Sins of omission
With many additions and omissions, the translated Urdu version of Imran Khan’s book attempts to paint the facts in local colours
By Aamir Riaz
With many additions and omissions, the translated Urdu version of Imran Khan’s book attempts to paint the facts in local colours
By Aamir Riaz
In mid 201I, UK-based Transworld Publishers — an imprint of Random House — published a book in English language written by Imran Khan ‘Pakistan: A personal History’. In spite of the map controversy, the book was well received not only in Pakistan and India, but also in the West.
Its Urdu translation has been recently published by an Urdu Bazar publisher. In the blurb written on the flap, Dr Khurshid Rizvi, a rare scholar of Arabic studies in Pakistan, has praised Haroon-ur-Rashid for an excellent translation. The Urdu translation has some amendments, additions and omissions, and there is no explanation in the book why these additions and omissions are made.
In the preface, Haroon-ur-Rashid says that Ghulam Mohyuddin had done the translation while he had given it final touches. He also says that he had reservations regarding what Imran wrote in English in Chapter 2 and 10. Among those who rechecked the final version included Urdu columnist Aamir Hashim Khakwani, Rana Mahboob Akhtar and Mian Khalid Hussain.
On page 226, Imran Khan talks about his first gambling experience. On page 228 in Urdu, there is an additional six-line explanation from the author — Imran Khan criticising media persons for using his confessional statement negatively.
On page 370, there is another addition where Khan is talking about his Lahore public meeting of October 30, 2011, which he did after publication of the English version. If these additions were so important, they could be printed in footnotes rather than in regular text.
In the English version on page 296/7, there are some sentences about Syed Ahmad Shaheed Barelvi. These are “Even in nineteenth century during the twilight days of India’s Mughal Empire, when Syed Ahmad Barelvi founded a revolutionary Islamic movement it failed to take hold. Barelvi preached jihad against non-Muslim influences and tried to rally the Pashtun tribes to his cause but they disliked his rigid brand of Islam and abandoned him, leaving him to be slain by the Sikhs who had at that time conquered the settled Pashtun areas.” In Urdu translation on page 303, translation of the sentence “leaving him to be slain by the Sikhs” is missing.
On the same page, there is another example of omission in the Urdu text. “There is a strong Sufi influences in Pakistan, which will always be at odds with the strict literal Islam of Wahhabi ideology that influences many militant groups. This tension is represented by the two main schools of thought for Sunni Muslims in Pakistan. Barelvis typically lean towards South Asia’s traditional brand of Sufi Islam with its saints and shrines and message of tolerance. Deobandis, on the other hand, are more ideologically aligned with the Wahhabis and are therefore more sympathetic to the Taliban’s version of Islam (Page 297).” In Urdu text on page 303, the omitted phrases are; ‘strict literal Islam of Wahhabi ideology’ and ‘aligned with the Wahhabis’.
In the English version on page 75, Imran Khan writes about the forced exile of Mian Nawaz Sharif after October 1999, while in Urdu on Page 70 it is not there.
In the English version on page 79, Imran Khan writes about the early days of Islam as “Hereditary kingship replaced the budding democracy of the Medina State and only in the twentieth century did it make reappearance in the Muslim world”. The translator did not feel necessary to translate it in Urdu.
On page 67 in the English version, Khan writes “at stake were Western puppet regimes in oil-producing countries like Saudi Arabia….” In Urdu translation on page 62/3, the translator missed the name of Saudi Arabia.
On page 68, Imran Khan writes “Zia, keen to legitimise his unconstitutional takeover of Pakistan,….” Yet the translator finds it unnecessary to mention the words “unconstitutional takeover” on page 63.
On page 66, Imran Khan criticises the US and CIA-backed coup to overthrow Mossadegh, yet CIA is missing in Urdu on page 61. The sentence which is missing on the same page also shows preferences of translators. Just read it “Mossadegh had had the temerity to stand up for the rights of the Iranian people and seize the country’s oil production, which had hitherto been controlled by the British Government’s Anglo-Iranian oil Company”.
In English on page 69, Imran Khan writes “Zia’s Islamisation and Musharraf’s enlightened moderation failed”, while in Urdu on page 64, the translation of Islamisation is mazhabiat and enlightened moderation is secularism.
There is a consistent pattern of omissions in the Urdu version as mentioned above with a few examples. It is neither called a separate book nor translation as mentioned in the blurb and in the first article of the book. At the back title, the publisher has used pieces of book reviews of the English version. Yet on the credit page, the name of the English-version publisher is absent. Why was the team of translators not satisfied with Imran Khan’s version as represented in English is an interesting question?
Famous historian Patrick French in his book Partition of India; Liberty or Death called Jawahar Lal Nehru the western face of Gandhi. So is the English version of Pakistan: A Personal History a western face of Imran Khan.
Aamir Riaz is a Lahore-based editor and researcher
No comments:
Post a Comment