Last week, another conference on culture hosted by Youth Revolution Clan and Cultural Invasion, Australia was held in Lahore. Presided over by the provincial education minister, government departments like The Urban Unit with a foreign high commission in tow, it was advertised all over the place. The purpose of it all was not very clear even after it ended; the outcome was just a few homilies on cultural exchange, promoting better understanding among various countries.

In the past few months, there has been a flurry of activity about a new culture policy being framed at the federal level. One thought is that this was Punjab’s contribution or answer to that initiative in Islamabad. That Punjab was instituting its own forum for a wholesome debate about culture not given its proper due -- being downgraded as frivolity or at best a ritualistic byproduct of religion.

Probably, the prime minister’s absence from the capital put dampener on that mad rush initiative whose trail has gone cold in the last few weeks. It is good because the pause has given more time to deliberate over the contours of culture policy which, like most things in the country, has become a contentious issue.

Billed as "portraying a positive image of Pakistan", the conference in Lahore leaned on the side of propaganda -- to drum beat the need of promoting the soft image of the country. In the past many years, since the full-blown terrorist activity started in the country, there has been a parallel drive launched especially from the government or the establishment for stressing upon a softer image of the country. That it should not only be seen as a place where bombs go off and women are killed for honour but a place that is peaceful enough to host concerts, theatre and music performances.

During the days of General Musharraf and Shaukat Aziz, it was considered that the softer image of Pakistan could be promoted by holding fashion shows across the world as well as inside the country. The embassies and high commissions usually hosted these gala exercises abroad while even the Presidency and the Prime Minister’s house were not spared as foreign dignitaries were entertained to this showcasing of Pakistani culture.

There has been a perception that the media has some magic wand through which it can turn darkness into light. There is a constant rant that the media portrays only the uglier side of the country and not its positive aspects - and that not to be doing so is perceived as a dereliction of national duty.

The best advertisement it is said is the product itself - the proof of the pudding lies in its eating. The image of a country likewise cannot be much different from what the society or the country is, and media or the agencies can gloss over only so much.

Tourism can be beneficial if it leads to ending the cultural isolation of the country. Pakistan can be a haven for all kinds of tourism provided society guarantees safety to visitors and offers the requisite facilities.

Three world religions have their most sacred sites in the land which is now called Pakistan - Buddhism, Sikhism and Hinduism. Given a more relaxed approach, the place would tire of receiving pilgrims as so many would throng the places. But there is tight control over visa policy with a constant fear lurking in the background, fuelled by secret agencies, of infiltration. There is also a view that there should be no relaxation in policy for the citizens of an enemy country.

The fear of the enemy has skewed everything here including the ability to be gracious to the visitors. It is followed by an attended apprehension of the visitors spreading immortality through their indulgences. In this sanctimonious society, morals are so fragile and constantly frayed at the edges by apprehension. Tourists visit a country to relax and be comfortable and would always opt for a place which offers them this advantage or frame of mind and not places where the best hobby is of voyeuristic peeping around and indulgence in repressed harassment.

Sports is usually the other activity that attracts tourists and people from outside but due to our best efforts, over a period of time, no country is willing to come and play here. The Zimbabvians were able to do so after much coaxing and change of currency but the Sri Lankans in good faith some years ago were targeted which ruined forever the changes if any other team or players visiting the country.

It should always be noted that culture is not pure entertainment, though it does have high entertainment value. Culture is the way we live and its rarefied reflection finds itself in the arts and the entertainment that it offers is only the byproduct of a quest to engage in activity which is creative and contains significance human expression. If it were not so, then culture could be imported and put on display. This is what is being done in some of the countries in the Gulf where museums, art galleries, music and dance shows are arranged and best artistes from all over invited to perform while the local people hardly have any opportunity or forum to express themselves.

A living society is not about entertainment only -- its culture, music, dance, theatre or film is the expression of the anguish, the concerns, the satisfaction involved in living in that society. If the society is free and it does not have barriers to inhibit expression, there will be plenty of art which will be a source of pleasure. But if there is harassment of the artist and lack of tolerance for what is being said, sung or displayed, then there is a massive issue here. There should also be tolerance of how others behave and act rather than to cut their outfit through sermonising scissors to what size would fit them.

The three basic problems of security, censorship and self certainty were not addressed and it seemed that probably this agency or organisation had a few funds left and these had to be put to some use. Like so many of the conferences, it too was nothing more than nashistan, guftan and barkhastan.