Censorship in paradise
Faiza Mardzoeki ; An activist; playwright; theater producer
and director in Indonesia
|
JAKARTA
POST, 07 November 2015
There is no doubt that
Bali is a beautiful place. Lush green rice terraces, created through the hard
work of Balinese farmers, bordered by dense coconut palms and frangipani
trees.
Along the coast, this
is supplemented by wonderful beaches and vast stretches of turquoise seas.
Adding to the beauty, lays what Westerners see as a colorful and exotic
religious and artistic life.
This has been the
foundation for that which defines Bali today: It has become a place where
millions of people from outside Bali, mostly from Australia and other
like-minded countries, take their vacations.
Millions of
holidaymakers go to Bali for leisure and relaxation, for minimal prices, much
less than they would pay if they were to travel in their own country.
It is this context
that defines much of what happens in Bali, especially happenings that involve
foreign holidaymakers — including the Ubud Writers and Readers Festival.
The festival was
initiated following the first Bali bomb in order to help revive tourism in
Bali. And the initiative has, thus far, worked brilliantly, attracting
hundreds of people from outside Indonesia every year to Ubud, helping raise
the town’s profile internationally.
I have twice been
invited to speak in Ubud, both to present the filmed version of my play They
Call Me Nyai Ontosoroh and to address a panel discussing women in literature.
It was a very ambiguous experience.
My partner and I were
accommodated in luxury hotels, surrounded by the stunning beauty of those
rice fields created by thousands of impoverished farmers.
In and around the
festival venues are scores of cafes and restaurants serving delicious
Indonesian and international food.
Cafes are designed to
capture and perpetuate the ambience of Ubud, with beautiful views where possible.
As a holiday
experience, it is pleasant. In addition to the food and the views, you can
wander from one discussion to another, sometimes these events host famous and
interesting writers.
Talks can be on light
and diverting topics or serious and intense ones. If one has heard too much,
there is opportunity to disappear to an alternative cafe to sit and chat with
others who are also taking a break from event activities.
Over the last 10
years, festival organizers have succeeded in attracting high-profile writers,
each presenting differences in political opinion, as well as non-political
writers, to what has now transformed into an internationally famous festival.
Thus, it was very good
news when the festival made the decision to host several sessions as a
platform for discussing the controversial events that occurred between Sept.
30 and Oct. 1, 1965 and the subsequential mass killings of alleged leftists.
In 2014, in Jakarta, I
had presented Nyanyi Sunyi Kembang Genjer (The Silent Song of The Genjer
Flowers) a play I had written about the sufferings and struggle of women who
had been imprisoned, tortured and abused as part of that purge of the Left.
Promoting a humane
public discussion of these events was very important to me. Indeed, many
groups, individuals, lawyers, artists and activists have become increasingly
active around these issues over the last few years, including survivors
themselves.
This was due to climax
this year, the 50th anniversary.
Lawyers and activists
will also launch the International Peoples Tribunal in The Hague, the
Netherlands, in November.
Both part of the
official program as well as at fringe events, the issue had also recently
been taken up by the organizers of Frankfurt Book Fair, where Indonesia had
been the featured country. A number of other events are planned.
To have the issue
highlighted at the Ubud Writers and Readers Festival would have been another
positive development.
However, the program
got caught in the contradictions of Bali’s tourism existence and the
ambiguities of the government’s passivity.
Local police in
Gianjar regency applied pressure on organizers to drop the sessions, placing
the whole festival under threat of being banned, this year and in the future.
[...] there is also a
responsibility, despite tourism, to take up issues of national and local
importance.
Organizers caved in
and withdrew all sessions with “65” in its title or blurb.
Such pressure should
not have been a surprise as harassment of activities connected to discussion
of 1965 had been regular over the past several years.
While the President
Joko “Jokowi” Widodo government has not initiated any tightening of
censorship, it has not sent any signals that it has approved a relaxation of
censorship.
Subsequently, local
authorities feel free to act in a repressive manner, especially when there is
some local support for such repression.
Among the many people,
including myself, who have worked hard to raise the issue of the mass
killings and repression, there has been great disappointment at the
festival’s easy surrender on the issue.
Of course, we can
understand one aspect of this failure to stand strong. Essentially, the
festival is an event providing an interesting and relaxing leisure activity
for holidaymakers — it was not designed to promote any specific political or
cultural issue. It is defined by the holidaying character that has been
developed in Ubud, one that can tempt us all.
That there might be
productive discussions on serious issues is a positive side-effect. Even with
the cancellation of the sessions, there were discussions of “65”.
Activists held side
events in defiance of the police.
However, the
repression and mass killings of 1965 remains the biggest issue of
humanitarian concern and justice in Indonesian history.
Winning an open
discussion of those events, especially in the face of the official state
version of
events that has been
upheld to this day and in the face of hostility from some more conservative
elements of state and society, has been, and still is, a matter that requires
real campaigning and a very serious commitment.
When the festival
decided to hold and promote sessions on 1965, they were duty bound to also
adopt that seriousness and campaigning stance.
Yes, such a commitment
would be in contradiction to the tourism context of the festival — but surely
the organizers realized that from the outset? The tourism context has always
been a source of tension. It has meant that the language of the festival has
always been English, with the result that sessions on Indonesian literature
in the local language are inevitably side-lined, despite efforts to achieve a
better balance.
This tension seemed to
be manifested again in the decision to cancel a discussion on the controversy
surrounding the construction of a luxury villa complex, on reclaimed land, on
the Bali coast.
No doubt the festival
pumps money into the local economy and provides some livelihood but, as an
intellectual and cultural event, there is also a responsibility, despite
tourism, to take up issues of national and local importance.
This is part of
contributing to local progress, even when this means seriously confronting
censorship. ●
|
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar