Jenna Burke

In this article, Anwar Iqbal shares his as an apprentice newspaper reporter in Pakistan in the late 70s. He discusses what he saw in his first public flogging. Flogging is the act of whipping the human body with a rod or wooden plank.

General Zia ul-Haq, the General of Pakistan at the time, made the flogging punishments a public event. He arranged a large spectacle of a show for his people. It became very popular and Iqbal was asked to attend a flogging “ceremony” as press.

He describes the looks on the victim’s faces as he approached the stage. Just empty and helpless. The victim was placed on the stage in a strategic way, so that the important people and the press could get a good view. There is even a microphone by his mouth so the audience could hear him scream!

The “flogger” was a convict himself, in order to appear intimidating and scary. Thousands come out to this “show”. All of the grounds, neighboring roads and streets were packed full of people just to watch the flogging. There were even hawkers who sold fruits and ice cream to the crowd!

What I find the most interesting thing about this spectacle is how it is influenced by the caste system. The richer class regularly commit the same crimes of the flogging systems. These crimes include drinking alcohol and having sex outside of marriage, which happens in exclusive upper-class places and cheap motels. The richer class are protected from flogging simply because of their status.

The police always put their attention in the cheap motels, to arrest anyone. The victims from the flogging Iqbal watched were arrested at a hotel in a lower-class neighborhood. There were over fifty people there, and men over fifty and all of the women were excused from the flogging. The victims are all middle-aged men. They are considered “fit for flogging.”

Iqbal encounters the poor man on that stage being whipped in his back, and explains how the audience went dead silent. After the first few hits, there was a doctor who came to examine the victim. After he was done, he allowed the flogging to continue!! After fifteen lashes, the flogging was done, and they untied the man and brought on the next victim.

I found this article very disturbing. It sickens me that anyone could consider this type of torture as entertainment! At the end of this reading, Iqbal discusses his reaction to a flogging that was canceled. He realized that even though he was against flogging, he was still somewhat disappointed. He “did not want to miss the spectacle”.

The question I have to ask is, Where is the line that draws between entertainment and human cruelty?

Amber-Lee Campbell

An apprentice’s job is to learn to become a skilled professional in their craft. For some, the first experiences in the trade may leave an everlasting impression or impact on their lives. In 1977, in Pakistan, as General Zia ul-Haqin came to power, in a military revolution, inexperienced reporter, Anwar Iqbal was sent to review his first public flogging.

Floggings, stonings and amputations had always been part of the Islamic law and punishments but the general came up with the ground-breaking idea of making them public, “pour encourager les autres” (pp.203). The spectacle took place on a stage built between two cities in a vast area usually used as a playground for children’s sports activities. The 15 convicts, deemed suitable for the flogging by a physician, were mostly middle aged men. According to Ibqal, they looked like “circus animals waiting for the crack of the trainer’s whip” (pp.203). They were dressed in white pajamas and caps. The grounds were packed to extremes with spectators, as if they were at a sold out rock concert in America. Although the victims were mostly from lower class, spectators from all neighbourhoods were in attendance. The lower class appeared to be detached or indifferent to the activities. In Anwar Iqbual’s opinion, this was most likely due to the fact that they must appear to be morally supportive of the convicts. The upper class viewers seemed to be openly enjoying the occasion. It did not appear to faze either group that all classes could have easily been arrested for committing the same sin of drinking alcohol or having sex with women other than their legal partners.

As the spectacle began, Iqbal watched 2 constables lead each victim, in turn, to have their hands and feet tied to a wooden frame placed in the middle of the stage. The grounds were quiet even though there was a microphone place which would carry the moans of the convict’s voice throughout the crowd. The flogger, a convict himself, receives the command from the magistrate to begin. His whip sears through the victim’s skin as the blood oozes out and the cries of agony are magnified.  A doctor periodically checks the victim until the fifteenth lash is completed and the convict is untied. At the next flogging, the young reporter attended, he was met with a belligerent crowd, disappointed that a higher court had suspended the event. What shocked Iqbual most was not his disappointment with his people’s attitudes and morals, but his own reaction to the cancellation. To his surprise, he found that he shared in the excitement of this cruel torture even though he wrote against it. This “unpleasing discovery” (pp.205) of himself and his country became a major force in his life.

This article raises the question, “Does man have an innate desire to witness cruel spectacles life?” or “Is man’s curiosity so ubiquitous that it “does kill the cat”?” On a personal note, I believe the latter to be true. I have actually on one occasion, waited 20 minutes to witness a car accident, that judging by the number of emergency vehicles on site, must have been horrific, when I could have easily taken another route. I know I am a moral person and I am honest about my convictions, but often I succumb to the desire to “sneak a peak” at an appalling spectacle.

Andrew Conlon

Contrast can be defined as the “opposition or juxtaposition of different forms, lines, or colors in a work of art to intensify each element's properties and produce interest and a more dynamic expressiveness”. Although this is clearly a definition for ‘contrast’ as explored in fine arts, it is completely applicable to Anwar Ichbal’s article “Fifteen Lashes”, in light of Edgerton’s essay “Maniera and Mannaia”.

The ‘interest’ and the ‘dynamic expressiveness’ that this definition speaks of is plainly obvious when examining these two articles. In order to explain this contrast, it is first important to note what they entail.

Fifteen Lashes is an article documenting the first public flogging which the author, Ichbal, attended. It is a graphic, unpleasant, and detailed condemnation of these particular acts as practiced in 1970’s Pakistan. Ichbal cites that “Floggings were always a part of prison life in Pakistan” (202) but writes that it was “The general’s innovation to make them public” (202). He compares the spectacle to that of a circus. An intimidating stage upon several characters of Pakistani society carried out their role.

Although not the topic of this Reading report, it is also important to know the content of Edgerton’s essay. In Maniera and Mannaia, Edgerton too writes about public punishment spectacles, but instead cites them as ‘artistic’ and ‘theologized responses’ to crime in the Renaissance period (97). Like the floggings in Pakistan, capital punishment was a well-attended social event, involving certain costumes, codes and rituals. However, this article highlights the artistic documentation, and how it tells a very different story than the article written by Ichbal.

Ichbal uses words like “circus” to describe the event and “fierce slashing” to describe the actions at such at event (204). In contrast, Edgerton links many of the artifices used in such performances as having “Christian” and not circus, connotations (79). He also uses the word ‘dignified’ to describe such public beheadings.

What was most interesting to me about Ichbal’s article, in light of Edgerton’s essay, was the absolute opposite opinions on the subject, despite extreme similarities between the events. For example, both talk of the ‘executioner’ or ‘whipper’ and compare him to a bird, using feathers to exaggerate their presence. They both speak of different punishments being reserved for persons of particular stations, and they both mention a figure with a stick or baton, to signal the commencement.

Although there are these and other similarities, it was extremely interesting to see how different the respective authors felt about the topic. Ichbal feels disgusted, and includes details like the play-by-play process of the whip entering and leaving the convicts skin, and the microphone picking up exact sounds. Yet for a similar, if not more gruesome event, Edgerton briefly covers the “fine art of decapitation” in a few, less emotional phrases.

To a reader who has a grasp of both articles, is proposed with some very interesting ideas. I wonder, Has Ichbal been more personally affected and inserted in such floggings, versus Edgerton who has taken a far more ‘back-seat’ and historical viewpoint? Has this affected their writings?

Gina DeLisser

This reading titled “Fifteen Lashes” by  Anwar Iqbal portrays the act of punishment by flogging in Pakistan during the reign of military leader General Zia Ul-Haq in 1977. According to this reporter, public flogging was used as a spectacle for and corporate punishment and entertainment. People caught in the act of judicial atrocities were arrested and brought forward to officials who would assess their “flogging potential”. That is how physically able they were to withstand the flogging.  This public display was a demonstration of Islamic government power and a warning for all those who would dare attempt to do likewise.

These public floggings in my opinion certainly encompass serious distortions. The site for judicial punishment has been turned into a public spectacle of cultural festivities. Floggings were viewed by a wide range of audience members from the lowly of peasants looking from afar to the pompous higher-class citizens and the prestigious government with the best seats of course. It was considered by all a  “site to be seen” onlookers observed with great fascination, anticipation and curiosity. The criminals were paraded on stage as “the show” was about to begin. The “festivities” of the procession were well organized and planned considerably, each participant aware of their respective roles. Those involved were the floggers, the to be flogged, the audience, the doctor and the officials.

This event could be seen by some as a spectacle involving interdisciplinarity due to the discernable roles taken on by participators including the audience each seared indelibly with the knowledge of  what was  expected of them. It would appear that in this text “performance” has  emerged from this very real life scenario. But should it really be looked as at a spectacle when the very essence of performance is to brake away from tradition  and  political oppression?

Yara Elarabi

Anwar Iqbal was an apprentice newspaper reporter when he wrote Fifteen Lashes. In 1977, General Zia ul-Haw came to power in Pakistan. He was very keen on Islamic laws and punishments. The general was in favour of public flogging, because he believed that it “encouraged the others” (202) to not commit sin, such as drinking alcohol and adultery. Iqbal article sums up his experience when he witnessed his first public flog.

In his article Fifteen Lashes, Anwar Iqbal explains in details what happens during public flogging. He states how he witnessed the victims lining up in their “white pyjamas, loose white shirts and white caps…they looked like circus animals waiting for the crack of the trainer’s whip” (202). The flogging stage is built in a big open space between the city of Rawalpindi and Islamabad. It is a 15 feet high platform that could be viewed from every corner of the ground. The victims are tied on a wooden frame, which is fixed in the middle of the platform. The victims’ face is towards the stage facing the policemen, the magistrate, while their hips would face the audience. During the flogging, a doctor would be present so that the victim does not die. Near the victims’ mouth, a microphone is fixed on the frame so everybody could hear his screams. The whippers are convicts, who have been brought from the prison. Flogging is a public spectacle that causes people to “stand on their rooftops of nearby buildings, or trees, and electricity poles on the ground” (203). The author claims how he experienced an unpleasant discovery about enjoying the public flog. He stated how he was supposed to watch a “blind woman flogged for sexual misbehaviour” (205). However, once the performance was cancelled, the crowd grew with anger and disappointment. The author stated that “although [he] has been writing against public flogging for years, [he] wanted to watch it” (205). He claimed how he felt such a sorrowful, angry disgust within himself and the country he lived in because they all didn’t want to “miss the spectacle” (205).

I believe that it is very unfortunate and disgusting how such an event is displayed as a public performance. The fact that the government wants to install fear into their citizens by whipping them publicly is very cruel and inhuman. Once the author claimed how a part of him enjoined it, I was outraged to believe that a person who has been writing about such a horrific event for years was actually disappointed when the flogging was cancelled.

Question: What makes flogging a performance art form and what causes it to be a huge spectacle?

Paolo Macchiusi

The story Fifteen Lashes revolves around a time period where “The Whip” was a soul mean of punishment. People who sinned or broke the law were sentenced to lashes until a doctor thought he or she could was not able to take it anymore. The narrator, a reporter at the beginning of the story is disgusted with this form of punishment and is 100% against it. He goes to watch a lashing to understand what the victims go through and how it is taken care of. As he watches, people are being whipped to the point where blood is oozing out of them and they are screaming for help. The reporter is still against this form of punishment and is disgusted in how it takes place and how many people attend. The narrator then goes to watch another lashing of a blind woman for sexual misbehaviour. When he arrives the flogging had been cancelled by a higher court. The crowd was upset because they wanted to see the woman in distress. The narrator himself, as against it he was, was very disappointed that it was not taking place. He wanted to watch it and did not want to miss the spectacle. This made him disgusted with himself and the country he lived in. It became a feature of his life. This text has taught me that near the beginning, without a throughout understanding of the topic, one is not able to fully understand what is happening and why which is what turns the reader away from the text. As one is able to view the topic and learn about it, they become more intrigued weather it is right or not and makes one want to have an informed view rather than a personal judgment.

Brent Wirth

In his article “Fifteen Lashes”, Anwar Iqbal, a former Pakistani newspaper reporter, discusses the violent public floggings that occurred during General Zia ul-Haq’s reign in Pakistan from 1977 to 1988 and the allure of a spectacle.

Flogging, a punishment that Pakistan adopted from the British colonialists, is the act of beating one’s body severely with a whip or stick. At the time, in Pakistan, flogging was made public and used as a common disciplinary measure to punish the crimes of fornication and drinking alcohol. These criminal offenders were dressed in loose white shirts, caps and pyjamas and brought to one of the stages where these punishments were exhibited publicly. One at a time, each offender was tied to a wooden frame that was affixed to the stage and beaten. Despite condemning these public floggings in his writing at the time and acknowledging his own disapproval with the laws and punishments of his country, Iqbal admits that he was drawn to the violent demonstrations and “did not want to miss the spectacle” (Iqbal 205).

Essentially, Iqbal is suggesting that a spectacle of any nature can be a dangerous affair, as one can become so absorbed by the excitement and action and influenced by others that one can easily become willing to abandon one’s beliefs, morals and compassion, the very essence of one’s humanity, in such a situation. Ultimately, this can lead to one doing something that one will regret for the rest of their lives. Thus, I suppose an appropriate question to pose based on the context of this course is: can an artistic spectacle yield such extreme results?