When we went to the house of Akhteruzzaman Elias at 12/3 K M Das Lane Tikatuli, Dhaka, we were greeted by Don Quixote on the right and Pridom on the left. Let's be clear. Don Quixote, a novel by Miguel Cervantes, was placed on a small tool. Pridom means a Bengali typewriter made in Poland. It was kept on a bookshelf. We friends used to say jokingly, these are the two show-pieces in Elias' drawing room. Don Quixote of Cervantes was his all-time favorite novel. And he used to write on typewriters: Pridom is his constant writing companion. I learned from him that this Polish-Bengali typewriter was invented a long time ago. We only knew the name of Munir Optima. But the Polish typewriter was also very beautiful to look at.

The place is in old Dhaka. Opposite the entrance was the back gate of the famous Bengal Studio. His landlord was the renowned orthopedic doctor Humayun. Before we reached Elias' house from the main road, we met people from different walks of life. There were various shops on both sides of the road. I could see that Parota or Singara or Jillipi was being fried in hot oil somewhere. The smell of freshly cooked biryani wafted from a shop. Needless to say, meat kebabs, potato chop or the pungent smell of onions.

I had read the stories of Akhteruzzaman Elias before. These roads in his area became known to me from the details given in his book before I actually went to his house. An old-fashioned smell, the hustle and bustle of every moment and the noise of so many people at once: all these seemed to be Elias’ own reality.

The title of his first story-book sounded very nice: 'Another Voice in Another Room'. It is, however, reminiscent of a novel by the American novelist Truman Capote (1924-1984). Capote's novel Other Voices, Other Rooms was published in 1948. Another of his novels brought him a lot of fame. That is Breakfast at Tiffany's. I also saw that film. Probably Audrey Hepburn was the heroine of the film. Elias liked his book name better than Truman Capote's writing, which he mentioned in an interview.

After the M. A. exam, some of my friends and I published a magazine called 'Little Magazine'. We interviewed Elias for the first issue of the magazine. The subject of the interview was short story. The current state of the short story, its nature and Elias’ own ideas about the short story were all at the center of our discussion. In that written interview he made many valuable remarks in his usual manner. It can be said that my contact with him started from then on. That contact later turned into intimacy and remained intact until his death in 1997.

I used to be accompanied by my intimate friend doctor-writer Mamun Hussain, while chatting at the house of Akhteruzzaman Elias. We chatted for hours. We talked about various things. Fascinated, we listened to Elias. He could talk about literature, society, politics, culture, history, religion and even food. At one point he became our favorite 'Elias Bhai'. There was a sense of humor in his writing and a sense of humor in his words. His wit and sarcasm were purposeful and sharp. Those wits would reach the exact target. They never seemed ridiculous. He could go deeper into life and bring the truth of life from there in his writings. He preferred to talk about other people's writings rather than his own. Yet we were able to learn a lot from him about his own writing. I wanted to know from him about the poetic language of his first story book. Why did you make the language of the story so poetic - was it intentional? Let's talk about that famous line from his first story: It rained beautifully today after a long interval in this picturesque monotonous town.

Elias acknowledged the poetic language of his early stories. At that time military rule was going on in the whole country. There was a suffocating situation all around. He had in mind the idea of ​​walking through the favorable roads of literature, leaving that blockade aside. Another thing to keep in mind is that Elias had been a fan of poetry since childhood. Even his literary endeavors began with the composition of a poem. Elias may have wanted to celebrate his own independence in his own writing. He let go of the language at a great spontaneous pace. In his story, the country-time-society can be clearly recognized and the individual can be known better. This awareness was important at a time when there was a blockade around. Elias was able to make his personages a true representative of the times. That time of his was ruined, that time had become the enemy. His characters were like the people of that time.

The tea and various snacks made by Suraiya Bhabi, the wife of Elias, enlivened our conversation. Even so, especially on holidays, we chatted from morning till night. Then in those days Suraiya Bhabi fed us lunch. We friends used to say, what a wonderful thing it would be if such majestic women as Suraiya Bhabi were the wives of writers! Sometimes Elias would make coffee for us himself. I lived in Chattogram and my friend Mamun was a doctor at a clinic in Dhaka. When I returned to Chattogram, I used to communicate with him through letters. We also talked on the telephone. I remember once Mamun and I had a long conversation with him about his novel 'Chilekothar Sepai', in English ‘The Sepoy of the Attic’. Later that unfinished discussion rolled up to the telephone and then from telephone to correspondence. He wrote me a long letter about his novel. The novel is about the mass uprising of 1969. In fact, no such remarkable novel has been written in Bangladesh before his novel about that extraordinary event during the rule of Pakistan. Even if I remembered one or two novels or short stories, it was not worth telling. Elias's contemporary perspective was important to his novel. There is no hero in the novel, anti-hero is the hero. As we have seen in Hugo's novel, Dickens' novel. We have also seen it in Bengali novels. One can think of Satinath Bhaduri's Dhorai or Kamalkumar's Baijunath. Even before Akhteruzzaman Elias, many novelists have been seen making anti-heroes in Bangladeshi novels. However, Elias' hero 'Haddi Khizir' is an exception in all respects. His character, his activities, his language and his consequences in the novel are all characteristic of the author Elias.

Elias himself is a pro-people. He believed that it was impossible for any great movement to succeed without the involvement of the whole masses. And the language in which Khizir speaks is not the language of the gentlemen it is the language of the lowest class of society. Gentlemen understand that language but on the contrary that language rejects them. The language spoken by Khizir is spontaneous. That language came out with great force from the depths of Khizir's existence. Then the language spread rapidly towards the society which was not yet ready for change and revolution. The revolution is needed most for Khizir. He had nothing to lose but a lot to gain. As a result, the fall of Ayub Khan seems to him to be a matter of great possibility and expectation. However, he could not reach Ayub Khan to bring him down. So Ayub Khan was replaced by the native Ayub Khans. Those Ayub Khans were moneylenders, zamindars and wealthy people.

Khizir's dialogue and speech in the novel is his own. There lay his own life and the impression of social life. All the experiences of his life are being uttered in his words. That experience is not of joy, but of pain and suffering. That experience of Khizir being exploited, neglected and tortured. Now that a time of possibility has come, Khizir wants to see the end. He understands that the new sun of his life will rise up through the fall of Ayub Khan. His language has warmth and excitement. In his words, the inner and outer Khizir became one. He speaks, his swearing, slang is also part of his words. I wanted to tell Elias, I have never seen such a Khizir in a Bengali novel before. Then, a few days after my return to Chattogram, I received a letter from him: it contained a long statement about 'The Sepoy of the Attic' and khizir.

Let us quote from his long letter about the language of Khizir: “People speak with slander for various reasons. First, be it regional or polite, people cannot fully open themselves to the common good words. Second, the illiterate lower class is reluctant to express any of their strong intentions or chest-to-back struggled feelings. This is even truer with the proletariat in the city. Long-term exploitation on the one hand and the comfortable and tidy life of the gentlemen on the other create a hidden mortification and bitterness in the nature of the proletariat. ... The channel to get rid of this bitterness, anger and filth is their practice of slander.” His long letter to me is probably the only one containing the author's own words about “The Sepoy of the Attic.”. Many researchers have already used it as a source. In this letter we find Elias, a responsible and upright writer. Akhteruzzaman Elias was a supporter of Karl Marx in thought. He believed that socialist values ​​and methods could take a society forward enough. But he did not run after any political party, nor did he seek the sympathy of any political party. No one can ever prove that he took advantage of any political wing. But he was politically conscious and his political philosophy was transparent and far-sighted. When I chatted with him in 1990/91, I remembered that he had said something about Indian politics. At that time, the rise of BJP politics was going on in Maharashtra. Elias said that one day the BJP would spread all over India because it is very easy to use religion in politics. In the context of Bangladesh, he said, it is not so easy in Bangladesh because we have the history of the liberation war which is a kind of shield for us. Today it seems his assessment was correct. But when the city burns down, it also ignites the temple of the gods. Even if the epicenter of the fire is far away, the effect of the center can also fall on the perimeter. Had he survived, he might have assessed the poison of communalism in South Asia differently today. Reading ‘The Sepoy of the Attic’, it is understood that the author is the greatest politician. Where political speakers are always busy heating up the field, spending time in meaningless nonsense, only the writer can give an accurate and useful explanation of the situation and events. For the writer, his character Khizir did just that. When the whole country was in turmoil, the opportunistic middle class was calculating profit and loss. The middle-class Anwar felt the heat of the situation but had to wait for Khizir to push him. Those who had nothing those who were completely destitute, gave the correct lessons of politics to the so-called educated and gentlemen. We find this opposite but real lesson in Elias’ novel. Elias considered writing a sacred duty. Because, the writer has to prove the correctness of his position and he has to prove it to the readers. He loved Kundera's writings. He accepted Kundera's statement as true where Kundera said that the novel is a parallel path to history. Again, it is important to remember that the novel begins where history ends. When he started writing his novel 'Khoabnama' in 1994, his understanding of history and literature was put to the test. Here is a little about what happened to him when he wrote the novel. In 1991 I had to go to England. I wrote letters to Elias from England and he replied to me too. I am quoting from a letter dated December 4, 1994: “I’m facing tough situations to write in the context of Bengali villages. A lot of things have to depend on the paperwork of that time. Again the main people are all farmers and fishermen. Is it easy to understand the psychology of their time? ... I am using the myth of a village near our village very much. Those myths are again associated with the fakir rebellion. I am using village poetry a lot. I don't know if it's okay." Reading his novel 'Khoabnama', we know that many things in history are suppressed or hidden. Many small elements of history are shown as huge while many huge elements are considered as trivial. As a result, history loses its neutrality. The author rescues that lost character of history. Elias did just that in his novel.

In 1989/90, I had a discussion with Elias about the Chittagong Hill Tracts. The matter was that one day he said he would go to Rangamati with his wife Suraiya and their only child Partho. At that time there was no peace treaty and there were a lot of rules and regulations in the hilly areas. Some of my friends were in the Hill Tracts, and many of Elias' acquaintances were from small ethnic groups. By the way, he told about one of his observations, well why has no novel of Chakmas been written?  I shared my personal observations. The people of the hill areas have not yet been able to break out of their tribal structure. If the individuality required for a novel is born, people from small ethnic groups will surely write novels. Chakma, Marma, Mro, Murang, Bam, Pangkhoa are all small ethnic groups that have songs, rhymes, poems, lyrical dramas but no big canvas like novels. But novels can undoubtedly be written about their lives: not one/two but many novels. I had a book I found some time ago - Persecutions of Human Rights in Hill Tracts. I told Elias about the book. The book tells the story of all the activities carried out under the auspices of the government in the hilly areas. Those stories were of torture and attacks and violence and murders. But in response to so many events happening on a wide canvas, huge protests like the novel itself were not created. In response to my words, Elias raised another fundamental issue. He said that people of small ethnic groups do not have the required level of education. Yes, the Chakmas are relatively advanced, so maybe one day the Chakmas will write the novel. If Elias were alive today, he would have seen the practice of fiction among the Chakmas.

Some of the short stories of one of our ex-students Bipam Chakma have already been published and I am quite optimistic after reading them. I don't know if Bipam wrote any novel. If he wrote the novel, it could be an answer to Elias' question. Later, Elias went to Rangamati with his wife Suraiya and son Andalib Elias Partho. The letter he wrote to me on March 26, 1993 contained a reference to his visit to Rangamati. He writes: “In the meantime, I visited Rangamati from March 10 to 18. I was only with Chakma friends those days.” It was also a long letter. Quoting a passage from the letter shows how much he cared about the realities of the life of the small ethnic groups. Quote: “I don't know Chakma language at all. But if the Bengali translation of their poems can be read a little bit and most of them can be heard, their anger and pain can be clearly understood. Now the subject of all the poems written in Chakma language is the country, the motherland, the constant oppression of one's own nation and the excruciating pain and terror of being evicted from the village.” His feelings expressed in the letter were very sincere. His essay 'We Need a Chakma Novel' was written to express this feeling. Elias says a lot of important things in this short article. A little bit from there: “The novel does not solve any problem. But it points to the endless possibilities of man. I believe that the novel will help him to organize his sense of life, albeit indirectly, while reflecting on the crisis and struggle of the deprived humiliated and oppressed Chakma.”

A notable aspect of Akhteruzzaman Elias' political awareness was his affiliation with the Bangladesh Lekhok Shibir. Perhaps he joined the organization with the encouragement of Hasan Azizul Haque. Elias had immense respect for Hasan. He was a devoted fan of Hasan's personality and his writings. Badruddin Umar, Anu Muhammad, Ashabuddin Ahmed and many other famous personalities were in the Lekhok Shibir. Elias requested me and the painter Dhali Al Mamun to join the Lekhok Shibir and I became a direct member of the organization. I don't remember if Dhali Al Mamun became a member but we got him in any of our jobs. Elias had already given us an argument as to why writers should be organized. He believed in the theory of cultural progress. He joined the organizational activities of the Lekhok Shibir with the idea that the revolution of the psyche is the precondition of the social revolution. If we can build the foundation of advanced cultural consciousness in the minds of the young generation of the country, it will be the welfare of the society and civilization. Elias used to illustrate these things with us. The thought of politics that will do with backward cultural consciousness is bound to be selfish. For this, progressive literature, art, music, etc. need to be predominant in the agenda of cultural organization. Elias wanted us to inspire the younger generation through these activities through the Lekhok Shibir. I remember on the advice of Elias, we organized seminars, reading sessions, etc. on the role of writers and artists in changing society. He used to say that if a young man got into the habit of reading the literature of Gorky, Lu Sun, Tolstoy, Rabindranath, Nazrul, Manik, it would be difficult for him to get involved in bad deeds. Therefore, the more young people can be motivated in these activities, the better for the country and the nation. In 1989, on his advice, we went on an organizational tour. Among us were Badruddin Umar, Hasan Azizul Haque, Akhteruzzaman Elias, Anu Muhammad, Professor Ashabuddin Ahmed, Yaqub Ali Mollah and many more. We held several public meetings first in Chattogram city and then in Banshkhali, Chakaria and Cox's Bazar. Joining us in Chakaria was Haji Bashir who was on the government blacklist due to leftist politics during the Pakistan period. When Ashabuddin Ahmed was on the Pakistani government's Most Wanted list, it was Haji Bashir who gave him refuge in the remote areas of Chakaria. We went to their secret dormitory and had tea and breakfast together. It was really a secret abode. It is not possible for anyone to get in there even during the day, and even if they do, it is more difficult for them to get out. Each of our meetings was a success. People were fascinated and listened to the speech of Hasan-Elias-Umar and others. In their speeches, they explained about the position of people in a class society and what to do.

I saw Ashabuddin Ahmed drawing examples from Shakespeare to the common man to raise the consciousness of class struggle. He had been a student and teacher of English literature and an activist in left-politics. He showed in those meetings that people can be inspired by the experience of life. People listened to his miserable life-experiences with great attention.

In the first story of Akhteruzzaman Elias’ first story book, we meet a lonely young man who is a mentally isolated person. He had infinite possibilities. He was surrounded by misery and blockade. It was impossible for him to jump out of them. Towards the end of the story we see him masturbate with the unspeakable pain and suffering of the mind. We remember this young man and see that these young men like him are responding to the changed situation later on. In response, they gradually moved towards life and towards people. The sepoys in his attic were no longer confined to the attic. They were out on the road to greater life. When they came out, they woke up the life with a strange vibration. We feel that vibration in his novels. Elias wanted to write a novel about the liberation war in Bangladesh. That desire was alive in his mind until his death in 1997. Thinking about his stories about the liberation war, it seems that yes, it would be great if we could get his liberation war novels. ‘Cry’, ‘Sten gun in Millie’s Hand’, ‘Accident’ are all stories written by a very powerful pen. Even then, the literature that Akhteruzzaman Elias has left for us will be remembered as the bearer of a strong life consciousness in the literary world of Bangladesh.

Dr. Mohibul Aziz, Professor and Dean, Chittagong University, Bangladesh.