Tasteless voyeurism
Dear all,
It is the 21st century, yet the most exciting thing that modern day TV seems to boast of are those dreadful 'reality' shows, i.e. shows that are an excuse for voyeurism and not much else.

The News on Sunday: You often say your party is still undecided about taking part in the elections, and has now linked it with the outcome of an All Parties Conference (APC) that you have convened. What will your decision be in the event of General Pervez Musharraf wanting to get elected president again by the present assemblies?

Mian Nawaz Sharif: General Musharraf has no respect for constitution, law and democracy. He in fact feels happier violating the constitution. For him it's a piece of paper which can be torn apart any time. This is where our generals have gone wrong. They show no respect for the law of the land, the political system or the parliament. They have trampled the mandate of the people and violated the oath that they had taken of staying away from politics. Rather than arresting enemies, they have arrested the prime minister of their own country. A man elected by the 150 million people of Pakistan was arrested, handcuffed and put in jail.

Musharraf must not forget that he was appointed by that same prime minister and he has the prerogative to appoint and sack him.

If Musharraf tries to renew his term of office for another five years from the present assemblies, it will be wrong, morally and legally. How can the present assemblies, elected for five years, elect someone for ten years? This has no precedent in any country and Pakistan must not set a bad one.

This parliament will finish its term in October (2007) and if the elections are held the new assemblies cannot meet before March next year. It will be ridiculous if the new parliament is forced to work with a president it has not elected.

TNS: Will the joint opposition boycott the election if Musharraf tries to get himself elected for another term before the elections?

MNS: This is an option always available to the opposition. I think, by and large, all the parties are in agreement that the opposition will resign en bloc if the president seeks re-election from the present assemblies. This is the decision of all parties including PPP (Pakistan People's Party) and Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA).

TNS: But time and again, political parties have not kept their words. In the light of their past performance, do you still hope they will accept a joint decision to boycott the next elections or resign before that?

MNS: I do share this view to an extent because this is what I too have witnessed in the past five years. But I still maintain that the opposition has to come together on one platform and take decisions from that platform. It is not easy to fight military dictatorship which can only be fought effectively if the opposition stands united.

That is why I have written to all the leaders (of political parties in the opposition) and soon we will be holding an all parties conference where all the leaders can sit together and evolve a joint strategy on how to rid the country of military dictatorship.

It is not a fight to bring me back to power. Let's be very clear on this issue. This is not a power struggle. We are struggling to rid the country of the military dictatorship for all times to come -- not just in 2007 but for all times to come. We need to mobilise people and launch a movement which will push back the armed forces to their barracks and force them to play their role as defined by the constitution of Pakistan and never get out of their domain. Once this objective is achieved, we can think of next elections and whosoever is elected should form the government. This struggle is mainly to put the country back on track.

The present system is ruining our country. The military rule was responsible for the loss of East Pakistan where 90,000 soldiers surrendered to the Indian Army and Pakistan had to beg India for their release.

TNS: Your party and PPP had together signed the Charter of Democracy. How do you view PPP's recent overtures towards the government?

MNS: When we signed the Charter of Democracy, it was obligatory for the signatories to stick to it. It precluded the possibility of any 'deal' with military rulers or military channels. Before signing, everybody had seriously thought over all the items in the charter. Therefore, we have every hope that all the parties in ARD (Alliance for the Restoration of Democracy) who had signed the charter have every intention of abiding by it. We owe it to our country and to our people and there is no reason to violate any part of it.

TNS: Are you thinking of forming an electoral alliance with PPP or some sort of a power sharing arrangement with that party, given that your Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) espouses an ideology different from that of PPP?

MNS: We are not talking about power sharing at all or even electoral alliance. Seat adjustment is a different thing altogether. We have not started working on that either but it might be possible. The purpose is not to get to power or form a government. The purpose is to rid the country of military dictatorship. The governments could come and go but now is the time to think of a higher aim -- to save the country.

Not a word is shared (on any government decisions) with the parliament and Musharraf alone is fighting the war against the 'terrorists'. He is using a national institution for his own ambitions. In Balochistan and Waziristan, gunship helicopters and fighter planes are being used to attack our own people.

Coming back to PPP and ourselves, in the case of Women's Protection Bill, PPP took a different stand from PML-N but that did not mean that ARD had collapsed. We decided not to take part in the voting because we consider it to be (a bill sponsored by) an illegitimate government. Also because we thought it was a trap and we stayed away from it.

TNS: In a recent statement PPP's Punjab President Shah Mehmood Qureshi said: "I want to disclose that the deal between Musharraf and the Chaudrys of Gujrat is over". Your comment...

MNS: I have not seen this statement. It means nothing and I don't want to make any comments on the Chaudrys of Gujrat. The people who are openly saying that they want to see Musharraf in uniform as their next president are nor worthy to be talked or commented about. There should be some limit to the boot-licking that they are doing.

TNS: Do you think PML-N will be a strong contender for power in the coming elections?

MNS: Yes, I do think so. The (party's) vote bank is intact and we have gained the respect of people more than ever before. People have told me that they want to see me back. I also miss my country and people very much.

TNS: Will you come back to Pakistan anytime soon?

MNS: Yes. Things are changing fast. I am planning and hoping to come soon. Lots of water has flown from under the bridges. Even though Musharraf has already said that he would not let me enter but I am not afraid of it. It is not Musharraf's Pakistan. He cannot prevent anyone from entering their own motherland. I also hope that when I come back Musharraf is also there. He too should also be ready to face the music for everything that he has done and be answerable for his deeds. If everybody is accountable for their deeds, then why not military generals? They are not above law.

TNS: Are you satisfied with the performance of your party leadership in Pakistan?

MNS: I think they are playing an effective role and they have taken a stand against the dictatorship. Their performance in the parliament and outside is outstanding. The party is talking with one voice and is standing united. People now appreciate our principled stand.

TNS: How do you view Pakistan's current foreign policy and the recent government decision to fence and mine the border with Afghanistan?

MNS: Pakistan is truly isolated now. There is a fence on the Indian side; another fence (is being proposed) on the Afghan border; in the south there is the Arabian Sea; and on the fourth side there is troubled Balochistan. So you tell me what are the indicators of the 'successful foreign policy' they are projecting? This is what happens when an individual starts taking decisions of national interest all by himself without even taking the parliament into confidence. We have run out of friends and truly isolated by these kind of decisions.

Musharraf talks of national interest on one hand and on the other kills Akbar Bugti in a targeted attack. This is a great crime, a murder. Do you think this will have no repercussions for Musharraf as well?

TNS: How do you look at the Kargil episode in the light of what you have just said?

MNS: It was Prime Minister Mian Nawaz Sharif who bailed Pakistan Army out of Kargil. He checked a disaster (from taking place) and saved Pakistan. It was the prime minister who saved a nuclear conflict between India and Pakistan. This is not being said by me. This has been said a number of times by the (then) American President (Bill) Clinton.

I knew about the consequences but I did what was most honourable and best for my country. In fact every government has been protecting the military, nourishing it, giving it all that it wanted to fulfil its needs and not thinking about the rest of the people. In every country the parliament approves the defence budget but not in our country.

TNS: Don't you think it reflects badly on the power of the parliament in Pakistan?

MNS: No it is does not. We wanted to have good relations with the military. Although now I think there should have been systems to bring better discipline, we sacrificed our own interests for the long term betterment of our country and our security. There has never been a prime minister who stood up against the army as I did.

TNS: Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz keeps saying that his government has brought the country back from the brink of bankruptcy. The claims that Pakistan is now in a strong shape economically...

MNS: I don't want to comment on anything Shaukat Aziz may say because he is not a prime minister since he has no authority. To comment on him will not be fair to oneself. The common man in Pakistan today is in a terrible state. While he is not able to build a house on three marlas, the new General Headquarters (GHQ) for the military is being built on 2,100 acres. In the new GHQ only 18 per cent of the available space will be used for offices, the rest will be used for building lakes and golf courses and army residences. For the security of generals special luxury cars are being bought for $500 million but the security of the common man in Pakistan is at stake like never before.

TNS: Have you suffered any business and financial losses as a result of your being away from Pakistan? How have you coped with them?

MNS: We have endured great financial losses. My own property has been taken over by the government without any justification. The personal loss does not matter to me. It is the loss of one person only but greater loss has come to the country.

As the world of music in the last few decades has been swept by the rise of computer-generated sound one wonders whether the definition of creativity has undergone a change. Those responsible for doing unimaginable things to sound with the latest machine seem to be competing with the actual players and singers for top creative honours.

Now even the so called live performances are not really live because the singers/vocalists do not sing but mime to recordings which are replayed on the highly sophisticated systems. The singer is now no longer the same entity outside the studio as he is inside it. Inside with the help of sophisticated acoustic equipment he records and that recording becomes his lifebuoy for he can sink without the help of all the add-on equipment which not only totally changes the timber of his voice but the character as well. He just cannot sing solo.

The advancement in technology has reduced the differences and distinctions between those who create music and those involved with its production. The recording technology and the post production process has made those who actually sit on the computer, manipulate, add, delete, play around with volumes and frequencies, control distortions, as the real arbiters of music rather than those who actually are involved in its playing and singing.

Perhaps this calls for a redefinition of creativity itself, as it is the person sitting on the computerized keyboard who is really calling the shots. Rather than play an instrument or write a musical score, it is the computerized keyboard that can do all, not by actually playing and creating music but by merely rearranging it in a creative manner. The rearrangement is now the more critical word than composition, voice application or the virtuosity to play an instrument.

It has also changed the entire process of music making. Before the advent of recording technology music had to be created and heard live because it only existed in real time. The moment the performance finished the only recall was the memory of that performance. But the recording technology made it possible to play the number by pressing the button of a playback gadget. The only factor that really mattered in the recording was whether it was as close to the real thing or not -- for a faithful reproduction of the voice or the sound of the instrument was considered to be the litmus test of a successful recording.

Since there was no way to record sound that is intangible and exists only in time, the only recourse left was to transfer it to the next generation in as meticulous a manner as was humanly possible. The transfer of craftsmanship became absolutely critical. The young apprentices were made to practice for endless hours for decades, so that they did not falter in the exact application of the note. And it was made difficult still as our music built on the subtleties of layered microtones involved a process both long drawn and tedious, that could only be maintained in an environment which harboured no distinction between education in music and upbringing. The family thus became the specialized haunt for the training of young musicians.

The entire ethos of upbringing and the regimen of training have been rendered obsolete. There being no real purpose in putting in hours of practice when the tentativeness in the application of the note can easily be corrected and rectified by the machine. This also means a fundamental change in the relationship between the human voice and human expression. It seems that the unity between the human voice and the expression through the gradual and painstaking acquisition of craft which facilitated the transition from feeling to its artistic output has been sundered.

The same is the case with instruments. The instrument became the vehicle of human artistic expression. It has been inconceivable to separate the bansuri from Hari Prasad Chaurasiya, sitar from Vilayat Khan, tabla from Shaukat Hussain and shahnai from Bismillah Khan. Now all kinds of instruments can be played on the computerized keyboard. The link between the man and his musical instrument has been severed as well.

By the mid century as popular music started to make an impact through the Hollywood films it was actually the Beatles who certified pop music that cut across class and national boundaries, and made music that was easily understood by the people. After a very long time it was possible to be equal partners in music because the audience did not have to be necessarily initiated. Perhaps the lyrics which reflected the concerns of the common man (the middle and working classes) and then the lack of effort in understanding music was what made the Beatles the leaders of a whole new revolution in the world of music. It was music that did not make you think but made you breakout of your cerebral and social constraints with abandon.

The march of technology is unstoppable and it should not be questioned either. What is crucial are the uses that we can put technology to, though it may be conceded that the advance in technology does bring in a certain sameness from which it is very difficult to breakout of. This sameness is not restricted to music only but is being experienced in architecture, (all modern cities look alike irrespective of where they are) in design and in languages. A large number of languages becoming obsolete are being replaced by the language which is primarily used in the computer -- English. Hundreds of different languages are on the verge of extinction because these cannot become part of the contemporary world of economic and social transactions.

In Pakistan many of the musical forms have been dying or are dead and many of the traditional instruments too are extinct or their players have passed away. This process in our country was hastened as no safeguards were provided to preserve these forms and instruments but even in countries where this was done the process of computerized music has put everything on its head. The issue is larger than mere promotion and preservation. It has to be addressed in the context of a technological breakthrough, which is not at the expense of wiping the peculiarities of culture and rich diversity but which should be employed in the service of higher artistic values.

With Iraq being in the news for all sorts of negative reports coming out of the country, one tends to forget all normal peacetime activities also continue in such areas. An exhibition in Lahore by Iraqi artist Ghassan Muhsen who is showing his acrylic paintings from 16th to 30th January 2007 at the Alhamra Art Gallery, Lahore, reminded one of this. Art survives in strange situations, in unfavourable times, and has an enigmatic link with reality.

A few artists choose a course in which they avoid political subjects, controversial themes and painful concerns. Instead, they concentrate on the elements of beauty, love and happiness. They wish to communicate these feelings to the public, who is already exhausted by the problems of their lives and catastrophes in their environment. It seems Iraqi artist Ghassan Muhsen is one of these individuals, who aim to produce works of art that are about the joy of life.

Muhsen is not only a painter, but a career diplomat too, currently serving as the Iraqi ambassador in Bahrain. From 1982 to 1986, he was posted in Islamabad, and held three solo exhibitions. The recent exhibition, titled 'Back to Pakistan' is a way of rekindling his fond memories of this country.

The show at Alhamra includes colourful canvases, which appear like landscapes, but consist of simplified structures, treated in different textures. Occasionally one glimpses the form of a tree, outline of a bird or traces of a boat, besides the flat areas filled with lines that resemble Arabic letters. Most of his works are composed of geometric shapes coated with several layers of vivid colours. At places impasto of golden paint and silver patches is applied alongwith stylized forms of minarets, palm trees and human eyes.

All of his work reflects a standard aesthetics, presently popular among painters and buyers of art created by Muslims or artists from the 'Third World'. At the same instance it belongs to an international style, which is practiced and promoted in many parts of the globe. These aspects of his work not only make him a familiar painter but place him in a category of our artists, who frequently exhibit in the local galleries, and in other countries (mainly the Gulf states).

The usual venues for these artists, who paint with an artistic diction akin to Muhsen, are the lobbies of five star hotels. In these establishments, globe-trotting guests are eager to enjoy local food and traditional festivals. In the same lieu they love to look at art which has indigenous symbols and ethnic imagery. Interestingly the art of 'five star' quality (like the cuisine in these places) may have local flavour, but in its essence it is identical everywhere. Because it follows the same pattern: to mix ethnic imagery with abstract compositions, handled in a painterly manner. So if you move from Lima to Lagos, or travel from Tasmania to Toulouse, you will come across similar works of art, with a native touch.

The work of Mr Ghassan Muhsen also offers what a traveller would wish to set his eyes on. So it is logical that his paintings are picked up by architects, who plan to hang them in hotels. His paintings can brighten up the interior of a five star hotel; viewed from a distance they appear to be abstract compositions, but on a closer look reveal multiple textures, and diverse techniques.

Ghassan Muhsen's art signifies another aspect of artists from the Muslim world and developing countries. As most subscribe to a Western demand and agenda, they portray a colourful world of their surroundings, which can delight a Western audience. For many outsiders, the east is a combination of colour and purity. Several of our artists seek to satisfy this expectation by using images from cultural heritage. This tendency is visible in Muhsen's work also, through his inculcating ethnic visuals in modernist canvases.

Dear all,

It is the 21st century, yet the most exciting thing that modern day TV seems to boast of are those dreadful 'reality' shows, i.e. shows that are an excuse for voyeurism and not much else.

The latest explosion of this has of course been Channel Four's horrid 'Celebrity Big Brother', now famous the world over for the allegedly racist treatment by some English housemates of the Indian actress Shilpa Shetty. The leader of abuse was Jade Goody, a young woman from a disadvantaged background (working class Bermondsey) whose greatest claim to fame was nothing she had achieved or learnt, but her very ignorant pronouncements. This foolish young woman shot to fame as a finalist on this very show some years ago and has since been famous for being famous -- for her ignorance.

After all the uproar over the way Jade, Jade's mother, and Jade's groupies behaved towards Shilpa (mimicking her Indian accent, calling her 'pappadom', expressing disgust that she ate with her hands), there was huge public condemnation of Jade Goody and she was the next person the public voted out of the Big Brother House...

After this foolish woman was ousted from the show, I felt a little sorry for her because her whole future was in jeopardy. All her lucrative advertising and sponsorship contracts were being cancelled and her future looks very uncertain. I felt sorry for her because it was these sort of idiotic reality shows that had elevated her to fame, kept her there for a while, and were now throwing her out as garbage... She may have achieved celebrity and money for a brief period but she remained basically, an uneducated and ignorant person...

This 'Big Brother' show has been going on for years and I find it really distasteful. You take a bunch of losers or a bunch or celebrities or a combination thereof and throw them into the big brother house to live together without access to media or books. They must co exist with one another and find their own entertainment. This entertainment usually consists of bitching, abuse, malice or stupidity. Contestants are horrid to each other and there is lots of backstabbing and undermining going on. And people just sit on their sofas in their living rooms and watch all this garbage... and they call it entertainment.

I suppose it is entertainment -- but in a base and vulgar sort of way. In the way that the Romans tossed gladiators into an arena to kill each other, or threw prisoners to the lions and cheered as they were mauled... It is entertainment in the same way that the shrewdest of operators manipulates family politics and then sits back to see the members of the household begin to tear each other apart...

The Big Brother 'racist' row has started a huge debate as to the value and integrity of the show. One school of thought has it that the show holds up a 'mirror to today's society and shows Britain as it really is'. I have to disagree. The only people who will want to go on the show are exhibitionists anyway, and then the producers like to pick the most freakish of these people to generate the most fireworks from the interaction, and to have the bloodiest possible battle in the arena.

The discussion over this season of Big Brother will go on in Britain for a very long time. The racist and bullying debate will prdominate. But I personally hope it is the last season of a show that as its premise undermines the human dignity of its participants and throws people together in an enclosed space like lab rats for us to observe...

I do hope these are the last days of the reality show. It would be nice if people could be famous for something they'd done, for some great achievement, some discovery, some research... rather than being famous for being crass, pushy or ignorant...