My colleague, columnist Samir Atallah, is regarded as one of the senior figures in Arab journalism. He is widely respected, prolific, and well-known. Born in Beirut in 1941, Atallah has worked for Al-Nahar newspaper, the Lebanese magazines Al-Usbu’ Al-Arabi and Al-Sayyad, as well as the Kuwaiti newspaper Al-Anba.
Atallah mastered the art of blending multiple genres in his writing, including politics, art, travel, love, literature, and culture. Since 1987, he has been writing a daily column for Asharq Al-Awsat, in addition to contributing weekly articles to other newspapers. He has also authored many books on history, fiction, and travel. Atallah served as a correspondent for Al-Nahar daily in both Europe and at the United Nations. Although I have met him only a few times, I read all of his columns in Asharq Al-Awsat, and he says he reads all of mine, even those related to local affairs. The years Samir Atallah spent in Kuwait as editor-in-chief of one of its newspapers left Kuwait with a lasting place in his heart and memory.
---
A Kuwaiti columnist wrote a harsh article about me, built on a strange premise and filled with personal attacks, without any reason, justification, or prior animosity between us. It appears that this offensive piece did not sit well with my friend and colleague Samir Atallah, who responded with an article titled “In the Country,” published in Asharq Al-Awsat.
---
In the Country” This article is about a poll conducted by a well-known newspaper, which was won by a prominent writer, long before the poll even took place. One of the writers objected to the results, challenging their validity. Of course, every writer has the right to express an opinion. However, in this case, it crossed the line into a misuse of that freedom, as it involved an unjustified attack on the credibility of a respected newspaper. Moreover, the recognition a writer earns over the years is not theirs alone; it belongs to the thousands of readers who value their work. I have no connection to the matter other than being one of those readers who sees the writer who won the poll as a highly talented and distinguished voice. Nothing changes this fact; it is neither fair to diminish the winner nor to exaggerate the value of his critics.
A writer’s standing is shaped by many factors, including the length of their career. Achieving and maintaining a distinguished position is not something that happens quickly or easily. It is equally difficult to strip a respected writer of their reputation. The real judging committee consists of thousands of readers, countless days, and hundreds of articles. Unfortunately, the objecting writer also lost the moral battle. He should have congratulated his colleague instead of questioning his victory. Both writers are in a daily race, and the public is the best judge of whom they value, love, and respect. A military officer can be promoted to the rank of major general by decree, but no decree, nor the backing of a dozen armies, can make him a poet.
I believe the objecting columnist was unsuccessful in his attempt because the colleague he targeted enjoys wide popularity and respect. It would have been wiser to accept the poll results as they are, to preserve the dignity and credibility of the newspaper that conducted it. Some journalistic battles can be insightful, even entertaining, but they lose their appeal when they are driven by jealousy and clear personal motives. In my view, the real winner in such debates is often the one who chooses silence. Let the polls run their course, and let people celebrate the results. Neither anxiety nor resentment can elevate or diminish a writer’s true worth.
