Writer, critic and literary historian Rakhshanda Jalil launched her new book of translation, “The Death of Sheherzad”, a collection of short stories by the inimitable Urdu writer Intizar Hussain, the other day. Published by Harper Perennial, the English translation is an anthology of 15 shorts written by the literary luminary from Pakistan nominated for the Man Booker in 2013. Apart from the stories, Rakshanda, at the end of the book, has also written about Hussain’s early life, his literary career and the writing style.
The launch event at Oxford Bookstore in the Capital, saw the likes of senior journalist Jawed Naqvi and translator Arunava Sinha interacting with Rakshanda. The topic of discussion, besides focussing on the genius of Hussain, also revolved around the promotion of Urdu in India and the problems one faced in translating works. During the discussion, Rakhshanda said she first met Hussain 15 years ago. Husain migrated to Pakistan in 1947; he was 24 then. She said, “He sounds exactly the same as he writes. Whatever sense of attachment he observed in 24 years in India can be found in his writings. Hussain started his literary career close on the heels of Saadat Hasan Manto. Unlike Manto and other writers associated with the powerful literary grouping known as Progressive Writers’ Movement, Hussain has shown no predilection for depicting the communal violence that spiralled out of Independence. He chose to view Partition as hijrat or migration, the greatest cross-border migration in recent history.”
Naqvi asked Rakhshanda, how she as a translator, communicates with the reader the local culture which has been an important part of Hussain’s writings. “There is a need to be aware of these things. I never try to edit the stories. Sensitivity and sensibility are important because I am not the creator,” she replied. In a work of translation, it is important to keep intact the exact sense of the writer, she underlined. To this, Sinha, who translates Bengali fiction and poetry to English, added, “For me, the business of editing is, add nothing and take nothing.”
Naqvi differentiated Hussain’s writings from those of other writers of Pakistan, saying, “Hussain tried to convert adversity into opportunity.” Throwing light on Hussain’s style of writing, Rakhshanda said, “His stories are cyclical, often stories within stories, replete with anecdotes from the rich oral tradition of storytelling in the Asian sub-continent, scattered with symbols and images that speak more than words.”
Hussain’s style is not easy to translate. It always gives challenges to the translators, Rakhshanda noted. “His writings in Urdu throw up many challenges to the translator. First thing is the story itself. His story often does not have a typical story with a beginning, middle and end but a rambling monologue peopled by characters from a past that is in many ways more vivid than the present.”
The discussion also brought to the fore a host of truth about the state of Urdu language. That the language is deteriorating and knowing the script is important to save it. The language just can’t be promoted only through literature. Urdu has also been harmed by technology. Everything is now available in the Roman script on the Internet. Naqvi added, “Urdu is politically and culturally vanishing.”
