 |
| Heikal |
He preferred to stay
silent when receiving any invitation to talk in commemoration gatherings. He
preferred to express his feelings of sorrow for those dear to the deceased in a
short message or cable, likely because he didn’t like talking about death and
wasn’t good at commemorating or even praising. May be if it had been possible
to ask him about his eulogy or commemoration, he would immediately have refused
preferring everyone should be dismissed to their assigned job. Whenever an
individual turns into a unique figure in history, only then accustomed
rules-disciplined scientific research can state its judgment which will definitely
not be “in favor of” or “against”, but rather detecting, analyzing, and
connecting incidents together in order to extract lessons out of it.
It’s the side I knew in
Mohammed Hassanein Heikal and definitely others know more than I do. In my
opinion, that was the trait that doesn’t necessitate to be described as the
best – like professors of Principles of Jurisprudence say – but rather requires
the man should be described as a phenomenon and a national and humanitarian
institution.
Until scientific
research in history, politics, journalism, sociology, and biography takes
command regarding Heikal’s life, I believe attributes will be limited to the
personal perspective when writing about his departure. It’s normal since main
source of writing in this case will stem from Al-ostaz[1] Heikal’s relationship with
all these parties. Those who co-worked with him and others who learned and
worked under his command in journalism have their perspective and those who
witnessed him in policy-making “kitchens”, presidential and monarchic palaces’
avenues, world capitals and resorts, have their own accounts as well. Even
those who used to meet him in the very short distance separating his
residential apartment from his office, the short distance separating his
secretary staff and assistants, those who used to serve him and serve his
guests, everyone of those people have his own perspective that outlines his
opinion and conviction about Al-ostaz.
Many circled him in a
constellation like planets do when orbiting the sun; they stayed attracted and
affected by him; he was their night, day, and four seasons; their tides were
linked to his existence. Many others, meantime, refused to submit to his
attraction; those were either scraps wandering in wide space or planets
rotating around other stars. However, those who opposed him couldn’t deny his
ability, and when they do, they become worthy to be described like what the
poet said:
If eye denies sunlight, it is due to blindness
And if mouth cannot
taste water, it is due to illness!
The relationship between
us started long time ago when we were young, when my father used to punish us
if he didn’t find his copy of Al-Ahram[2] – Friday’s edition in
particular –, the edition he ordered to be kept safe until next one comes out. And
so Al-Ahram Friday’s edition – due to the significant value of “besaraha[3]” article – used to escape
the destiny of being laid over the dining table, under chicks’ feet, or moistened
with water in order to be used in cleaning windows’ glass, or even foiled for
the purpose of igniting fire in furnaces and stoves! It was until I knew my way
to the newspapers’ seller – this time to buy the paper for me, not for my
father – when I realized there were newspapers other than Al-Ahram. That was
because Al-Ahram was the only one in “curriculum” at home; I have no idea why
it wasn’t Al-akhbar, Al-masry, or Al-gomhoriyea, the papers that circulated at
that time in addition to Al-Ahram. Our colleague newspapers sellers’ callings
were known to everyone… Read about the accident… Read…. Read… Read for Heikal.
In March, 1971 I was the
post-graduate studies’ representative in Ain Shams University and faculty of
Arts’ student union and in the preliminary year of my Master’s degree study as
well when the culture committee of the union decided to arrange a meeting with
Al-ostaz. An appointment was scheduled through his then-secretary Fawzia. We
went and were seated in a room attached to his office where we sit at a round
table circling him. A long discussion was conducted. I don’t know why I sought
to provoke him when he said, ending my annoying attempts, “are you here in a
game?!” I stopped and he, welcomingly, published almost all the debate with us
in Al-Ahram Friday’s edition instead of his article “besaraha”.
Four years later, I went
to his house without prior appointment. His blue-eyed blond secretary Mounir
opened the door and asked me: do you have an appointment?! I said, like a big
celebrity does: just tell him X from Ain Shams University group. Permission was
granted and I was allowed to enter. I saw his youngest son lying in Mounir’s
place watching TV. Al-ostaz came, welcoming, and immediately asked me: “aren’t
you afraid to come here?! At that time, he fell out with then-president Sadat
and left Al-Ahram when Sadat incited his partisans to harass and insult the man
with what best suits them, not him!
Meetings and
conversations between us – either individually or in groups – lasted since 1974
inside Egypt and abroad. I used to record his regard for me through the
dedications he wrote to me on his books!!... Starting from “To X, the young
fighter…”, to “Dear friend X…”.
A lot of situations,
accounts, and heat in conversation went between us sometimes, with rare anger from
his side at times. The worst was when someone – a very mean Jordanian
Palestinian man – rushed to him in the morning to check on him after X – me –
told him Al-ostaz health condition were bad and that he – Al-ostaz – was
suffering from a terminal disease. This wasn’t true. Al-ostaz called me, while
the mean guy was sitting before him, and said one short statement: “hey, Ahmed,
if I’m suffering from a terminal disease, you will be the first to know”. I
immediately said: “I’m sure Y is sitting before you”. Al-ostaz said “yes, talk
to him”. I talked to the man and went describing him using all mean words I
knew.
I discussed him in his
relationship with president Gamal Abdel-Nasser, asked him about his romances,
universal beliefs, his understanding for the philosophy of history. He, as
usual, preferred to listen first to his guest and go on answering afterwards.
Heikal will always be a
historical political sociological journalistic phenomenon… and will ever be a
model for the individual who turned into a national and humanitarian
institution. I stop here for he didn’t like eulogies or attending
commemorations.
Translated into English by: Dalia Elnaggar
Translated into English by: Dalia Elnaggar
This article was
published in Al Ahram newspaper on February 19, 2016.
To see the original
Arabic version, go to:
#alahram#ahmed_elgammal#Heikal#gamal_abdel_nasser#sadat#journalism#media#newspapers#politics#history#biography#writing
[1] Al-ostaz: (Arabic: الأستاذ) a word meaning
Master in Arabic language. Heikal was named by this title to dignify and honor
his long life role in journalism in Egypt and the Arab country either through
his journalistic essays or his books.
[2] Al-Ahram :(Arabic: الأهرام; The Pyramids), founded
on 5 August 1875, is the most widely circulating Egyptian daily newspaper, and
the second oldest after al-Waqa'i`al-Masriya (The
Egyptian Events, founded 1828). It is majority owned by the Egyptian
government. Given the large dialectal variety of the Arabic
language, Al-Ahram is widely considered an influential source
of writing style in Arabic. In 1950, the Middle East Institute described Al-Ahram as
being to the Arabic-reading public within its area of distribution, "What The Times is
to Englishmen and the New York
Times to Americans", however it has often been accused
of heavy influence and censorship by the Egyptian government. (Source:
Wikipedia)
[3] Besaraha: (Arabic: بصراحة) meaning frankly
in Arabic. It was the title of Heikal’s weekly column article in Alahram
newspaper.
No comments:
Post a Comment