The next chapter contains excerpts from the minutes of the meetings and selected presidential addresses, and the views expressed about the HAZ by some of its members. Politics had already caused a split, as we saw, in 1972. Chapter six exposes some of the crudest schemes that ultimately destroyed whatever was still left of the HAZ unity. Two rival groups were formed that year, each carrying a part of the membership with it. Jawaid offers us excerpts from newspaper columns in which the two factions carried out their ideological feuds. These columns also provide a fair estimate of how others perceived the activities of the HAZ. The rest of the chapter gives a comprehensive list of the HAZ office-bearers from 1939 to 1979 and the membership rosters of the center and the branches. In the final chapter, Jawaid lists some of the country-^wide seminars sponsored by the HAZ, and the major turning-points in HAZ's history, including the final crisis of 1983. That year the HAZ, made brittle by the infighting of previous years, finally snapped into three rival groups. The coup was allegedly masterminded by Kishwar Naheed, who, "according to some people, deserves [at least] half the credit for eroding [for the first time ever] the constitutional basis of the HAZ" (p. 390). This, then, is a brief survey of the book's contents: if not exactly a mine of information, at least possessing a number of gems of some briliance. Nothing in the book appears"to the present writer, at least—so objectionable as to deserve the outcry that has followed. Yunus Jawaid*s role has been little more than that of a compiler, and his presence throughout so low-keyed as to be barely perceptible. He mostly records—but rarely comments on—the main sources of feather-ruffling and brow^-beating. When he does comment occasionally, his style is both delightfully humorous and blissfully free of rancor and innuendo. The organization of the material is quite loose, and could profitably have used some pruning and tightening. This minor inadequacy aside, the author deserves to be complimented for placing within our reach a fairly comprehensive history of one of Sonth Asia's most influential literary organizations. He does not pretend to have written the final word, nor should it be taken as such. He has, however, definitely cleared the way for others to follow, If there have been some important omissions^^-which a work of such magnitude can barely escape-^then let those who are more knowledgeable state so, rather than reject the present work out of hand. For the present, Yunus Jawaid merits our thanks and must be commended for a difficult job well done. 106