This blog is best viewed with the latest browser and an open mind!

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Quo Vadis?

Quo Vadis - the name of one my all-time favourite films - is a Latin term, meaning 'Where are you going?' The Pakistani nation had, over the years, offered no real answer to this question and was beginning to look more and more like the personification of the title of Wynford Vaughan-Thomas's 'Madly In All Directions' - a delightful phrase that often triggers the image of Escher's famous, albeit totally unconnected, work ('Relativity') reproduced below.

Mirza Ghalib - always a great resource for an apt shayr - gives us one possible reason for this by stating:
Along comes Election 2008 and, suddenly, the nation finds a voice (except where party-hired goondas or the comperes of the show I am now watching on Business Update choose to throttle it). 
Some election! Some result!
However, while it is difficult enough to reach a goal, when the direction is lacking, it is infinitely more difficult if the goal itself has not been identified before starting off. 60+ years have passed and we have yet to reach a consensus on the basic nature of the country. Democratic? Theocratic? Secular? Ideologically an Islamic Republic? Or a Republic that is a homeland for Muslims? All Muslims?
A shayr of my father comes to mind:

Labels: , , , , ,


Blogger Sidhusaaheb said...


20 February, 2008 13:45

Anonymous ayesha said...

This is a post straight from the heart and I am so happy to see it. :)

Your post reminds me of the work of Elise Boudling. She talks about the process of dynamic social change through "imaging of the future". Something very similar to what you are alluding to here.

Yes, we need to decide where we want Pakistan to be in 20-50 years. The difficult bit question is how we try to do that.

20 February, 2008 23:31

Blogger Vic said...

Contra, of course, is the Douglas Adams view of: "I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I intended to be." This may not be a very comforting view to take of a reasonably successful-seeming election, and its cliffhanger outcome, but enfranchisement isn't just a stamp on a piece of paper (or click of a button).

The lack of any equitable variant of this process, however, one that doesn't sequester liberty in the practice of its enrichment, leaves one inevitably drawn to Adams' simple wisdom.

21 February, 2008 18:04

Anonymous samina b. said...

Monsiur Vic, will you EVER write a non-convoluted sentence? Each time I see your comment on this blog I say to myself: Drat! Here comes that Scrabble player again.

21 February, 2008 23:20

Blogger Vic said...

@samina b.


A hit! A palpable hit!

ok, translation> Democracy is, as such, in a TINA state. Follow Adams' precept. Find advantage.

22 February, 2008 19:49


Post a Comment

<< Home