Indonesian Literature vs. New Order Orthodoxy: The Aftermath of 1965– 1966 (original) (raw)
Related papers
Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs
Although the Indonesian Communist Party (PKI) was the world's third largest communist party in 1965, claiming to have 27 million members, within five years it had been completely destroyed. Research into the 1965-1966 anti-communist violence and what led to the end of the Sukarno era in Indonesia is currently booming. The recent fiftieth anniversary of the mass killings stimulated a number of journal special issues and a range of new studies on this controversial topic which touches on events that have not yet been fully unravelled. There are also dozens of autobiographies by survivors for whom time to speak out is fast running out. These attempts to reconstruct the historical circumstances before, during, and after the collective violence have, of course, implications for the present-day politics in Indonesia, where the remaining survivors still await proper official recognition of the hardship they endured and restitution for injustices against them. Hearman's fine study joins this rapidly growing body of literature on Indonesia's repression of communism and of any suspected communist sympathisers. Rather than refining the meta-narrative about the defeat of Indonesia's left with new detail that has begun to emerge with increasing intensity ever since the downfall of Suharto's New Order regime, Hearman directs attention to the ordinary communists and sympathisers to illustrate what systematic oppression and marginalisation meant for them once the mass killings had come to an end. In her study, she relies on the accounts of more than thirty victims of anticommunist repression whom she interviewed to find out about what their lives were like after they had lost their jobs, when they went into hiding, were arrested and were in prison, and after they had been released from prison. While some informants preferred to remain anonymous, others insisted that their full names and photos of them be used in this book. This individualised long-term perspective reveals that the ongoing repression of anybody associated with the Indonesian left, no matter how vaguely, was a fundamental ingredient of the New Order regime after Suharto took over from the founding President Sukarno.
Describing kekerasan; Some observations on writing about violence in Indonesia after the New Order
Bijdragen tot de taal-, land- en volkenkunde / Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences of Southeast Asia, 2004
Describing kekerasan Some observations on writing about violence in Indonesia after the New Order [T]he truth can never be full enough (Minow 2000:241). [T]o respond to ongoing killings of unarmed civilians, political terrorism, envirortmental devastation or avoidable mass starvation by treating them as no more than texts to be read as writerly is ethically questionable to say the least (Heryanto 1995:33). The authoritarian regime and its leader are gone and the structures that maintained his power are weakened, but in post-New Order Indonesia violent conflict has become more frequent and more varied. 1 It is no longer sufficient to explain the violence in the terms used by the regime and others during its rule. Scholars, human rights workers, and victims increasingly recognize the plurality of truths about violent conflict (Stoler 2002). State truths, 'media reality', and the 'factual' and 'moral' truths told by human rights organizations are all in tension (Sai Siew Min forthcoming; Ignatieff 1996). The continuing and escalating violence after the end of the New Order indicates that the 'roots' of the violence also lie outside the New Order (Schulte Nordholt 2002). During the New Order, explanations could be located within an authoritarian system that sponsored violence as a problem-solving method. Today, links between the actors involved in the conflicts in Ambon, West Kalimantan, and even Aceh, and the state elite in Jakarta cannot be made so easily. In a 1 I would like to thank Henk Schulte Nordholt, Charles Coppel, and Robert Cribb for their comments on earlier drafts of this article, and Freek Colombijn and Gerry van Klinken for their feedback. The International Institute for Asian Studies, Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-. Land-en Volkenkunde, and Australian Research Council sponsored my research in Leiden. JEMMA PURDEY completed her PhD on anti-Chinese violence in Indonesia, 1996-1999, at the University of Melbourne. Her interests include representations of violence in Indonesia, human rights, and the legal position of ethnic Chinese in Indonesia today. She has contributed articles to a number of publications, including Asian Survey and Asian Ethnicity. She is a Fellow of the Department of Political Science at the University of Melbourne and is currently living in Mumbai.
Terror Narrative: Representing State Violence in Modern Indonesian Literature
2021
Literature and society are a way of looking at problems in society. Literature not only functions as entertainment, but it may also represent socio-political problems. Some literary works even carry more roles as both a reflection of such issues and a means of protest against them, including human rights violations. This paper examines how Indonesian literature has reflected human rights breaches, such as oppression in Indonesia during the New Order era. This qualitative research was conducted through direct documentation. The research revealed that the regime punished any individuals, groups, or institutions which tried to challenge its policy by the name of national stability. Some writers, such as Putu Wijaya, used anecdotes to protest against such oppression. He was a prolific Indonesian writer whose works often expose socio-political issues, such as human rights violations in Indonesia. His writings suggest his disagreement with such abuses. The three short stories investigated here "Sket," "Mulut," and "Rakyat" represent Putu Wijaya's dissent with the violence performed by the apparatus of the regime. Playing his role as a literary activist, Putu uses these stories to remind rights perpetrators that such cases as seen in the stories have taken place and might take place somewhere in Indonesia.
Under Duress: Suppressing and Recovering Memories of the Indonesian Sixties
From October 1965, the Indonesian Communist Party (Partai Komunis Indonesia, or PKI) and its followers were brutally repressed after the party's alleged involvement in a coup attempt. Approximately half a million party members and sympathizers were killed, and hundreds of thousands of them were imprisoned for varying lengths of time. This paper examines how collective memory and a sense of identity were shaped under the conditions of repression and silence that the Suharto regime (1966-1998) imposed on former political prisoners in Indonesia. The survival strategies employed
[Book Review] The Killing Season: A History of the Indonesian Massacres, 1965-66
Newbooks Asia, 2019
Geoffrey Robinson’s The Killing Season is one of the most-awaited books by the Southeast Asian studies community in 2018. The 456-page monograph explores in great detail the anti-communist massacres of Indonesia in 1965-66 and the long-term repercussions in the following decades. As one of the worst human atrocities in the 20th century, the mass killing led to the death of some half a million real and alleged communist members and sympathizers. After more than 50 years, however, reflections on this tragic event are far from sufficient. Although academic work in recent years spurred growing discussions within small circles, the mass violence has not received adequate attention from the international audience. Worse still, a troubling silence permeates Indonesia even today, as many of those who committed the atrocities have stayed in power. While victims struggled to find viable ways to pursue justice, numerous murderers managed to get away with impunity. https://www.iias.asia/the-review/killing-season
Gestapu: Indonesian Short Stories on the Abortive Communist Coup of 30th September 1965
Center for Southeast Asian Studies with the School of Hawaiian, Asian, and Pacific Sudies at the University of Hawaii at Manoa eBooks, 1975
How could he kill his own brother, Suryoputro, who was given birth to by the same mother as he? Arjuna felt weak. Krishna reminded him: Arjuna, Arjuna. Arjuna, you are a warrior. The duty of a warrior is to fight. The duty of a warrior is to wage war, when it is called for. It is the duty of a warrior to safe guard, defend his country. This is the task of a warrior. It is true, they are your brothers on the other side. Your own teacher. They will destroy the stat~ of Pandawa. Strike back at them. This is your task and your duty. Carry out your task without regard to the conse 3 quences. That, night six members of the alleged Council of Gen~rals were killed by members of the palace guard, the Tjakrab,~rawa, under the 4 command of Lt. Col. Untung. Three of the generals were taken alive to Halim airbase, out side Jakarta: Major General Parman, Major General Huprapto and Brigadier General Sujoto. Three were taken there dead: Brigadier General Pandjaitan, Major General Harjono and Lieutenant General Achmad Yani. A seventh, General Nasution. escaped. elthough his young daughter subsequently died of gun wounds. Ar eighth, Major General SUharto, was not at home. At Halim, the living generals were killed in a particularly brutal fashion, in the presence of members of the co~unist women's or anization, Gerwani, and the communist youth movement, Pemuda x 13. Robert R. Jay: Javanese Villagers, Social Relations in Rural Modjokuto (The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1969) p. 279 (slightly altered). 14. On the distinction between socio-cultural groups in Java empha sizing Islam (the santri) or syncreticist Javanese belief (abangan),