this time does not, this would putting dramatic irony to use as well.

A parodist would study the style and mannerisms of the principals of the wedding, the decor, and would try to follow these conventions as closely as possible. The humor would spring from the shock of our recognition of these conventions, and our delight over the parodist's shrewd recognition of the style and manner of the event.

It might be difficult to burlesque something as grand as the wedding of the century. How does one exaggerate what is already so overblown? One could exaggerate the length of Diana's dress's train, making it several city block longs (this would be difficult to stage except within a movie), or otherwise exaggerate the pageantry of the wedding. Burlesque is probably a technique more suited to targets of a smaller scale.

Something as grand as the wedding of the century is perhaps better approached through travesty. The wedding could be trivialized by being rendered as a crude sock-puppet show. The trick of travesty here is that some semblance of verisimilitude to the actual event must be established, else the travesty looks simply juvenile. So for the sock-puppet wedding to work, you might employ actors who uttered their wedding vows with all due seriousness, or even use the audio footage from the wedding itself, played along to the crude sock-puppets' wedding.

The satirist might employ any or all of these techniques (though burlesque and travesty mixed together could either by sloppy or wildly funny), but would probably have some lesson or social goal as well. Perhaps s/he would like to see the abolition of the royal family, or of strict monogamy, or of extravagant spending with the taxpayers' money. Satire is often an expression of outrage, even if the satirist himself does not propose a solution of the problem.

Of course the best humor often results from a careful mix of these strategies.

From:
http://www.thesatirist.com/_thesatirist_admin/thesatirist_definitions.html

.