Ahmed Ibrahim Al-Faqih has been a prominent novelist, storyteller and columnist for decades. He became particularly well-known internationally after the publication of his trilogy: ‘I will Grant You Another City,’ ‘These Are Borders of My Kingdoms’ and ‘A Tunnel Illuminated By a Single Woman,’ which was translated into several languages.
Ahmed Ibrahim Al-Faqih has been a prominent novelist, storyteller and columnist for decades. He became particularly well-known internationally after the publication of his trilogy: ‘I will Grant You Another City,’ ‘These Are Borders of My Kingdoms’ and ‘A Tunnel Illuminated By a Single Woman,’ which was translated into several languages.
Although he presided over a number of cultural newspapers and magazines under Muammar Gaddafi, Al-Faqih denies the accusations made against him about being a supporter of Gaddafi on the basis that he accepted the Gaddafi International Human Rights Award as well as his relationship to the late prime minister, Shukri Ghanem.
How do you explain the obscure cultural scene in Libya?
Libya now is in a transitional stage and needs time to develop visions and policies, and build institutions before the situation settles and life gets on a normal track. Therefore, we should not be in a hurry and we are all confident and certain that the era of repression, tyranny and intellectual terrorism has totally ended.
We all look forward to reaping the fruits of the revolution and enjoying a climate of freedom, and hope in which thought and creativity prosper and the artistic and literary movement will be revived as soon as the situation stabilizes. There is no fear that the transitional period won’t lead us, after a short period, to literary and intellectual life for which the Libyan society looks forward in the era of freedom.
How do you summarize your relationship, as an intellectual, to the past government? How do you see it in the future?
Most victims of tyranny are intellectuals and ingenious and creative people because a tyrant fights and targets them as a threat to him. In Libya, we experienced the harshest and most despicable kinds of tyranny since the Libyan tyrant was full of mental disorders and complexes. Thus, just keeping our lives in tact was an achievement. Being able to produce creative works that put Libya on a regional and global literature map, despite his madness and war against us, has been an even greater achievement.
Yes, we dealt with the tyrant as a reality that we could not surmount. We were unable to get into a war with him, so we dealt with him in a more flexible manner to protect ourselves and communicate our mission, and this is the important thing.
Thank God I did not participate in the falsification of consciousness and did not surrender to the tyrant who was trying to turn pens into mere mouthpieces. I headed major newspapers, such as ‘Thawra’ daily, ‘Osbou Thaqafi’ weekly and ‘Thaqafa Arabyia’ monthly. I was able to keep the honor and mission of the word and resist all attempts of hybridization, domestication and exploitation because when the coup of 1969 took place, I was working in the press and media, which was a source of livelihood.
If you went back in time, would you accept Gaddafi’s award?
The largest part of our lives passed under the damned tent of Gaddafi. Any appreciation, recognition or honoring in Libya was only possible through him, and any award could not come unless it carried his name. If a scientific committee honored you with a prize named “Gaddafi Award” or “Wissam Al-Fateh Award”, would you reject it? Of course not, because rejection would certainly be considered a hostile attitude against the regime and its head. And I did not say that I was a commando seeking a collision with a tyrant like Gaddafi.
Some admonished you for publication of an article in an Egyptian newspaper after the death of Shukri Ghanem, and accused you of shirking his friendship. How do you reply?
May God have mercy on Shukri Ghanem’s soul. Those people know that I wrote about my friendship with him in my youth. My objections to his policies and attacks on his shortcomings and deficiencies in conducting his duties, which I made during his life at the height of his power as minister and prime minister, were only to constructively criticize a person whom I had known in his scientific activity periods and considered a hope of Libya.
However, I saw that his behavior was disappointing when he took office. We know, of course, the pressures put on him, but he had to leave office rather than respond to these pressures or be driven by temptations and advantages of leadership positions. After I published my offensive article, he received me with no grudge or resentment against me because he knew my principles.
After his mysterious death, all reservations fell and I wrote a lament of him as friend and fellow of youth and of media activity. I did not free myself from his friendship, but I pointed out to some ambiguity that accompanied his mysterious death and demanded that the Libyan state seek to clarify this ambiguity.
Why did you not oppose the regime before the February revolution?
This question can be asked to a person living in a country that recognizes the other opinion; while in Libya, any opposition meant murder. Writing in order to criticize and guide however, was allowed, and my writings were never devoid of such criticism about shortcomings in the performance of the Libyan state.
Vocal opposition to Gaddafi’s policies was not permitted unless a person emigrated and lived abroad under the protection of the other countries, in order not to be subject to Gaddafi or the assassins whom he sent to opponents and who killed a large number of them.