A good friend of mine just went back from Kansas University to pursue her Master’s Degree. She told me some interesting experiences of hers. One of them is ‘safe ride’ facility provided by the municipal government of Kansas City. My friend said the latest city bus was operated around 22.30. When someone wanted to go home later than that, he/she could call ‘safe ride’ and a car would come and take him/her home. It applied from anywhere in the city, and the ride given was to be back home. My friend made use of that service several times when she was too absorbed by her activities in the library of Kansas University that opened until 2.30am.
I was amazed because it showed the good will of the government to protect the citizens.
Compare it to what happens in Indonesia. Some regions issued bylaws claiming to “protect” women while in the practice they even made women as targets for crimes because of some things; such as women were not allowed to go out after 10pm. If a woman were still on the street late at night, she would easily be accused as prostitute, or as a lawbreaker.
If the government really wants to protect women from criminals, especially women whose job or activities make them still hang around on the street, for example to wait for a public transportation, why doesn’t the government provide service such as ‘safe ride’?
PT56 23.20 160708
Saturday, July 19, 2008
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Having Children
Having children is one of some other most coveted things in Indonesian culture. I am not sure whether it is closely related to religious teachings since Indonesia is well-known as one country where the majority of the people are religious. In fact, to adhere a religion in Indonesia is a must if someone doesn’t want to be marginalized.
Therefore, no need to wonder if a newly married couple wants to have a baby very much; moreover for those who have been married for quite a long time. It is not clear though whether they want to have a baby because they want to have a regeneration in their family—maybe to continue their family name; or to do one religious teaching—perhaps to make the religion not run out of adherents because of course the parents will teach their babies the same religion and will not easily let them convert; to have “investment” in their old age—for example to take care of them when they are elderly, or to give them financial support after they undergo physical degeneration so that they are incapable to earn money; or just a “trivial” thing—to be considered ‘normal’ and ‘happy’ by society.
No matter the reason is, ‘having children’ idea has made some people become victims in Indonesia.
Firstly is a woman who doesn’t get pregnant soon after she is married. People around her will incessantly question her about, “When will you expect a baby to come in your family?” To some extent, it will really bother her psychologically. She will get tired of the question and probably she will blame herself for not getting pregnant soon. The worst thing is when the husband accuses her to be incapable to get pregnant and decides to marry another woman—Indonesian gender-biased law ‘supports’ men to do this psychological oppression toward women.
Secondly is children who were born in a family where the parents do not realize that (to borrow Gibran’s idea) the children do not belong to the parents. The parents will make the children doll to fulfil their dream; such as to choose an education the parents want, to choose a job the parents possibly used to dream but could not make it.
Some unlucky children were born from parents who in fact do not really want them; they just want to conform to society’s norm—after getting married, to be categorized ‘normal’ and ‘happy’ family, they ‘produce’ children. Unfortunately, they are psychologically immature so that they don’t take care of them well. They even sometimes think that children are just burdens. You can name some examples of this category by yourselves.
*****
Around a year ago, I got an email from a friend who confided in me about this having babies thing. She complained and accused that God was being unfair. She said that she was psychologically and financially prepared to take care of a baby. However, she still didn’t get pregnant although she was already married since 1999. On the contrary, her sister in law even got three babies although she and the husband were not financially enough. As a result, she didn’t take care of the babies well (she was not psychologically mature, she was not ready to be a mother, not ready with the responsibilities, she also didn’t equip herself with some knowledge how to raise babies well). From financial aspect, my friend’s husband—the elder brother of my friend’s sister in law—had to support, such as to pay the Caesar operation the sister had to undergo to deliver the second and third babies, to buy milk every month, to help provide small business to augment the income, etc.
“God is really unfair. I am more psychologically ready and financially safe. My age is already in the middle of thirties. I haven’t got a baby yet. But why did God give my sister in law another baby while in fact she already has two babies?” This was what she wrote in the email to me.
To reply her email—to appease her high emotion—I cited what Ayu Utami said in one article in her book SI PARASIT LAJANG. There are three most coveted things by Indonesian people; they are having an established job, getting married (more important thing is having a responsible and loving spouse), and having children. By God she was given two out of those three things: an established job and a responsible and loving husband. Her husband also was a very supportive person. His idea about having children in a marriage is something certain due to the sex a married couple regularly has. He does not really adore having children.
The fact that people like to compare what they have with what other people have to measure whether they are lucky or unlucky, I compared her to me. “From those three things, I only have one—a child. I do have a job but this is not really an established one, and I don’t have a spouse.
Maybe she saw the “truth” in what I said to her, she no longer complained about her child-less to me anymore.
PT56 22.00 130708
Therefore, no need to wonder if a newly married couple wants to have a baby very much; moreover for those who have been married for quite a long time. It is not clear though whether they want to have a baby because they want to have a regeneration in their family—maybe to continue their family name; or to do one religious teaching—perhaps to make the religion not run out of adherents because of course the parents will teach their babies the same religion and will not easily let them convert; to have “investment” in their old age—for example to take care of them when they are elderly, or to give them financial support after they undergo physical degeneration so that they are incapable to earn money; or just a “trivial” thing—to be considered ‘normal’ and ‘happy’ by society.
No matter the reason is, ‘having children’ idea has made some people become victims in Indonesia.
Firstly is a woman who doesn’t get pregnant soon after she is married. People around her will incessantly question her about, “When will you expect a baby to come in your family?” To some extent, it will really bother her psychologically. She will get tired of the question and probably she will blame herself for not getting pregnant soon. The worst thing is when the husband accuses her to be incapable to get pregnant and decides to marry another woman—Indonesian gender-biased law ‘supports’ men to do this psychological oppression toward women.
Secondly is children who were born in a family where the parents do not realize that (to borrow Gibran’s idea) the children do not belong to the parents. The parents will make the children doll to fulfil their dream; such as to choose an education the parents want, to choose a job the parents possibly used to dream but could not make it.
Some unlucky children were born from parents who in fact do not really want them; they just want to conform to society’s norm—after getting married, to be categorized ‘normal’ and ‘happy’ family, they ‘produce’ children. Unfortunately, they are psychologically immature so that they don’t take care of them well. They even sometimes think that children are just burdens. You can name some examples of this category by yourselves.
*****
Around a year ago, I got an email from a friend who confided in me about this having babies thing. She complained and accused that God was being unfair. She said that she was psychologically and financially prepared to take care of a baby. However, she still didn’t get pregnant although she was already married since 1999. On the contrary, her sister in law even got three babies although she and the husband were not financially enough. As a result, she didn’t take care of the babies well (she was not psychologically mature, she was not ready to be a mother, not ready with the responsibilities, she also didn’t equip herself with some knowledge how to raise babies well). From financial aspect, my friend’s husband—the elder brother of my friend’s sister in law—had to support, such as to pay the Caesar operation the sister had to undergo to deliver the second and third babies, to buy milk every month, to help provide small business to augment the income, etc.
“God is really unfair. I am more psychologically ready and financially safe. My age is already in the middle of thirties. I haven’t got a baby yet. But why did God give my sister in law another baby while in fact she already has two babies?” This was what she wrote in the email to me.
To reply her email—to appease her high emotion—I cited what Ayu Utami said in one article in her book SI PARASIT LAJANG. There are three most coveted things by Indonesian people; they are having an established job, getting married (more important thing is having a responsible and loving spouse), and having children. By God she was given two out of those three things: an established job and a responsible and loving husband. Her husband also was a very supportive person. His idea about having children in a marriage is something certain due to the sex a married couple regularly has. He does not really adore having children.
The fact that people like to compare what they have with what other people have to measure whether they are lucky or unlucky, I compared her to me. “From those three things, I only have one—a child. I do have a job but this is not really an established one, and I don’t have a spouse.
Maybe she saw the “truth” in what I said to her, she no longer complained about her child-less to me anymore.
PT56 22.00 130708
A Wife's Place
“A wife must always be beside the husband” is a very common and taken-for-granted idea in the patriarchal culture. Although this is considered quite obsolete in this era, moreover by feminists, I believe many people still adhere to it. Therefore, it is very easy to find a woman who gives up her job after getting married because her husband—who happens to work out of town, or out of island—asks her to be by his side.
Several weeks ago, a neighbour was seen here while in fact several months ago I heard that she moved to Kalimantan, to follow her husband who worked there. Her mother said, “She didn’t feel at home there. Not many things could she do so she easily felt bored.”
“How could she say she felt bored? She had an honourable duty there, to accompany her husband!” This was my mother’s comment. FYI, my mother was taken to Semarang by my dad five days after they got married in 1962. Despite the fact they were cousins, they barely knew each other. I once told her that she was very lucky because my dad was a very good man so that she was really in the ”right hands” after she was taken away from her loving parents. That’s why it is understandable if she completely agrees with the aforementioned idea, “a wife must always be beside the husband.”
To respond her comment above, I asked whether that neighbour of ours worked before she moved to Kalimantan. She did. So, it was very easy to know why she was bored in the somewhat isolated area. She was accustomed to being busy working, and suddenly she was forced to be idle. Not all women were born to have a housewife instinct, I suppose, so it must be understood if some of them could not find enjoyment being a “Stepford Wife”, who feels excited to do all household chores and become the best servant for the husband and children, as well as become submissive.
Perhaps that neighbour of mine could not get enjoyment being a Stepford wife.
The second reason was it was hard for women who used to work and get her own money and suddenly she became financially dependent. This would be worse if the husband were stingy, calculating money he gives the wife every month and does not really believe in the way the wife manages the money.
Agreeing with what I said, my mom then cited an example. In one community she joins, (she mostly joins religious groups, besides some gatherings in the neighbourhood), several months ago the members planned to have a uniform. However, when discussing the cost of the uniform to make, one of the members desperately said, “It is difficult for me to make it. It depends on my husband’s generosity, because the money is his. He usually doesn’t agree if I want to buy new clothes.” The woman used to work. She stopped working after getting married because her husband asked her to be a full housewife.
I remembered the first wife of my brother. When they got married, she worked as a cashier in one bank. For that, she often went home late, around 9pm while my brother arrived home at 5pm the latest. After the bank got bankrupt, she became a full housewife. She didn’t look for another job because she said she wanted to focus on trying having a baby. I believe it was not my brother’s idea but hers due to Indonesian culture that adores having kids in a marriage. Some time after that, my brother opened a “playstation” rental. She seemed happy when counting the money she got on one day, and said to me, “I used to work and have my own money. After being laid off, I often felt depressed because I didn’t make my own money. The money I get everyday from this small business really makes me happy although only a little.”
Despite the fact she suffered from a physical disease, I sometimes thought that the depression she had by being a full housewife and coveting to have a baby helped “kill” her in 2004. My brother married her in 1992.
I think the two reasons aforementioned were enough to make my neighbour go back to her hometown. Moreover after knowing the possibility of the quiet and not enough entertainment in the city where her husband lives, one perhaps had better understand why a woman chooses to leave her husband and decides to have a long distance marriage.
I reminded my mom that she had a different background. She used to be very young when marrying my dad. She didn’t have any experience to earn her own money. Besides, she belongs to a ‘housewife type’ so she found enjoyment to do household chores. And the most important thing is: everything changes. The era has changed too.
PT56 19.59 130708
Several weeks ago, a neighbour was seen here while in fact several months ago I heard that she moved to Kalimantan, to follow her husband who worked there. Her mother said, “She didn’t feel at home there. Not many things could she do so she easily felt bored.”
“How could she say she felt bored? She had an honourable duty there, to accompany her husband!” This was my mother’s comment. FYI, my mother was taken to Semarang by my dad five days after they got married in 1962. Despite the fact they were cousins, they barely knew each other. I once told her that she was very lucky because my dad was a very good man so that she was really in the ”right hands” after she was taken away from her loving parents. That’s why it is understandable if she completely agrees with the aforementioned idea, “a wife must always be beside the husband.”
To respond her comment above, I asked whether that neighbour of ours worked before she moved to Kalimantan. She did. So, it was very easy to know why she was bored in the somewhat isolated area. She was accustomed to being busy working, and suddenly she was forced to be idle. Not all women were born to have a housewife instinct, I suppose, so it must be understood if some of them could not find enjoyment being a “Stepford Wife”, who feels excited to do all household chores and become the best servant for the husband and children, as well as become submissive.
Perhaps that neighbour of mine could not get enjoyment being a Stepford wife.
The second reason was it was hard for women who used to work and get her own money and suddenly she became financially dependent. This would be worse if the husband were stingy, calculating money he gives the wife every month and does not really believe in the way the wife manages the money.
Agreeing with what I said, my mom then cited an example. In one community she joins, (she mostly joins religious groups, besides some gatherings in the neighbourhood), several months ago the members planned to have a uniform. However, when discussing the cost of the uniform to make, one of the members desperately said, “It is difficult for me to make it. It depends on my husband’s generosity, because the money is his. He usually doesn’t agree if I want to buy new clothes.” The woman used to work. She stopped working after getting married because her husband asked her to be a full housewife.
I remembered the first wife of my brother. When they got married, she worked as a cashier in one bank. For that, she often went home late, around 9pm while my brother arrived home at 5pm the latest. After the bank got bankrupt, she became a full housewife. She didn’t look for another job because she said she wanted to focus on trying having a baby. I believe it was not my brother’s idea but hers due to Indonesian culture that adores having kids in a marriage. Some time after that, my brother opened a “playstation” rental. She seemed happy when counting the money she got on one day, and said to me, “I used to work and have my own money. After being laid off, I often felt depressed because I didn’t make my own money. The money I get everyday from this small business really makes me happy although only a little.”
Despite the fact she suffered from a physical disease, I sometimes thought that the depression she had by being a full housewife and coveting to have a baby helped “kill” her in 2004. My brother married her in 1992.
I think the two reasons aforementioned were enough to make my neighbour go back to her hometown. Moreover after knowing the possibility of the quiet and not enough entertainment in the city where her husband lives, one perhaps had better understand why a woman chooses to leave her husband and decides to have a long distance marriage.
I reminded my mom that she had a different background. She used to be very young when marrying my dad. She didn’t have any experience to earn her own money. Besides, she belongs to a ‘housewife type’ so she found enjoyment to do household chores. And the most important thing is: everything changes. The era has changed too.
PT56 19.59 130708
Women's Voice
“Suara kaum minoritas elite juga bisa dengan mudah kita jumpai di media semacam Jurnal Perempuan. Meskipun namanya menggunakan perempuan, justru terjadi dekonstruksi makna perempuan oleh Jurnal Perempuan.”
(The voice of elite minority community can be easily found in some media such as Jurnal Perempuan – Journal for Women. Although there is the word ‘women’ in it, in fact Jurnal Perempuan even deconstructed the significant meaning of the word “women”.)
I got the above statement from one article forwarded to Jurnal Perempuan mailing list some weeks ago. It was stated by a woman who was on the other (or even contradictory) boat of women “warriors” labelled as feminists. I remembered the first time I read Jurnal Perempuan (JP) around 2003; the first time I learned there was another ‘voice’ uttered by “women” that was different from “women’s voices” I read/heard from some other medias I had known for decades. I bet I recognized the ‘voice’ expressed by JP as the “real” voice of women – free from patriarchal culture – because at that time I was assigned to read Gilligan’s book “In a Different Voice” by one lecturer of American Studies Gadjah Mada University.
The “voice” expressed by JP was in fact the answer of so many questions having crowded my mind since I was a kid; such as women were not the weaker sex, Islam – the religion I have adhered since I was born – was not the religion that discriminated women because in fact the people – you can label them ulema or Islamic scholars – behind the religion were the ones who discriminated women by producing gender biased interpretation of Alquran and hadiths, etc.
Therefore I do agree if someone says that articles published at JP ‘deconstruct’ what patriarchal culture believes, especially on women’s ‘destiny’. Is it to corner women? The answer is a big NO. It is even to lift women’s position!!
*****
Several days ago I had a long talk with a good friend of mine who just went back from Kansas University. She claimed that she has believed in an equal relationship between husband and wife because her parents gave a good example towards the children. I told her that my parents also didn’t differentiate the treatments towards the children. My late father recognized the intelligence in me more than my big brother, that’s why he supported my education very highly because he didn’t want to see me end up as an exclusive cook for the husband and children. (So I ‘read’ the attention he gave me.) The way my parents divided household chores among the children also without gender stereotypes.
“So, where did you get the idea that a woman had to dedicate all her life for the husband as well as children and be submissive with whatever the husband does? Be the only one who takes care of all household chores, serve the husband, etc to provide ‘heaven’ on earth for the family? Therefore you felt like finding a very precious jewellery after you got to know the perspective conveyed by JP?” She shot me.
I could not answer that killing question.
That made me keep thinking about it and keep trying to find the ‘traces’ that resulted in a deep pain in my heart.
The first possibility was the indoctrination I got when I was at Islamic elementary school. I believe my teachers at that time cited many misogynist interpretations to indoctrinate the students. Besides, they also said there were no dialectics in religion. So? “Take it or leave it.” Read it as “take it if you want to enter heaven. Leave it if you want to accompany Satans in hell.” And usually the teachers frightened the young kids about hell.
I got the second possibility after for a few days trying hard to remember again my childhood and teenage years. I assume it was the beginning moment I shaped myself to be one victim in this patriarchal society because I wanted to fulfil the requirements to be a “true” woman. I remembered at that time my mom subscribed – or at least bought regularly – one magazine claimed for women. Since my reading was my hobby, I also often read some articles or stories – short stories or novella – in the magazine. I still remembered many articles and stories gave illustration of how to be a “true” and “good” woman, how to attract men, etc. The indoctrination of how to be a pious woman I got from my elementary school education plus the shaping of how to be a “true” and “good” woman viewed from patriarchal perspective amazingly shaped me to be a perfect example of Cinderella complex sufferer.
However, it was ruined by choosing a wrong guy to be my Lovely Star’s father.
The perfect example was broken into pieces.
Therefore when finding out my own “voice” I collected from scratch by my own readings – one of them is absolutely JP – I was like a woman warrior who “woke up late”. However, I do believe in an axiom saying that it is better late than never.
I still have to celebrate my awakening: by writing in my blog.
LL TBL 15.33 120708
Bike to Work
“I am not sure if you will succeed in gathering many people to join that b2w community,” this was Angie’s pessimistic comment when seeing the flyer of ‘bike to work’.
I said nothing to hear that. I am more optimistic than she is, I assume.
However, Angie’s comment reminded me of one nineteenth-century American thinker, Henry David Thoreau with his experience living around a pond, all alone, away from ‘civilized society’, that he wrote in his book entitled WALDEN. He did that to criticize American government that he thought damaged the environment by building trans-continental railway during the decade of 1860s. Despite the fact that the railway would help improve the transportation so that it would also result in good business plus profit, smoke coming out of the train would absolutely damage the environment. Thoreau, the true environmentalist, extremely objected the railway building. But what could a Thoreau do to stop it? Even, his good friend as well as teacher, Emerson, only expressed his objection toward the then government’s so-called crazy idea. Emerson did not do any real action to show it.
Bike-to-work idea itself is great and easy to do. This is also obviously more possible to carry out rather than Thoreau’s idea to leave the city he lived to live in a forest, living like a hermit, away from other people, only consuming anything he found in the forest. I believe that it is an absurd thing to do what Thoreau did in this internet era. Do you agree?
So, why is it difficult to attract people’s attention to join b2w community? (This is the result of seeing some people’s reluctant reaction when getting the flyer of b2w during ‘fun bike’ held in Semarang on June 15, 2008) It is essential that we do care for our environment, isn’t it?
I think the answer is on Indonesian people’s way of life. We are ‘popular’ to have high-class lifestyle. Have you ever heard how Indonesian government officials went to a building where they would get debt from some debtor countries? While the officials from the debtor countries came by a simple car, Indonesian officials came by a luxurious car.
Japan that used to colonize Indonesia from 1942-1945 successfully rose from the crumble due to the bomb to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It has become one giant country in Asia. But look at the people’s way of living. Although many of them have private cars, they would prefer to go by public transportation. In Indonesia, people would prefer to show off their ‘property’ by driving cars or riding motorcycles that probably they haven’t fully paid. They would rather expose their prestige. Likewise, other people would prefer to show their respect to people driving cars rather than people riding motorcycles. (Try going to a mall or supermarket close to your dwelling place by bike and see how the parking person will treat you!)
Last Saturday morning on my way to my workplace located 11 kilometers away from my dwelling place, when passing Gombel ‘hill’, suddenly I daydreamed to see other motorists riding a bike. No vehicles on the road but bikes and buses (as public transportation). I daydreamed not to breathe polluted air.
PT56 21.31 150608
Thursday, June 19, 2008
The Zoo Story
Several weeks ago I assigned my class to read THE ZOO STORY, one-act play written by Edward Albee. This was written in 1958 in New York but its premiere performance was occurred at the Theater Werkstatt in Berlin on September28, 1959. It was performed on Broadway on January 14, 1960. The story is about two characters, Peter and Jerry, who meet accidentally in one bench in The Central Park. The main conflict is built while the two are talking to each other. What happens at the end of the play oftentimes startles the audience.
To dissect the play together in my class, I gave four questions to lead the discussion.
1.What is the main conflict of the story?
2.What kind of personality traits do the two characters have?
3.How do their family backgrounds differ from each other?
4.What is your reaction when coming to the end of the play?
At first one student complained to me, “If you categorize this play into comedy, I don’t think I find funny aspects in it. Or is it due to my low capability in English?”
When I asked her how she perceived the story of the play, she simply said, “The story is very weird.”
The play is indeed weird; that’s why literary critics categorized it into ‘absurd play’. The word ‘absurd’ itself means “plainly not true, logical, or sensible; so contrary to reason that it is laughable; foolish; ridiculous.” The story to some extent is also pathetic.
Another student then said that probably this kind of story was very much impossible to happen in Indonesia but it was absolutely possible to happen in America.
“Why is that? Which part of the story do you think is impossible to happen here?” I asked her.
I suspected that she didn’t finish reading the whole story so that she answered my question just by mentioning the fact that Peter’s family had two cats and two parakeets. “It is indeed a common thing for Indonesian people to have pets. But you know, pets in Indonesia are just pets. Animals. They don’t really mean a lot. In America, as far as I know there is always a very strong emotional relationship between people and their pets.” Meanwhile I expected that she would answer my question by appointing the weird conversation between Jerry and Peter.
Let’s take one example. After a little bit ‘small talk’ about going north, Jerry asked Peter, “Do you mind if we talk?”
In Indonesia, especially in small towns, when two people meet accidentally in a park, or anywhere else, they will just talk, without asking, “Do you mind if we talk?” They will just talk casual things though, to show hospitality. However, as some critics have said, at the very beginning of the time when Albee had this play published, they did not understand what Albee actually wanted to convey to public.
In the following discussion, we talked about different family backgrounds Peter and Jerry had. Peter was married, had two daughters, and had an established job in a publishing company. On the contrary, Jerry was single, no steady job, living in an indecent tenement with an abusive landlady who had a crazy dog that liked attacking Jerry playfully. Jerry also came from a broken unhappy family.
This contradictory family background absolutely made them have different personality traits. Peter was an established man, educated, able to control his emotion quite well. Jerry seemed somewhat insane with his almost unbelievable story about his landlady and the crazy dog. Therefore I understood when my students said that Jerry seemed to envy Peter’s seemingly happy life.
No one expected to find someone dying at the end of the story because from the very beginning, the play just showed two men talking about unimportant things in their life. My students said that Jerry was too much to provoke Peter so that Peter lost his common sense in facing him although he seemed careful.
The first question—about the main conflict of the story—was not answered in the discussion. I opined that in fact Jerry was already desperate about his unhappy life. He needed someone to “help” him commit suicide. Peter was just the right person on the wrong place. Jerry succeeded in provoking Peter so that he did what Jerry ‘planned’: to hold the knife on his hand, enabling Jerry to impale on it.
Why did Jerry need someone else’s help to commit suicide? He wanted to share his unhappiness to someone else he assumed to have a happy life—in that decade, to be married, have kids and a good job were ‘requirements’ to be lead a happy life.
Peter’s life would never be the same again as before he encountered a crazy, desperate man who involved him in his death.
What did Albee want to convey to the audience? I assume that he wanted to criticize American values that started to worship wealth and did not care of the neighborhood.
PT56 13.33 190608
To dissect the play together in my class, I gave four questions to lead the discussion.
1.What is the main conflict of the story?
2.What kind of personality traits do the two characters have?
3.How do their family backgrounds differ from each other?
4.What is your reaction when coming to the end of the play?
At first one student complained to me, “If you categorize this play into comedy, I don’t think I find funny aspects in it. Or is it due to my low capability in English?”
When I asked her how she perceived the story of the play, she simply said, “The story is very weird.”
The play is indeed weird; that’s why literary critics categorized it into ‘absurd play’. The word ‘absurd’ itself means “plainly not true, logical, or sensible; so contrary to reason that it is laughable; foolish; ridiculous.” The story to some extent is also pathetic.
Another student then said that probably this kind of story was very much impossible to happen in Indonesia but it was absolutely possible to happen in America.
“Why is that? Which part of the story do you think is impossible to happen here?” I asked her.
I suspected that she didn’t finish reading the whole story so that she answered my question just by mentioning the fact that Peter’s family had two cats and two parakeets. “It is indeed a common thing for Indonesian people to have pets. But you know, pets in Indonesia are just pets. Animals. They don’t really mean a lot. In America, as far as I know there is always a very strong emotional relationship between people and their pets.” Meanwhile I expected that she would answer my question by appointing the weird conversation between Jerry and Peter.
Let’s take one example. After a little bit ‘small talk’ about going north, Jerry asked Peter, “Do you mind if we talk?”
In Indonesia, especially in small towns, when two people meet accidentally in a park, or anywhere else, they will just talk, without asking, “Do you mind if we talk?” They will just talk casual things though, to show hospitality. However, as some critics have said, at the very beginning of the time when Albee had this play published, they did not understand what Albee actually wanted to convey to public.
In the following discussion, we talked about different family backgrounds Peter and Jerry had. Peter was married, had two daughters, and had an established job in a publishing company. On the contrary, Jerry was single, no steady job, living in an indecent tenement with an abusive landlady who had a crazy dog that liked attacking Jerry playfully. Jerry also came from a broken unhappy family.
This contradictory family background absolutely made them have different personality traits. Peter was an established man, educated, able to control his emotion quite well. Jerry seemed somewhat insane with his almost unbelievable story about his landlady and the crazy dog. Therefore I understood when my students said that Jerry seemed to envy Peter’s seemingly happy life.
No one expected to find someone dying at the end of the story because from the very beginning, the play just showed two men talking about unimportant things in their life. My students said that Jerry was too much to provoke Peter so that Peter lost his common sense in facing him although he seemed careful.
The first question—about the main conflict of the story—was not answered in the discussion. I opined that in fact Jerry was already desperate about his unhappy life. He needed someone to “help” him commit suicide. Peter was just the right person on the wrong place. Jerry succeeded in provoking Peter so that he did what Jerry ‘planned’: to hold the knife on his hand, enabling Jerry to impale on it.
Why did Jerry need someone else’s help to commit suicide? He wanted to share his unhappiness to someone else he assumed to have a happy life—in that decade, to be married, have kids and a good job were ‘requirements’ to be lead a happy life.
Peter’s life would never be the same again as before he encountered a crazy, desperate man who involved him in his death.
What did Albee want to convey to the audience? I assume that he wanted to criticize American values that started to worship wealth and did not care of the neighborhood.
PT56 13.33 190608
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Nationalism and Religiosity
Last Sunday, June 8, 2008, after interviewing some participants of students exchange (AFS program), I was involved in a chit-chat with some other volunteers. One of them, a middle-aged woman, wearing jilbab, has a Japanese course at her dwelling place. Another one, a man at his mid-thirties, just opened an English course in Semarang some time ago, after he lived in Jakarta for around fifteen years.
There are two main interesting topics we talked.
1. Nationalism
The woman I mentioned above said about the young generations in Indonesia who did not have enough nationalism. One guest teacher she got from Japan encouraged her to evoke nationalism in her students before they go to Japan. (Note: her institution often gives Japanese training for those who will go to Japan to work.) The guest teacher said that the young generations did not have enough nationalism. It was proven from what they said about their own country when they were in Japan.
As a comparison, Japanese young generations, as well as Korean who work in Japan, have high nationalism so that they do not want to talk bad things about their country.
From the way the woman talked about that, and her concern with the low nationalism among the young generations, I concluded that she tended to scold them, without trying to dig out more deeply what caused it. Therefore, sadly I said, “Well, I don’t really blame them. Let’s take a corruption case as an example. What happened if one government official—let’s say a minister—in Japan was found out that he allegedly was involved in a corruption case? He perhaps would resign from his position, or even would do ‘harakiri’. What happened if that happened in Indonesia? Even in Semarang, there is one government official who has been suspected to get involved in a corruption case, he, without shame, still moves on to join the gubernatorial election.”
Feeling concerned about this matter, on Tuesday June 10, I asked one class of mine—there were twelve students present, varying from the second until sixth semester at college—to discuss the cause why nationalism decreased among the young generations. I divided them into three groups. I didn’t tell them what I said in the chit-chat two days before in order that I didn’t ‘interfere’ their way of thinking. Nevertheless, the three groups agreed that one main reason was the leadership crisis among the government officials, it resulted in the young generations’ disappointment toward the government. They felt embarrassed toward Indonesian ‘reputation’ as the most corrupted country.
Some other reasons mentioned were:
Impacts of globalization where the information was not filtered. One example mentioned was when the young generations see a prosperous life in another country, one thing they hardly find in Indonesia nowadays, it will make them dream to live abroad.
Impact of being colonized for some centuries so that we felt inferior toward the colonial country.
Not good educational system, proven by the continuous changing in the curricula every time a new minister of education is elected
Protection from the government toward the citizens is bad.
Disbelieve in our own products
Not preserving our original cultures
Unfortunately, since we didn’t have enough time to discuss, I could not explore more of their answers. I assume, however, it was enough to know the voice of the young generations why they would choose to live abroad, even probably to change their nationality in case they get a good job, good salary and enough facility in another country.
2. Religion
The guy living in Jakarta for more than a decade complained about the impolite behavior among children and teenagers in Jakarta. He mentioned the non-religiosity as one main cause of the bad behavior. One example: during Ramadhan month (the holy fasting month for Muslim), people no longer showed empathy toward other people who perhaps were fasting. Without feeling shy—moreover sinful—people enjoyed having meals in public places. Another example was the bigger tendency for people to have free sex recently without feeling ashamed.
On the contrary, he said, living in Semarang—one much smaller city than the metropolis Jakarta—was much more peaceful. Children and teenagers in Semarang behaved much better than their counterparts in the capital of Indonesia.
“The key, in fact, lies in religious teachings.” He said.
I kept quiet.
Then the woman told us a story one time she got an exchange student from Japan staying at her house. A little chat on religion happened between her and the student in the beginning of their encounter.
She asked: “What is your religion”
The student answered, “I don’t have religion. Should I adhere one religion if I live in Indonesia?”
The woman responded, “Oh, you don’t need to. That’s fine. Forgive my nosy question, please.” (Nana’s note: it seems to me that “what is your religion” has become one very common question asked in the first meeting with someone.)
The student said, “My parents never teach me about religion. They strongly teach me not to harm other people, though.”
The woman commented, (to us, to sum up her chat with the student) “See? In fact it is as simple as that the way Japanese raise their children. Don’t harm other people. And I assume that is the key of all religions.”
Then I simply said, “You know what? In Indonesia, adhering religion is very important, even it is a must, I guess, because we are taught that religious people are better than the non-believers. And many cases happen where religious people think that they even can make use of their religions to do violence to others and they don’t feel ashamed or sinful because they believe they harm other people in the name of God.”
Hearing my saying, the woman nodded solemnly, while the guy smiled, a bit embarrassed. :)
PT56 13.23 110608
There are two main interesting topics we talked.
1. Nationalism
The woman I mentioned above said about the young generations in Indonesia who did not have enough nationalism. One guest teacher she got from Japan encouraged her to evoke nationalism in her students before they go to Japan. (Note: her institution often gives Japanese training for those who will go to Japan to work.) The guest teacher said that the young generations did not have enough nationalism. It was proven from what they said about their own country when they were in Japan.
As a comparison, Japanese young generations, as well as Korean who work in Japan, have high nationalism so that they do not want to talk bad things about their country.
From the way the woman talked about that, and her concern with the low nationalism among the young generations, I concluded that she tended to scold them, without trying to dig out more deeply what caused it. Therefore, sadly I said, “Well, I don’t really blame them. Let’s take a corruption case as an example. What happened if one government official—let’s say a minister—in Japan was found out that he allegedly was involved in a corruption case? He perhaps would resign from his position, or even would do ‘harakiri’. What happened if that happened in Indonesia? Even in Semarang, there is one government official who has been suspected to get involved in a corruption case, he, without shame, still moves on to join the gubernatorial election.”
Feeling concerned about this matter, on Tuesday June 10, I asked one class of mine—there were twelve students present, varying from the second until sixth semester at college—to discuss the cause why nationalism decreased among the young generations. I divided them into three groups. I didn’t tell them what I said in the chit-chat two days before in order that I didn’t ‘interfere’ their way of thinking. Nevertheless, the three groups agreed that one main reason was the leadership crisis among the government officials, it resulted in the young generations’ disappointment toward the government. They felt embarrassed toward Indonesian ‘reputation’ as the most corrupted country.
Some other reasons mentioned were:
Impacts of globalization where the information was not filtered. One example mentioned was when the young generations see a prosperous life in another country, one thing they hardly find in Indonesia nowadays, it will make them dream to live abroad.
Impact of being colonized for some centuries so that we felt inferior toward the colonial country.
Not good educational system, proven by the continuous changing in the curricula every time a new minister of education is elected
Protection from the government toward the citizens is bad.
Disbelieve in our own products
Not preserving our original cultures
Unfortunately, since we didn’t have enough time to discuss, I could not explore more of their answers. I assume, however, it was enough to know the voice of the young generations why they would choose to live abroad, even probably to change their nationality in case they get a good job, good salary and enough facility in another country.
2. Religion
The guy living in Jakarta for more than a decade complained about the impolite behavior among children and teenagers in Jakarta. He mentioned the non-religiosity as one main cause of the bad behavior. One example: during Ramadhan month (the holy fasting month for Muslim), people no longer showed empathy toward other people who perhaps were fasting. Without feeling shy—moreover sinful—people enjoyed having meals in public places. Another example was the bigger tendency for people to have free sex recently without feeling ashamed.
On the contrary, he said, living in Semarang—one much smaller city than the metropolis Jakarta—was much more peaceful. Children and teenagers in Semarang behaved much better than their counterparts in the capital of Indonesia.
“The key, in fact, lies in religious teachings.” He said.
I kept quiet.
Then the woman told us a story one time she got an exchange student from Japan staying at her house. A little chat on religion happened between her and the student in the beginning of their encounter.
She asked: “What is your religion”
The student answered, “I don’t have religion. Should I adhere one religion if I live in Indonesia?”
The woman responded, “Oh, you don’t need to. That’s fine. Forgive my nosy question, please.” (Nana’s note: it seems to me that “what is your religion” has become one very common question asked in the first meeting with someone.)
The student said, “My parents never teach me about religion. They strongly teach me not to harm other people, though.”
The woman commented, (to us, to sum up her chat with the student) “See? In fact it is as simple as that the way Japanese raise their children. Don’t harm other people. And I assume that is the key of all religions.”
Then I simply said, “You know what? In Indonesia, adhering religion is very important, even it is a must, I guess, because we are taught that religious people are better than the non-believers. And many cases happen where religious people think that they even can make use of their religions to do violence to others and they don’t feel ashamed or sinful because they believe they harm other people in the name of God.”
Hearing my saying, the woman nodded solemnly, while the guy smiled, a bit embarrassed. :)
PT56 13.23 110608
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
