| Username |
Post |
| Paschim |
Posted
on 14-Mar-02 11:57 PM
I found this column that appeared in the most recent issue of the fortnightly “Nepal” magazine, under the Editor’s column titled, “On Relationships” by Bijay Kumar, well written, balanced, and insightful enough to nudge me towards spending a good hour this morning translating it. I hope readers of modern Nepali history will benefit from this piece as much as I did in knowing more about a man who, for all his overt vices and virtues, is undoubtedly beyond simplified reductions and ordinary grasp.
---------------
On Krishna Prasad Bhattarai
by Bijay Kumar
Translated from Nepali by Paschim.
It’s very hard for me to write about Kisun-ji. This is so because I like him. When a journalist begins to admire someone personally there is a risk that integrity of the profession might be compromised. Although in my affections for Kisun-ji, the words, ‘greed’, ‘fear’, ‘expectation’, ‘political line’, never were a factor whether when he inhabited the cold floors of Pulchowk during the Panchayat days or when he worked at an air-conditioned office during his term as an all-powerful Interim Prime Minister. Whenever I see him, he welcomes me as warmly as always saying, “O-ho, my dear”, or “How are you Bijay-babu?”
In my almost twenty year long career as a journalist Krishna Prasad Bhattarai never once asked me write something or say something on his behalf. His calculus of behavior towards me was never shaped by the television programs I made on him whether they turned out to be of small political gain to him or causes of momentary infamy. My journalistic deeds or misdeeds were always divorced from the affections that Kisun-ji showered on me. Let me give an example of the much talked about by-election in Kathmandu constituency number 1. He granted an interview then which people still use to belittle him. At one point during that 25-minute long interview, he said, “I am fighting this election so that I can raise enough money to buy some Scotch.” During that 25-minute long interview, Bhattarai spoke about many serious issues related to the Palace, Singha Durbar, democracy, etc. But people only lifted that one line and propagated it.
I could have edited that if I had wanted, but I didn’t. I saw it as a humorous sentence that cropped up in the middle of a serious tete-a-tete. I thought Kisun-ji was taking a swipe at the then crop of MPs. That interview was recorded at the top floor of the then Nepali Congress Central Office in Baneshwor. Before the interview commenced, Kisun-ji said, “there was too much salt in today’s meal, so I need to drink water.” That bottle of mineral water as seen on television later was propagated as ‘alcohol’. After I found out that water was being described as alcohol in the market place of rumors, I told him that this had to be denied. Gently, he replied, “time issues the biggest denial. When I stayed in prison for 14 years, I never denied the charges that the kings leveled against me. Why should I deny an observation of those who see water as alcohol and alcohol as water. I urge you not to issue a denial too.”
In a society like ours where no one delves into the substance of issues but rather wastes time by indulging in irrelevant small talk, that statement of Kisun-ji, “I want to become an MP so that I can drink”, was cited by everyone. Those who sneered at him never thought for a moment that does a person of Krishna Prasad Bhattarai’s stature really need to buy drinks? Bijay Shah, the owner of Jawalakhel Distillery who was also Kisun-ji’s neighbor in Pulchowk asked me once, “I hear this controversy about Kisun-ji wanting to become an MP so that he can drink. I really don’t think he meant it literally. He has hundreds of admirers like myself. If asked to treat him, there are many in this city who would feel honored to not only offer him bottles, but even build a swimming pool of Scotch for him. I am sure that sentence had a deeper meaning.”
There’s only a very tiny group of people that knows Kisun-ji intimately. He is much beyond what he appears to be. Those who have acquainted with him for years can also be betrayed at their guesses of his inner thoughts. Although the sound bites he has issued to journalists have hit the headlines several times, in many circumstances, he utters exactly the opposite of what he is really thinking. Once he scared away a well-known journalist who had come to interview him by showing his penis. Smilingly, he talked about the incident later, “I would have given answers to that rascal had he come here really looking for them. He hadn’t.” Despite being the first president of the Nepal Journalists Association and the first Asian journalist to interview the Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev, I am not aware of an occasion when Kisun-ji has ever cared about what journalists write about him. Praise him - that’s fine; slander him, that’s fine too. There’s an element of arrogance in him on this issue, “what exactly can these journalists achieve and influence by writing about me in whatever way they want?” That arrogance, of course, didn’t emerge out of nowhere. In his 50 year long political struggle, those who sang his praises eventually turned into those hurling abuses, and those who abused him before have started to sing his praises now. This has not happened once, but many a time. But on issues of democracy and constitutional monarchy, Bhattarai himself has stay put wherever he stood since Day One, without moving an inch to the left or the right. What has the press left to write about him, and what has he not said of the press that has not been said? Once, he declared, “all journalists are thieves.”
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 14-Mar-02 11:59 PM
Continued.
In my previous column, I wrote that Kisun-ji is not a leader, but a mere ‘political manager’. Many people thought Kisun-ji would now be furious with me. They were mistaken this time too as they had been before when they thought I’d angered him by not editing that line about Scotch and being an MP in my TV program. To people who had gone to complain about this, Kisun-ji said, “yes, that fellow Bijay is indeed a scoundrel. In the interview, I’d also mentioned that I have slept with 22 women. He edited that line out, but kept intact the line about alcohol.”
People gossip a lot about Kisun-ji’s liaisons with women. He also talks to his ‘inner circle’ about women and sex in an unrestrained manner. After listening for years, I now know that Kisun-ji’s talk about women is like that of Khuswant Singh’s ramblings about his love for alcohol. Singh, the famous Indian writer and journalist, who has been well known for his writing as well self-professed weakness for Scotch is actually known to drink very little in real life. But he never fails to write about his imaginary fondness for Scotch. Kisun-ji, too, is not a virgin. He has never hidden this fact anywhere and from anyone. When alone, Kisun-ji sometimes shares his most private thoughts. Once he told me, “Look, Bijay, I can’t even walk properly. Do you think I can have sex? But fools here gossip about me day and night. They don’t ask themselves, how can an elderly person who can’t even walk properly perform a sexual intercourse? One side of me thinks, this is actually a good propaganda. At least, people think I’m able and competent. Why should I then actually go around denying my own prowess and competence?” He said, “there was a time when I had fun. Now, my sex-life has merely been sustained by these propagandist well-wishers.” Recently when he met the Indian Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, in Delhi, he told him, “Your Excellency, like yourself, I am also a real bachelor but a fake virgin, ‘sakkali abibahit, nakkali kumar’.” Hearing this, Atal-ji is said to have reciprocated with a self-contented smile.
There is, in all likelihood, only one Nepali who can talk with an Indian leader of Atal-ji’s stature so frankly. Not only in these ‘light’ matters, but even in issues warranting gravity, Kisun-ji is equally respected in India. In 1990, when he received guests at India’s Presidential Palace as Nepal’s Interim Prime Minister, I saw with my own eyes two Cabinet Ministers greeting him by bowing and touching his feet. I still remember one of their names. It was Sharad Yadav, and I believe he is still a Minister. Sometimes I think about this and wonder what a state he would be reduced to in Nepal if a hapless chap, in his capacity as a Nepali Minister dared to touch the feet of an Indian PM? During that same visit, at a press conference with Indian PM V.P. Singh in Delhi’s Science Building, the answers that Kisun-ji gave would have made any nationalist Nepali proud. A Nepali leader who goes to Delhi and talks with the Indian leaders on equal terms is unfortunately labeled ‘pro-India’ in our country, while those who follow the dictates of India always and on anything pass here as ‘nationalists’. A very strange definition of nationalism we have here. In the name of Mahakali, a party split. Mahakali is exactly where it was when that party split, but now there’s been unity. When you broke away in the name of Mahakali, you were a nationalist. When Mahakali remains where it was, and you re-unite, you are still a nationalist. Those who wage “People’s War” out of Delhi are also nationalists. But Bhattarai - the man who declares openly in Delhi that he will buy weapons wherever available is pro-Indian? Strange indeed is our custom.
Krishna Prasad Bhattarai was imprisoned for 14 years. Unlike his leader BP Koirala and his other colleagues, he refused to be released on condition that he sign a note of acquiescence. Of course, people don’t become great by just staying in prison for long. But what one can extrapolate from that episode is a fact that a person who appears so ‘light’ on the outside has inside him a commitment cast in steel. He did not go to India on self-imposed exile. But this man - who didn’t bow to the king for 14 years and who remained in Nepal upon release by disagreeing fundamentally with his leader BP Koirala – what has become of him lately? Which is the real face of Krishna Prasad Bhattarai - a petty man who talks light and takes everything lightly, or the one who never compromised on ideals that to him were as firm as those cast on a rock? I have thought about this question a lot and also talked to him about it many times. I will write about this very topic in my next column.
|
| diwas k |
Posted
on 15-Mar-02 01:11 AM
Shree Paschim,
Dhanyabad for the translated post... quite Bijaya Kumar_ish.. but refreshing read ....
_Diwas
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 15-Mar-02 04:20 PM
I don't read Bijaya Kumar a lot of times, but these two articles I read. To me,
without going into detail of what he was writing about the protagonist and what
ever excuse he gave for writing these two articles: one praising Ganesh Man
and somehow belittling KP Bhattarai and GP Koirala and another one praising
Krishna Prasad, looked like his botched attempt to both look like a standout,
righteous guy and ingratiate with a powerful person who is also friendly with him.
In the first article, he praises Ganesh Man(who I agree was a far better guy than
the other two in NC triumvirs) and says the other two are just political manager.
Then he goes to detail of Krishna Pd Bhattarai's life, and culls the best moments
of his life, and tries to write justifies even all the wrong things he did(like showing
private organs to the dissenting journalist!). I mean, come on, I can write a
similar article mentioning only the illustratious moments of Girija Babu and thus
lionizing him!
Despite my praise for his aggressive style, I think Bijay Kumar needs to be honest
with himself. He needs to prove himself that he is a person he can be proud of , he
can adjudge himself as the person he can admire!
|
| hmmm.... |
Posted
on 15-Mar-02 04:37 PM
Why did he have to mention the Unification of UML here by the way? I think that was lame-- shows his biased opinion.
Things that make you go hmmm....
hmmm....
|
| Nepe |
Posted
on 16-Mar-02 03:52 PM
I don’t depend on Vijaya Kumar to make my own ‘personally accurate’ account of Nepali political scenario. Like Biswo, I too think VK needs to prove that he is honest to himself. I think he is a mediocre critics. His mediocracy comes in part from his observable need to show off and the rest from the bias he uses to fit his statement of the moment. As Biswo rightly said even Girija Babu can be lionized using VK tool of writing. I would say, using VK style, one can go as far as iconizing even Prachanda and Baburam Bhattarai.
Honesty is one of those blunt things, which, either you are or you are not. There is no gray zone in honesty.
Nepe
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 16-Mar-02 06:41 PM
Nepeji:
I agree with you. Remember how he said his daughter is in "Budhanilakantha"
without any help from powerful persons. It is very tough to remind readers
that he was not getting any benefit from his powerful political friends, while
penning their flattering biography!(This by no way means insinuation about
Budhanilakantha school. I believe BNKS admission system is mostly fair!)
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 18-Mar-02 09:26 PM
Interesting exhange on the irrepressible BK. Usually I resist from trespassing of this kind, but BK being BK, I couldn't help myself from penning some honest opinions on him.
I neither know Bijay kumar well, nor am I related to him. I met him twice for lunch in 1999. During both the interactions, although personally respectful to me, I found him arrogant, vain, flamboyant, talkative, shallow, and insensitive overall on the content of the chat. In his first column of "On Relationships", he admits to being "basically a shy guy", which "unknowingly" propelled him to be branded, "rightly", over the 20 years of his career as, what he himself calls "sanki" and "rude". His justfication for his deserved reputation as being a cranky chap is unconvincing, but he has been honest in admitting that he has a problem.
I have however enjoyed almost all of his TV and radio programs, and find his written pieces distinct. I read his articles whenever I see them, and in Kathmandu, I remember rushing back to my place from the Thamel bars or the Mandala Book Point by 8 pm so as to catch the NTV news and his programs that followed. I hated some of his episodes, disliked a few, was indifferent to a handful, and thoroughly enjoyed some. But did I feel bad when I missed his program? Yes. I saw him as a journalist - one without any formal training in it - who stood out for his innovative way to inform and entertain. Did he sway my opinion on how I personally formed my frame of nepali politics? No, hardly ever. He was possibly one of ten different sources who might have had some input, but it would be flattering BK too much to say that he has singlehandedly convinced me on any one thing. That has not happened. But there is something in him as a journalist that makes him tick differently, and like the Gradfather's Clock that stands on the hallway, I can't pretend not to notice and recognize it. I distinctly remember three of his interviews, all during 1998-99, which made me think about his subjects for a long time precisly because of the way he had handled his "material", i.e., the guests - Shashanka Koirala (eye doctor) and Anuradha Gurung (Maiti Nepal) on NTV, and Bhim Rawal (then the UML Civil Aviation Minister who had just leased a Boeing from China South West for RNAC) on Kantipur FM. When in Nepal last month, I heard he had just finished another series of interviews for TV. Talking with friends, I found out that the series was mediocre at best, and the only interview that was good was with Pradeep Giri. But I nevertheless felt bad for missing it, especially the one with Giri. That intensely unfulfilled urge to have been there when that particular episode was aired was only partially satisfied when I eventually met Giri in person, and had a chance to talk about some of the things which I assumed he talked with Bijay Kumar.
So there you go, despite very mixed impressions on the man and his work, the cult of BK is not entirely vacuumed. A veteran British journalist, Sir David Frost said once, "TV personalities are people who you wouldn't mind being entertained by on screen, but would never invite into your sitting room." His insinuation was perhaps these folks show off interesting public work, but are essentially ugly in private. What a grossly unfair generalization, but in my search for a Nepali character who fit Sir David's typology, I might have found BK; and like most discoverers, I am pleased with my find.
On Bijay Kumar's honesty, I wouldn't be able to comment just from his writings. I find his "tone" of writing consistent, but the substance is occasionally unpredictable, but always interesting; occasionally illuminating, but never intellectually fulfilling.
On integrity though, and this I was told by the well-known Editor of Kantipur himself who I have sufficient faith in, that for all his vices, BK stands out among Nepali journalists for exactly not doing what Biswo, rightly, instinctively, and perhaps based on many anecdotal evidence guessed: "getting benefits from his powerful contacts". We know journalists who slander, blackmail, and profit by compromising the profession's integrity. Apparently BK is not known for exploiting his high-profile network that would I'm sure be quite happy to reward him for "fear", "respect", or just "honoring a custom" like the bottle of Whisky that the Indian Embassy used to send journalists every Dashain. As evidence, BK's ordinary "rahan sahan" was cited, and the modest 800 CC Maruti that he rides is apparently a result of a credit that his good friend the industrialist Binod Chaudhari extended via his Finance company. My source's contention was that BK could have got a free car from somewhere else if he'd wanted, but the maximum he bargained for with Binod was a concessionary interest rate on the loan.
But I realize people who have suffered his arrogance first hand perhaps find it hard to reconcile these facets. For me though, quite versed by now to differentiate the 'structure' of a personality from the 'outputs' of that personality, I think I'm okay living with two diametrically oppositive views about the man and his work. So re. that Budhanilkantha claim, I'd actually like to believe that it is true. I'd give him the benefit of the doubt anyway until reliable evidence emerges that challenge either BK's claim, or the credibility of my source. Like Maynard Keynes said, "I change my opinion when facts change. What do you do, Sir?"
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 18-Mar-02 10:11 PM
To remedy an apparent contradiction that was not intended between the first and the sixth line in the third paragraph of my posting above, please replace the word "enjoyed" by " been amused by" in the first line of that paragraph.
|
| Purba |
Posted
on 18-Mar-02 11:40 PM
Hello Paschim ji,
You took your valueable time to translate the above articles, but have you thought about NOT posting? I don't think it is worth doing.
oohi
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 19-Mar-02 12:26 PM
Paschimji:
Good to read your 'inside' information. I didn't mean to say that his daughter was
in BNKS with the help of someone in power.(That's why I added BNKS admission
system is mostly fair , as long as I know.)It was a dig at his writing style: in
showing off one's friendly relationships, he had a tough job reminding readers that
he wasn't misusing them. He needed to keep on telling his readers that he wasn't
benefitting from the powerful ones he was both befriending and writing adulatory
article about.
> I find his "tone" of writing consistent, but the substance is occasionally
> unpredictable, but always interesting; occasionally illuminating, but never
> intellectually fulfilling.
I also read him/listen him whenever possible. (that is not a lot these days,
predictably!) His 'tone' is consistent, but 'substance' of his articles are not. Just
the last two articles in Nepal proves that. In the first one, he is all gaga over
Ganesh Man, and derogates the KP and GP duo. But in a drastic volte-face, he
goes on to explain his previous remark in the subsequent article, and gushes
lyrically about KP.
I would like to compare him with conservative talk show host Bill O'Reilly. His tone
is consistent, He is mostly acerbic and condescending. (He was bluntly saying
Al Sharpton ,'i don't think you will win the race' and to a CBS executive about latest
9/11 documentary, 'I won't watch your documentary'!). Bill O'Reilly, whose Factor
is now #1 show in US, actually fails both liberal and conservative, because with
the popularity of his show, he obviously became dizzy and grossly overestimated
his importance. Now, his show is just full of his own ranting, without any principle
or any consistent ideological backup. That's what I think Bijay Kumar has become
lately. I believe that though he is a good and honest person in comparison to a lot
of his contemporaries, his oratorial and observant talent have become a hostage
of his own overestimation of himself.(Maile chaaheko bhaye yesto garna sakthe,
oosto garna sakthe.. type of statements only prove this!)
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 19-Mar-02 08:47 PM
Purba-ji, you confused me completely. I couldn't figure out if you were criticizing me for posting trash, implying that it's not "worth doing" as no one reads or gets anything out of them; or you were my well-wisher who thought I was wasting my valuable time and effort in this forum, which you believe for whatever reason is not "worth doing".
Anyway, never before have I been so curious over an ambiguous statement. If you have time, I'd really like to hear from you privately on what exactly you meant. Please send me an email at the following:
Paschim
c/o Dilli Kumar Bhurtel
kautilya100@yahoo.com
(Yes, this is a functioning email address!)
---------
And Biswo, thanks for your comments, which were also kind of summarized in the 3rd line of the second paragraph in my posting. So, yes, I agree with you.
|
