A REVIEW OF ABBAS HASAN'S COMPARISON BETWEEN
AL—MUTANABBT AND SHAW QI
Z. I. OSENI,
University of Ilorin
Ilorin
'Abbas Hasan: AI-Mutanabbi wa Shawqi we Imarati-Shi'r-dirasah wa naqd wa
muwazanah [Maktabat ad-Dirast al-Adabiyyah No. 381, Second Edition (Cairo: Dar al-Ma'arif
Press, 1973), 397 pages, EE1.10 {Egyptian currency).
The book is a critical study of Abu at-Tayyib al-Mutanabbi (915-65 C.E.) and Ahmad
Shawqi (1868-1932) as poets. It compares the two Arab poetic giants and establishes the
superiority of Shawqi oveT al-Mutannabi. This invaluable work is dedicated to the two poets, a
number of whose lines are quoted. Professor 'Abbas Hasan opens his study with the discussion
of leadership amongest Arab poets. Right in the first section (introduction, p.7), the author gives
his verdict that, hi spite of the poetic masterpieces which al-Mutanabbi produced he was no
match to the Egyptian bom Ahmad Shawqi, He refers to the congress of Arab literary scholars
held in Cairo in 1927 where Shawqi was ceremoniously crowned as the king of Arabic poets past
and present-but explains that, like any other human being, Shawqi has many weak verses, and
that the weak verses do not puncture the thesis that he is the greatest of all Arab poets. The
author further touches on the point that it is not unjustifiable to compare two great poets from
different ages. He then talks about the ancient literary critics like al-Ma' arri, Ibn Jinni, at-Tibrizi
and al-Qadi al-Jurjani, who assessed al-Mutanabbi's works exhaustively. Some of their criticisms
were favourable to the poet while others seriously vilified his works.
The next section captioned "Kayfa takunu 'l-mywazanah" offers the reader some hints on
how the two poets would be assessed by the author. He first refers to ancient Arabic rules for
critical valuation of poetry, i.e. the soundness of the form, content, metre, rhyme and rhythm, and
then states that his own discussion would be based on (a) The-message of the poet and his
measure of success in conveying it. (b) Diction and all that is connected with it such as the
euphony of the woras, metre and rhythm, (c) Content in all its ramifications such as honesty of
emotion and virtuosity portrayed in quaint imagination, (d) Themes and their treatment, (e)
Certain peculiarities for which the poets were known, e.g. wise-sayings, self-praise, panegyric
and amatory verses.
The above are collectively known nowadays as ash-sha-'iriyyah (the poetic essence). !n
Chapter one (p.22), the writer goes on to define poetry and the poet before giving short
biographical sketches of the two bards, quoting some of their verses to buttress his points. In the
conclusion on al-Mutanabbi in this section, 'Abbas Hasan expresses disgust at the fact that a
great poet like al-Mutanabbi should, at the end of his life leave a poetic heritage of about 200
pages, nineteeth of which consist* of panegyrics for two kings, and the remaining one-tenth
comprising wise-sayings and description of people.
The author gives a lengthy talk on the appreciation of good poetical work in Chapter Two.
He also dwells exhaustively on Arabic rhetoric [Bafaghah], quoting copiously from Arabic poets of
various periods and then uses the welt established rules of Arabic rhetoric to judge the works of
the two poets.
Regarding the choice of words, the writer offers us a list of 63 instances where alMutanabbl chose the wrong words and expressions to convey his ideas. In addition, he gives
some other extracts from the poet's work to enhance his thesis, and then quotes the opinions of
many ancient critics of the poet's work. Al-Jurjani is cited as someone who tried to defend the
poet. This is followed by ten examples of the great bard's elegant and imaginative poems.
On the Shawqfyyat of Shawqi, the author showers praises on the poet's choice of apt
words, but also quotes some 47 examples of weak and over-affected constructions in Shawqi's
poetry. He also cites a few other examples of ambiguity of expression which are apparent in a
number of his verses.
About the choice of suitable words for the various themes treated in their poetry, the
writer criticizes at-Mutanabbi for fatting short of expectation and cites many examples to
substantiate this point. On Shawqi, also, 'Abbas Hasan quotes some examples of the defects in
his selection of words but this criticism is not as fierce as that of al-Mutanabbi's. In the final
analysis, he puts the two poets at par as none of them excelled the other in the choice of words
(p. 123).
Solecism and Poetic Licences:
The writer highlights the grammatical mistakes which were detected in al-Mutanabbi's
poetry even by the ancient critics, but honestly adds that such errors are few. I n fact, he explains
that some of the alleged errors are acceptable and correct constructions in the Arabic language.
As for Shawqi, the author states that he read the whole volume 11 of the Shawqiyyat but hardly
found any grammatical mistake. Yet, in spite of this assertion, the writer highlighted some
grammatical pitfalls in Shawqi's poems. He, however, defends some strange constructions in the
poet's anthology. He concludes this section by stating that although the mistakes are few, he
finds it difficult not to blame Shawqi. He finally gives his verdict in favour of al-Mutanabbi (p. 134).
Rhetorical embellishment:
There are good examples of rehetorical ornamentation in the poetry of both poets. In alMutanabbi's work, according to 'Abbas Hasan, one notices high-flowing expressions, harsh
concatenation of words, and structures that produce an impressive melody. His works also
contain a lot of superfluous words in the following line:
Sara 's-sayfu mimma tafba'u ‘l-Hindu Sahibi
lla's-sayfu mimma yatba'u 'liahula '/-Hindu.
"The Indian-made sword, my friend, moved as a companion to me.
'To the sword made by God-not by India" (p. 1 6).
Another issue worth nothing here is a good number of al-Matanabbi's verses which are
said to have been a plagiarism of other poets' works. The author says that this allegation is
difficult to verify, and tries to defend the poet in this regard, emphasizing his feeling of self-esteem
which would have made him-feet too big to engage in detestable plagiarism.
As regards wasf (description), Shawqi excelled al-Mutanabbi. There are many things
which would have called for Idyllic descriptions during al-Mutanabbi's time, but the poet did not
care to describe them as a creative artist. On the contrary, Shawqi made an indelible mark of
wasf in Arabic literature. He described al-manar (light-house), Shakespeare's poetry, the sphynx,
the Nile, a game of football and the season of spring, to mention a few. His poetry is, however,
not devoid of some rehetorical defects. Like al-Mutanabbi's, some of his expressions are
superfluous. He also allegedly plagiarised other poets' works, but this is somehow difficult to
authenticate — in the author's opinion — as two poets in different places and times can express
identical ideas without having read each other's works. In imitation of some ancient bards, the
words qif and gum are too frequent in the opening verses of his poetry, and this is counted as a
defect (pp. 179-81).
The third chapter of the book is captioned al-Ma'ani wa ma yattafilu biha (p. 187)'. It deals
with the content and signification of the expressions in the verses composed by the two poets.
After giving a short note on the rhetoric requirements of a good speech, the author
accuses al-Mutanabbt of lack of clarity in expression, a weak point which makes his poetry
particularly difficult He also accuses the poet of dishonest and insatiable ambition to praise any
ruler who was ready to pay the price. Furthermore, the poet did not bother whether his eulogy
was morally appropriate or not. But when humiliated, he could go to any length to deliver
devastating satires on his ex-patron. (This is evident in his praise, and satire of Kafur). He was
undoubtedly a temperamental man who could use his poetic virtuosity for, or against, anybody,
any time-depending on his relationship with the person at the time.
In a threnody [ritha] for the mother of King Sayfu 'd-Dawlah, the poet used expressions
which are not considered decent or pertinent in Arabic elegy. He described her as having a
beautiful face, an issue about which one of his contemporaries asked him whether he was not
shy to describe his patron's late mother like that.
Furthermore, al-Mutanabbi used hyperboles excessively. On many occasions, instead of
conveying his ideas in sweet and easy-to-understand expressions, he would resort to hyperbolic
mystification. His aim was to compel his patron to reward him abundantly. For instance note the
following verses he addressed to Badr ibn' Ammar:
Lawkana 'Hmu-ka bi'l-ilahi muqassaman Ft nasin, ma ba 'atha 'l-ilahurasula
Lawkana lafzu-ka fi-him, ma unzila 'l-Qur'ana wa 't-Tawfata wa 'l-injila.
"If (the type of) your knowledge were shared among people, God would not have sent an
Apostle. If they had possessed (the like of) your speech, He would not have revealed the Qur'an,
Torah and the Gospel," (p. 210).
In addition, al-Mutanabbi used certain hackneyed terms in describing his generous
patrons in excess without having created new ones. He can be defended, however, on this score
for his non-exposure to the types of foreign cultures, to which Shawqi was exposed. Similarly, it is
stated that there are no serious, thought-provoking philosophical statements in his poetry. One
wonders, however, whether a poet should necessarily be a philosopher in addition to stirring
people's emotions, high toning their imagination, and carrying them with him to his dreamland
with his bewitching poems.
Abbas Hasan now directs our attention to Shawqi. There are also obscure expressions in
his poetry, though those of al-Mutanabbi are more. An example of this is found in the poem which
begins with:
"To what extent will your disagreement go? and for what is this great turmoil?"
Such a poem would need an elaborate annotation to be useful to those who were not
present when the emergent Egyptian politicians of the early decades of the twentieth century
were quarrelling with one another.
Shawqi excelled al-Mutanabbi in elegant description as has already been noted. He
made an appreciable description of many sceneries and events that leave no one in doubt that he
is an unrivalled creator of idyllic descriptions.
In Shawqi's panegyrics, like those of al-Mutanabbi, the author has noted certain defects
namely using out-worn cliches such as "being generous like the sea" and "high like the star". His
poems also contain hyperboles. He, however, had numerous poems which show his powerful
imagination and dignity.
An example is a poem in honour of the revolutionary youths who were imprisoned in
1919 because of their revolt, and their demand that Egypt be granted independence immediately
by the British Government. The youths were later released in 1924 (pp. 245-6). Shawqi
composed very beautiful poems on patriotism, religion, description of his exploits, exertions and
love.
In Chapter Four (pp. 258-352) the author discusses the themes on which the two poets
composed their poems. He begins, as usual, with al-Mutanabbi. The poet sometimes opened his
odes with some amatory verses and sometimes reminisced on the old relics of the beloved one
as in the pre-Islamic preludes to poetry (technically called Nasib] before proceeding to the main
theme of the poem. He at times went straight to the theme of his poetry, and in some cases,
revealed the ideas which crowded his memory when he was composing.
He used ornate phrases and occasionally made artless attempts to stir people's ^emotion
in his excessively stuffed encomiums. Sometimes, his choice of words ebbed below expectation.
Similarly, there are evidences of praise in some of his satires. Lastly, a prominent feature of alMutanabbi's eulogies is that he often included a eulogy of himself in them so that he praised his
patron and himself together.
According to the author, the poet used vulgar expression in vilifying his adversaries, and
did not care to use a well polished, colourful language.
As regards threnody, the poet never mourned any deceased person for certain
universally acknowledged good qualities; rather his 'elegy stemmed from the material benefits
which he had received from the deceased person. In addition to this materialistic tendency, he
was dishonest in his threnody.
Furthermore, his amatory verses are a description of base, vulgar love adventures, and
devoid of that refined, soothing composition which a romantic lover makes. His other themes are
congratulations of his patrons on festive occasions, boasting and description. He is unparallel in
boasting but his description is, in the opinion of the author, inferior to Shawqi's.
As for Shawqi, he detested the use of foul language. He was very proficient in composing
poems in appropriate metres in his short and long epics and poetic drama. In subject-matter, the
poet, like al-Mutanabbi, composed on the popular ancient themes and further added other seven
[sic] themes which are: humour, songs, story-telling eipcs, private and historical themes.
Like al-Mutanabbi, he either opened his poems with love verses, a halt and weeping at
the sight of a departed beloved one's abode, or plunged into the theme without any preliminary
pleasantries.
He sometimes endeavoured to portray his thoughts and those of other peoples on the
theme before Knocking the nail on the head.
Volume I of Shawqi's Diwan contains a lot of panegyrics which he composed first at the
court of Khedive Tawfiq and (later) of Khedive 'Abbas.
The poems are many and detailed but weak. We should remember that, unlike alMutanabbi who was a professional panegyrist, Shawqi's life did not depend on praising people.
Nevertheless he has fine praise for the above named Egyptian rulers and the mother of the
Khedive 'Abbas Hilmi who was fondly called Umm al-muhsinin (Mother of the righteous ones). A
good example of his eulogy is his praise of the great Egyptian surgeon, 'All Ibrahim Pasha (p.
301).
On the other hand, Shawqi tried hard to avoid satirising people. In a few oases where he
satirised, he did not mention names of individuals; rather he spoke generally of certain ills in the
society, and was often mild. There were many odious things worth-critizing but he failed to attack
them. This "gentlemanly" attitude of his has been interpreted as indefensible cowardice. He
nevertheless compose') a poem to attack Mustafa Piyad Pasha who praised Lord Cromer, the
British Agent and Consul-General O,T the occasion of the opening of Muhammad 'Ali Technical
School at Alexandria (pp. 308-8).
As far as threnody is concerned, there are 59 poems on this theme in Volume III of
Shawqi's diwan. In these elegies he registered the achievements of great politicians, military
dignitaries, erudite scholars, and his relatives. A fair representative of his elegies is the one he
composed in 1924 on Mustafa Kamil Pasha — the nationalistic martyr who died in exile in
Germany — a victim of British imperialism (pp. 313-4). His elegy was, however, depreciated by
sweeping generalisations, ambiguity, superficiality, slavish imitation of the style of ancient bards,
and colourlessness. AI-Mutanabbi's elegy is judged by 'Abbas Hasan to be superior to Shawqi's
(p. 317).
Shawqi had two types of love poems; the one he gives as a prelude [Nasib] to poems of
other themes and the independently composed love lyrics [ghazaf]. His style in this genre is soft,
melodious, imaginative end well constructed. But some of his earlier amatory verses had some
hackneyed, common-place expressions {p. 329).
Regarding descriptive poems [wasf], the author judges Shawqi the greatest exponent in
Arabic literature — past and present {p. 330}. White some of the poet's descriptive poems were
composed Independently, others came as preludes, appendages or mere beautifiers to other
poems. In spite of his superiority in this field, the writer still felt that Shawqi fell short of
expectation because his descriptions are full of generalisations, and he never described one
object more than once. (Other themes the poet composed on but which were untreated by alMutanabbi are not discussed in this work in detail).
Shawqi's melodious songs are commonly sung today as part of the modern Arabic
literary heritage; some of them were carefully composed for children. These are simple, elegant,
and captivating. He also narrated didatic fables in his poems. In these there are lots of material
for exhortation and admonition, e.g. the story of the "Fox and Cock", and most of them have dual
interpretations (pp. 341-8). The author argues that al-Mutanabbi has no justification whatsoever
for not having done the same things, for many good stories were being circulated in his days.
Examples of such are found Alflayfah wa lay/ah (Arabian Nights), Kitab al-Bukhala' (Book of
Misers), Kitab al-Hayawan and Kalilah wa Dimna.
Shawqi also wrote in prose;-an example is his short note on a/-watan (p. 351). No prose
work is left by al-Mutanabbi exept some rhymed prose contained in his "Koran" which he
composed in his early life when he claimed to be a prophet (hence his nickname al-Mutanabbi,
one who claims to be a prophet).
In quantity, al-Mutanabbi had a very powerful capacity for articulating wise-sayings. He
vehemently denounced oppression and proudly preferred to live in dignity in hell rather than in
humiliation in heaven. On the contrary, Shawqi was too soft in his denunciation of oppression and
oppressors.
In terms of good manners, according to the author, Shawqi was by far better. He was
gentlemanly, while al-Mutanabbi had the notoriety of being arrogant, greedy, miserly,
temperamental, and occasionally cowardly. '
Shawqi exhibits more religious leaning in his poetry. AI-Mutanabbi's claim to.
prophethood apart, he was accused of neglecting ritual prayers [salawat], fasting [sawm] and he
hardly read the Qur'an. His poetry is, in addition, devoid of strictly religious themes. He was proud
and easy-going. Both of them used to drink wine.
I n conclusion, 'Abbas Hasan gives his final verdict. He first refers to the facts already
presented and then quotes a critique of al-Mutanabbi's poetry written by an ancient scholar. He
also quotes al-Tha'alibi who depicted al-Mutanabbi as confessing that since he left the Hamdanid
court of Sayfu 'd-Dawlah, he never again cared much about the quality of his poetry. Having lived
in that court for about nine years and composed one third of his Anthology there, it follows that
the remaining two-thirds of his poetry was carelessly composed.
Conversely, the author quotes a large passage from the oration delivered on the
"coronation" of Shawqi in 1927 as the king of all Arabic poets, and fully vocalises the passage,
obviously as a mark of honour.
In the final analysis, 'Abbas Hasan judges Shawqi as the greatest Arabic poet that had
ever lived (pp. 386-9).
Concluding Remarks
A careful reading of Professor 'Abbas Hasan's book shows the hand of an eruditive
literary critic, and his richly exhaustive material. It is doubtedless no mean research work. In spite
of all this, one finds that the presentation of the material in the book is anything but tidy. In point
of fact, it would be no exaggeration to describe the arrangement of the material as chaotic.
To begin with, the book's chapters are not well divided into sections and sub-sections
that can make for easy reading. Hence there are many interpolations, digressions, and
unnecessary repetitions. A cursory glance at the synopsis of the book's content which we have
painstakingly given above will no doubt convince one about the untidiness alluded to in this
paper. One would have expected to find literary criticism clearly defined in an early chapter rather
than on scattered passages on the subject all over the book haphazardly.
Secondly, the author presented himself as a partial judge by telling the reader right from
the introductory note that Shawqi was greater than al-Mutanabbi and by citing the "coronation"
ceremony of 1927 as part of his proofs. He ought to have left tills judgement till the end- at least
to absolve himself from the suspicion of partially.
Thirdly, after giving a full chapter on literary criticism, as suggested above, the author
ought to have treated the biography of each of the poets in more detail, and then either base his
comparison on the rules of criticism he had already acquainted his readers with, or base it on the
various themes on which they composed. Each of these themes could be given as a full chapter
in which the poems composed by the two poets are compared and the verdict of the writer clearly
given at the end. Fourthly there is an apparent disparity between the examples given from each
topic treated by the two poets. To maintain credibility, the author should not have highlighted a
large number of al-Mutenabbi's weak points in one place while deliberately giving a few ones
when dealing with the poems of Shawqi. Similarly, to give more examples of the letter's
masterpieces and play down on those of the former or illustrate his work with verses quoted out
of context can hardly convince the critical reader.
Fifthly, the summary of the oration made during Shawqi "coronation" which the author
quoted with relish in his conclusion, is another pitfall. The ceremony was referred to with so much
zeal that one wonders whether the ceremony was an evidence of the poet's superiority over alMutanabbi or something which was performed objectively to acknowledge his uniqueness and
unrivalled position amongst the Arabic poets of the modern time. If this ceremony is cited as a
proof of his superiority, then the argument is dearly fallacious. But if it is given as a result of an
impartial examination of all Arab poets, then it is a befitting conclusion. The former seems to be
the case here.
Sixthly, if we look at the conclusions arrived at by 'Abbas Hasan under certain themes
which both poets composed on, one might be led to infer that al-Mutanabbi is superior to Shawqi
as a poet. By way of illustration, he put the two poets at par in their choice of words and rhetoric
embellishment (.123). He judged al-Mutanabbi as superior to Shawqi for he committed less
grammatical errors, and seldom resorted to the use of poetic licences (p. 134). Similarly, alMutanabbi is said to be superior in the composition of elegiac poems (p. 317). The author seems
to be silent on panergyrics, satire, and wise-sayings, though the inference can easily be made in
the light of the book's content that al-Mutanabbi is superior.
Leaving apart themes such as epic, fable, drama, etc. on-which Shawqi composed a lot
but which eluded al-Mutanabbi, the author decidedly gave his verdict in favour of Shawqi in wasf
(idyllic description) (p. 330} and in character as an honest poet (pp. 362-85). With all these facts
at the back of our mind, we do not think that the author has succeeded in convincing us of the
validity of his final verdict.
Finally, it seems that 'Abbas Hasan deliberately quoted those who vilified al-Mutanabbi
and those who over-adored Shawqi in order to make his readers believe that the latter was
greater than the former. The contents of the book, however, had belied his conclusion, and we co
not hesitate to say that although the two poets are great institutions in themselves as far as
Arabic poetry to concerned, we still find that al-Mutanabbi is greater — in view of the evidence
given in 'Abbas Hasan's monumental Arabic literary study of both poets.