The Feudal

This particular drama deals with the feudal system of Sindh, a very different plot from the other two. But more importantly, it also addresses the rural-urban link and its impact on the Pakistani society at large.

There is no doubt that Lal Hussain Shah is a man of great influence and power (“hum maalik hain iss zameen ke, humare hokum ke baghair chirya paani nahin peeti”). [We discussed in class that] the drama shows power of the feudal to be decreasing as people choose to exert a certain amount of resistance and vote against him. Even Lal Hussain Shah’s statements seem to suggest the same (“aayeinda ye howa karay gaa ke vote bhi kissi aur ko dain gai aur paoon bhi kissi aur ke chhowain gai”). His loss in elections is shown as a loss in power/influence as well.

However, we see ample evidence to the contrary. Lal Hussain Shah’s power is a result of his position as the wadera [as he so fondly likes to refer to himself] and not the local elected politician. When his son, Guddu, is bullied in school he tells him to be brave and stand up for himself reinforcing his position as the son of Lal Hussain Shah (“bete, bahadur bano. Koi tumhain kuch kahe naa uska moun tor do. Aakhir tum Lal Hussain Shah ke bete ho”).  Even Shahrbano is reminded of her position as his daughter (“tumhain humesha yaad rakhna chahiye ke tum Lal Hussain Shah ki beti ho”).

            Despite having lost the elections, he is also able to admonish both a sitting bureaucrat and a newspaper owner (i.e. a source of information for the general public). One would assume that having lost his seat he would have more to gain from them than the other way around but their conversation suggests otherwise. It is the bureaucrat and [let’s call him] the journalist who apologise and claim to be subordinate to him.

            His power as feudal is best demonstrated through his reaya (peasants). When they visit him in the city to apologise for his loss in elections he assures them that they would not be affected (“abb tum loag jao. Tum logon ke kaam waisay hi howa karain gai jaisay pehle hote the, aisi koi baat nahin”). The drama shows that losing in the elections did not affect the landlord’s power since he is still able to deliver. The kind of patron-client relations these reaya depend on are completely unaffected by elections [and by extension democracy]. Lal Hussain states that he would work for his people even though he lost the elections (“main agar haar bhi gaya tou uss se kya farq parta hai, main hoon tou abhi bhi tum logon ke dukh such ka saathi”).

            It seems then that there is some truth to Jahanian Shah’s statement [despite being a complete idiot: http://www.youtube.com.s48.en.wbprx.com/watch?v=w0Zmy5JZ0PI] when he says there’s nothing to learn from politics. For these people [the feudal and the tillers] elections mean nothing. Their relationship is a direct result of the patron-client relations that continue to persist even today.