A man of conscience

The qualities of Abul Mansur Ahmad that impress me the most are his integrity and political consciousness. They may be termed personality traits which turned into virtues in his case. For such a combination of the two—strength and political consciousness—was rare in his time. At the time there were other powerful writers and those who were politically very conscious. But unlike him, very few had the ability to keep that consciousness awakened at all times. One of the reasons behind this could be that he was directly involved in politics. 

But to say that he was a politician does not give the complete picture of the man. It was not even his main identity. His main identity was that he was a writer despite being a journalist, a lawyer and politician. That was the identity in terms of permanence or importance. 

There is no ambiguity in knowing Abul Mansur Ahmad. His success and political consciousness introduce him to us. His writing, his thoughts and his passion captured the force that was unleashed by the flourishing and emergence of the Muslim middle class. Mrityukhuda is the name of a novel by Kazi Nazrul Islam. There is life, but constantly shadowed by death. Abul Mansur Ahmad was a friend of Kazi Nazrul Islam and the name of his novel was Jibon-Khuda. This too has the shadow of death but he shows how life triumphs over death.  The protagonist, Halim, comes from a feudal background and combats the hurdles of the bourgeois environment with full force. There is power in this journey. This power, this force is evident in everything Abul Mansur Ahmad has ever written. 

Of course, it should also be mentioned that it is not as if this force was evident in the overall development of the Muslim middle class. Not everyone is Halim. The history of the lower middle class is different. In fact, even in the strata Abul Mansur Ahmed belonged to there exists the same lack of conviction of the lower middle class. He is thus a representative of a section; not of the other section. If there is partiality there, i.e. in the specified subject, it is compensated by the precision of his representation.

No matter what Abul Mansur Ahmad wrote – be it political essays or satire or novels – I have noticed that he always spoke with conviction. As the writer of Food Conference and Aayna, he has effortlessly gained much attention. The tone of his satire was severe, the image horrific. It can easily be said that there was an absence of tenderness. To be honest, tenderness didn't exist in his environment; he unabashedly unveiled the hypocrisy of society. Even today I do not notice such excellent satire being written, whereas it is professed that satirical elements are scattered all around us. Contradictions definitely exist in society, but those contradictions are so vulgar that it is difficult to laugh about them. Abul Mansur did that difficult task. He had courage. He mastered the tone of superseding the tone of contradiction. Through humour, he rebuked the monstrous. 

This strength is evident even in his autobiographies. He has two autobiographies – Amar Dekha Rajniteer Ponchash Bochor and Attokotha. One contains the history of politics, the other the history of an individual. But the two books have converged in one respect – his candidness. Particularly, he did not identify himself as the representative of any class like Nirad C. Chaudhuri had, or present himself like Kamruddin Ahmed had in his autobiography, even though class representation was definitely present in Abul Mansur Ahmad's writing. 

Unlike the autobiographies of his contemporaries such as those of his friend, Abul Kalam Shamsuddin, Syed Murtaza Ali and Ibrahim Kha, Abul Mansur Ahmad wrote clearly from a personal point of view. He forcefully told his story. As I had mentioned earlier, a segment of his own class was represented in his autobiography Attokotha. In the same manner, he had hope in his opinions. Whatever he had to say, he said it with conviction, be it about politics or literature. There was no ambivalence in any comment. 

Some of his ideas are apparently controversial. I do not agree particularly with his outlook on language and culture. There were also many others who did not agree with his viewpoint. However, Abul Mansur Ahmad was always outspoken in his writing. The way he used words with different origins in his literary language shows how totally aware he was about his endeavour. The critics have rightly pointed out that middle class suffers from the incurable disease of vagueness. But Abul Mansur Ahmad was an exception to that ailment. 

It will be wrong if we detach Abdul Mansur Ahmad from his politics. He always took a pro-people stance as much as possible from his position. Unlike most of politicians, politics was not his profession but his passion. He became minister but it was not his sole identity. 

His works reflect that he was never forgetful that politics ultimately determines everything. Like him his hero Halim also fights for securing the demands of tenants and farmers. He always prioritised people's interest over personal interest. Those who take politics as a business will be ashamed comparing their lives with that of Abul Mansur Ahmad, provided they have the ability to feel shame. His literary works are a strong protest to those who think literature should be devoid of politics. He is an outstanding figure, particularly because of the unique combination of truthfulness and political consciousness imbibed in his works. 

The writer is Professor Emeritus at Dhaka University.

Translated by the editorial team, The Daily Star.

This article is taken from Abul Mansur Ahmad Commemorative Volume (Abul Mansur Ahmad Sharokgrantho).