Dear Ms Taslima

Taslima hogs headlines, againg

Then I read "Lojja" -- out of curiosity and was appalled by its utterly poor standard -- not the Hindu-Muslim frame, but the novel as a whole was disappointing. I agree with the dilemma Hindus are facing, though.

Now about your recent "Ka". I did not have a chance to read it wholly, only the excerpts, intentionally distributed by some concerned "groups" online. True or false? I hardly care. What I care about is your stand and your standard as an author. If you are truly as egalitarian and liberal as you claim to be, then what is so special about your personal experiences with some other famous authors? Why is it worth publishing any way?

Extramarital affair is common in our society, however discreetly it happens. What is bothering me is your motive: Was it inspired by creative ingenuity or personal ambition for mere fame and publicity?

If it is creative ingenuity, then I must admit, "Ka" has very little to offer. But if it is just an effort to become controversial, you have succeeded .

I am shocked and disappointed at your selfishness, that you somehow chose to exploit liberalism. You published the book being fully aware that it would cause agitation, at the same time spared no opportunity to portray yourself to be a muktomona or free-thinker.

Are you really free, or just a prisoner of your own illusion of freedom? Once again, I admire your courage to question religious and traditional bigotry, gender discrimination, etc. I am myself somehow rebellious. But when I think that you described your personal memoir only to proclaim your status as a free thinker, that you are intellectually superior and more venturesome than others, it hurts. Is the book right about Mr. Haq? Maybe it is, it does not really matter. What matters is whether Ms Taslima is true to her cause, that she is truly dedicated to liberation of women and the oppressed, not her self-interests of being famous as a "controversial writer".

If your goal was to reveal the mask of Mr. Haq, then the effort appears to be too personal. Literary corners all over the globe are full of excesses: in sex, drugs, romantic relationships etc. Mr. Haq should not be an exception. Nor is any one else, even you.

The funny thing is, in those intimate scenes you appeared to be a participant (since you are an adult, avoiding your own responsibility in those moments would be a hypocritical behaviour). Then, you went on depicting Mr. Haq as the initiator and yourself as an innocent bystander -- who just observes and comments later on!

Had those chapters been written as a simple narrative, that would have been perfectly all right. But they weren't. Your sentences were written in a judgmental and accusatory tone, which is anything but a simple narrative style of a memoir. Therefore, the question about your motive becomes so irresistible.

The new generation always crave for something genuine, they look for role models. You could be one. But if "Ka" is any example, despite the integrity of the facts, it certainly raises questions about your integrity as an agent of benevolent social change. That is where my deepest disappointment lies.

You are now a fellow at Carr Institute of Harvard University, and we hope you will contribute to global human rights issues. But I worry that many in the West fail to comprehend you from a critical viewpoint, since the linguistic and cultural gap between Bangladesh and the West is quite a big one. Nor is it possible for them to distinguish between a truly creative urge and a fetish for becoming a literary figure. They may also fail to understand that "controversy" does not mean "content."

However, you are a famous person now, deservedly or not. I request you, on behalf of all who are victims of religious and social oppression -- children, women, men, all -- that you utilise your position and pen for greater ends. It's much better than tickling public sensitivity or becoming famous by proclaiming about some sexual encounters with an elderly writer. The world has much more pressing issues than these. By the way, I do disagree with Mr. Haq's claim about banning your book; none should ban a book unless it threatens human security (like a terrorist manual, etc.). I think Mr. Haq's is as immature an initiative as your recent work "Ka".

I wish you all the best.

"ka"

Aneesa Batul, University of Denver Colorado, USA

I wonder what would be the next surprise from Syed Shamsul Haq in the name of protecting decency of the nation (!) and protecting 'freedom of pen'(banning a book!!).

What you did, Mr. Haq, aptly qualifies you to join the vice squad of the Talibans. In the eyes of the civilised world, your self-defence is simply outrageous and unacceptable. Your apology, in fact, proves you as an opportunist, as you were aware that being in exile, Ms Taslima would not be able to defend herself in the court. Should you have had the moral courage to face the truth and faith in your proclaimed freedom of pen, instead of going to the court, what you would have done is exactly what morals you attempted to preach: take advantage of your freedom of pen to refute Taslima's account.

Alas, as opposed to pen, you chose the chain of law whose pen now it appears to be in chain, Mr. Haq? This act also exposes another side of your character: hypocrisy, as the irony of the incident is that to suppress the truth by banning the book you went to a court of the government , which often you decry as being fundamentalist. What is more, when the same government had banned "Lojja", you had decried it with a loud voice. Therefore, I ask you a straight forward question: do you stand by your previous decision to decry censorship? Do you now believe that like this time, banning the "Lojja" was a correct decision?

Given your chameleon behaviour, people would like to have some answers from you:

A. Would you withdraw your criticism of the government's decision of banning the novel "Lojja"?

B. Instead of back-stabbing Taslima unfairly, would you provide the readers your version of the incidences that she claims to have taken place?

C. Because of the graphic depiction of sexuality and dehumanisation of the fair sex as an object of molestation, as depicted in your numerous novels, if the honourable court decides to ban them on the ground of obscenity , would you agree to withdraw their circulation and pay punitive fine, as you claimed from the publisher of "Ka"?

D. Should the scores of obscene screenplays that you wrote for the vulgar Bengali movies (and made mock protest in public) be banned also?

E. Above all, for the sake of societal health, do you retain morality to enjoy your "freedom of pen"?

F. Lastly, was this censorious attempt an act of your individual will, or was it a collective effort, as a member of the pack of wolves, who used to shed tears to protect Taslima's "freedom of pen" and now prefer a golden silence?