Superioritas China di Mata Duo-Naisbitts

Oleh Ecep Heryadi*

Judul Buku : China’s Megatrends: 8 Pilar yang Membuat Dahsyat China
Penulis : John & Doris Naisbitt
Penerbit : Gramedia Pustaka Utama
Terbit : I, Juli 2010
Tebal : 282 halaman

Tahun 1982, bagi mereka yang pernah membaca Megatrends: Ten New Directions Transforming Our Lives yang ditulis suami-isteri Jhon Naisbitt dan Doris Naisbitt, tentu akan senantiasa menantikan buku-buku berikutnya oleh duo penulis kenamaan AS dan pakar tentang China itu. Dalam buku laris yang dirilis tahun 1982 itu, duo-Naisbitts mampu menghadirkan sepuluh prediksi (prediction) yang sangat berani. Dan lebih mencengangkan lagi, karena sebagian besar dari prediksinya itu berbuah menjadi kenyataan secara hampir sempurna. Misalnya, “globalisasi” yang pada medio 1980-an awal sampai menjelang 1990-an bukan ide yang mudah difahami mayoritas orang, namun kontur-kontur apa yang kita sebut “globalisasi” itu sudah mampu dipetakan oleh Jhon dan Doris Naisbitt.

Dalam dua dekade terakhir ini, menurut John dan Doris, China merupakan negara yang mampu mengalami perubahan fundamental terkait beragam hal; kehidupan sosial, ekonomi, dan politik, serta dampaknya yang signifikan bagi pesaing-pesaing utamanya; negara-negara Barat terutama AS.

Dalam urusan ekonomi, China sebagai aktor terkuat di BRIC yang memiliki cadangan devisa sampai 2,5 triliun dollar AS, diprediksi menjadi eksportir terbesar di dunia, mampu memuncaki sektor-sektor potensial semisal keuangan, perdagangan, teknologi informasi, jelas menjadi ancaman utama AS. Selain juga, dalam konteks kekuatan politik, negeri Tirai Bambu yang sosialis-komunis ini sudah mampu digdaya karena memiliki populasi dan jumlah militer sangat signifikan dalam konteks kekuatan global, akhir-akhir ini telah berani melakukan klaim teritorial di Laut China Selatan, serta pemilik hak veto di Dewan Keamanan Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa (DK PBB).

Sehingga dengan berbagai alasan diatas, sah-sah saja jika kemudian John dan Doris lebih concern dalam mendalami segala pergerakan fundamental-radikal yang dilakukan China. Masih menggunakan teknik serupa dalam best seller book Megatrends, megakarya terbarunya China’s Megatrends: 8 Pilar yang Membuat Dahsyat China diterbitkan oleh PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama, diekspektasikan bakal menyamai bahkan melebihi “Megatrends” 1982 sebagai pendahulunya. China’s Megatrends ini terlihat sangat teliti dan komprehensif, sampai-sampai dalam prosesi penulisannya John dan Doris Naisbitt menjelajahi pelosok negeri berpenduduk 1,5 miliar itu, melakukan pelbagai wawancara dengan aneka profesi seperti dengan akademisi, politisi, wartawan, budayawan, pengusaha, sampai pengamat.

Bahkan, lebih dari itu, puluhan staf di lembaga yang didirikannya, Naisbitt China Institute yang office-nya di Provinsi Tianjin, melakukan monitoring terhadap berbagai surat kabar nasional dan lokal untuk melakukan identify serta mapping beragam perspektif serta power yang menjadi backbone reformasi ekonomi-politik China. Riset berkala dan ketat itu mampu menghasilkan kesimpulan bahwa bukan hanya mengalami perubahan fundamental—sebagaimana terlingkup diatas—saja, melainkan jauh lebih penting mampu mengkreasikan apa yang disebut banyak ahli sebagai “demokrasi vertikal” sebagai penentang demokrasi liberal ala Barat.

Banyak hal yang diungkap penulis dalam buku terbarunya ini, semisal, membongkar habis “secret” yang telah dilakukan para pemimpin China dan apa saja yang sedang dan akan terus dilakukan oleh China dalam menghadapi peta persaingan globalisasi dimana mereka—bersama BRIC lainnya—telah menjadi pusat perhatian dunia karena pertumbuhan ekonominya yang melonjak signifikan.

Buku ini, laiknya buku “Megatrends” sebelumnya, menjadi menarik karena selalu berupaya melakukan “ramalan-ramalan” masa depan China terkait lanskap budaya dan politik di China. Instrumentasi yang digunakannya yakni identifikasi terhadap indikasi-indikasi akan lanskap yang menjadi modal penting bagi China. Sehingga, menurut duo-Naisbitts tersebut, negara-negara manapun harus memahami lanskap komponen tersebut jika ingin membangun hubungan produktif dengan pemerintah China.

China secara keseluruhan dikenal sebagai negara yang berorientasi pada hasil dari reformasi ekonomi dan politik, bukan pada cara dan bingkainya. Dengan brilian, hal ini menjadi pembahasan diawal bab buku ini bahwa para pendukung reformasi China tersebut lebih menekankan pada tujuan-tujuan substansial masyarakatnya seperti kemakmuran dan kesejahteraan sebagai salah satu pilar pentingnya, dengan kurang memperhatikan pada aspek lainnya, pada demokrasi (ala Barat) misalnya. Itulah, mungkin yang menjadi penyebab mengapa China belum juga tertarik mengimplementasikan demokratisasi di negaranya sebagaimana didesakkan oleh mayoritas negara-negara di dunia.

Lantas, apa yang disebut 8 pilar masyarakat baru sebagaimana menjadi judul buku ini? Yakni “emansipasi pikiran”, “membingkai hutan dan membiarkan pohon tumbuh”, “menyeimbangkan top-down dan bottom-up”, “menyeberangi sungai dengan merasakan batu”, “bergabung dengan dunia”, “kebebasan dan keadilan”, “antusiasme artistik dan intelektual”, dan “dari medali Olimpiade menuju hadiah Nobel”. Kedelapan pilar itulah yang berusaha dielaborasi dan diimplementasikan oleh pemerintah China untuk menguasai dunia dan menjadi pesaing utama Barat.

Lebih jauh dielaborasi, bahwa identifikasi Naisbitts tentang “Barat” yang condong individualistis dengan “Timur” yang sosialis. Sehingga itulah mengapa China selalu berupaya mendengungkan kekuatan—dalam berbagai hal—dalam negerinya sendiri dan meminimalkan bantuan asing yang bisa mencengkeram kepentingan nasionalnya. Di China, kepentingan ekonomi menjadi “panglima” dibandingkan politik, karena para pemimpinnya berasumsi bahwa keberhasilan di bidang ekonomi akan melegitimasi kekuasaannya yang ‘tak dipedulikan’ mayoritas bangsa China.

Bagi Indonesia yang berdekatan dengan China secara geografis—dibandingkan AS—tak berlebihan jika mencoba mengintip apa yang dilakukan China dalam membangun imperium kekuatan ekonomi-politiknya untuk menghadapi aras globalisasi yang sarat dengan persaingan. Maka, membaca buku ini, terlepas dari lebih dan kurangnya, bisa menjadi solusi dalam menemukan kiat-kiat China menghadapi kedinamisan dunia, kini.

* Penulis analis politik UIN Jakarta.

Read More

Sejarah Nusantara Model Gus Dur

Judul buku : Membaca Sejarah Nusantara
Penulis : Abdurrahman Wahid
Pengantar : KH A Mustofa Bisri
Penerbit : LKIS, Yogyakarta
Cetakan : Pertama, 2011
Tebal buku: 133 halaman

Peresensi : Danuji Ahmad

Diskursus sejarah Nusantara memang mengasyikkan. Kehadirannya terbuka untuk kita telaah dan diperbincangkan dengan ragam tafsir dan versi. Ragam tafsir itu tentu tidak sekonyong-konyong hadir begitu saja. Menurut para pakar sejarah, ragam tafsir itu hadir terkait dengan berkembangnya kebudayaan lisan di antara masyarakat pribumi prasejarah. "Kebudayaan lisan yang lebih merakyat daripada bahasa tulis itu," kata para pakar, "sangat memengaruhi proses penyampaian sejarah dari generasi ke generasi."

Itu karena sumber penyebarannya dari lisan ke lisan sudah pasti akan terjadi banyak kerancuan versi di dalam penyebarannya. Berawal dari sinilah, sumber sejarah Nusantara mengalami titik perbincangan dan perdebatan yang sangat serius di antara para sejarawan. Salah satu sejarawan yang meramaikan perdebatan dan tafsir itu tidak lain adalah Abdurrahman Wahid atau yang akrab di sapa Gus Dur. Bagi sebagian orang, Gus Dur mungkin tidak terkenal dengan predikat sejarawan, tetapi lebih akrab di mata masyarakat sebagai agamawan, budayawan, atau bahkan cendekiawan yang mengibarkan spirit pluralisme, pribumisasi Islam, bahkan sosok guru bangsa yang getol memperjuangkan hak asasi manusia.

Hadirnya buku yang berjudul Membaca Sejarah Nusantara, 25 Kolom Sejarah Gus Dur, predikat sejarawan tampaknya tidak terlalu berlebihan jika kita sematkan kepada beliau, selain predikat-predikat lain seperti agamawan, budayawan rohaniawan, cendekiawan, serta lainnya. Gus Dur memang sosok yang multitalenta, unik, cerdik, serta berpola pikir divergen (berpikir keluar dari konvensional) ketika membicarakan sesuatu, entah itu masalah agama, politik, serta sejarah. Inilah ciri khas pemikiran Gus Dur yang oleh sebagian orang dianggap nyeleneh itu.

Oleh sebab itu, buku setebal 133 halam ini cukup menarik untuk kita baca dan telaah, utamanya bagi peminat sejarah. Buku karya Gus Dur ini merupakan acuan yang pas untuk memperkaya perspektif, data, dan pola penulisan sejarah yang unik, hidup, lincah, dan merakyat. Gus Dur selalu menekankan adanya pengolahan baru di dalam penulisan sejarah yang berorientasi untuk memberikan paradigma baru, angin segar di setiap tafsirnya ihwal sejarah Nusantara. Sebab, bagi Gus Dur, sejarah bukanlah sebuah serial yang mati dan stagnan dari sebuah perspektif. Oleh karenanya, gagasannya tentang sejarah selalu dibuatnya baru.

Contoh dari sekian kecerdasan Gus Dur di dalam mengolah sejarah bisa kita simak ketika Gus Dur mengaitkan asal-usul LSM dengan cerita rakyat. Cerita itu diawali dari pertempuran antara Sultan Hadiwijaya atau yang terkenal dengan sebutan Jaka Tingkir dan menantunya Sutawijya. Peperangan yang pada akhirnya dimenangi Sutawijaya itu membuat Hadiwijaya kembali ke Asta Tinggi, Sumenep, Madura, tempat di mana ia dilahirkan untuk mencari kesaktian.

Akhirnya, setelah Hadiwijaya mendapatkan kanuragan, dia pun siap bertempur kembali untuk merebutkan Pajang dari tangan menantunya, Sutawijaya. Akan tetapi, ketika Hadiwijaya istirahat di Pulau Priggobayan atau kalau sekarang terlentak di Kabupaten Lamongan, Hadiwijaya tertidur lalu bermimpi dengan sang guru. Dalam Mimpi itu kemudian sang guru menyarankan agar Hadiwijaya tidak melanjutkan perjalanannya ke Pajang untuk bertempur dengan Sutawijaya. "Jika itu kamu lakukan," ujar guru Hadiwijaya dalam mimpi, "kamu hanya akan menjadi budak kekuasaan." Singkat cerita, akhirnya Hadiwijaya mengurungkan niat ke Pajang, lalu mendirikan kekuatan baru di Pringgobayan, Lamongan, di luar kekuasaan Pajang. (hlm 5-7)

Menurut perspektif Gus Dur, cerita Hadiwijaya tidak jadi perang dengan Sutawijaya untuk merebutkan Pajang, dengan mendirikan kerajaan baru di Pringgobayan, Lamongan, itu merupakan benih-benih asal-usul tradisi LSM di negera kita. Artinya, LSM seharusnya keluar dari lingkar kekuasaan dengan mengembangkan jati dirinya sendiri, mendidik masyarakat, dan mengontrol kekusaan yang cenderung arogan. Di sinalah kelebihan tulisan-tulisan sejarah Gus Dur. Pembaca akan disuguhi cerita-cerita rakyat, kemudian diolah dengan sesuatu yang baru seperti dikontekskan dengan kondisi sekarang, diramu dengan bahasa yang jenaka dan lugas.

Gus Dur dengan gaya kepenulisannya juga berani keluar dari mainstream kepenulisan sejarah pada umumnya. Menafsirkan sejarah dengan gayanya sendiri, memilih dan memilah data-data referensi dari berbagai sumber yang tepercaya, termasuk dari cerita rakyat. Sejarah Nusantara mampu dibaca Gus Dur dengan kritis dan selalu menekankan adanya reinterpretasi baru dengan menyelipkan nilai-nilai humanisme. Kritik di dalam karya-karyanya merupakan kelebihan tersendiri dari sosok Gus Dur.

Tulisan-tulisan Gus Dur memang lebih bersifak kualitatif daripada kuantitatif, dalam artian data-data seperti tahun-tahun tidak begitu terlihat di sana-sini dalam tulisan-tulisan Gus Dur. Di sinilah mungkin kelebihan dari kepenulisan sejarah versi Gus Dur. Pembaca tidak dijenuhkan dengan menghafal tahun-tahun, tetapi lebih diajak untuk bersikap kritis, bahkan pembaca sering dibuat bertanya-tanya untuk memberikan tafsir sendiri dari sebuah peristiwa.

Oleh sebab itu, hadirnya buku ini patut kita apresiasi dan kita jadikan karya nyata, spirit, serta kobar untuk selalu membuat inovasi-inavasi baru untuk kemajuan bangsa seutuhnya dan seluruhnya.

*Peresensi adalah pustakawan pada rumah baca Jagad Aksara, Yogyakarta

Read More

Muslim-Buddhis Merajut Indonesia

Oleh Geger Riyanto Alumnus Sosiologi Universitas Indonesia

Judul: Berpeluh Berselaras: Buddhis-Muslim Meniti Harmoni
Penulis: Zaenal Abidin Ekoputro dkk.
Penerbit: Kepik Ungu
Jumlah halaman: 256 hal
Waktu terbit: Januari 2011
Harga: Rp 55.000

Apakah yang terbayang ketika kita menyinggung wacana hubungan antar agama di Indonesia? Konflik? Kecamuk? Kekerasan? Carilah berita-berita dengan topik tersebut di media massa, maka kita akan menemukan wajah para penganut agama yang jauh dari sejuk—jauh dari ajaran-ajaran agama itu sendiri.

Nah, lewat buku Berpeluh Berselaras: Buddhis-Muslim Meniti Harmoni, tim riset Zaenal Abidin dkk. berusaha mengetengahkan sisi lain hubungan antar agama yang akan mencengangkan mereka yang membayangkan Indonesia dari tayangan-tayangan media massa. Pengantar Zaenal Abidin dan Audriane F. Sani yang membuka buku ini langsung menggambarkan suasana Dusun Barakan di Malang, di mana warga-warga dengan agama yang berbeda tinggal berdempetan, tak mempersoalkan perbedaan.

Tentu saja, sejumlah wilayah pedesaan di Jawa yang menjadi subyek penelitian ini tidak begitu saja, plek, terbentuk sebagai wilayah yang damai. Niat untuk mengupas hubungan di antara Muslim dengan Buddhis—yang tidak lazim diteliti banyak orang—menggiring para penulis untuk pertama-tama merunut sejarah Buddhisme di Jawa yang pada kenyataannya dilatari oleh pertikaian kental antar aliran.

Ulasan para penulis akan membawa kita ke periode pertengahan 60an, yang mana kita mengenalnya sebagai episode vivere pericoloso bagi Indonesia; the years living dangerously! Persaingan tajam di antara golongan-golongan politik merangsek hingga ke serat-serat kehidupan terkecil, menjadikan suasana di negeri ini amat mencekam dan tegang.

Sejarah Buddhisme di Indonesia secara umum dimulai setelah tragedi 1965. Pada saat yang sama dengan dimulainya upaya sistematik menyingkirkan komunisme, jutaan warga Indonesia mulai memeluk identitas agama yang formal agar tidak dicurigai sebagai simpatisan gerakan kiri yang dianggap memusuhi beragama. Di daerah-daerah yang diteliti dalam buku ini, para penganut Buddhisme mengakui bahwa mereka awalnya para anggota PNI yang tidak diterima oleh kelompok Islam; mereka ingat betul penolakan getir yang mereka alami, banteng masuk masjid hanya akan meninggalakan kotoran.

Di sejumlah daerah, PNI lantas mengirimkan utusannya untuk mempelajari agama Buddha—salah satu dari lima agama yang sah menurut pemerintah. Inilah awal terbentuknya komunitas-komunitas Buddhis di Jawa. Politis, memang. Tetapi, dalam perjalanannya, komunitas Buddhis menjalin hubungan yang baik dengan kelompok Muslim.

Petinggi agama Buddha, di satu daerah, memiliki banyak anak yang beragama Muslim dan sama sekali tidak mempermasalahkannya. Dalam perayaan di desa-desa Jawa, daging sapi kerap menjadi hidangan lezat untuk menyempurnakan kemeriahan. Ketika seorang Buddhis mengadakan perayaan, sementara mereka dilarang menyembelih binatang, maka umat Muslim akan datang membantu.

Sayang, setelah menemukan jejak-jejak sejarah kemunculan Buddhisme, buku ini langsung mengulas harmonisme di antara Muslim-Buddhis. Periode pasca 60an, atau Orde Baru, atau sejarah bagaimana hubungan selaras itu dibangun ditinggalkan kosong. Tetapi sebagai sebuah riset/buku rintisan tentang hubungan antar umat Muslim dengan Buddhis, kita tentu perlu mengapresiasi keberaniannya meneroka ruang yang masih melompong dalam khazanah pengetahuan kita.

Read More

Kerisauan Ahli Waris Musik Bambu Ngada

Alat musik ini mirip seruling, terbuat dari bambu. Bedanya, seruling ini memiliki dua tabung. Kedua tabung itu disambungkan sedemikian rupa sehingga embusan angin dari sang peniup bisa terbagi ke dua tabung tersebut. Alat musik itu disebut Foy doa.

Tim Ekspedisi Jejak Peradaban Nusa Tenggara Timur menemukan alat musik itu ketika bergerak ke Kabupaten Ngada, Pulau Flores, NTT. Kabupaten ini terletak di barat Ende. Kawasan ini ditempuh sekitar tiga jam perjalanan darat dengan mobil.

Di Kabupaten Ngada terdapat banyak jenis alat musik etnik bambu yang unik. Ada Bhiru lilu, misalnya, seruling sepanjang 15 sentimeter (cm) yang memiliki dua lubang sekitar 0,5 cm di tengah-tengahnya.

Satu lubang berfungsi untuk meniupkan udara, sedangkan satu lubang lagi yang berdiameter lebih kecil mampu melahirkan nada kres. Sementara bagian kiri-kanannya menjadi tangga nada. Ada juga alat musik Teko reko, semacam kulintang yang memiliki tujuh tangga nada.

Nada pentatonik itu agaknya ”turunan” alat musik tradisional Gong Gendang, yang didominasi gong kecil (mirip gambang keromong, alat musik Betawi), dengan tangga nada wela (sol), uto-uto (fa), duru/dere (mi), dan doga (nada do dan re).

Sayangnya, alat musik etnik tersebut nyaris punah. Di Ngada sudah tidak banyak lagi orang yang bisa memainkan alat musik itu, apalagi membuatnya. Tinggal Daniel Watu, pria berusia 62 tahun yang tinggal di Kampung Woloroa, Desa Sarasedu, Kecamatan Golewa, Kabupaten Ngada, yang masih setia dan gigih menekuni alat musik etnik tersebut.

Belum ada orang yang mau mengikuti jejak musisi tua itu untuk memelihara dan menyelamatkan musik bambu Ngada dari kepunahan.

Warisan
Bisa dikatakan, Daniel adalah satu-satunya sosok yang memiliki keterampilan paripurna dan sangat mencintai alat musik tradisi Ngada itu. Dia belajar musik bambu itu dari ibunya, Elisabeth Baba (85).

Saking cintanya kepada sang bunda dan musik bambu, Daniel bercerita, dahulu dia sampai sering membolos dari sekolah. ”Saya kemudian bertemu kepala sekolah, saya minta berhenti,” kata Daniel mengenang.

Dia kemudian mengisi hari-harinya dengan bertani, juga memainkan Foy doa dan mencipta lagu. Banyak lagu berhasil dia ciptakan dari keakrabannya memainkan musik bambu.

”Kalau tidak salah, sekitar 30 lagu yang saya ciptakan,” kata Daniel seraya membolak-balik lembaran buku lusuh berisi dokumentasi lagu-lagu karyanya.

Lagu-lagu ciptaan Daniel kebanyakan bertema rohani, ajaran cinta kasih, atau tentang keseharian kehidupan petani peladang yang merupakan mata pencarian umumnya penduduk di Ngada.

Lagu berjudul ”Wula kasu da te’a” (Saat Padi Menguning), misalnya, berkisah tentang keriangan para petani yang terbebas dari pekerjaan di ladang untuk sementara waktu sebelum kembali disibukkan dengan musim petik padi.

Lagu dia lainnya, ”Manu Naru” (Ayam Betina), mengisahkan seekor ayam betina yang dipinang ayam jantan dan induk ayam yang mengajak anak-anaknya untuk mengais-kais makanan.

Bersama rekannya bermain seruling, Johanes Wawo, lahir lagu ”Tuga Mori Rua” (Dua Anak Cukup) yang merupakan lagu pesanan dari pemerintah agar suami-istri mau mengatur jumlah kelahiran anaknya guna mengatasi ledakan jumlah penduduk. Mengandalkan perasaan

Pengembangan keterampilan membuat alat musik bambu diperoleh Daniel secara otodidak. Pria yang putus sekolah saat kelas I SMP ini bercerita, ia lebih mengandalkan perasaan saat menyelaraskan nada pada alat musik yang dibuatnya.

Setelah itu, dia baru mengecek kemampuan alat musik tersebut dengan membawanya ke paroki terdekat, menggunakan alat musik organ. Ternyata, 99 persen alat musik bambu karyanya memenuhi standar nada.

Bahan bambu alat musik buatan Daniel selalu diambil saat ”gelap bulan” pada musim kemarau atau dua minggu sebelum bulan purnama. Alasannya, ketika ”gelap bulan”, batang bambu bersih dari serbuk dan kutu kayu. Kondisi ini membuat bambu tahan lama. Bambu yang digunakan untuk membuat seruling adalah bambu pilihan, yaitu bambu betho (petung) berusia matang—sekitar dua tahun.

Dari pengalaman mengutak-atik bambu, Daniel berhasil mendesain seruling yang masing-masing memiliki nada tersendiri: B, G, A, Ais (Bes), B, C, dan D. Pada 2009, satu set (enam unit) alat musik bambu karyanya dibeli seorang pastor asal Manggarai, Flores, seharga Rp 3,5 juta.

Sebagian alat musik buatan Daniel dia simpan sendiri dan dipakai untuk berlatih bersama kelompoknya yang tergabung dalam Sanggar Persada. Latihan itu mereka lakukan untuk memenuhi permintaan mengisi acara pesta perkawinan, ritual potong gigi bagi gadis yang memasuki masa akil balik, serta syukuran setelah seseorang ditahbiskan sebagai imam dalam agama Katolik.

Sayang, karena kurang terawat, kondisi koleksi alat musik itu banyak yang dimakan kutu kayu.

Bercerita tentang bahan baku bambu untuk membuat seruling, Daniel tak pernah kesulitan mendapatkannya. Bambu tumbuh di sejumlah lokasi sekitar hutan kampung itu. Rumpun bambu setiap hari dia lewati saat pergi-pulang dari rumah ke kebun. ”Nenek moyang masih banyak punya (bambu),” katanya.

Kerisauan justru muncul karena ia belum tahu bagaimana bisa mewariskan keahliannya itu kepada generasi muda. Tak seorang pun dari anak-anaknya yang mau meneruskan keterampilannya itu. Padahal, menurut Daniel, mereka relatif sudah mahir memainkan seruling karena diajari sejak berusia dini.

”Setelah saya tidak ada, saya tak tahu nasib kesenian ini nanti,” katanya galau.

Sumber: kompas.com
Read More

Tongkonan, Simpul Peradaban Toraja

Tidak kurang dari 100 kerbau dan 50 babi dipersembahkan dalam acara Rambu Solo’ di Kecamatan Balusu, Kabupaten Toraja Utara, Sulawesi Selatan, Senin (27/12). Esoknya, ritual Rambu Tuka’ di Kecamatan Tallunglipu mempersembahkan 70 babi dan seekor kerbau. Esensi kedua ritual itu kontras, tetapi sama-sama menghimpun warga Toraja di tongkonan dalam suasana guyub.

Pagi itu jenazah Hendry Puang Balusu diletakkan di bagian atas Tongkonan Kollo-Kollo. Sarat dengan ornamen berwarna hitam dan merah yang lazim digunakan pada upacara Rambu Solo’, para kerabat dari beberapa daerah menghadiri pemakaman Hendry. Hari raya Natal dan Tahun Baru pun jadi momentum keluarga yang merantau untuk mudik ke Toraja, 328 kilometer (km) utara Kota Makassar.

James Linggi (41), seorang kerabat Hendry, rela berdiri berpenat-penat di dalam bak truk yang disewa rombongan keluarganya dari Palopo, sekitar 50 km dari Rantepao, ibu kota Toraja Utara. Ia datang bersama 10 saudaranya dan membawa seekor kerbau untuk disumbangkan.

Lain lagi Marten Samba (44). Kerabat Hendry yang bekerja di Jakarta ini datang bersama istri dan putra-putrinya.

Keesokan harinya, komunalitas serupa terjadi di Tallunglipu, tetangga Kecamatan Balusu. Bedanya, ratusan warga yang berkumpul di Tongkonan Massing ini larut dalam sukacita. Di tengah balutan ornamen putih dan kuning yang lazim dalam upacara Rambu Tuka’ atau syukuran, warga keturunan Ne’ Kaise mengadakan selamatan untuk tongkonan induk.

Oktavianus Paonganan (39), keturunan Ne’ Kaise, menyumbangkan seekor babi, seperti dilakukan setiap keluarga. Seekor babi dihargai Rp 4 juta-Rp 7 juta.

Esensi dari Rambu Tuka’ sesungguhnya bukan sekadar syukuran pernikahan anggota keluarga atau berdirinya tongkonan baru. Warga dari satu rumpun melaksanakan Rambu Tuka’ di tongkonan ketika mereka merasa tali kekerabatan mulai merenggang. Ritual ini biasanya diadakan setiap lima tahun ketika keluarga makin jarang berkumpul karena merantau.

Penjaga nilai
Bagi warga Toraja, tongkonan bukan sekadar pusat pelaksanaan ritual. Tongkonan menjadi penjaga nilai-nilai adat. Warga Toraja bisa saja tersekat-sekat secara administratif pascapemekaran wilayah, yakni Kabupaten Tana Toraja dan Toraja Utara tahun 2009. Namun, dalam hal kekerabatan yang disimbolkan melalui tongkonan, mereka tidak tercerai-berai.

Lestarinya tongkonan merupakan hasil inkulturasi antara Aluk Todolo, kepercayaan warisan leluhur, dan ajaran agama Kristen. Menurut antropolog Universitas Hasanuddin, Makassar, Stanislaus Sandarupa, pandangan tentang kehidupan yang berputar yang hingga kini masih dianut dan dipraktikkan orang Toraja sesungguhnya merupakan ajaran Aluk Todolo.

Manusia berasal dari langit, turun ke bumi, dan kembali ke langit setelah melalui transformasi. Bagi penganut Aluk Todolo, kerbau dan babi dipersembahkan sebagai media arwah bertransformasi ke dalam wujud tomembali Puang atau dewa. Persembahan kerbau dan babi juga disimbolkan bekal orang yang sudah meninggal dalam perjalanan menuju puya (surga).

Adapun daging hewan persembahan yang terakumulasi dalam ritual Rambu Solo’ dan Rambu Tuka’ oleh ajaran Kristiani dipandang sebagai aspek sosial. Daging dibagikan kepada sesama dengan semangat cinta kasih. Dengan demikian, lahirlah keseimbangan antara urusan Sang Pencipta dan sesama. Proses perpaduan ini telah berlangsung sejak awal 1900-an ketika Belanda menyiarkan ajaran Kristiani bagi suku pedalaman di Sulawesi, termasuk Toraja dan Mamasa.

Agar ajaran Aluk Todolo dan Kristiani berjalan seiring, dalam setiap acara ritual tampillah Parenge dan Tominaa. Parenge berperan sebagai pengatur tata cara upacara dari sisi adat. Adapun Tominaa mengawal secara moril esensi ritual supaya tetap berpijak pada kemaslahatan sesama.

Sayangnya, tradisi yang luhur tersebut belakangan ini larut pada prestise dan jumlah persembahan. Tidak sedikit keluarga dari kalangan berada menggelar pesta Rambu Solo’ dan Rambu Tuka’ dengan persembahan hewan dalam jumlah tidak terkendali. Dalam upacara Rambu Solo’, misalnya, sebuah keluarga bisa mempersembahkan ratusan kerbau dan babi yang nilainya miliaran rupiah. Seekor kerbau Toraja paling murah Rp 25 juta. Adapun babi dihargai Rp 5 juta-Rp 10 juta per ekor. Menurut tokoh agama, Yoseph Pairunan (66), sebetulnya ajaran Aluk Todolo telah mengatur pelaksanaan Rambu Solo’ secara proporsional. Jumlah kerbau persembahan dibatasi paling banyak 24 ekor. Warga juga dilarang menjual tanah atau berutang untuk mengongkosi Rambu Solo’.

Kosmologi tongkonan
Tongkonan, yang berbentuk rumah panggung dan beratap melengkung, terdiri dari tiga bagian, yakni atas, tengah, dan bawah. Bagian tengah berfungsi sebagai tempat tinggal yang di dalamnya terdapat teras, ruang tamu, ruang tidur, dan dapur. Bagian atas biasanya digunakan sebagai tempat menyimpan jenazah sebelum dimakamkan. Bagian kolong biasanya untuk tempat warga bercengkerama.

Bagi penganut Aluk Todolo, bagian atas, tengah, dan bawah tongkonan bermakna langit, bumi, dan bawah bumi. Langit dipercaya tempat Puang Matua (pencipta) yang berwujud laki-laki. Bumi digambarkan sebagai Datu Baine, saudara perempuan Puang Matua. Inilah yang memunculkan idiomatik tongkonan berjenis kelamin perempuan.

Tongkonan tidak pernah berdiri sendiri. Di depan tongkonan selalu terdapat alang, tongkonan berukuran lebih kecil. Alang berfungsi sebagai tempat penyimpanan padi. Penganut Aluk Todolo umumnya menyebut alang Londong Nabanua (ayam jantan). Itulah mengapa alang diibaratkan berjenis kelamin laki-laki. ”Jika atap tongkonan dan alang disatukan akan membentuk bulatan, simbol keseimbangan makrokosmos dan mikrokosmos dalam hidup suku Toraja,” kata Stanislaus.

Keselarasan tersebut juga terlihat dari penataan sejumlah kampung di Tana Toraja dan Toraja Utara. Deretan tongkonan dan alang di Kampung Sillanan, Tana Toraja, serta Kete’ Kesu, Toraja Utara, misalnya, dikelilingi hamparan padi menguning.

Kelokan sungai di sela perkampungan membuat persawahan terasering di sekitarnya terairi sepanjang tahun. Konsep itu menambah elok panorama Toraja yang berketinggian 1.500-3.000 meter dari permukaan laut itu.

Read More

Imaji Rumah Orang Jawa

Oleh Munawir Aziz

Manusia Jawa kini terasing di rumahnya sendiri. Ingatan orang Jawa (wong Jawa) tentang rumah memberi energi dan tafsir multidimensi akan asal kehidupan.

Rumah memberi arti sosiologis dan religius dalam kehidupan wong Jawa. Batasan-batasan dalam rumah dijebol agar keakraban menyapa kehidupan di luar diri. Hubungan dengan tetangga ada dalam filosofi rumah Jawa. Membaca manusia Jawa adalah membaca rumah dalam telaah panjang.

Rumah manusia Jawa tak terelak dari silang budaya dalam historiografi Jawa. Sebagaimana pakaian, rumah Jawa hadir dengan model akulturasi dari berbagai peradaban agung, ketika Jawa menjadi simpul transportasi dagang dan kuasa.

Denys Lombard dalam Nusa Jawa: Silang Budaya, Jaringan Asia (2008: 34) menulis, ”Jawa persimpangan kuasa, yang berhubungan dengan Gujarat maupun Indochina. Salah satu fakta terpenting dari periode itu adalah munculnya Jawa sebagai kekuatan laut yang besar. Sampai saat itu, ’She po’ dari sumber- sumber di China masih mengacu pada Pulau Jawa. Marcopolo menamai Jawa sebagai ’Java Major’, Ibnu Batutta menamakan Muljawa (Jawa yang asasi)”. Riset Lombard jadi fakta dan kesaksian soal Jawa lintas batas. Silang budaya dalam historiografi Jawa juga menentukan struktur dan imajinasi manusia Jawa akan rumah sebagai hunian.

Imajinasi rumah
Rumah wong Jawa berbentuk limasan dengan pendapa. Di pendapa, ritus komunikasi manusia Jawa terjalin dinamis dan egaliter. Pendapa jadi ruang pertemuan yang akrab dan komunikatif: membahas masalah dan rencana strategis. Pendapa jadi ruang tamu: nguwongke wong (memanusiakan manusia).

Selain pendapa, ruang rumah Jawa dibagi longgar, tetapi sadar fungsi: gandhok, omah jero, longkang, senthong, dan pawon.

Struktur rumah Jawa bersandar pada lima entitas: panggung pe, kampung, limasan, joglo, dan tajug. Ruang-ruang dalam imajinasi rumah Jawa punya fungsi dan makna hidup. Rumah peninggalan Sosrokartono di Kaliputu, Kudus, misalnya, memberi imajinasi lintas batas memaknai ruang. Kamar Sosrokartono tak hanya ruang menstabilkan energi fisik, tetapi juga kekuatan spiritual. Kamar itu bersimbol ”alif”, tanda filosofis yang menyimpulkan ajaran Sosrokartono. Kamar punya fungsi ruang semedi untuk kekuatan spiritual dan refleksi diri.

Senthong bermakna penghubung publik dan privat: jembatan kepentingan luar dan keintiman keluarga. Pawon (dapur) punya fungsi integral. Penghormatan pada perempuan adalah menghormati pawon sebagai wilayah kuasa perempuan Jawa. Di sana perempuan Jawa bebas berkreasi dan mengendalikan nafsu makan keluarga.

Rumah, dalam imajinasi manusia Jawa hadir dalam imajinasi dan diskursus eksistensi serta kenyamanan. Revianto Budi Santoso (2009) menyebut, ”Omah adalah nucleus yang akan membentuk ranah domestik yang lebih luas, yang diikat kedekatan spasial, jejaring aktivitas dan pemahaman makna bersama”. Rumah jadi kode yang menghadirkan tafsir semiotik tentang identitas diri.

Rumah yang hilang
Sekarang, rumah manusia Jawa kian hilang fungsi. Bertahan sebagai cagar budaya tiap kota untuk simbol pariwisata, tetapi dangkal secara substansi.

Manusia Jawa kehilangan rumah dalam fungsi fisik dan substansial: wong Jawa ilang omahe. Bagaimana nasib rumah Jawa sebagai identitas kultural? Bagaimana efek kehidupan manusia Jawa setelah rumah dihadirkan sebagai onggokan material yang kehilangan fungsi?

Wong Jawa tak akan kehilangan rumah saat punya kesadaran ruang dan substansi hunian. Rumah Jawa diburu dengan dalih menghadirkan pertanyaan, kenangan, dan kesaksian.

Munawir Aziz Esais dan Peneliti, Lahir di Pati, Jawa Tengah

Sumber: kompas.com
Read More

Gasing

"Gasing" is a Malay word for top. Gasing or top spinning is a traditional game of the Malays. It was a popular pastime and recreation among children and adults alike who lived in kampongs.

In Singapore, however, its popularity declined as more and more people moved to public flats. In an effort to revive and promote the games, gasing enthusiasts established the Gasing Federation in Jul 1979.

Basically, there are two types of gasing. One is ornamental - strictly for display purposes and the other is for playing. There are five different shapes of tops - plate-shaped, heart-shaped, flat-top, egg-shaped and ‘berembang‘-shaped. ‘Berembang‘ is the fruit of a seaside tree.

Method of Play:
Number of Participants: The number is not fixed. It can be played in teams or individually.

Equipment: Wooden tops and strings

Aim: To keep the top spinning for as long as possible within a specified area

For individual play:
A circle is drawn depicting the area in which the top must spin.
A string is tightly wound clockwise round the base of the top, beginning from the nail.
The player clasps the top in his hand, gripping the loose end of the string between the fingers.
He throws the top into the circle and swings the string backwards to give the top a spinning effect.
If the top spins out of the circle, the player loses the game.
The one whose top outspins the rest wins the game
For team play:

Circles are drawn for each team.
Players from each team spin their tops into the respective circles at the same time.
When the top stops or spins out of the circle, the next member of the team should quickly throw in his top.
The team whose last top outspins the rest wins the game.

Source : http://www.ssc.gov.sg (4 April 2007)
Read More

`Gonggong`: Unique Seafood of Riau Islands

You`ve never really been to Batam, Bintan or Tanjung Balai Karimun in Riau Islands province unless you have tried gonggong, a seafood dish unique to these three areas, Gonggong, which literally translates to barking, is the name of a sea creature. After just one bite, you`ll be hooked.

The snail-like gonggong has a yellowish white shell. The flesh is softer than that of a snail. The gonggong has no pincers and is not slimy.

The art to eating gonggong is to use a toothpick to slowly remove the flesh of the gonggong from the shell. Do it too quickly and you`ll fail.

Obviously it takes patience to enjoy a delicious dish of gonggong, which is considered an aphrodisiac. Although it is said that you must eat one kilo of gonggong for it to really work. If you suffer from hypertension, forget it as it could make your blood boil.

Practically every seafood restaurant in Batam and Bintan has gonggong on their menu. How to serve gonggong? Easy, just boil it and serve hot on a red plate. Why red? Well almost all plates used in seafood restaurants in Riau Islands are red.

Any visitor to a kelong (vendor selling cooked seafood at the seaside) or to an open-air food center in Batam, will surely order a dish of gonggong.

Aneka Selera, a popular kelong at Tanjung Kertang, Rempang Island, some 2.5 km to the southeast of Batam, is popular among locals and outsiders alike.

A favorite dish at this kelong is gonggong. A visitor is free to pick the gonggong of his or her choice in whatever amount he or she chooses. This restaurant has its own pond where gonggong and other sea creatures are kept.

Ali, who runs this restaurant, told The Jakarta Post that gonggong was often ordered by customers. Compared with other seafood dishes like fish and crab dishes, gonggong is not that expensive. One kilogram of gonggong costs Rp 40,000. before the fuel price hike one kilo cost only Rp 30,000 a kilogram.

"Singaporeans like gonggong very much because they believe it is an aphrodisiac. Some non-local visitors also come here to taste gonggong just out of curiosity," said Ali.

Seafood vendors and restaurants have developed various kinds of gonggong dishes. Some offer dishes of steamed gonggong or fried gonggong and garlic.

If you want to see gonggong in their natural habitat, the only place to go is Bintan island.

"Many people breed gonggong now because is a very popular food. Gonggong is always included in an order of seafood dishes," Ali said.

Source: www.thejakartapost.com (27 Maret 2007)
Read More

Sikka Weft Textiles: A Tribute to Weaving Women

By Rita A.Widiadana

On the hillside of Watublapi village in Sikka, 30 kilometers from the largest city in Flores, East Nusa Tenggara, a number of women meticulously weave some of the world’s most refined and elaborate warp ikat textiles.

Thanks to these women’s superb talent, this centuries-old tradition is still well preserved and blossoming in the region.

Once called Copa de Flores in Portuguese — or the Isle of flowers — for its beauty, Flores is one of the Lesser Sunda Islands located in the eastern part of Nusa Tenggara Islands.

Locals called their island Nusa Nipa or the land of the snakes to illustrate the island’s shape and its grandeur. Snake designs have inspired various textile patterns and designs, and found their way onto house ornaments and a myriad of art local artefacts.

The island became a landmark when Portuguese traders and Catholic missionaries landed there in the 16th century, unravelling the richness of its culture and its nature, flora and fauna.

One of the region’s cultural gems is textile weaving. Prominent textile scholar John Gillow penned in his book on Traditional Indonesian Textiles that textile weaving was part of Indonesia’s cultural identity.

Magic hands: A woman meticulously weaves an ikat, one of the world’s most elaborate textile, in Flores.Magic hands: A woman meticulously weaves an ikat, one of the world’s most elaborate textile, in Flores.Most fine textiles in Indonesia, including in Sikka, Flores, have been produced by women. Men undertake some of the work in factories and workshops, such as building the tools used to produce these textiles — metal stamps or wooden looms. However, all the steps in creating the cloth — from preparing the ground, planting the cotton and gathering dye plants to weaving the patterned fabrics, are traditionally and exclusively undertaken by women.

In the village of Sikka, which was named after the mighty Queen Sikka Du’a Go’it of Sikka Kingdom, women play the most important role, running the textile “industry” for domestic, ritual and commercial purposes.

Given the island’s tropical climate, clothing requirements are relatively meager and garments are simple, traditionally composed of rectangular cloth.

Sikka women weave four main types of textiles: kain, which wraps around the waist and legs; sarong made of smaller kain shewn into a tube-shape; selendang breast and shoulder cloths and selimut, large-wrap-around mantles of blankets.

Women from these communities weave ikat textiles on backstrap looms during the quiet hours of the day, in the shelter of the recess under their stilted houses. Young girls learn the simpler techniques on small looms, leaving the finer weaving to their mothers and grandmothers.

Their weaving skills tend to make them the breadwinners in the family as they sell textiles in village markets and other provinces such as Bali, where tourists always look for exquisite and antique textiles.

Dong Song Legacy

Ikat (to tie or to bind) is a weaving method whereby the patterning of a textile is obtained by tying fiber tightly around the warp threads and then immersing the tied hanks in a dye bath. The basic ikat technique can be applied either to warp or to weft threads alone. Alternately, certain sections of the textile can be warp ikat, such as borders and other parts of weft ikat.

Traditionally, the color of the ikat has come from a wide variety of vegetable dyes, the most valued color originating from the natural, organic dyeing materials including great morinda (turkey red, mengkudu or kombu), true indigo, turmeric and sappan wood.

Warp ikat is primarily the preserve of ancient people who built the megalithic civilization, and the legacy of the Dongsong culture, which was preserved either in the rugged mountainous interiors of the main island, or on the outlying islands.

Dong Song culture introduced to the Indonesian islands the technique of weaving warp-ikat textiles on a simple backstrap loom.

In Indonesia, the ikat textile tradition spreads from North Sumatra across to Kalimantan, Bali, Lombok, West and East Nusa Tenggara including Flores and Sumba. Each region developed its own styles and patterns blending local and other cultural influences.

In Flores, each village has its own distinctive ikat textile patterns and motifs. But, like in other part of the country, strict rules specified which textiles were to be worn at every level of society – the ruling class, nobilities and commoners.

Spinning: Women from the village of Watublapi in Sikka, Flores, turn cotton slivers into yarn, before weaving ikat.Spinning: Women from the village of Watublapi in Sikka, Flores, turn cotton slivers into yarn, before weaving ikat.The textiles have a ritual significance that far exceeds utilitarian need and play a vital role in maintaining harmony and balance between spirits and humanity.

The world is changing fast in the late century. The culture of the Sikka people is still very strong, but prolonged contact with the outside world is bound to have detrimental effects, which will most probably lead to a lowering of the quality of their textiles.

The spreading of factories, machine-manufactured textiles into the remote island of Flores has threatened the existence of the village’s textile weaving heritage.

Women weavers are grouped into the village’s aging population without having opportunities to pass on their weaving skills to younger women in the community, who show less interest in preserving the tradition as the world is now wide open for them to pursue other career paths.

Despite modernity, Sikka’s wealth textile craftsmanship must continue to strive with help from various parties — the government, the private sector, artists, and individuals who care about the island’s priceless heritage.

Read More

New Cultural Wars

By Farish A Noor

In the process of rediscovering our past and our culture, let us not be narrow-minded in our approach. Southeast Asia is a rich patchwork of diverse communities and cultures, and we are all the richer because we share this common legacy together

Demo season has come early this year, and over the weekend it was reported that a number of anti-Malaysia demonstrations had flared up across several towns and cities in Indonesia. The reason for this latest round of acrimony lies in the claim that a tourism ad for Malaysia had presented a Balinese dance as being ‘Malaysian‘ and as such quite a number of Indonesians were miffed about it.

The ASEAN region seems to be facing the prospect of what can be aptly described as the new ‘cultural wars‘ of the era. Over the past few years, we have witnessed clashes (some of them violent) over temples, artefacts, words/signifiers, handicrafts and local products that some nations and communities claim as theirs, and which have been ‘stolen‘ by other societies. One of the hot topics at the moment is the Indonesian claim that Batik is a uniquely Indonesian invention and that countries like Malaysia and Singapore have ‘stolen‘ batik by claiming that it is theirs as well.

On a superficial level, one understands the nature of the complaint and the logic behind it. It would be perfectly reasonable for a country to be angry if its products were bought by another, only to be re-sold to the international market after the original ‘Made in X‘ label was removed and replaced with a ‘Made in Y‘ label. Intellectual copyright is something that this academic understands and appreciates very much, for it would be akin to someone stealing the contents of one of my academic papers or books and simply replacing the author‘s name with his/her own. That is theft and copyright infringement, plain and simple.

But when it comes to copyrighting cultures, we move to an altogether murkier and more complicated domain, for how does one copyright an idea, a colour, a theme, a sentiment or a musical note?

There are two points that require emphasis here, and both are related to the common shared cultural history of our Southeast Asian region.

First, it has to be recognised that much of the misunderstanding that has arisen thus far over issues of cultural borrowing has to do with the narrow nationalist histories that we have relied upon since the day our nation-states became independent. The realities of the colonial era were that the region of Southeast Asia — which historically has been one of the most fluid, cosmopolitan and diverse in the world — was cut up and divided according to the logic of colonies and then nation-states. As a result of this, our postcolonial histories tend to be narrow and inward-looking, and fail to note the cultural continuity and overlap that has existed in the region for hundreds and thousands of years.

As an academic who moves between Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia, I am struck by how little the citizens of all three countries know about each other. Do Indonesians realise that all over Malaysia there are Malaysian communities who still speak Javanese? Why is this so? Because all over Malaysia there are millions of descendants of Javanese, Sumatran, Madurese, Bugis migrants who have settled there over the centuries, such as my own family, which were first categorised as ‘Jawi Peranakan‘ (Hybrid/Mixed Javanese) in the 19th century.

So when some Malaysians speak Javanese at home, is this a case of Malaysians ‘stealing‘ the Javanese language? Surely not: if anything it points to the continuities of identities over time and space, which is a factor that enriches the region as a whole.

On the issue of Batik and other art and cultural forms, it should also be noted that Batik was worn by many of the communities of the region, and not just the Javanese. Batik was the lingua franca of the plastic arts for Javanese, Sumatrans, Balinese, Bugis, Malays, Peranakan Chinese, Indians, Arabs and Eurasians for more than a century; and in my collection of photos of Batik as it was worn between the 19th to the 20th century we see how Batik was adapted, used, popularised and produced by practically all the communities of maritime Southeast Asia.

While I understand and sympathise with the complaint that some Indonesian Batik may have been bought and then re-sold as ‘Malaysian‘, let us not go overboard by claiming that Batik was produced by only one community in the region. Batik production was predominantly centred in Java and parts of Sumatra, but it was also produced in parts of Malaysia and worn all across the region. Indeed, Batik production extends as far as Africa and even Europe, where European artists tried their hand at the Batik technique to produce Batik pieces that were inspired by the school of l‘art nouveau and art deco. That is the factor that makes batik the rich cultural heritage of all, and not the parochial totem of a few.

Second, in the process of re-claiming our history, let us not be provincial, or worse still, neglectful of the complexities of history. The popular art forms of Indonesia such as the wayang kulit puppet theatre is not unique to Indonesia alone, for it exists all across Southeast Asia (in Malaysia, Southern Thailand, parts of Cambodia and Southern Vietnam) and can be found in places as far apart as China to the East and India and Turkey to the West. Furthermore the repertoire of stories that are told and enacted include the Ramayana and Mahabharata, both of which certainly did not come from Indonesia or any country in Southeast Asia, but India — the wellspring of so much classical Asian art, culture and religion from the time of the Gupta dynasty.

Thus if any country has the right to claim copyright to the wayang genre and the stories that make up the popular lore of Asia, it would be India. So how would the countries of ASEAN react if India were to lay claim to our arts and culture, our architecture, our religions (Hinduism and Buddhism come from South Asia, after all) and even our languages (the Thai, Khmer, Lao, Burmese, Malay and Indonesian languages all borrow heavily from Sanskrit and other South Asian tongues). What then?

As stated above, in the process of rediscovering our past and our culture, let us not be narrow-minded in our approach. Southeast Asia is a rich patchwork of diverse communities and cultures, and we are all the richer because we share this common legacy together. One understands the need for commercial regulation of goods and products, and in such cases theft and misrepresentation of labels is simply a case of criminal fraud that can be dealt with in the courts.

But culture cannot and should not be cut up, demarcated and commodified as some may want it to be. By all means, sue and penalise unscrupulous businessmen who sell fake goods, but let us understand and accept that the cultural wellspring that inspires the production of so much of our arts and crafts belongs to us, together.
__________
Dr Farish A Noor is a Senior Fellow at the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore; and one of the founders of the www.othermalaysia.org research site

Read More

Of Different Malays: The Problem Of Boundaries

By Merlyna Lim

The recent furor caused by the Discovery Channel`s mistaken insertion of the Balinese Pendet dance into a TV spot for Malaysia has reopened an old wound of Indonesians, who believe Malaysian has repeatedly stolen Indonesian cultural heritage, including the song "Rasa Sayange", the angklung, and the Reog Ponorogo dance, among others.

For most Indonesians, that the Malaysian government can claim these things is bewildering. Regular Indonesians would undoubtedly associate these three intangible cultural items with three different origins: "Rasa Sayange" is Ambonese/Maluku, the angklung is Sundanese, and the Reog Ponorogo is Javanese.

Most Malaysians, including the government of Malaysia, however, fail to see these as being of different cultural lineage. They lump them as belonging to Malay (Melayu) culture.

Malay culture is considered by Indonesians in reference to the dances of Lilin, Randai and Serampang Dua Belas, and has no direct connection to the Javanese gamelan, the Reog or the angklung. It is directly associated with the traditions and customs of the ethnic group within the boundary of the Malay peninsula. Malaysians seem to see a different boundary for Malay culture. Why is this?

Knowledge and narratives of local culture in Indonesia are developed in association with ethnic-based regional boundaries. They are endorsed by the state and they are part of nation building.

From elementary school, Indonesian kids learn about national heritage by memorizing the names of dances, folk songs and visual representations of traditional costumes.

The practice of documenting and selecting material artifacts of local cultures is part of the larger political process of inclusion that stresses nationalism and the national unity of Indonesia. Selective preservation of regional and/or local art forms, in constructing the national culture, is therefore part of the politics of exclusion.

Recognizing this pitfall, however, the ways in which local culture is framed in Indonesia are much less crude than in Malaysia. It is still assigned and identified with a certain cultural context/geographical (of origin). While being partial and reductionist, multifarious contexts and diverse locales still have some space in the narrative of Indonesian national culture.

Malaysia adopts a different route in approaching its national and local cultures. The modern nation-state of Malaysia frames national culture by clustering cultural artifacts into the Malay, Chinese, Indian and indigenous tribe (orang asli) cultures. The term Malay here differs from that of Indonesia, and refers to and is influenced by several concepts.

First, as enacted in the term "Malay is Muslim, Muslim is Malay", it is a form of ethno-religion. It is entwined with the concept of ethnic nationalism that has become today`s Malaysia`s dominant state-religion relations in which the state is fused to a particular ethnic group and religion functions as a signifier of ethnic identity.

Any Javanese, Acehnese or other Indonesian who migrated to Malaysia will be classified as Malay and are expected to be Muslim. Chinese-Indonesians, though, can box themselves as Chinese, thus do not have to be Muslim.

Second, it is used in association with the Malay race (bangsa Melayu) instead of the Malay ethnicity (suku Melayu).

This concept originated in Blumenbach`s racial classification system, which divides the world`s races into the Caucasian/white race, the Mongolian/yellow race, the Malayan/brown race, the American/red race and the Negroid/black race. His skull-based concept has been rejected by many anthropologists who recognize the enormous complexity of classifying races.

He considered the inhabitants of Southeast Asia, including the Marianas, the Philippines, the Malukus, Sundas and Pacific Islands as Malayan. Blumenbach wrote, "Malay variety. Tawny-colored; hair black, soft, curly, thick and plentiful; head moderately narrowed; forehead slightly swelling; nose full..."

The concept of the Malay race is also a historical heritage of colonialism. European planters and British officials in Malaysia were keen to obtain laborers from the Dutch East Indies because they were regarded as being better suited to the climate and would assimilate more easily with the local Malays.

Indonesian migrants were viewed as originating from the same racial stock as the Malays, regardless of ethnicity. In early colonial Malaysia, the Straits Settlements censuses of 1871 and 1881 both listed "Malay, Achinese, Andamanese, Boyanese, Bugis and Javanese" separately.

In the 1891 census, however, there were major structural changes in the classification of ethnicities. The 48 different ethnicities were sorted under the major (hierarchical) classifications of "European and American, Eurasian, Chinese, Malays and other Natives of the Archipelago, Tamils and other Natives of India, and Other Races".

The creation of the category "Malay and other Natives of the Archipelago" and the inclusions of the various ethnicities in it contributed toward formalizing the boundaries of Malay-ness. The modern nation-state Malaysia cultivates this heavily politicized classification by clustering Malaysians into Malays, Chinese, Indians and indigenous tribes.

Tracing the origin of the term Malay as used in Malaysian context, we thus can understand that the Malaysian version of Malay is more a product of political reconstruction (of colonialism and a modern ethnic nationalism) and is rooted in the politics of race and identity rather than the geographical boundary of origin.

As people move around globally, cultures flow in all directions. Tracing the histories and origins of culture is thus always a complicated task. Lumping together various artifacts into one Malay culture whose boundary is heavily politicized is certainly not the most plausible method to complete the task. It fails to recognize the complexity of the cultures of the archipelago, thus removing them from their multifarious contexts and locales and uprooting these cultures from the people who shape and are reshaped by them.

As for Indonesia, it is time to recognize and appreciate local cultures not by treating them as symbols to justify unity and diversity, but by supporting and caring for the people who work tirelessly in preserving and maintaining these cultures.
__________
The writer is an Indonesian professor at Arizona State University, Tempe, US.

Read More

Heritage And Paradox

By Sarah Anais Andrieu

As often happens in West Java during November, rain had been falling all day, so Bandung`s central public space, known as the Gasibu, was half-flooded. A large temporary stage had been erected, in front of which stood a large tent sheltering about two hundred chairs. Forty chairs were prepared with white covers for use by government officials, but only about ten were present. Only a few spectators sat behind them. TV and radio crews busied themselves trying to protect their equipment from the rain.

A performance of wayang golek, the traditional rod puppet theatre from West Java, was scheduled to take place for the entire night. The troupe was already on stage waiting patiently behind their gamelan instruments. The show should have already started, and a crowd should have already gathered around the stage as customarily happens, but very few people had dared to brave the rain and the cold on this night. The improvised market that always appears besides wayang golek performances was barely visible, with only a few sellers offering food and snacks from the shelter of huge umbrellas.

At last, the show started at around half past nine with speeches reminding the audience of the purpose of the performance, namely the protection of the national cultural heritage, of which wayang golek is officially a part. After the audience was reminded too that the event had been sponsored by the National Department of Culture and Tourism and its provincial subdivision in West Java, the committee finally gave a sign to the puppeteer, or dalang, that he could start performing the story entitled Cepot`s Twin (Cepot Kembar).

But soon after the first scene, the dalang stopped and introduced three famous Sundanese comedians who launched into an interactive dialogue with the audience. Spectators asked questions via SMS, which were relayed by the comedians to specialists from cultural and governmental institutions to be answered. After an hour of jokes and questions, the humourists retired from the stage and the wayang performance continued. The dalang recommenced his task of guiding the well-known characters through diverse intrigues and adventures. The rain had stopped, but there were still only a few spectators. Even fewer stayed until the performance ended at three o`clock in the morning.

What happened that night raises many questions about contemporary wayang golek. Government officials left the performance – if they came at all – long before its end. Much more seriously, the structure of the performance, something usually subject to quite strict convention, was upset by the intervention of humourists just after the story commenced. Such a thing could not happen in performances sponsored by rural communities or households. Moreover, the radio and TV broadcasts stopped after the comedians had withdrawn from the stage, even though the wayang performance would continue for a further three hours. For the broadcasters, the entire performance was too long and convoluted.

Local heritage, global value
There is some irony in the rather shabby treatment granted to the performers on this occasion, for it was not long ago that wayang was given its own space on the world`s cultural stage. In 2003, UNESCO proclaimed `Wayang Indonesia` as a `Masterpiece of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity`. Indonesia`s cultural bureaucrats responded to this recognition: the performers at the Gasibu were advised by the organisers that the performance was being held to honour Indonesia`s commitment to the preservation of humanity`s cultural heritage. But the events of the evening indicated that wayang golek, despite its global value, was encountering difficulties negotiating its status in contemporary West Java and Indonesia.

Wayang golek is still considered an essential social and political media, as well as a mark of Sundanese identity within the national context. It also forms the basis for proud family heritages, as artists typically learn their puppetry skills directly from individual teachers who are often their own fathers. The UNESCO proclamation gave these performers hope of a worldwide audience, and since then, they have tried to have some say in the destiny of wayang golek.

However, they feel it loses out on a national stage dominated by the culture of Central Java. The government, on the other hand, sees wayang golek as not only a distinctive regional genre, but also as something shared by the national Indonesian community. Since Indonesian independence in 1945, national cultural policy has attempted to gather the most important, aesthetic and spectacular traditions of each region as part of a unifying Indonesian culture. These icons are then disseminated throughout the country by the mass media and educational institutions as distinctive hallmarks of the regions – a practice that freezes regional culture and contributes to its standardisation. The UNESCO Proclamation enhances this process: after it was made, the government proposed a national action plan that included the creation of wayang schools, which would dispense standard teaching about wayang with adjustments for each regional `variant`.

Only bait
The Bandung performance illustrates an important paradox. On one hand, the government`s emphasis on heritage legitimises and supports the continued practice of wayang golek. But, on the other hand, it turns the puppet performances into a (profitable) museum exhibit, standardising them and preventing them from evolving.

On that November night, the wayang were simply bait, used to attract the audience`s interest, then all too quickly relegated to the background as ethnic scenery for the transmission of other messages. In the process, this event intended to support and safeguard traditional cultural heritage was turned into a demonstration of the government`s lack of confidence in wayang golek.
__________
Sarah Anais Andrieu (sarahanais@gmail.com) is a PhD Candidate in Social Anthropology and Ethnology at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales (EHESS), Paris where she is writing her doctoral dissertation about the political anthropology of the Sundanese wayang golek and its process of patrimonialisation.

Read More

Memories Of A Ramon Magsaysay Woman-Artist Awardee

By Cecile Guidote-Alvarez

We congratulate the 2009 Ramon Magsaysay Awardees: Krisana Kraisintu, Thailand; Deep Joshi, India; Yu Xiaogang, China; Antonio Oposa Jr., Philippines; Ma Jun, China; and Ka Hsaw Wa, Burma. The recognition of their exceptional work in honor of our former President Ramon Magsaysay has been dubbed the equivalent of the Nobel Prize in Asia.

Watching the RM Ceremonies last August 31, I had a lump in my throat applauding heartily the 2009 awardees whose outstanding services to their countries were vividly presented. Supreme Court Chief Justice Reynato Puno and Board of Trustee Chairman Jaime Augusto Ayala gave their medals. My mind wandered down the memory lane 39 years ago when I stood on stage at a different space—Phil-Am Life auditorium. The time frame and situation were totally different. We were living under Martial law. A day before the ceremony, a top defence official warned me about my then fiancé: “Tell Alvarez to surrender or he‘ll be shot on sight!”

Tension, anxiety, even fear was now mixed with jubilation. Even Doroy Valencia in an appeal to Malacanan to give me a travel permit to serve as a UNESCO consultant of the International Theater Institute‘s US Center to evaluate ethnic programs fell on deaf ears. The reason, ‘Cecile dared to join Ninoy Aquino‘s protest against Imelda Marcos‘ plan of putting up a Cultural Center instead of making operative the law on Commission on Culture signed by President Diosdado Macapagal.‘

At the Senate hearing in 1972, this was my explanation: $67 million of war damage educational fund should not be used for a building by the bay. It should be spent for development and training to evolve and apply nationwide the integration of a relevant arts education curriculum from kindergarten to high school. If construction is the purpose, the fund should be equitably distributed $1 million each to 67 provinces to animate their own architectural design of their respective centers of culture and unleash the creative power of their local community in all artistic disciplines to build skills and confidence, as well as appreciate our history, habitat and heritage to unearth the wealth of cultural diversity, in our country. This approach will help forge our national identity to achieve peace and sustainable development.

After being cited “for leadership of the renaissance in the performing arts giving a new cultural content to popular life,” Belen Abreu, then Magsaysay Foundation director, called me to deliver my response. As expected, under the regime of the conjugal dictatorship where press freedom was absent if not curtailed, my response was neither broadcast nor was it printed.

I was determined with God‘s grace to fulfill my assignment with La Mama Theatre as a base of operation to link our country into the global arena. In spite of the travel ban, I staged a dramatic escape at the airport. For doing so, I was alternately accused as a “CIA agent” and branded a “subversive.” I was reunited with Sonny to whom I was married Matrimonia Consciencia style before he escaped to direct a democratic opposition overseas. In assisting the struggle to restore freedom on the cultural front and providing cultural care-giving services to Filipinos overseas, I was inscribed in the list of “Steak Commandos” in exile. The current vilification campaign undertaken against me is therefore not a new experience but a recycled strategy of character assassination. It is understandable that the Marcos children would protest the executive prerogative of President Gloria Arroyo in proclaiming national artists. Twenty-eight years ago, offered as a sweetener for my husband to stop his opposition to the regime and cut our alignment with Ninoy and Tita Cory was for him to return home and run a ministry with me honored as a national artist and running the Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP). We did not bite the bait.

In her column, Imee Marcos has berated me as an overrated artist, and in an interview castigated me as desecrating the legacy of her parents. This is a classy deception as they cast into oblivion the amendment of the Marcos Proclamation with Executive Order 236 rationalizing an Honors Code and E.O. 435 stating that CCP with NCCA serves in an advisory and not mandatory capacity. The best response to help clarify the disinformation drive mounted vigorously in the media where there is hardly equity of reply is a speech delivered almost four decades ago at the Magsaysay Awards ceremony in March 1973. My commitment stands as articulated: to democratize the right to culture.

“My father died before I was born. He joined the guerrilla movement and dismissed the fears, tears and anxieties of my mother with the urgent explanation of fighting to give us the gift of freedom. I often wondered about him. My father left me a shining legacy of giving, loving and fighting for one‘s convictions. He was medal-less, but he is my hero. Even as a child, as his daughter, I was resolved to define and seek my own service to our people.

At the age of 16, working at the Orthopedic Hospital, I was deeply impressed how a frail, shy girl on crutches, whose hands were sweaty, whose eyes were downcast, who could speak inaudibly only through trembling lips, found herself. She blossomed into a beautiful character on stage, acknowledging the cheers of the other patients who were a most enthusiastic audience. The wonder-therapy for her incredible personality development and social adjustment was drama.

A further realization of theater as a formidable means of influencing thought came into focus while I was working with teenagers as a constructive reaction against the rise of juvenile delinquency. It was noticeable that participants‘ sensitivity, flexibility, imagination, creative facilities and expression were being cultivated as we continuously developed weekly original TV dramas. These dramas functioned not merely as a platform for entertainment, but also as an arena for social action where youth‘s present problems and future goals were discussed to provide consciousness expansion.

Surely, if the scope was broadened, if we had a national theater movement truthfully articulating our people‘s thoughts, feelings, values and aspirations, if we could develop and encourage theater artists to draw from the wealth of indigenous folklore, legends and ethno epics—to understand them, to teach from them and to improve upon them in order to provide a knowledge and understanding of the region‘s temper, tradition, figures of speech, and historical trends yet striving to reflect the time in which we live—then we should also be a nation.

This is where I found meaning to serve, to care and to be involved. My goal became to initiate and develop a network of theater arts programs for enriching curriculum and educational techniques for community development of creative human resources. Such programs could enhance the rehabilitation of workers, farmers and prisoners and provide specialized workshops for out-of-school youth, adult illiterates, the mentally retarded and the physically handicapped. They could also contribute to the integration of our ethnic cultural communities.

My associates and I aspired to provide the necessary high caliber program to encourage, train, promote, disseminate and coordinate professional excellence, artistic skills, research, meaningful expression and experiments within the context of the indigenous Philippine cultural heritage and the richly varied Asian theater traditions. Our movement aimed to build bridges of goodwill to the rest of the world, particularly in the absence of diplomatic arrangements or where political negotiations remained unsuccessful.

In the face of such great objectives and so little finances, a superior type of manpower rose to the challenge as artists were inspired to work for a newer, more vibrant Philippine theater.

It‘s most heart-warming for us that the Ramon Magsaysay Award Foundation has manifested faith in and now gives testimony to the enormous power of theater arts for the public good in our country.

The joy of this Award is shared by all who unselfishly gave their time, talent and energies, and lent encouraging support to the concerted struggle to establish a theater, not for the coterie and the elite, but for the masses— drawing meaning and power from the lives of Filipinos, speaking in the language of our people. The honor belongs to all in Philippine Educational Theater Association (PETA) who joined in the determination to displace the false attitudes attached to theater arts as personal exhibitionism and social frivolity by projecting theater arts as public service, effectively applying it as a creative force in evolving and strengthening nationhood and advancing our national development, complementarily utilizing it as a dynamic vehicle for promoting regional friendship and cooperation, as well as international understanding and peace.

Avenues have been opened and directions set with efforts for a Central Institute of Theater Arts in Southeast Asia and a responsible position in the Third World Project of the International Theater Institute. But the search for and creation of a vital theater that meets the needs of our people is a continuing lifetime process. To this vision we are pledged. It is an art that relies upon the work of many collaborators, united and disciplined but free in order to thrive.

We can only express our deep appreciation to the Ramon Magsaysay Award Foundation for its interest, concern and attention through a strengthening of our commitment. Please know that the Award has given us more courage and greater impatience to tap and guide the vast potentials of our people so that, eventually, the curtains will rise everywhere in the country on theater at its best—”a factory of thought, a prompter of conscience, an elucidator of conduct, an armory against despair, dullness and repression, a temple of the ascent of man.”

In August 1972, Cecile Guidote at 28 became the youngest Filipina to receive the Ramon Magsaysay Outstanding Asian Award for Public Service in the Arts. It was five years after she founded the Philippine Educational Theatre Association and organized the 1st Third World Theatre Festival and Conference for the Unesco International Theatre Institute. She was also bestowed with the Earthsavers DREAMS Ensemble the Unesco Artists for Peace Award and the UN Human Rights Day Award for Theatrical Innovation by the International Fund for Free Expression.

Read More

Whose Is It Anyway?

By Dzulkifli Abdul Razak

The recent spat over the cultural claims by Indonesia offers another dimension on the understanding of the 1Malaysia concept.

First and above all, it boils down to our weakness, if not failure, to articulate what precisely is Malaysian culture, which now assumes a rather amorphous dimension given the multicultural dimensions of the Malaysian cultural horizon.

If it is to be "Truly Asia", then which Asia? Including Indonesia? Not any more it seems.

Previously, a Malaysian of a Javanese descent, for example, is deemed to make up part of the Malaysian culture, but now this can be challenged by our neighbours, just as in the case of a Balinese dancer who appeared in the fateful Enigmatic Malaysia programme on the Discovery channel.

The fact that apologies have been extended for such a "mistake" reaffirms that the cultural heritage of Indonesian descendants in Malaysia -- from the Minangkabau to the Javanese and more -- are anything but Malaysian, at least culturally speaking.

And by extension they are identified as Malaysian Javanese, and so on, rather than Javanese Malaysian, or anything similar to that of African Americans.

Meaning to say, they are Americans first, and the African bit is a mere variation of the dominant American culture; and therefore, they have nothing to apologise for.

On the contrary, following our apologies over the Balinese dance incident, the implications are the opposite, suggesting a tremendous consequent to the dominant Malaysian culture itself: if there is such a thing.

To some Indonesians, Malaysians have no indigenous culture; everything is borrowed, now deemed as "stolen".

Otherwise, under the context of 1Malaysia`s "unity in diversity" this is just it, namely Malaysian culture is the sum of the potpourri of many cultures belonging to each descendant it represents.

They are not in any way "stolen" or "borrowed" rather they are just Malaysian given the diversity of its population. Just like there can be a Javanese Malaysian, so too the culture.

With the recent vehement Indonesian protests, resulting in apologies being tendered, they strongly signalled that this is no longer possible. Indonesian culture in all its shades, in fact belongs to Indonesia.

It then brings us back to the basic question: what is Malaysian culture? Incidentally, "Melayu" is just one of the many ethnicities that makes up Indonesia.

We need to be careful in assuming the role of the Malay culture as such as the dominant culture for Malaysia, lest we run the same risk again.

The Nusantara slant somehow does not apply here, amidst the oft-repeated claims of being "serumpun".

In a similar vein, should China and India, for example, adopt the same attitude as Indonesia (which is not inconceivable), then the Malaysian culture will be really in a state of flux.

Even though it might not happen at all, the principle is the same. After all, we still prefer to identify ourselves as Chinese Malaysians and Indian Malaysians, and by the same logic, it is the cultures of the Chinese (read: China) and of the Indians (read: India, perhaps Tamil Nadu).

What part of it, therefore, makes up the Malaysian culture remains to be answered.

That the performers are citizens of Malaysia do not necessarily make their culture a Malaysian one. More likely it remains a Chinese or Indian culture performed by a Malaysian, who could be a Kadazan.

In other words, the "unity in diversity" 1Malaysia idea needs to be revisited, as the "potpourri" model of culture which is made up of a blended "scent" is no longer a tenable argument, at least for now.

Of course, it is not confined just to dances, but includes songs as well (remember late 2007, Malaysia was to be sued for using traditional Indonesian songs), though the latter case is more straightforward.

An Indonesian song sung by others would still belong to Indonesia, whether or not the lyrics are translated. And so, too, the other facets of the cultures.

The Indonesian culture and tourism minister made this clear when he wrote a protest note last week to Malaysia citing the violation of the 2007 agreement to honour each other`s cultural heritage.

Better late than never, the sensible thing to do is to begin delineating in earnest our national culture that we have taken for granted for too long. In the wake of all this, the Indonesians are doing the same, too.

Of late, the effort to declare what are the Malaysian kuih is a step in the right direction, though we have barely started the process.

We need to do more so that others do not claim (if not steal) our local flowers and fruits as theirs to be exported, let alone the songs and dances.

So far we have been civil but clearly this not the way forward in the realm of culture, ironically.
__________
The writer is vice-chancellor of Universiti Sains Malaysia. He can be contacted at vc@usm.my

Read More
-

Arsip Blog

Recent Posts