BBC's list of Great Bangalis: Some questions

BBC prepared a list of 20 GBs from the survey, whose names were disclosed, beginning from the bottom, from 26 March-the day of our independence. The identity of the person, who topped the list, was revealed on the Bengali New Year's day -- 14 April. This person is none other than Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the founding father of Bangladesh.

Bangabandhu, as the leader of our political independence, is supposed to be above all controversies. However, as ill luck would have it, he has been made a very controversial figure in the country, purely by partisan politics. Naturally, the outcome of the BBC's survey has been taken politically. AL and its supporting cultural and political organisations, and public media have made the revelation of the survey result a matter of celebration, while BNP and its supporting taken and cultural and political organisations have made little notice of the news.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

Impartial spectators, if there are something like this, are not surprised by this partisan interpretation of apparently benign survey result. However, they are indeed confused about the meaning, merit and intention of the survey.

The problem with the meaning of the term GBs emanates from the very methodology of survey. BBC asked each listener (respondent), who included Bangalis living all around the world, to nominate five famous Bangalis chronologically. The person nominated number one was assigned five points and so on. The list was prepared by adding the scores each nominated person received in the survey.

The respondents identified 140 GBs, of which BBC published a list of top 20 score-receivers. To appreciate the nature of methodological problem, the entire list, with positions, is reproduced below: Rabindranath Tagore (2nd), Kazi Nazrul Islam (3rd), A. K. Fazlul Haq (4th), Subash Bose (5th), Begum Rokeya (6th), Jagadish Chandra Bose (7th), Ishwar Chandra Bidyasagar (8th), Maoulana Bashani (9th), Raja Ram Mohon Roy (10th), Titumeer (11th), Lalon Shah (12th), Satyajit Roy (13th), Amartya Sen (14th), Language Movement Martyrs (15th), Dr. Muhammad Shahidulla (16th), Sawami Vivekanada (17th), Atish Depankar (18th), Zaiur Rahman (19th), Suhrwardy (20th).

Given the vagueness of the question posed, the respondents were troubled by the formidable job of defining a GB. A GB is to be defined with respect to his/her achievements in personal life that have resulted in notable contribution to the Bengali community. This means that the respondents compared each individual's achievements, while revealing their preferences. Those identified in the survey have made contributions in different areas of our social life. For example, Bangabandhu had made immeasurable contribution in our political life. However, poets Tagore and Nazrul Islam had made similarly significant contributions in promoting and publicising Bengali literature. Thus, it is logically wrong to compare the contributions of these diverse personalities, particularly for the purpose of ranking them. The list cited above clearly shows the validity of this argument.

Second, the merit of this survey should also be questioned. It seems obvious that the definition or idea of a GB that the respondents have in mind is supposed to vary widely. For, the selected BBC listeners could be any person from a very ordinary individual, like a poor farmer or a rickshaw puller, to renowned academics, intellectuals, politicians and so on. Then each of these respondents' choice will vary in accordance with their understanding as well as moral and political views.

Let's consider four respondents -- a rickshaw puller, a die-hard supporter of Bengali nationalism, a die-hard supporter of Bangladeshi nationalism and a highly respected intellectual. We can easily imagine that the rickshaw puller would never think of many names cited above, just because of the shallowness of knowledge. We can also imagine that Bangabandhu's name might not appear in the list of the die-hard supporter of Bangladeshi nationalism, while the same could happen about Ziaur Rahman in the list provided by die-hard supporter of Bengali nationalism. Finally, the intellectual might hesitate to submit his/her list because of the definitional ambiguity.

Thus, the merit of such survey is questionable, which the survey results clearly indicate.

Finally, the intention of this survey is not quite obvious. This is certainly not a news item. And because the issue involved is a matter of historical truth, this issue cannot, and should not, be subjected to normal opinion poll conducted by news media.

This survey seems to have done a great disservice not only to the memory of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, but also all other great men and women who have been identified by the selected BBC listeners.

In democracy, opinion polls, conducted by popular media, are very important instruments of revealing views and understandings of general public about important socio-economic and political issues. However, given the fact that the respondents of the survey are public in its true connotation, extreme cautions should be taken in selecting the issue and framing the question.

Khandakar Qudrat-I Elahi, a former Associate Professor of Bangladesh Agricultural University, lives in Guelph, Ontario, Canada. He is currently visiting Bangladesh.