Upload
misscourage
View
226
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
1/36
AN IMAGINED NATION: STAGING PLURALITY AND UNITY IN MALAYSIA*
By
Prof. Dr. Solehah Ishak
Faculty of Artistic and Creative TechnologyUniversity Technology MARA
Introduction: Nation Building
Malaysia, a British colony for eighty-three years, (figure derived from
1874, the date of official British intervention in Perak), became merdeka
(achieved freedom) on 31st. August 1957. Independence was achieved
through peaceful negotiations based on constitutional compromise
citizenship by right of birth for the different ethnic groups in exchange for
recognition of the special position of the Malays. (Malayan
Constitutional Documents, 1958). In August 1963, Malaysia together with
Singapore and the Borneo States of Sabah and Sarawak formed what is
now called the Federation of Malaysia. As a result of political differences
and misunderstandings due mainly to racial composition, (Mahathir
Mohamed, 1970), Singapore separated from the Federation of Malaysia
in 1965.* Paper presented at the New Directions in Humanities Conference, June 8-11, 2011 in
Granada, Spain.
1
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
2/36
In Malaysia there are three main ethnic groups: Malays form
50.4%, Chinese 23.7%, Indians 7.01% and others 7.8% (est. 2004 data).
The division that the British first created still remains: the Chinese have
more economic power and with independence the Malays have more
political power. As long as the Chinese did not demand more political
influence and the Malays did not want more economic power, these two
groups were able to co-exist peacefully.
Throughout Malaya/sias history, the state has been involved in
constructing and creating a truly harmonious Malaysian identity in which
its ethnically mixed population can be hybridized into a cohesive,
national, imagined community (to borrow Ben Andersons phrase)
which can transcend the limitations of its own multi-ethnicity. One of the
best ways to do it is through language which must reflect not only the
independence from a colonial past but must serve to reflect the nations
independence to conquer new frontiers. The English language was to be
replaced by a national language, Bahasa Melayu. The Malay language
was designated in the Malayan constitution as the national language of
the country. Article 152(1) of the Constitution stipulates that the National
language shall be the Malay language and shall be in such scripts as
Parliament may by law provide.
2
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
3/36
In 1960, the government launched National Language Week
which later became National Language Month. The use of Bahasa
Melayu by non-Malays was specially stressed. Under these changing
circumstances the focus turned again on the National Language which
was seen as the National Unifier.
In Malaysia, Bahasa Melayu was chosen not only because it was
verso to the English language, but also because it has become the
lingua franca throughout Malaysia, to the lowest stratum of society. But
the Malay language is tied in with the interest of a major ethnic group,
the Malays. Over the years we should note the change in terminology.
What first started as Bahasa Melayu (the Malay language) gave way to
Bahasa Kebangsaan ( the National language), which finally, after the
May, 13 1969 racial riots, became Bahasa Malaysia (the Malaysia
language), to lessen its association with one particular race and to make
it into a more encompassing Malaysian entity, as belonging to all races.
The dilemma becomes more pronounced now because the English
language is not only widely used but has in the new millennium been
empowered to also become the lingua franca of the Malaysian nation.
Fluency in the English language is now a pre-requisite and a mark of
success and achievement.
3
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
4/36
The issue of the National language has to be fought on many
fronts: on a national, post-colonial front where the national language is
seen and encouraged to be used to free oneself from the shackles of a
colonial past; on a multi-ethnic front where it must be accepted as a
national unifier and now with ICT and a borderless world, it must be
fought on a global front and must confront its colonial nemesis once
again for English is widely used and accepted as a global language. In
this post-modern era, Malay leaders have also realized the importance of
the English language to be mastered by Malaysians of all races. The
issue of the standing of the National language is still cause for concern
by Malay nationalists who fought so hard for Bahasa Melayu to be
accepted and used by all levels of society. This is an ongoing battle and
it is hoped that the supremacy of the National language will remain
unchallenged even as Malaysians gear themselves to be inhabitants of
a borderless world.
National Culture
4
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
5/36
Malaysias hybridity also entails the need for political, social, economic
and above all cultural re-engineering to ensure an imagined community
of Malaysian homogeneity. This is an important part of nation building.
The state has realized this crucial need for cultural intervention even in
the early post-merdeka days. Thus it was that from 30 December 1957
until 2 January 1958 the first National Malay Congress was held in
Malacca, where it was unanimously accepted that the Malay culture
would be the basis for the National Culture. In 1960, the first Prime
Minister of Malaya/sia Tunku Abdul Rahman proclaimed and reiterated in
the Dewan Rakyat the validity of making the Malay culture as the basis
of the National Culture. This notion was further empowered and
legitimized with the setting up of the Ministry of Culture, Arts and
Tourism, better known then as MOCATS. In 2005, there was another
name change and the Ministry was referred to as KEKKWA,
Kementerian Kebudayaan, Kesenian dan Warisan , the Ministry of Arts,
Culture and Heritage. Its current name as of 2009 is the Ministry of
Information, Communications and Culture, Malaysia.
After the May 13 1969 racial riots, the government sponsored a
National Cultural Congress, held for five days from August 16 20,
1971. The congress took the initial step towards defining the basic
5
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
6/36
fundamentals of the proposed national culture. The non-Malays had
always insisted that it is meaningless to ask them to become absorbed
into a common Malayan culture when that culture has yet to be
identified (K.J. Ratnam, 1965). No one is yet sure what Malaysian
culture is. Is it to be an amalgamation of the cultures of the Malays, the
Chinese and the Indians? Or is it only the Malay culture which shall be
made into a Malaysian culture to be accepted by all the different ethnic
groups, just as the Malay language was accepted as the Malaysian
national language by all the groups?
The National Cultural Congress rectified this lack of knowledge and
arrived at three main conclusions; first, that the principles that are used
to shape a national culture should be based on Malay culture. Second,
since Islam was chosen as the religion of the Federation, it was only
natural that the National Cultural Congress should also make Islam an
important element in the promotion of this national identity. Third, to
show that the other ethnic groups have not been ignored, the Congress
stipulated that the cultures of the Chinese and the Indians, where
suitable and appropriate, should be incorporated in the promulgation of
a national cultural identity (Ministry of Culture, 1973). But the basic
6
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
7/36
principle remains: Malaysian culture has to be based on the culture of
the Malays.
The government has succeeded in making Bahasa Malaysia the
national language; it might even succeed in its economic programmes.
But with culture there are bound to be problems. The different ethnic
groups have their own cultural heritages of which they are proud. The
Chinese culture, no less than the Indian culture, is important, and
certainly not inferior to the Malay culture. It has been noted that:
While accepting the desirability of a local orientation ineducation, the non-Malays continue to insist on culturalpluralism. They are willing to become Malayans politically;culturally however, they are determined to remain Chineseand Indians. (K.J. Ratnam, 1965)
It is crucial in a multi-ethnic country where multi-culturalism prevails
for the government to use its political clout and power to re-engineer
and ensure the acceptance of the National Cultural policy within the
praxis of nation building. This is to legitimize the role of the government
in creating an imagined homogeneous community. This becomes more
glaringly crucial in the postmodern, global era where there is a
predominance of shifting paradigms and annihilating barriers to enable a
7
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
8/36
laissez-faire, accommodating attitude in all spheres of life. It is important
to highlight the national culture, for it symbolizes the expression,
nuances, identity and character of the nation state. Yet, culture is
created, shaped, identified, disseminated by the inhabitants, their
languages, beliefs, norms, taboos and ways of life. Thus in multi
everything Malaysia, the national culture is based on the Malay culture
but it has to accommodate the cultures of the others. It is simple to
concretize it in words, to actualize it in reality is something else. Hence,
the current national agenda and slogan of 1Malaysia as propounded
by the current Prime Minister, Dato Seri Najib Abdul Razak. We are One
Malaysia; we are Malaysians, (not Malays or Chinese or Indians or
others). This is our national identity.
National Identity
Within Malaysias multi-ethnic-religious-cultural-lingual nation state, how
does one identify oneself? For starters, all Malaysians have and must
carry an identity card now known as MyKad. On this tiny credit sized
card, is listed ones name, religion and gender, but not ones race or
ethnicity. One is then given an identity number, made up of ones
8
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
9/36
birthdate (year, month and date), the state one is from and a last four
digit number.
What is identity? How is one identified, categorized and catalogued? For
administrative purposes it is done in the above manner. That is the
official means of identification. But what about our real identiy as
exemplified by the manner we live, the way we talk, eat, dress, pray,
celebrate religious and cultural festivals, the friends we have and keep.
Is that also not part of our identity? Are we not confused, perplexed,
agitated about what is our national identiy as against our ethnic identity?
Do we think of ourselves as Malaysians or as Malays, Chinese, Indians
first? And even as we think of ourselves as Malays, do we not see
ourselves as Kelantanese Malay, Perak Malay, Kedah or Johore Malay
amongst others. And do we not think also of ourselves as Malays of
Minangkabau, Achenese or Bugis origins? Likewise if are Chinese, are
we Hakkas or Teochews or Cantonese? And if we are Indians, are we
Telugus, Malaylees, Punjabis, Gujeratis or Sindhis? And what about our
political inclinations and ideologies? Are we UMNO Malays, PAS Malays
or Pakatan Rakyat Malays. Are MCA or Gerakan or DAP Chinese?
(These are the different political parties which exist in Malaysia and
afiliated with one race) The point to be stressed is: not one of these
9
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
10/36
racial group comprises a hmogeneous ethnic entity. We become
homogeneous only when we are posited against the other whoever that
other might be. From my Malay perspective how do I interact with my
Chinese, Indian and even Malay friends, colleagues and or neighbours?
Can we be colour blind? Or are our eyesights so excellent that we can
see not only colours, but also warts and even the most minute of
blemishes, and even more, we can also imagine all of these blemishes or
create them when they do not exist. Are we and must we always and
forever be embroiled in and within the forces of contestations and
controls embedded within our society and psyche?
Perhaps we are all of the above, for we are after all automatically
conditioned to think in terms of we and us and the Other them. Our
togetherness, our harmonious existence, our nation state, to borrow
Andersons phrase, are all imagined. But the imagination is also real,
the divides pronounced, the pluralities and multiplicities deep and
corrosive and we as individuals alone cannot overcome and change
these historically embedded, traditionally entrenched and sometimes
politically motivated disparities. Hence the governments role, functions
and concerns. Hence the nullifying of identities associated with racial
and ethnic identities. Towards this end the government has instituted
10
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
11/36
various national policies of the post 1969 era and are now engaged in
numerous transformation plans. These plans and policiies are made so
as to transform our economy, society and mindsets so that we can all
become One Malaysia, irrespective of our different races, ethnicities,
religions, cultures. Thus, the current agenda and slogan of 1Malaysia.
We are One Malaysia; we are Malaysians, (not Malays or Chinese or
Indians or Others). This is our national identity. Still it is unavoidable to
also highlight the fact that we are not even an intra, forget about being an
inter homogeneous society.
It is because of these that throughout Malaysias history, there
has been a conscious need that has become almost part of the psyche
of Malaysian leaders to create a United Malaysian nation. These efforts
towards nation building and the creation of a uniquely, Malaysian identity
has seen the propositions of various national and or prime ministerial
slogans which then becomes translated into national agendas to be
fulfilled. (For a detailed discussion of these national slogans see
Kamaruddin M. Said Slogan 1Malaysia dalam Konteks Evolusi
Demokrasi Malaysia, in Malaysian Journal of Youth Studies, June,
2010). The latest 1Malaysia slogan has its own agenda of social,
economic, cultural transformations towards the empowerment of a
11
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
12/36
united Malaysian nation. It is not the concern of this paper to discuss the
layered implications of this 1Malaysia concept, but it is crucial to point out
that playwrights have always reflected, reacted and refracted on these
issues of nationbuilding.
It is within these contestations that three Malaysian playwrights
have given us the didascalia of their theatrics from which we must read
and find their intended or even unintended semiotics.
Imagining the Nation: The Plays
Playwrights have reflected and refracted the socialeconomicpolitical
cultural-racial-ethnic dynamics and divides of an ever changing, evolving
Malaysia nation. This paper exfoliates how three Malaysian playwrights
ponder the issues of racialism,ethnicity, plurality, identity, nationalism
and unity in three different plays: Othman Zainuddins Myth, Noordin
Hassans Children of this Landand Kee Thuan Chyes We Could. You
Mr. Birch.
Othman Zainuddins Myth opens with the return of the British as
symbolized by Tuan Besar (Big Sir) to the country below the wind
(Malaya). Myth gives us a whole array of easily identifiable characters.
12
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
13/36
There is the Indian Khadam (Slave), Nina Suras nephew, who is ever
devoted and loyal to Tuan Besar, the British colonizer.
Budiman is a Malay who alienates himself from other nationalist
Malays when he decides to join forces with the communists but only to
fight a common enemy, British colonialism. When Helang Merah, the
Chinese Communist, wants to expand his objectives to include
revolutionizing the kampung folks to accept communist doctrines,
Budiman realizes he has to part ways with Helang Merah. As a Malay,
Budiman cannot be part of the Chinese (communist) scheme to destroy
the Malays and their religion, Islam. Budiman eventually returns to the
fold of his Malay relatives. He is forgiven, accepted and welcomed back
by his Malay brethren, in spite of their earlier differences and
contestations.
Herein lies the nature of identity in the Malaysian context. One is a
Malaysian, yet one is manacled within the very real racial, ethnic
boundaries, and by being thus one is, consciously or unconsciously,
empowering ethnic nationalities, instead of identifying, seeing and
believing oneself to be a Malaysian devoid of all these other identities.
In Myth the playwright does not portray a healthy Malay-Chinese
relationship. The Chinese are portrayed either as openly Communists,
13
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
14/36
hence enemies of the Malays and of the nation or of the even more
dangerous possibility as the hidden enemies like the hypocrite Tong
San. He pretends to be part of the Malayan nation, pretends to help the
Malays, but in actuality he helps his communists brethen, the Helang
Merah. Again ethnic nationalism and identity supercedes national
identity.
Moreover, Tong San is also portrayed as a greedy Chinese who
wants to have and eventually control everything. For him the nation is a
huge piece of cake. which is very delicious, (p. 95). He admits that he
and his people already have a small piece, but this is all too insufficient,
too little to be of any significance. He wants to have a bigger piece. He
will bide his time, help the communists, plan well and when the nation is
at war he will grab the lions share. Such is Tong Sans greed, cunning
and hypocrisy.
If the Chinese are portrayed either as openly bad by being
communists, or being hypocritical and greedy, the Indians are not drawn
in a favorable light either. Nina Sura is a character of Indian descent who
owes no loyalty to the country. In times of peace and prosperity he will
stay, trade, acquire property and accumulate wealth. In times of war, he
will leave. But he is also honest enough to admit that it is worse where
14
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
15/36
he comes from, namely the real India, his country of origin, is really
poor (p. 17). Nina Sura wants only to acquire wealth; he is satisfied if
he can trade and made his money, unencumbered; he does not harbor
Tong Sans ambitions. In fact he reminds Tong San that when they
arrived Tuk Sidang was already ruling and there was already a raja in
the town (p. 97). The subtext of this cautionary remark is to remind
Tong San that they are immigrants, that the country already had a Malay
raja/king when they came to the country. The plays subtext is to
delineate the history of the nation and the history of the immigrants.
In Myth the playwright has portrayed a country whose only
attraction is the wealth it offers. It is not only Helang Merah or Tong San
and Nina Sura, but the likes of Tuan Besar who all want to have the
countrys wealth. This is the pull factor. But wealth alone does not ensure
that people will stay, live and mix freely and harmoniously. Hence when
the country is unsafe these people will flee. When the colony was
attacked and invaded by the forces of Panglima Hitam (Black Warriors,
symbolizing the Japanese), Tuan Besar and his troops were the first to
leave their created empire. Nina Sura Diwana also wanted to flee. The
play posits the notion that these people have the choice and the ability to
leave and return to their country of origin. They are not bounded to the
15
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
16/36
nation, they do not have to stay, unlike the Malays who have no other
choices. Myth reinforces the racial, ethnic divides and stereotype
images of the greedy Chinese, the ambitious, heartless Communist, the
ever loyal Malay nationalist (and Malay communist), the cant be
bothered attitude of the Indian so long as he can make some profit,
albeit he is politically aware that when they came, there was already a
Malay raja. Myth in fact reinforces the stereotype images and
contestations of multi everything Malaysia.
Myth can be seen as a theater of denunciation which deprecates
Tuan Besar, disparages the likes of Nina Sura Diwana and excoriates
both Towkay Tong San and Panglima Merah. The play also decries the
natives. Tuk Sidang, Tuk Iman, and Mawars loyalty to the country is
unquestioned. Budiman is also made to return to the Malay-nationalist
fold. These are the people who will lead the country. But the attitudes of
other people, especially those involved in defending the country, is
criticized, for they are portrayed as not being brave and proactive
enough to take care of the nation state.
Myth is a symbolic, fantasy play open to interpretations. It is
Othmans way of saying that the multi-racial and ethnic relationships he
so symbolicly portrayed in his play, is but a myth and like all myths it
16
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
17/36
should not be trusted. If one chooses to read this text in this way it could
then serve a redemptive function which augurs well for the health of this
nation. One is then seeing it as a parody which can be highlighted in
theatre through a campy or parodied style of directing. Or perhaps Myth
is indeed the way of living then and now. We are a plural society and our
ethnic nationalities continue to dominate and be more important than our
national identities. We live in one country but we still have choices to
leave it when the economic or political situation is not good. Or we have
no choice but to live in this country and to view the Other(s) with doubts
and suspicions. We, the reader-audience of this play, are certainly left to
decide what to do about it: perpetuate the chasms, continue the plural
divides or become close and homogenous in spite of the multifarious
diversified identities. Thus it is that Othman wants his readers/audience
to evaluate themselves, their society, the past, the present and the future
that they are heading for and that they want to now create.
If Othman portrays the Chinese and the Indians in a negative light,
Noordin Hassan in Children of this Landpaints for us another portrait of
the Chinese. In the list of characters Ah Heng is described as a,
Chinese who has lived for a long time among the Malay community.
Almost like a relative with Hamzahs family. Opposes the communists
17
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
18/36
and is finally killed by them, (p. 5). Ah Heng is a Chinese, but he not
only opposes the Chinese Communist, he also fought for the Malayan
nation and eventually was tortured and killed by the communist.
Ah Heng not only grew up in the kampung, but grew up in front of
Mak Sus eyes. As midwife it was Mak Su who brought him into this
world. It is not surprising therefore that she is like his own mother. Such
is the very close symbiotic relationship between a Malay woman and her
Chinese son. Ah Ean and Ah Heng are in a relationship with the
Malays, a relationship that is signified to be not so much between friends
as between relatives. Ah Heng considers Mak Su to be his mother and
Kudus as his very own brother whom he greatly loves.
Ah Ean and Ah Heng are part of and have been assimilated into
the Malay community. Their complete assimilation into Malay life is
achieved by ostracizing them from the Chinese community and nullifying
all their other ties. In this play, for a Chinese to be good, he must live
with and be accepted by the Malays. Thus Ah Ean reiterates that they
have no other place to return to. The play also highlights that Ah Heng
willingly suffers at the hands of and is eventually killed by the communist.
It is important to highlight that Ah Heng is not like Othmans Helang
18
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
19/36
Merah or Tong San, or even Budiman. Ah Heng epitomizes an ideal
image of the Chinese as envisaged by the playwright.
In Noordins play, it is not only the Chinese who are good, even the
colonial master as represented by Tuan Brown, is portrayed in a positive
manner. On a simplistic, superficial level, Tuan Brown is a kind,
generous employer. Later it becomes clear that Brown has other
motives: he wants to marry Sapura and takes her back to England.
Sapura is far-sighted enough to know that such a marriage would not
work. The cultural and social divides are too wide to be effectively
crossed.
In Children of this Land, Noordin Hassan gives a microcosmic
portrayal of the macrocosmic, multi-racial-religion-cultural Malaysian
nation where characters grapple with their ethnic identities as they
negotiate and re-negotiate, their diversities and pluralities to empower
their national identities. A complex play, Noordin does not paint black
and white pictures based on ethnic lines. He gives a potpourri of the
good, the bad, the ugly of differing inter- and intra-ethnic groups. If Ah
Heng and Ah Ean symbolize the good Chinese who willingly have
become assimilated into the Malay community, the playwright
simultaneously gives the larger, Chinese communists who are the
19
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
20/36
nations enemies. If Mr. Brown is the good British Colonizer, his nemesis
is his own bad, self for he eventually succumbs to the mystery of the
oriental thus exotic Sapura even as he had frolicked with the Malay,
Western educated and liberated Hani.
In this play, Noordin also gives a portrayal of the Malays in all their
hues: good, concerned, bad, indifferent, and malevolent. This is best
exemplified in Sir Sabur Shahs own family. Sir Sabur Shah is a Malay
councilor, enamoured by the British and all things English. But he is also
a survivor: when the British was in power, it was only to the British that
he looked up to and emulated, but during the Japanese Occupation, he
had no qualms about becoming friends with the Japanese especially
when the Japanese now have the power. His son, Badrul Shah, is an
opportunist who, like his father, does not help the Malays. But his other
son, Aman Syah, is a concerned Malay nationalist who will help fight and
garner forces to ensure independence of the nation. His daughter, Hani,
is a liberated woman who is involved with the British, Mr. Brown, and
during the Japanese Occupation with a Japanese officer.
For Noordin all these elements form part of the nucleus of multi-
everything Malaysian society. For the playwright it is not only the good
nationalists, in the likes of Hamzah, Sapura, Aman Syah and Ah Heng,
20
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
21/36
who are the children of this land. The wavering, British-enamoured, later
Japanese favoured Malay councillor, Sir Sabur Shah, and his vaccilating
son, Badrul, are also children of this land.Likewise the patient and
nationalist Malay woman, Sapura, who is ever patient and dedicated to
transforming the lives of other Malay women. Also in this continuum is
the hard working, kuih selling, mat weaving mid-wife, Mak Su. These are
all children of this land. The murderer, as exemplified by Hamid, also
belongs to this land. To make sure that his readers/audience understand
that Ah Heng is also a son of this land Noordin, after having portrayed
Ah Heng as a Chinese who has been assimilated into the Malay
community, re-emphasizes this fact as seen through Sitis dialogue with
Kamariah. As Siti, the undergraduate, says this country, kak, is also
Ah Hengs country. All the above people, the good Malays, the bad
Malays, the good Chinese, the bad Chinese are children of this land.
Noordins statement, given in a straight, declarative dialogue may jar his
mostly Malay audience, cajole his Chinese audience and hopefully
succeed to inspire a re-thinking of ethnic identities and the re-aligning of
national consciousness..
Perhaps it is because of the above that at the end of the play,
Noordin, through the Chief Warden of the Prison, tells his audience that:
21
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
22/36
.A good person is one who is useful to society; helpfulto himself and to other members of the community thisis the first time that prisoners from different jails haveworked together so successfully. Weve proven that wecould work together, and tonight Im very proud to saythat Ive witnessed the type of people we have here. Ironbars and walls are purely man-made. But our hearts, ourthoughts, our feelings cannot be imprisoned by anyoneexcept our own selves (p. 147)
The prison is a powerful image. Noordin wants the people to break free
from this (ethnic?) prison, which has been shackling the hearts, minds,
consciousness and feelings of the people. The prisoners, in the play-
within-the play have come from different jails, yet they have managed to
work hard and successfully. Noordin wants us to carry that image further,
to extend it to the different races in Malaysian society at large, such that
we who are so multi-ethnic, multi-religious, multi-cultural will also
change, work together, willingly, hard and hopefully we will succeed to
eventually metamorphose and become Malaysians. Perhaps, implicitly
Noordin is saying that we as Malaysians, whether we are Malays,
Chinese, Indians or others, are in this prison together. So we might as
well work together to turn this prison into a meaningful, happy world for
all of us. For only when this is done, can we live in this potpourri of many
22
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
23/36
hues and shapes, nurture our ethnic identities, enjoy our pluralities, our
multiplicities, diversities and differences and by so doing empower our
national consciousness and identity.
The prison also poses a different image, one of imprisonment, of
being manacled and shackled, and without having the freedom of being
able to make choices. Above all, it is the notion of being unable to
escape. The loss is not only of personal freedom, but also of an ability to
break free from this bondage which can be seen as being unable to
unshackle the dominant, main-stream ideas which have coloured our
perceptions, shaped our trajectories and determined the formations of
our ethnic racial-cultural psyches and angsts. But the nation state has
evolved, the political-economic-cultural scenarios are not stagnant and
static. We have and must also chang, accept and be able to
accommodate. As Siti, the undergraduate, tells Kamaria: Times have
changed; and situations are different, kak. The awesome reality is right in
front of our eyes. We have to accept the truth and use it to the best
advantage. (p. 151). But what is the awesome reality? The fact that this
is a multi-racial, multi-ethnic nation and that we should be basking in
these diversities; or we are boxed in within our own innate ethnic
assumptions and that we are thus hampered and manacle? Or the
23
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
24/36
awesome reality is that we are all but members of one nation, we have
all made sacrifices just as we have contributed to its growth and
progress, and although we all have our historical baggages we can move
along a new continuum and create new trajectories and narratologies.
As paradigms shift, we must be able to break free, to change, to adapt,to
make sacrifices, to wilingly share, to accomodate and to accept new
premises. This is the thrust of Noordins message. It is Nordins reflection
of what being Malaysian means and entails.
In Kee Thuan Chyes We Could. You Mr. Birch, we again take a
journey into history, namely the history of British intervention in Perak
with Sir Andrew Clarke, governor of the Straits Settlements, trying to
solve the political problem of a Sultans ascension to the throne. Tan Kim
Cheng has advised the Malay Sultan to approach the British for help for
it is in the best interests of everyone that order is established in these
parts. Business can now proceed as usual [my emphasis], (p. 3). From
the beginning the premise is to ascertain that the country is at peace and
all the differences co-exist harmoniously, for only when stability is
ensured can other socialpolitical cultural cogs function together. The
play also re-enforces the image of the Chinese as being interested only
in business, namely in making money. Datuk Sagor highlights the
24
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
25/36
presence of the Orang Cinas shop (p. 41), the Chinese peoples shop.
It is the Chinese who are doing business and obsessed with raking in the
profits. As Birch, the British Resident says Drop a gold shilling and
they (the bloody Chinamen) can hear it miles away (p. 4). The
Chinamans main concern is to make money. He has no principles, he
goes along with the party that will support his business/financial interests
and he will do anything to ensure he succeeds. As the character in the
play says, the only straight thing about the chinese is their hair (p.30).
Besides economic power, the Chinese also wants political power and so
plans to wrest power from the Malays.
Tan, the Chinaman, cohorts with the Sultan, his friend, and will
advise the Sultan to cooperate with the British. Tan is a Chinese
middleman negotiating with the British and the Malay Sultan, all for his
own ends. He admits that he is being devious in his dealings with the
Chinese, Malays and the colonial master but what to do, must cari
makan, what, (earn a living), (p.29). The Melayu therefore fears the
Chinaman. Reminiscent of Othman Zainuddins Myth, Kee Thuan
Chyes play posits the same stereotype image of the Chinese who are
portrayed as greedy both for power and wealth. And always the fight is
between the Chinese and the Malays, often with the British being the
25
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
26/36
colonial mastermind. Each seems to be the others nemesis. The
Maharaja Lela is aware of the divide and rule policy of the British. He
also knows that a gulf will be opened not only between them and us,
namely between the British and Us (the Malays) but between Us and Us
(Malays and Malays)! The British will create gulfs not only between the
Malays and the Chinamen but also amongst the Malays themselves, and
amongst the Chinese. Thus the British must be fought, an initial step
which must be taken so that we, who are so diversified can not only be
united but others, whoever these others are, within or without, cannot
exploit our diversities and in so doing not only weaken us but prevent us
from becoming united as one Malaysian identity.
In Tan Kim Cheng, the playwright has given us different
perceptions of the Chinaman, namely as perceived by the Chinaman
himself, by the British and also by the Malays. Furthermore, it is also an
image given by a Chinese playwright who has to negotiate and re-
negotiate myriad paths and byways as his dramatic character Tan Kim
Cheng is doing, so as to be able to become, to be seen and to be
accepted not only just as a Malaysian but also seen as not being
particularly pro-Malay and by implication anti-Chinese!! Herein lies the
26
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
27/36
cruz of living in a multi-racial nation and the negotiations that are
involved.
Again in this play, as in Children of this Landwe are confronted
with the image of the colonial master, the white man being enamoured
by the exotic native slave, Kuntum. From Birchs speech we know that to
him the colonized people are blessed with a gentleness. But Birch also
admits that whilst he finds their brown skin inferior, it is nevertheless
attractive The Birch-Kuntum relationship finds its parallel in the earlier
Brown-Sapura relationship. This type of relationship is still based on a
power relationship: the powerful white man and the powerless native
woman, who, although inferior is stilI attractive. It would seem that at
this juncture relations between the colonial master and the native cannot
or should not proceed beyond that of a political exegesis, albeit one that
is still based on power, on the one hand, and lack of power, on the other,
both of which still involves a lot of negotiating.
Birch does not have a flattering image of the locals. As he says
these locals are incapable of organizing themselves. What they know
best is fighting. For gain. The upriver chiefs versus the downriver chiefs.
And the bloody Chinamen and their rival secret societies (p. 4.). For
Birch things will only change with the presence of the British Resident.
27
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
28/36
The locals/natives are mixed in petty disputes inter and intra their
ethnicities. The problematics become more pronounced when
compromises are unhinged and the natives empowered by being united
as exemplified by the Malays who are not about to accept all that Birch
has planned for them. As the Maharaja Lela says The white people
have no place here. Birch has no right to tell us what to do. He doesnt
understand the way things work in our society (p. 6). Birch does not
understand our language (p. 6), or how things work in our (emphasis
added) society. Moreover he is kurang ajar (literally not well taught,
namely rude) (p. 6). He is a white misfit, a colonizer in tune only with the
political mapping and economic plundering of the country, albeit aware of
the racial pluralities and differences and playing them to his advantage.
Still there are Malays who are obsessed with aping the ways of the
British just as highlighted by Noordin Hassan in the character of Sir
Sabur Syah. As the Maharaja Lela says:
.It has already happened with people like the
Temenggong of Johore. He dresses like the white men,gambles on horses, plays the white mens games likehitting balls on a table with a long stick. Is he still one ofus? (p. 37).
28
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
29/36
In this play, the Malays have to fight not only the Chinamen and the
British but also their own kind who have gone over to the British and the
Malays who are fighting for their own personal gains. This is the Us
against Us syndrome, which has led to the questioning of loyalties and
identities. Is he still one of us becomes a question of deep implications
and significances. For the opposite is: he is no longer one of us; he has
so transformed himself and thinks he can be part of the other, although
in reality, he will never be really accepted into their fold. He will just be
another misfit, to them and to his own people. Still in the final analysis
the Malays will be united, and the British defeated, by something greater,
namely the Malay tradition which will annihilate the British and give order
to the lives of the Malays. As the Maharaja Lela says:
Our tradition will bring him down. He cannot challengesomething that he doesnt understand, something greaterthan all of us. We live and die by it. In our society, everyperson knows his place. Every person knows the role he hasto play as dictated by our tradition. That gives order to ourlives. (p. 6).
Tradition will be the unifying factor. Tradition will annihilate them and
unify us. Tradition will empower us. As the Maharaja Lela says join me
now to stand up against the white men. Our numbers are bigger, we can
29
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
30/36
fight them if we join together. Come, my people, rise up against them,
drive them from our land. (p. 43)
Theatrical Productions
We could You Mr. Birch, as the playwright says, is satire and
parody, mocking and self-mocking (in the Playwrights-Directors Notes).
Kee Thuan Chye has made clever use of his actors breaking in and out
of character. The readers/audience are brought in and brought out of the
play ever so often so as to nullify the representation on stage and to
highlight the reality around us. This is Thuan Chyes Verfremdungs
Effekt to prevent us from being assimilated into the play and more
importantly, to enhance our thinking and analysis. Throughout the play
the actors break out of character to question, discuss and analyze what
they are doing. And we, in the audience, are also broken out of our
reverie of seeing a play when we see actors break out of character. In
fact, the actors, when not in character, not only talk among themselves
as people/actors but also address the audience and demand their
participation.
The technique of breaking in and out of character, of deliberately
destroying the illusions of theatre, and of enhancing the Verfremdungs
30
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
31/36
Effekt enable us to analyze and evaluate our present. To this aim, the
playwright has included the ensemble scene, where the young, dressed
in contemporary dress, dance and indulge in much revelry. They dance
to the strains of ajogetnumber as they talk about the stock market. The
play ends with the same ensemble group, frantically using their
handphones as they talk to their stock-brockers. Past and present
become interlocked when Kuntum, the slave woman, grabs a handphone
and joins in the frentic fray of buying and selling shares. The ending
takes a different hue. It is almost as if the playwright is saying: forget the
play, forget the politicalcultural-religious-ethnic divides, forget the past,
forget our history, instead live and enjoy the present and work for the
future. But significantly the present is mired with finance as seen by the
negotiating of shares.
Noordins technique is to present a play within a play within yet
another play. Within these Pandora like boxes and never ending array of
doors, he presents and re-presents to his audiences the history of the
nation from the past to the present to the future. He uses techniques
from traditional theatres, amalgamating songs, dances, multiple roles
and the moving in out of characters to jolt his audiences. Noordin is also
31
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
32/36
an adept exploiter of the verfremdungs effekt. He even mocks at his
audience by using his dramaticpoetic licences to turn his audiences into
prisoners, at least for the duration of the play. Noordin implies that we
are all prisoners, we might not know it or be aware of it, but we have all
been imprisoned, our minds be they political, cultural, ethnic or
religious- are shackled, our angstenhanced, our insecurities exploited,
our consciousness denied, nullified, exacerbated and our futures
compromised . As prisoners, we will be controlled and even manipulated.
The choice is ours: continue to live in this prison, embedded within the
same dynamics or break free from this prison to create new trajectories
and possibilities.
Othman Zainuddins theatre denounces and deprecates all so as to
enhance the realities of the past which continues into the present and
might perpetuate into the future. If these stereotypical images, so deeply
ingrained and practised in our daily lives are not changed, they will
forever affect and impact our current and future situations and
endeavors.
Conclusion
32
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
33/36
The above three plays are attempts to find our ethnic and national
identities in this multi-racial country of ours. Othman Zainuddins Myth
is a symbolic fantasy which presents and confirms stereotypes of the
past which unfortunately linger on to become problematics of the
present. Hence at some levels society is integrated, at other levels it is
not. The question is: can we release ourselves from this past? This is
something which we all must re-think about if we are all going to be
integrated.
Noordin Hassan has given us an interesting play which attempts to
portray integration. But Noordins integration demands absolute
assimilation into Malay society. Is it possible or viable for all Chinese to
be like Ah Heng? Can they become thus? Must they in the first place, be
like that? Or is this all a dream or nightmare for Noordin Hassan?
Kee Thuan Chyes Birch forces us to relook at the whole history of
British intervention, at the money minded Chinese, at the Malays as they
tussle with power, slavery and fighting their many other nemesis. Above
all Thuan Chye, throughout the play, by making his characters break out
of characters forces the readers to evaluate the history of the nation.
All three playwrights want us to ask ourselves what is history after
all. Their plays highlight not only that our views of history are as we
33
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
34/36
want to view it, but also that if we can control history, then history will not
control and dominate us. We have to break out of that stereotype and be
able to change, adapt and above all accommodate. The dramatists
stress the fact that we not only have a choice but also a responsibility
because we choose how we want to see history and how to let history
determine our roles and our identities.
All these playwrights have given us powerful didascalias so that
we can understand better the semiotics of their theatres for us to further
appreciate our pluralities, our diversities, use these differences (instead
of fighting them) to empower ourselves and our identities so as to enable
all of us to become a nation state of united Malaysians, bearing in mind,
to borrow Andersons term, imagined though they may be.
The above three playwrights have presented both the other and
we/us in their plays, both within their ethnicities, pluralities and the
overriding national community in the larger sense of a multi-racial nation.
We are we, we are others, we fight against them, we even fight amongst
and against us, yet in the final analysis what is our innate identity within
this multi-religion, cultural, multi-hued pot of many possibilities. Within
this context, characters and readers have to contest, contend, negotiate,
34
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
35/36
re-negotiate how to become really, truly Malaysian or in the current lingo,
1Malaysia.
35
8/3/2019 An Imagined Nation
36/36
Bibliography
Plays
Kee thuan Chye. We Could . You Mr. Birch. Penang: kee Thuan Chye,1994.
Noor Hassan. Children of This Land (Trans. Solehah Ishak). KualaLumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, 1992.
Othman Zainuddin. Myth (trans. Solehah Ishak in Malay LiteratureJournal, Vol. 2, No. 1, 1989, pp. 66-120.
Cited Works
Anderson, Benedict.1983. Imagined Communities: Reflections on theOrigin and spread of Nationalism. New York: Verso.
Kamaruddin M. Said. Slogan 1Malaysia dalam Konteks EvolusiDemokrasi Malaysia, in Malaysian Journal of Youth Studies, Vol.2, 2010.
Mahathir Mohamed. 1970. The Malay Dilemma. Singapura: Asia PacificPress.
(N.A.). 1958. Malayan Constitutional Documents. Kuala Lumpur:Malayan Government.
(N.A.). 1973. Asas Kebudayaan Kebangsaan. Kuala Lumpur:Kementerian Kebudayaan Belia dan Sukan.
Ratnam, K.J. 1965. Communalism and the Political process in Malaysia.Kuala Lumpur: University of Malaya.