Post colonial critique of sara suleri’s meatless days. assignment

Chatterjee highlights an important point in the midst of this dichotomy found in the discourse of nationalism. That the elite with their concerns for modernizing their backward national culture assume the role of their bygone colonial masters while the general masses with their perceived backwardness are placed again in the position of the colonized subjects, who are considered to be incapable of any rational thinking. This again places the masses in a marginalized position. Franz Fanon in his book “ Wretched of the Earth” shows that how nationalism is complicit in undemocratic form of government.

He too like Chatterjee talks about the illiberal dilemma at the heart of the discourse of nationalism, that how the political elite is unaware of the problems and issues of the general masses, who are merely tools in the struggle between the ruling and the opposition forces in the newly independent countries. Fanon talks about the injustices prevalent in the newly independent countries, where only a small section of influential political elite is able to avail the political and economic benefits, while the rest of the population is unable to and most of the time denied the fruits of political and economic benefits.

In the text, Suleri makes a hint towards the cause of the fall of Dhaka and the major reason was General Yahya’s response to the fall of Dhaka, as evident from the text “ The following morning, General Yahya’s mistress came to mourn with us over breakfast…with swathes of overscented silk. The Brigadier lit an English cigarette. He was frequently known to avow that Pakistani cigarettes gave him a cough…it is so trying, she continued, I find it so trying it is trying to us all to live in these trying trying times”(9).

These very lines explicitly show that how the political elite was delved in corruption and focused merely on their own material and physical comforts. The hollow remarks of those at the helm of affairs, while the country was splitting into two, shows their indifference towards the aggravated situation created by their own wrong-doings and indifferences. In this line, Suleri epitomizes the very fragile, insecure and unpredictable state of the affairs of Pakistan. In the following line, Suleri epitomizes the fragile, insecure and unpredictable state of affairs of Pakistan. We lived in the expectation of threatening surprise. ” The Pakistan of Suleri’s novel is a place where mismanagement is rampant and social security is nowhere to be found. The things that are taken as granted in other welfare societies are made a source of fear in Pakistan. To give an example, the items of groceries were never made available to the common masses, as it evident in the text, “ Items of security___such as floor or butter or cigarettes were always vanishing, or returning in such dubiously shiny attire that we could barely stand to look at them” (29).

The short sightedness of politicians, mentioned earlier, is further elaborated by commenting on the policies of Yahya’s regime, as it was in that time, Pakistan lost its Eastern half. “ General Yahya’s government, which held an election and, not knowing how to face its consequences clamped a massive military emergency on single province that lead not just to its secession but to the bloody war of Bangladesh” (120). Pakistan was created so that democratic practices could flourish but Suleri pinpoints the undemocratic forces that were ruling the country from time to time.

As is evident from the order in which Pakistan was ruled by democratic and Military officials. “ After General Ayub came General Yahya; after the Bhutto years came General Zulu Haq”(34). These consecutives martial laws implemented by the Generals are one of the major causes of Pakistan’s political instability and refer to the fact that Pakistan as a nation was going through a process of error and trial where government toppled and a dictator rose, leaving behind a gruesome legacy of corruption and mutilation of people’s aspiration.

A female is targeted to malign a male in the society. In order to pressurize Z. A. Suleri his wife and daughter were brutally murdered (124, 125). Women, even after independence, were not the controllers of their destiny. Iffat married of her own accord thus making herself an outcast in her own family, as Suleri recounts her father’s response in these words: “ Pip would not let her name be mentioned in his presence, so total was her banishment” (72).

Sara Suleri while narrating an incident from her days of youth recalls a memory of being harassed by a group of vagabonds, emphasizes the point that even in an independent Islamic state the women are still unable to enjoy true liberty and a dignified life they are still a marginalize segment of the society and this painful truth is made obvious in the text when Suleri was prevented from entering a mosque simply for the reason that she was a woman, “ Muslim women were not allowed in the mosque between the hours of Maghrib and Isha” (80).