new boundless family. bismillah, barakallah, biaminillah.
April 9, 2013
Merajut Tanpa Benang dan Jarum (Bagian 2)
Dia ciptakan suara-suara, dan tidak semua yang Dia ciptakan membantu dengan nyata. Seperti game developer yang ciptakan banyak ghost untuk dapatkan reward. Dan seringkali mereka tidak membantu.
Kalau mencari dan mengusahakan benang dan jarum itu (saja) masih begitu sulit, masih bisakah saya merajut? Saya pikir mungkin merajut bukanlah profesi yang paling tepat untuk saya.
Mereka bilang: seharusnya kau tidak boleh tertekan dengan pencapaian sejauh ini. They think (that) they know me, seperti menganggap kotoran luwak sebagai biji termahal di dunia atau tumpukan liur sebagai aset berharga. Those come from (sorry) shit.
Apa jadinya seseorang yang tumbuh dengan sosialisasi tidak sempurna, orang yang cacat secara sosial? Jiwa mereka juga cacat. Mungkin sama riskannya dengan kupu-kupu yang dipaksa bangun dari kehangatan kepompongnya oleh anak-anak kecil yang ingin tahu. Poor it.
After a long thinking… rasanya semua masih sama: hitam – abu-abu. Dan mereka (sekali lagi) pikir saya tidak berpikir. Terserah mo ngomong apa toh gue yang… #Wrong Way, Bondan-fade2black#
Menenggelamkan diri dalam pecahan kaca murahan yang menyayat kulit. Merusak wajah yang tidak sempurna. Menyakiti diri sendiri. And the story goes back… what a suck!
#np SS501: Because I’m Stupid.
Yeah, maybe like that… berhubung saya selalu berpikir dan merenungi kejadian lingkaran: tanpa pernah tahu titik awal dan akhir. Saat terdiam pun, gema di otak saya hanya menyuarakan semua kejadian-kejadian lingkaran.
Mencari Benang
Even though yang paling berantakan, ruwet, dan gak jelas… selama itu benang-benang yang punya awal dan akhir. Bukan roda, gelang, tutup botol, kincir angin. Dan hal-hal melingkar lain yang jika terus mellingkar dan merapat akan menyesakkan dan tewaskan saya.
Menguraikannya
Dengan tersenyum dan berpikir untuk sesuatu yang lebih jelas, lebih bermakna. Someone said: sepayah apapun itu, pasti bermakna. Okay, maybe yes -menurut mereka. Tapi apakah pantas saya pakai standar mereka yang bahkan bukan SNI? Sialnya, saya tidak suka standar mata, apalagi hati mereka. Karena semuanya hanya akan memantul ke otak mereka.
Tuhan yang tahu kucinta Kau… BCL sang.
Everything’s back to The Only Gave It to Me.
Bukan Anda, kamu, dia, mereka, juga kalian. No matter how precious your degree is.
Sebenarnya saya tidak peduli. Tapi otak (ditambah hati) saya begitu jahat dengan terus memaksa saya memikirkan kalian. Menyebalkan.
Kapasitas otak saya masih kecil, tapi sudah 18 tahun Dia biarkan saya rusak bumiNya. Padahal saya ingin kembali, tapi saya harus terus ke depan. Menyapa mereka dari podium dan memaksakan senyum palsu tanda terima kasih dan mengoceh banyak hal untuk menyenangkan mereka. Setelah itu menangis.
Poor me? No, that’s stupid. Dan menangis lagi, tapi bukan untuk sesuatu yang cukup tinggi dan sulit untuk ditangisi. Lantas, masih mulia kah air mata yang terus menetes keluar itu?
Saat hati tak lagi beku, ia menjadi cair untuk apa dan karena apa? Bukannya semua itu tangisan? Dan bertanya pun menjadi attitude orang bodoh: karena mereka tidak mau berpikir.
Ya, benar. Saya jadi egois tanpa sosok penjaga benang dan jarum yang dulu saya buang. Tapi saya masih punya sosok Yang Maha Memberi.
Padahal Undang Undang sudah mencatat saya sebagai orang dewasa secara yuridis. Sayang sekali. Seandainya bisa ditunda… padahal saya masih ingin berteriak kencang atas kekecewaan, bukan menangis dalam pemikiran yang terabaikan.
Padahal keong racun dirilis tahun 2008, tapi baru tahun 2010 hati saya bergejolak? *tulisan apa ini? analoginya terlalu menyesakkan dada!!*
Mungkin karena saat menerima gift-Nya saya belum paham dan berpikir semua ini akan berlangsung seperti mengikuti acara konser Justin Bieber di MTV: berteriak histeris dan terharu (?) menatap teman sebaya (saat itu) menyandang status dan peran seperti itu. Dan pastinya karena otak saya belum terpakai lebih dari 0,5 persen saat itu. Arrrgh!!
Saat kau tahu kau nyaman berjalan kaki tapi kau harus naik bus untuk sampai ke tujuanmu dengan alasan waktu. Dan ini paksaan dalam bahasa nasihat.
Debater itu munafik. Sometimes. Maybe yes. Maybe no. Saya ingin katakana “No” dan mengangguk, lalu katakan semua dengan jujur.
In my way…
Merajut Tanpa Benang dan Jarum (Bagian 1)
Saat saya berpikir cahaya saya akan benar-benar menyinari tingkatan ini, kembali saya dipersalahkan oleh ego yang sebenarnya bukan otoritas saya.
Saya pernah buang semua benang dan jarum yang dulu bantu saya hasilkan beberapa helai rajutan (yang masih cacat).
Tapi sekarang, tanpa benang dan jarum itu, masih bisakah saya merajut? Apapun jawabnya, saya harus tetap merajut. Sebagai professional: merajut pola mereka.
Saat bertemu merak di taman (bagian gersang mana di kota itu yang menyimpan keindahan merak?) saya pikir tak apalah jadi feminim yang benar-benar mempesona sepertinya. Anggun yang totalitas, feminis kuno.
Saat melihat ke atas: rasanya terbang bebas seperti elang menyenangkan sekali~~ tapi saya tidak terlahir perkasa seperti elang. Yah… paling tidak saya menyukai sayapnya. Apapun nama mereka, saya kagum pada bulu-bulu yang dirajutNya itu, menerbangkan mereka pada langit yang begitu bijak.
Haaah… tapi saat pada akhirnya saya dapatkan sayap itu, saya “tersesat” dan terkurung dalam sangkar emas yang saya bangun dengan liur saya (sekarang ini saya seekor wallet).
Mereka lihat sarang saya sebagai peti emas atau kebun buah yang siap mereka panen. Tapi bagi saya, sangkar ini tak lebih dari tumpukan liur yang begitu memuakkan.
Untitled
Takdir menetapkan kelahiranku pada keluarga yang mengesakan Allah dalam ajaran tauhidNya; menjadikanku terbiasa menjalankan titah tanpa banyak kata. Bagiku, tak ada yang lebih aman dan nyaman selain menjadi patuh. Patuh berarti bebas dari kemarahan dan hukuman. Diam, dengar, dan taat berarti kebebasan, begitu pikirku dulu. Konsep aneh tentang kebebasan yang kujalani selama lebih dari sepuluh tahun sejak perkenalanku dengan ilmu agama, sebelum kemudian lingkunganlah yang mengubahku.
Keikutsertaanku pada klub debat di SMA menuntutku berpikir ‘kritis’ atas semua permasalahan –yang sebenarnya tidak memiliki koneksi langsung denganku, dan komitmen untuk memaksimalkan otakku sepertinya menampakkan hasil. Aku, yang dengan semangat pencarian jati diri remaja tertarik mengikuti Kerohanian Islam, mulai mempertanyakan konsep ketuhanan secara totalitas –Islam kaffah, seperti yang selalu disebut dalam kajian Rohis kami.
Mengapa setiap muslimah harus memakai rok dan berjilbab besar? Toh, memakai celana panjang longgar dan berpakaian rapi tanpa mengundang syahwat lawan jenis sepertiku juga bukan tidak baik? Menngapa harus menunduk dan melembutkan suara saat berbicara? Sementara Khalifah Umar ra. tetap luarbiasa tanpa menjadi Abu Bakar ra. yang lemah lembut. Mengapa menatap tidak senang pada persahabatan orang lain yang begitu solid, dan mengatakan itu adalah kumpulan maksiat, sedang ukhuwah yang diagung-agungkan justru berantakan? Mengapa sibuk menasihati orang lain sementara diri sendiri banyak dosa? Para ikhwan dan akhwat itu pun terlihat hanya sebagai kumpulan orang sok suci yang ekslusif di mataku.
“Ideologi itu sistem. Kau tahu bagaimana system bekerja, kan? Totalitas, atau tidak samasekali,” seseorang mengingatkanku. Sisi pemberontak tanpa ilmu dalam diriku terus membantah selama pembicaraan itu. Agama itu tentang aku dan Tuhan, tanpa perlu melibatkan kalian atau mereka, pikirku. Dan sekarang, agama yang selama kehidupanku selalu ada di setiap lembar kartu identitas dan istilah-istilah yang kugunakan sebagai identitas, kini mulai menggangguku dengan meminta perhatian lebihku untuknya, tetapi pemikiran-pemikiran tanpa ilmuku tentangnya justru semakin membawaku pada pertanyaan tak terjawab yang lain. Aku semakin menolak konsep totalitas dalam beragama.
Pelajaran Kewarganegaraan –studi yang bagi sebagian orang merupakan akar sekulerisme- justru menamparku dari keraguan tanpa ilmu selama ini. Aku selalu bertanya untuk kembali bertanya, tanpa memahami setiap kata dan keadaan yang keluar sebagai jawaban. Aku tak pernah mau belajar, tetapi kemudian menolak segala konsep hanya karena tidak sesuai dengan ‘keyakinanku’ –jika masih bisa disebut keyakinan. Aku mengakui dan meyakini eksistensi Dzat penuh Maha di atas sana sebagai pencipta dan pengatur semesta, yang kepadaNya masih aku mengadu dan meminta, bahkan mencaci keadaan yang sebenarnya tercipta olehku. Dan keyakinan ini lah yang menamparku, sekali lagi menjatuhkan kesombongan seorang angkuh tak berilmu sepertiku.
Jika aku masih meyakini keesaan Tuhan yang bersemayam di Arsy, membaca firmanNya, memohon, mengadu, dan berterima kasih untuk setiap nafas yang Dia izinkan untukku hidup dengannya, Dia yang kuyakini sebagai penghidup yang mematikanku untuk kemudian membangkitkanku kembali pada kehidupan lain yang juga kuyakini –lantas apakah pantas jika kemudain aku berbalik mempertanyakan sistemNya, konsep hidup yang dikehendaki Dzat yang padaNya masih aku mengemis kasih di setiap detik kehidupanku? Rasanya aku tidak lebih dari seorang munafik. Mungkin, jenis sepertiku inilah yang sering tertulis dalam setiap firman peringatanNya.
Aku pasti sudah dicuci otak. kalau beragama jangan fanatik, yang biasa-biasa sajalah.. sekali lagi pikiranku terganggu dengan kalimat yang sengaja kuciptakan untuk kembali menolak konsep. Bukankah perbedaan fanatik dan totalitas sangat tipis? Dia meyuruh, bukan menyarankan, manusia untuk memasuki sistemNya secara keseluruhan melalui ayat ke dua ratus delapan dalam surat ke dua di kitabNya. Perintah yang begitu jelas tanpa analogi, yang anak kecilpun bisa menafsirkannya. Aku ingin masuk surga –tempat indah tak terdefinisi indera manusia yang kuyakini ada pada kehidupan selanjutnya, dan aku cukup sadar diri tifak dapat ke sana tanpa ‘sesuatu’. Sholat lima waktu yang tidak tepat waktu tanpa diiringi rowatibnya, sholat malam tidak bermutu penuh kantuk dengan muhasabah yang sering dipaksakan, puasa sunah dengan masih berprasangka, dan di atas semua itu – ketakutan atas penilaian orang lain, tentu menjadikanNya memiliki sangat banyak alasan untuk menolakku dari pintu surga terendahnya.
Bukankah Muhammad bin Abdullah, manusia pilihan yang kuyakini berfungsi sebagai pembawa risalah, juga tidak biasa-biasa saja dalam beribadah? Sisi pemberontak buta ilmu agama dalam diriku seketika bereaksi: sungguh tidak pantas membandingkan diri dengan Rasulullah. Lalu, pada siapa aku harus bercermin? Bukankah padanya lah terdapat teladan yang baik untuk semua umat? Aku memang tidak akan pernah bisa seperti sosok mulianya, tetapi aku sadar, dengan menjadi baik dan biasa saja belum bisa memenangkan surgaNya.
Selama ini aku mengaku diri Islam dalam lumpur kejahiliyahan, dengan menjalankan perintah yang kumaui dan menolak yang lain. Sepertinya Islam menjadi sangat mudah di jalanku: pilih ajaran yang sesuai dengan keinginanmu, lalu sampaikanlah pada penerima ajaran itu. Sesederhana itu kah? Rasanya berdosa sekali mengubah keagungan sebuah ideoloogi menjadi begitu remeh. Mengutip kalimat sakti ilmuwan penemu teori relativitas yang diagungkan: segala sesuatu harus dibuat sesederhana mungkin, tetapi tidak lebih sederhana; seperti mempersingkat perjalanan darat Jakarta-Surabaya dengan beralih dari jalur pegunungan ke dataran rendah, bukan mengubah jalur menjadi Jakarta-Bandung hanya agar lebih cepat mencapai tujuan. Jangan mempersulit hal mudah, tapi jangan menjadikannya sepele.
Beragama itu pilihan, seperti saat pertama kali aku dilahirkan dalam keadaan suci. Saat pada akhirnya aku memilih Islam sebagai jalan hidupku, aku tahu pasti konsekuensinya, dan itu sangat tidak sepele. Para ahli kitab yang dalam firmanNya dituliskan menyembunyikan kebenaran untuk menunda keislaman mereka, menurutku, karena mereka tahu pasti konsekuensi di balik ‘dua kalimat persaksian’. Bukan sekedar mengakui Allah dan RasulNya untuk kemudian kembali melakukan persaksian setelah bermaksiat.
Saat aku berkata, “Kan ku genggam hidayah ini erat-erat selamanya” bukan berarti seseorang telah memberi cahaya padaku. Aku meyakini hidayah sebagai pencerahan –cahaya matahari yang mengharuskan kita keluar gua untuk mendapatkannya, meskipun pada akhirnya Dia adalah penentu dari setiap ketentuan.
Ideologi itu jalan dan pandangan hidup, begitu penjelasan yang kupahami dari pelajaran Kewarganegaraan sejak SMP. Aku pernah menyangsikan keberadaan Tuhan, menolak sistemNya, dan begitu sombong seperti seorang atheis sok religius. Saat aku memutuskan untuk meyakininya, aku telah siap dan tahu pasti pilihannya: totalitas atau tidak sama sekali. Surga atau neraka, wallahu’alam.
Keikutsertaanku pada klub debat di SMA menuntutku berpikir ‘kritis’ atas semua permasalahan –yang sebenarnya tidak memiliki koneksi langsung denganku, dan komitmen untuk memaksimalkan otakku sepertinya menampakkan hasil. Aku, yang dengan semangat pencarian jati diri remaja tertarik mengikuti Kerohanian Islam, mulai mempertanyakan konsep ketuhanan secara totalitas –Islam kaffah, seperti yang selalu disebut dalam kajian Rohis kami.
Mengapa setiap muslimah harus memakai rok dan berjilbab besar? Toh, memakai celana panjang longgar dan berpakaian rapi tanpa mengundang syahwat lawan jenis sepertiku juga bukan tidak baik? Menngapa harus menunduk dan melembutkan suara saat berbicara? Sementara Khalifah Umar ra. tetap luarbiasa tanpa menjadi Abu Bakar ra. yang lemah lembut. Mengapa menatap tidak senang pada persahabatan orang lain yang begitu solid, dan mengatakan itu adalah kumpulan maksiat, sedang ukhuwah yang diagung-agungkan justru berantakan? Mengapa sibuk menasihati orang lain sementara diri sendiri banyak dosa? Para ikhwan dan akhwat itu pun terlihat hanya sebagai kumpulan orang sok suci yang ekslusif di mataku.
“Ideologi itu sistem. Kau tahu bagaimana system bekerja, kan? Totalitas, atau tidak samasekali,” seseorang mengingatkanku. Sisi pemberontak tanpa ilmu dalam diriku terus membantah selama pembicaraan itu. Agama itu tentang aku dan Tuhan, tanpa perlu melibatkan kalian atau mereka, pikirku. Dan sekarang, agama yang selama kehidupanku selalu ada di setiap lembar kartu identitas dan istilah-istilah yang kugunakan sebagai identitas, kini mulai menggangguku dengan meminta perhatian lebihku untuknya, tetapi pemikiran-pemikiran tanpa ilmuku tentangnya justru semakin membawaku pada pertanyaan tak terjawab yang lain. Aku semakin menolak konsep totalitas dalam beragama.
Pelajaran Kewarganegaraan –studi yang bagi sebagian orang merupakan akar sekulerisme- justru menamparku dari keraguan tanpa ilmu selama ini. Aku selalu bertanya untuk kembali bertanya, tanpa memahami setiap kata dan keadaan yang keluar sebagai jawaban. Aku tak pernah mau belajar, tetapi kemudian menolak segala konsep hanya karena tidak sesuai dengan ‘keyakinanku’ –jika masih bisa disebut keyakinan. Aku mengakui dan meyakini eksistensi Dzat penuh Maha di atas sana sebagai pencipta dan pengatur semesta, yang kepadaNya masih aku mengadu dan meminta, bahkan mencaci keadaan yang sebenarnya tercipta olehku. Dan keyakinan ini lah yang menamparku, sekali lagi menjatuhkan kesombongan seorang angkuh tak berilmu sepertiku.
Jika aku masih meyakini keesaan Tuhan yang bersemayam di Arsy, membaca firmanNya, memohon, mengadu, dan berterima kasih untuk setiap nafas yang Dia izinkan untukku hidup dengannya, Dia yang kuyakini sebagai penghidup yang mematikanku untuk kemudian membangkitkanku kembali pada kehidupan lain yang juga kuyakini –lantas apakah pantas jika kemudain aku berbalik mempertanyakan sistemNya, konsep hidup yang dikehendaki Dzat yang padaNya masih aku mengemis kasih di setiap detik kehidupanku? Rasanya aku tidak lebih dari seorang munafik. Mungkin, jenis sepertiku inilah yang sering tertulis dalam setiap firman peringatanNya.
Aku pasti sudah dicuci otak. kalau beragama jangan fanatik, yang biasa-biasa sajalah.. sekali lagi pikiranku terganggu dengan kalimat yang sengaja kuciptakan untuk kembali menolak konsep. Bukankah perbedaan fanatik dan totalitas sangat tipis? Dia meyuruh, bukan menyarankan, manusia untuk memasuki sistemNya secara keseluruhan melalui ayat ke dua ratus delapan dalam surat ke dua di kitabNya. Perintah yang begitu jelas tanpa analogi, yang anak kecilpun bisa menafsirkannya. Aku ingin masuk surga –tempat indah tak terdefinisi indera manusia yang kuyakini ada pada kehidupan selanjutnya, dan aku cukup sadar diri tifak dapat ke sana tanpa ‘sesuatu’. Sholat lima waktu yang tidak tepat waktu tanpa diiringi rowatibnya, sholat malam tidak bermutu penuh kantuk dengan muhasabah yang sering dipaksakan, puasa sunah dengan masih berprasangka, dan di atas semua itu – ketakutan atas penilaian orang lain, tentu menjadikanNya memiliki sangat banyak alasan untuk menolakku dari pintu surga terendahnya.
Bukankah Muhammad bin Abdullah, manusia pilihan yang kuyakini berfungsi sebagai pembawa risalah, juga tidak biasa-biasa saja dalam beribadah? Sisi pemberontak buta ilmu agama dalam diriku seketika bereaksi: sungguh tidak pantas membandingkan diri dengan Rasulullah. Lalu, pada siapa aku harus bercermin? Bukankah padanya lah terdapat teladan yang baik untuk semua umat? Aku memang tidak akan pernah bisa seperti sosok mulianya, tetapi aku sadar, dengan menjadi baik dan biasa saja belum bisa memenangkan surgaNya.
Selama ini aku mengaku diri Islam dalam lumpur kejahiliyahan, dengan menjalankan perintah yang kumaui dan menolak yang lain. Sepertinya Islam menjadi sangat mudah di jalanku: pilih ajaran yang sesuai dengan keinginanmu, lalu sampaikanlah pada penerima ajaran itu. Sesederhana itu kah? Rasanya berdosa sekali mengubah keagungan sebuah ideoloogi menjadi begitu remeh. Mengutip kalimat sakti ilmuwan penemu teori relativitas yang diagungkan: segala sesuatu harus dibuat sesederhana mungkin, tetapi tidak lebih sederhana; seperti mempersingkat perjalanan darat Jakarta-Surabaya dengan beralih dari jalur pegunungan ke dataran rendah, bukan mengubah jalur menjadi Jakarta-Bandung hanya agar lebih cepat mencapai tujuan. Jangan mempersulit hal mudah, tapi jangan menjadikannya sepele.
Beragama itu pilihan, seperti saat pertama kali aku dilahirkan dalam keadaan suci. Saat pada akhirnya aku memilih Islam sebagai jalan hidupku, aku tahu pasti konsekuensinya, dan itu sangat tidak sepele. Para ahli kitab yang dalam firmanNya dituliskan menyembunyikan kebenaran untuk menunda keislaman mereka, menurutku, karena mereka tahu pasti konsekuensi di balik ‘dua kalimat persaksian’. Bukan sekedar mengakui Allah dan RasulNya untuk kemudian kembali melakukan persaksian setelah bermaksiat.
Saat aku berkata, “Kan ku genggam hidayah ini erat-erat selamanya” bukan berarti seseorang telah memberi cahaya padaku. Aku meyakini hidayah sebagai pencerahan –cahaya matahari yang mengharuskan kita keluar gua untuk mendapatkannya, meskipun pada akhirnya Dia adalah penentu dari setiap ketentuan.
Ideologi itu jalan dan pandangan hidup, begitu penjelasan yang kupahami dari pelajaran Kewarganegaraan sejak SMP. Aku pernah menyangsikan keberadaan Tuhan, menolak sistemNya, dan begitu sombong seperti seorang atheis sok religius. Saat aku memutuskan untuk meyakininya, aku telah siap dan tahu pasti pilihannya: totalitas atau tidak sama sekali. Surga atau neraka, wallahu’alam.
Korupsi, Mahasiswa, dan Masa Depan Moral Bangsa
Korupsi, Mahasiswa, dan Masa Depan Moral Bangsa
Oleh Esty Dyah Imaniar
6 Oktober 2012 memberi baris baru dalam catatan panjang upaya pembersihan moral bangsa. Ribuan orang, tersebar di berbagai ruang publik urban dan suburban, ramai menyuarakan perjuangan penyelamatan Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK). Penangkapan penyidik KPK asal Polri, Novel Baswedan, diperkirakan erat terkait dengan isu pelemahan KPK yang muncul dari rencana revisi UU KPK dan penarikan penyidik KPK dari unsur kepolisian .
Meyakini peran besarnya sebagai agen perubahan, tidak sedikit pemuda bergelar mahasiswa terjun dalam banjir manusia pengusung misi ‘Bersih Indonesia’ tersebut. Semangat penghapusan korupsi sebagai bagian konservasi moral bangsa dihayati mereka dalam kobaran orasi anti-korupsi. Tuntutan pada para pemimpin negeri serta hujatan kepada para pencuri berdasi dilayangkan secara cerdas dalam emosi yang bisa dibilang cukup dewasa. Namun seberapa jauh semangat ‘bersih-bersih’ itu merasuk dalam jiwa mereka?
Dalam perjalanan pulang menuju rumah, kos, atau kampus selepas aksi anti-korupsi, sebagian mahasiswa tentu masih menyimpan semangat perubahan tersebut. Sayangnya, tidak semua intelektual muda itu ingat dan sadar penuh makna perjuangan mereka saat orasi. Pada sudut-sudut sekretariat atau tepi koridor serta lorong-lorong panjang di depan kelas, kelompok itu terkadang melupakan project description dalam tiap aksi #SaveKPK mereka.
Selepas kabar ujian menyebar, menyadari kesibukan organisasi menyediakan tidak cukup waktu untuk persiapan akademik, semangat untuk ‘bersinergi’ saat ujian menjadi jalan pintas. Para aktivis yang sama, almamater ‘Bersih Indonesia’ yang sama, minggu yang sama, tetapi aksi yang berbeda. Sebagian mereka yang berkapasitas intelektual dan moral cukup baik akan memilih untuk percaya pada kemampuan pribadi saat ujian, meskipun terkadang kembali melupakan esensi kejujuran saat jadwal padat rapat internal dan eksternal mengharuskan mereka ‘titip absen’ atau melakukan kejahatan akademik lain, yakni ‘peminjaman’ ide orang lain yang kembali dituliskan dalam bahasa –atau jenis huruf yang berbeda: plagiarisme.
Menyontek saat ujian, titip absen, dan plagiarisme merupakan tiga dari kebiasaan mahasiswa yang semakin berkembang sebagai budaya akademik populer. Sayangnya penggiat kecurangan ini tidak hanya mereka yang kurang memiliki idealisme akademik sejak awal, melainkan para pejuang perubahan dalam berbagai ranah kepemudaan: politik hingga agama.
Sebuah ironi yang membenarkan popularitas hastag #KPK di media sosial sebagai ‘Kemana Pendirian Kita’ yang mengaku aktivis. Seringkali konsep global tentang kejujuran dan kebersihan negara mengaburkan pandangan mahasiswa mengenai kehidupan kampus yang anti-korupsi. Bukankah esensi korupsi adalah kecurangan? Sesuatu yang dapat dipahami seorang idealis manapun sebagai pokok pikiran menyontek, titip absen, dan plagiarisme.
Mochtar Lubis menerangkan bahwa upaya pemberantasan korupsi tercatat secara resmi sejak pembentukan Panitia Retooling Aparatur Negara (Paran) pada masa Kabinet Juanda. Namun sebenarnya sejarah panjang korupsi telah dimulai sejak zaman pendudukan Belanda, ketika budaya upeti masih menjadi gaya hidup para priyayi. Dalam perkembangannya, upaya pemerintah RI menghapuskan segala bentuk korupsi dimanifestasikan melalui berbagai peraturan perundangan seperti UU No 31 tahun 1999 jo UU No 20 tahun 2001 hingga pembentukan Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK) pada Desember 2003. Namun sebagaimana nilai kebaikan yang universal, jalan terjal pemberantasan korupsi pun terasa sangat universal dalam berbagai wilayah otonomi dan pusat pemerintahan RI.
Dalam Lexicon Webster Dictionary , korupsi (corruption) diartikan sebagai ketidakjujuran; tidak bermoral; penyimpangan dari kesucian. Mengacu pada definisi tersebut, sangat jelas bahwa potensi korupsi tidak hanya berada di rumah mewah para anggota dewan maupun ruang nyaman para pejabat pemerintah. Seorang rakyat jelata tanpa pondasi moral yang baik pun dapat melakukannya dengan profesional, termasuk para pemuda yang akan melanjutkan roda kepemimpinan bangsa di masa depan.
Sebagaimana das solen dan das sein jarang menemui kesepakatan mereka, kondisi ideal mahasiswa sebagai pemuda agen perubahan dan tulang punggung bangsa seringkali kontra dengan degradasi idealisme mereka. Misi mulia penghapusan korupsi justru terhambat aksi korupsi yang secara tidak sadar telah membudaya dalam kampus para penggiat kejujuran tersebut. Maka bukan tidak mungkin kesuksesan perjuangan idealis para pendahulu mereka perlahan terkikis semangat pragmatis generasi terkini.
Data Worldbank menunjukkan sebab seseorang korupsi terbesar adalah buruknya etika, diikuti adanya kesempatan, kecilnya sanksi atau penangkapan, minimnya pendapatan, serta lingkungan atau kebiasaan yang mendukung. Acuan yang sangat relevan untuk mengomparasi fakta kecurangan para koruptor pejabat dan mahasiswa. Seorang koruptor beretika buruk tidak bersedia bekerja keras sementara menginginkan hasil yang besar. Ketidakmampuan bersusah ini sayangnya tidak disertai penerimaan legawa saat hasil yang didapat tidak sesuai.
Sebagai orang yang kurang memahami arti konsekuensi, koruptor pejabat tidak peduli pada kausalitas kinerja buruk, pangkat rendah, dan penghasilan tidak memadai. Sama halnya dengan koruptor mahasiswa yang kurang memahami hubungan sebab-akibat sering absen, tidak sempat belajar sebelum ujian, dan nilai buruk. Nihilnya pemahaman akan konsekuensi tersebut mengantarkan para koruptor menuju ‘pintu kemana saja’: melakukan apapun demi kemanfaatan pribadi. Istilah populernya, pragmatis.
Dewasa ini terma idealis sering dikontrakan dengan pragmatis, sesuatu yang wajar meninjau sejarah kelahiran dan perkembangan keduanya di Eropa dan Amerika. Albertine Minderop mendefinisikan pragmatisme sebagai paham yang menilai nilai kebenaran sebagai asas kemanfaatan. Hal ini menjadikan sesuatu hanya bernilai benar jika hal tersebut bermanfaat bagi seseorang. Maka eksekusi nilai ideologi penganut pragmatisme akan sangat dinamis dan cenderung oportunis –sesuatu yang dinilai berseberangan dengan nilai idealisme.
Lantas ketika pelabelan identitas, termasuk mahasiswa, turut menyertakan parameter ini sebagai poin penting identifikasi, menjadi idealis atau pragmatis mutlak sebagai opsi. Hanya kesadaran identitas dan idealisme yang dapat membantu mereka mengonstruksi label masing-masing.
Menjadi generasi anti-korupsi penting dikampanyekan mahasiswa dalam upaya penanganan degradasi moral bangsa. Namun alangkah bijak saat semua usaha ‘pembersihan’ tersebut dimulai dari diri sendiri dan lingkungan terdekat. Ketika budaya menyontek, titip absen, dan plagiarisme masih kuat melekat di kampus para aktivis –bahkan mungkin melibatkan partisipasi mereka– pergerakan anti-korupsi sebaiknya tidak sekedar menjadi slogan demonstrasi. Sehingga para pejuang generasi ini benar-benar bergerak atas dasar keyakinan, pemahaman, dan kenyataan. Bukan sekedar beramai memenuhi ruang publik sebagai ‘aktivis ranah konsep’.
Dalam rangka konservasi moral bangsa dan menghayati semangat Sumpah Pemuda tahun ini, akan sangat esensial sekaligus monumental jika para pemuda, khususnya mahasiswa sebagai generasi penerus pejuang intelektual, bersumpah pada diri sendiri, Tuhan, serta negara, untuk menjadi bangsa yang satu, bangsa yang anti-korupsi.
Oleh Esty Dyah Imaniar
6 Oktober 2012 memberi baris baru dalam catatan panjang upaya pembersihan moral bangsa. Ribuan orang, tersebar di berbagai ruang publik urban dan suburban, ramai menyuarakan perjuangan penyelamatan Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK). Penangkapan penyidik KPK asal Polri, Novel Baswedan, diperkirakan erat terkait dengan isu pelemahan KPK yang muncul dari rencana revisi UU KPK dan penarikan penyidik KPK dari unsur kepolisian .
Meyakini peran besarnya sebagai agen perubahan, tidak sedikit pemuda bergelar mahasiswa terjun dalam banjir manusia pengusung misi ‘Bersih Indonesia’ tersebut. Semangat penghapusan korupsi sebagai bagian konservasi moral bangsa dihayati mereka dalam kobaran orasi anti-korupsi. Tuntutan pada para pemimpin negeri serta hujatan kepada para pencuri berdasi dilayangkan secara cerdas dalam emosi yang bisa dibilang cukup dewasa. Namun seberapa jauh semangat ‘bersih-bersih’ itu merasuk dalam jiwa mereka?
Dalam perjalanan pulang menuju rumah, kos, atau kampus selepas aksi anti-korupsi, sebagian mahasiswa tentu masih menyimpan semangat perubahan tersebut. Sayangnya, tidak semua intelektual muda itu ingat dan sadar penuh makna perjuangan mereka saat orasi. Pada sudut-sudut sekretariat atau tepi koridor serta lorong-lorong panjang di depan kelas, kelompok itu terkadang melupakan project description dalam tiap aksi #SaveKPK mereka.
Selepas kabar ujian menyebar, menyadari kesibukan organisasi menyediakan tidak cukup waktu untuk persiapan akademik, semangat untuk ‘bersinergi’ saat ujian menjadi jalan pintas. Para aktivis yang sama, almamater ‘Bersih Indonesia’ yang sama, minggu yang sama, tetapi aksi yang berbeda. Sebagian mereka yang berkapasitas intelektual dan moral cukup baik akan memilih untuk percaya pada kemampuan pribadi saat ujian, meskipun terkadang kembali melupakan esensi kejujuran saat jadwal padat rapat internal dan eksternal mengharuskan mereka ‘titip absen’ atau melakukan kejahatan akademik lain, yakni ‘peminjaman’ ide orang lain yang kembali dituliskan dalam bahasa –atau jenis huruf yang berbeda: plagiarisme.
Menyontek saat ujian, titip absen, dan plagiarisme merupakan tiga dari kebiasaan mahasiswa yang semakin berkembang sebagai budaya akademik populer. Sayangnya penggiat kecurangan ini tidak hanya mereka yang kurang memiliki idealisme akademik sejak awal, melainkan para pejuang perubahan dalam berbagai ranah kepemudaan: politik hingga agama.
Sebuah ironi yang membenarkan popularitas hastag #KPK di media sosial sebagai ‘Kemana Pendirian Kita’ yang mengaku aktivis. Seringkali konsep global tentang kejujuran dan kebersihan negara mengaburkan pandangan mahasiswa mengenai kehidupan kampus yang anti-korupsi. Bukankah esensi korupsi adalah kecurangan? Sesuatu yang dapat dipahami seorang idealis manapun sebagai pokok pikiran menyontek, titip absen, dan plagiarisme.
Mochtar Lubis menerangkan bahwa upaya pemberantasan korupsi tercatat secara resmi sejak pembentukan Panitia Retooling Aparatur Negara (Paran) pada masa Kabinet Juanda. Namun sebenarnya sejarah panjang korupsi telah dimulai sejak zaman pendudukan Belanda, ketika budaya upeti masih menjadi gaya hidup para priyayi. Dalam perkembangannya, upaya pemerintah RI menghapuskan segala bentuk korupsi dimanifestasikan melalui berbagai peraturan perundangan seperti UU No 31 tahun 1999 jo UU No 20 tahun 2001 hingga pembentukan Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK) pada Desember 2003. Namun sebagaimana nilai kebaikan yang universal, jalan terjal pemberantasan korupsi pun terasa sangat universal dalam berbagai wilayah otonomi dan pusat pemerintahan RI.
Dalam Lexicon Webster Dictionary , korupsi (corruption) diartikan sebagai ketidakjujuran; tidak bermoral; penyimpangan dari kesucian. Mengacu pada definisi tersebut, sangat jelas bahwa potensi korupsi tidak hanya berada di rumah mewah para anggota dewan maupun ruang nyaman para pejabat pemerintah. Seorang rakyat jelata tanpa pondasi moral yang baik pun dapat melakukannya dengan profesional, termasuk para pemuda yang akan melanjutkan roda kepemimpinan bangsa di masa depan.
Sebagaimana das solen dan das sein jarang menemui kesepakatan mereka, kondisi ideal mahasiswa sebagai pemuda agen perubahan dan tulang punggung bangsa seringkali kontra dengan degradasi idealisme mereka. Misi mulia penghapusan korupsi justru terhambat aksi korupsi yang secara tidak sadar telah membudaya dalam kampus para penggiat kejujuran tersebut. Maka bukan tidak mungkin kesuksesan perjuangan idealis para pendahulu mereka perlahan terkikis semangat pragmatis generasi terkini.
Data Worldbank menunjukkan sebab seseorang korupsi terbesar adalah buruknya etika, diikuti adanya kesempatan, kecilnya sanksi atau penangkapan, minimnya pendapatan, serta lingkungan atau kebiasaan yang mendukung. Acuan yang sangat relevan untuk mengomparasi fakta kecurangan para koruptor pejabat dan mahasiswa. Seorang koruptor beretika buruk tidak bersedia bekerja keras sementara menginginkan hasil yang besar. Ketidakmampuan bersusah ini sayangnya tidak disertai penerimaan legawa saat hasil yang didapat tidak sesuai.
Sebagai orang yang kurang memahami arti konsekuensi, koruptor pejabat tidak peduli pada kausalitas kinerja buruk, pangkat rendah, dan penghasilan tidak memadai. Sama halnya dengan koruptor mahasiswa yang kurang memahami hubungan sebab-akibat sering absen, tidak sempat belajar sebelum ujian, dan nilai buruk. Nihilnya pemahaman akan konsekuensi tersebut mengantarkan para koruptor menuju ‘pintu kemana saja’: melakukan apapun demi kemanfaatan pribadi. Istilah populernya, pragmatis.
Dewasa ini terma idealis sering dikontrakan dengan pragmatis, sesuatu yang wajar meninjau sejarah kelahiran dan perkembangan keduanya di Eropa dan Amerika. Albertine Minderop mendefinisikan pragmatisme sebagai paham yang menilai nilai kebenaran sebagai asas kemanfaatan. Hal ini menjadikan sesuatu hanya bernilai benar jika hal tersebut bermanfaat bagi seseorang. Maka eksekusi nilai ideologi penganut pragmatisme akan sangat dinamis dan cenderung oportunis –sesuatu yang dinilai berseberangan dengan nilai idealisme.
Lantas ketika pelabelan identitas, termasuk mahasiswa, turut menyertakan parameter ini sebagai poin penting identifikasi, menjadi idealis atau pragmatis mutlak sebagai opsi. Hanya kesadaran identitas dan idealisme yang dapat membantu mereka mengonstruksi label masing-masing.
Menjadi generasi anti-korupsi penting dikampanyekan mahasiswa dalam upaya penanganan degradasi moral bangsa. Namun alangkah bijak saat semua usaha ‘pembersihan’ tersebut dimulai dari diri sendiri dan lingkungan terdekat. Ketika budaya menyontek, titip absen, dan plagiarisme masih kuat melekat di kampus para aktivis –bahkan mungkin melibatkan partisipasi mereka– pergerakan anti-korupsi sebaiknya tidak sekedar menjadi slogan demonstrasi. Sehingga para pejuang generasi ini benar-benar bergerak atas dasar keyakinan, pemahaman, dan kenyataan. Bukan sekedar beramai memenuhi ruang publik sebagai ‘aktivis ranah konsep’.
Dalam rangka konservasi moral bangsa dan menghayati semangat Sumpah Pemuda tahun ini, akan sangat esensial sekaligus monumental jika para pemuda, khususnya mahasiswa sebagai generasi penerus pejuang intelektual, bersumpah pada diri sendiri, Tuhan, serta negara, untuk menjadi bangsa yang satu, bangsa yang anti-korupsi.
Face(s) of America: Changes of God’s Authority in American Society (Journey of Religion from Puritanism – Transcendentalism)
Introduction
The birth of America was the birth of religion freedom. The term ‘freedom’ successfully applied in the development of US religion; the wide gate of probability to welcome new era coming with new ideology which shapes new face of the current ideology. The ‘main’ religion in US history was Calvinist Christianity. However, it grew into some new faces of the later US Christianity due to the emergence of new interpretation of religions, such as Deism, Unitarianism, and Transcendentalism. They are not even seen merely in the case of Christianity doctrines but religion in a universal meaning.
Those first four ideologies in early America indicate the changing identity of US society –although the ideas are not simply represented the whole society of it. Tracking the journey of God in those four isms, I see the way American society construct their identity through their bound with God. It supports the idea of being ‘protestant’ including the spirit to always have new ‘innovation’ of religion by critically re-considering current ideology.
Religion can be seen as a cultural production which is constructed based on certain system of ‘supply and demand’ (Finke, 1997). How this idea works can be seen on the history of American thought. Each new ism comes as the answer of the previous one(s). It can be totally new, half new, or re-appear merely as an old concept in a new name. As a cultural production, the emergence of certain ism cannot be separated from its social background to explain what kind of society owning the demand of religion that the thinker should give supply for it.
According to Hegel’s theory on “thesis – antithesis – synthesis”, the new isms usually come with an additional knowledge or system of thought. They were born to complete the previous ones either in a whole concept or a certain focus. Hence, there will be certain ‘silver line’ connecting the dynamical changing on a particular issue.
In this writing, I will focus on the changing of God’s authority upon American society during the era of Puritanism, Deism, Unitarianism, and Transcendentalism. Later on, this journey of thought is importance to conceptualize the face (identity) of American society since religion is somehow attached –at least, personally– to certain identity of people.
Discussion
Basic Principles of Ideology
Puritanism came as a breakthrough of current Rome Catholic atmosphere which is viewed as a corrupt disenchanted institution. Based on the idea of Geoffrey Moor in his book entitled American Literature, the basic ideas of Puritanism is defined as follow; 1) total and innate depravity, 2) unconditional election, 3) prevenient and irresistable grace, 4) preseverence of the saints, 5) limited atonement (Sardjana, 1988).
In the era of European and American enlightenment, Deism was born in a more extreme way of thinking. It is not only protesting the institution of religion but also refuse the institutionalization of religion (Horton & Ewards, 1974; Sardjana, 1988; Suseno, 2006). This thinking was the first step to have an open-minded religion culture of US society. Its basic concepts are; 1) that there is a God, 2) that He ought to be worshipped, 3) that piety and virtue are the essentials of worship, 4) that man ought to repent his sins, 5) that there are rewards and punishment in a future life (Horton & Ewards, 1974; Sardjana, 1988).
As the effect of mass growing on science and technology, Unitarianism appeared with a more diffuse ‘rituals’ of religion (Blau, 1965; Horton & Ewards, 1974; Sardjana, 1988). This ideology give more rooms for human development as it can be seen from its basic principles as follow: 1) the fatherhood of God, 2) the brotherhood of man, 3) the leadership of Jesus, 4) salvation by character, 5) the progress on mankind onward and upward forever (Holman, et al, 1986 in Sardjana, 1988).
The last ism had the strongest concept of preserving human power, authority, and dignity. According to Holman, et al (1986), the basic principles of Transcendentalism are; 1) it is important to live close to nature, 2) every person’s relation to God is a personal matter to be established directly by the individual rather than through formal religion, 3) human beings are divine in their own right, 4) self-trust and self-reliance are to be practised all times since to trust oneself was really to trust the voice of God speaking through us, 5) it is important to support reform movements which foster human potential such as the abolition of slavery and the enfranchisement of women (Sardjana, 1988).
The Authority of God and Individual Position
In the early development of American thought, Puritanism had its huge number of believer since the holy purpose on purifying Christianity as the religion of God. For these people, God has the biggest power and authority among all. Having the role to be the Creator, Supervisor, and the Judge in the day of Final Judgment, God is the One connected with every single line of life. In the most extreme idea, Puritans had a big dream to create a nation upon religion base or theocracy (for maintaining its law, government, and society) (Blau, 1965; Marty, 1988; Sardjana, 1988).
Individual position in the case of arguments (thoughts) distribution is not important due to the existence of clergies as the only justifiable people to interpret Bible. Different point of view in religion sectional is forbidden because of the doctrine believing in the Divine Unity. Moreover, every ‘different’ thinker considered have dangerous ideology such as Thomas Hooker, Roger Williams, and Anne Hutchinson were alienated and punished.
However, authority of God was decreased in the emergence of Deism. God is deemed only as the Creator. There is no authority of God to control or supervise human’s life. The destiny of man is determined by their deed. This thought diminished the role of God as the Elector of human’s future life; whether they are included as the chosen people of heaven or not (Blau, 1965; Foerster, 1980; Sardjana, 1988). God created the world, creatures, and a permanent system to control it before leaving it all works alone. Men are the ones responsible to control and drive their lives.
The face of God is painted in some emotive descriptions such as merciful and graceful (Amstrong, 2003; Suseno, 2006). This concept contradicted with Puritans belief on God as the ‘Executor’ and the One giving men the ‘origin of sin’ of Adam and Eve. The notion of excluding men from the story of Fallen Adam in this belief encourages people to live the life in an optimistic way. According to their basic principles number 3, it is not the doctrine of the church to measure one’s good deed, but something related with humanism (piety and virtue). Therefore, to get positive position in the eyes of God, man has to have good attitude with others.
Coming in the era of enlightenment, Deism gave big portion of human development in the form of freedom of thinking. It was the way far different with Puritanism which limited the access of knowledge. Deistic people considered human as the owner of high authority thus they have to explore it. In addition, they accept as true that the success of man is determined by the development of their brain, not by religious doctrine (Sardjana, 1988).
In the journey of Unitarian, this ism declines trinity system of God as one of Calvinism characteristic. There is only one God to be worshipped. They believe no in Holy Ghost and declare Jesus as a man gifted by great leadership skill. Unitarianism put human in a higher position and reduce the authority of God since they believe that God lies inside human. Accepting this kind of notion, Unitarians see God not as the Determinant of their destiny since they (man and God) both work ‘together’ –men do what God said to them.
God or Religion = New Identity
In the era of Puritanism, religion principles should be practiced under the dogma of church. Besides, as the representation of God in the earth, a nation should make its constitution based on Bible. Religion had strong collocation with activity and thought of group (congregation). Thus, individual identity should stand for group (congregation) identity. This condition leads to the important role of religion as the ‘bond’ of people grouped in certain congregation for constructing one’s identity. Hence, identity of people is determined by the belonging of certain group of religion, not merely by the essence belief of God.
Deism, however, disagree with the idea of religion rituals. They believe in God, but they put religion as an individual interest. They refuse the Puritan congregation system as form of collecting people to do some rituals in certain place. The term ‘essentials of religion’ in Deism’s basic principles shows that religion’ rituals have no strong role in this ism. For these people, religion is no more the only way for God to communicate with men. These people appreciate every individual to ‘customize’ their own religion based on their own understanding. Religious leadership should be separated with governmental issue. Therefore, religious institution has less authority to control society and personal thought is well acknowledged. At the end of the day, Deism put God as the parameter of identity, not by formalizing the belief into certain religion (rituals).
Conclusion
The changing of God’s authority upon American society during the era of Puritanism, Deism, Unitarianism, and Transcendentalism creates different characteristic of group of people. Since belief is strongly related with one’s identity, to frame American identity by portraying its religion means to identify each personal idea of God. The history of US religion shows process of religion development in particular of its way of seeing God and the application of principles answering His existence.
From the journey of Puritanism until Transcendentalism, I conclude the way of thinking of American as a ‘protestant’ to always re-considering their belief and fix it with the current condition. The existence of a religion is determined by its ability to confer with current condition; what the society needs (demand).
In term of religion identity, US society attached themselves to a group (congregation) identity in the era of Puritanism. Later on, Deism creates the sense of ‘religious essentialism’ which concerns more in the personal relation with God; therefore communal identity is no longer glorious. The two late beliefs (Unitarianism and Transcendentalism) are way more moderate by strengthen the concept of vertical relationship and put human in a highest position of authority and dignity. Those ideas create some notion of not obeying outer authority, one way to personally interpret and ‘customize’ their own religion.
Bibliography
Amstrong, K. (2003). Sejarah tuhan: Kisah pencarian tuhan yang dilakukan oleh orang-orang yahusi, kristen, dan islam selama 4.000 tahun.Bandung: Mizan Media Utama.
Blau, J. L. (1965). Men and movements in american philosophy.New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Finke, R. (1997). The illusion of shifting demand: Supply-side interpretations of american religious history. In T. A. Tweed (Ed.), Retelling u.S. Religious history.Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Foerster, N. (1980). Image of america: Our literature from puritanism to the space age.London: University of Notre Dame Press.
Horton, R. W., & Ewards, H. W. (1974). Background of american literary thought.London: Prentice Hall International, Inc.
Marty, M. E. (1988). Religion in america. In L. S. Luedtke (Ed.), Making america: The society and culture of the united states.Washington DC: United States Information Agency.
Sardjana, B. M. (1988). Ambivalensi pikiran nathanael hawthorne dalam the scarlet letter. Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta.
Suseno, F. M. (2006). Menalar tuhan.Yogyakarta: Penerbit Kanisius.
The birth of America was the birth of religion freedom. The term ‘freedom’ successfully applied in the development of US religion; the wide gate of probability to welcome new era coming with new ideology which shapes new face of the current ideology. The ‘main’ religion in US history was Calvinist Christianity. However, it grew into some new faces of the later US Christianity due to the emergence of new interpretation of religions, such as Deism, Unitarianism, and Transcendentalism. They are not even seen merely in the case of Christianity doctrines but religion in a universal meaning.
Those first four ideologies in early America indicate the changing identity of US society –although the ideas are not simply represented the whole society of it. Tracking the journey of God in those four isms, I see the way American society construct their identity through their bound with God. It supports the idea of being ‘protestant’ including the spirit to always have new ‘innovation’ of religion by critically re-considering current ideology.
Religion can be seen as a cultural production which is constructed based on certain system of ‘supply and demand’ (Finke, 1997). How this idea works can be seen on the history of American thought. Each new ism comes as the answer of the previous one(s). It can be totally new, half new, or re-appear merely as an old concept in a new name. As a cultural production, the emergence of certain ism cannot be separated from its social background to explain what kind of society owning the demand of religion that the thinker should give supply for it.
According to Hegel’s theory on “thesis – antithesis – synthesis”, the new isms usually come with an additional knowledge or system of thought. They were born to complete the previous ones either in a whole concept or a certain focus. Hence, there will be certain ‘silver line’ connecting the dynamical changing on a particular issue.
In this writing, I will focus on the changing of God’s authority upon American society during the era of Puritanism, Deism, Unitarianism, and Transcendentalism. Later on, this journey of thought is importance to conceptualize the face (identity) of American society since religion is somehow attached –at least, personally– to certain identity of people.
Discussion
Basic Principles of Ideology
Puritanism came as a breakthrough of current Rome Catholic atmosphere which is viewed as a corrupt disenchanted institution. Based on the idea of Geoffrey Moor in his book entitled American Literature, the basic ideas of Puritanism is defined as follow; 1) total and innate depravity, 2) unconditional election, 3) prevenient and irresistable grace, 4) preseverence of the saints, 5) limited atonement (Sardjana, 1988).
In the era of European and American enlightenment, Deism was born in a more extreme way of thinking. It is not only protesting the institution of religion but also refuse the institutionalization of religion (Horton & Ewards, 1974; Sardjana, 1988; Suseno, 2006). This thinking was the first step to have an open-minded religion culture of US society. Its basic concepts are; 1) that there is a God, 2) that He ought to be worshipped, 3) that piety and virtue are the essentials of worship, 4) that man ought to repent his sins, 5) that there are rewards and punishment in a future life (Horton & Ewards, 1974; Sardjana, 1988).
As the effect of mass growing on science and technology, Unitarianism appeared with a more diffuse ‘rituals’ of religion (Blau, 1965; Horton & Ewards, 1974; Sardjana, 1988). This ideology give more rooms for human development as it can be seen from its basic principles as follow: 1) the fatherhood of God, 2) the brotherhood of man, 3) the leadership of Jesus, 4) salvation by character, 5) the progress on mankind onward and upward forever (Holman, et al, 1986 in Sardjana, 1988).
The last ism had the strongest concept of preserving human power, authority, and dignity. According to Holman, et al (1986), the basic principles of Transcendentalism are; 1) it is important to live close to nature, 2) every person’s relation to God is a personal matter to be established directly by the individual rather than through formal religion, 3) human beings are divine in their own right, 4) self-trust and self-reliance are to be practised all times since to trust oneself was really to trust the voice of God speaking through us, 5) it is important to support reform movements which foster human potential such as the abolition of slavery and the enfranchisement of women (Sardjana, 1988).
The Authority of God and Individual Position
In the early development of American thought, Puritanism had its huge number of believer since the holy purpose on purifying Christianity as the religion of God. For these people, God has the biggest power and authority among all. Having the role to be the Creator, Supervisor, and the Judge in the day of Final Judgment, God is the One connected with every single line of life. In the most extreme idea, Puritans had a big dream to create a nation upon religion base or theocracy (for maintaining its law, government, and society) (Blau, 1965; Marty, 1988; Sardjana, 1988).
Individual position in the case of arguments (thoughts) distribution is not important due to the existence of clergies as the only justifiable people to interpret Bible. Different point of view in religion sectional is forbidden because of the doctrine believing in the Divine Unity. Moreover, every ‘different’ thinker considered have dangerous ideology such as Thomas Hooker, Roger Williams, and Anne Hutchinson were alienated and punished.
However, authority of God was decreased in the emergence of Deism. God is deemed only as the Creator. There is no authority of God to control or supervise human’s life. The destiny of man is determined by their deed. This thought diminished the role of God as the Elector of human’s future life; whether they are included as the chosen people of heaven or not (Blau, 1965; Foerster, 1980; Sardjana, 1988). God created the world, creatures, and a permanent system to control it before leaving it all works alone. Men are the ones responsible to control and drive their lives.
The face of God is painted in some emotive descriptions such as merciful and graceful (Amstrong, 2003; Suseno, 2006). This concept contradicted with Puritans belief on God as the ‘Executor’ and the One giving men the ‘origin of sin’ of Adam and Eve. The notion of excluding men from the story of Fallen Adam in this belief encourages people to live the life in an optimistic way. According to their basic principles number 3, it is not the doctrine of the church to measure one’s good deed, but something related with humanism (piety and virtue). Therefore, to get positive position in the eyes of God, man has to have good attitude with others.
Coming in the era of enlightenment, Deism gave big portion of human development in the form of freedom of thinking. It was the way far different with Puritanism which limited the access of knowledge. Deistic people considered human as the owner of high authority thus they have to explore it. In addition, they accept as true that the success of man is determined by the development of their brain, not by religious doctrine (Sardjana, 1988).
In the journey of Unitarian, this ism declines trinity system of God as one of Calvinism characteristic. There is only one God to be worshipped. They believe no in Holy Ghost and declare Jesus as a man gifted by great leadership skill. Unitarianism put human in a higher position and reduce the authority of God since they believe that God lies inside human. Accepting this kind of notion, Unitarians see God not as the Determinant of their destiny since they (man and God) both work ‘together’ –men do what God said to them.
God or Religion = New Identity
In the era of Puritanism, religion principles should be practiced under the dogma of church. Besides, as the representation of God in the earth, a nation should make its constitution based on Bible. Religion had strong collocation with activity and thought of group (congregation). Thus, individual identity should stand for group (congregation) identity. This condition leads to the important role of religion as the ‘bond’ of people grouped in certain congregation for constructing one’s identity. Hence, identity of people is determined by the belonging of certain group of religion, not merely by the essence belief of God.
Deism, however, disagree with the idea of religion rituals. They believe in God, but they put religion as an individual interest. They refuse the Puritan congregation system as form of collecting people to do some rituals in certain place. The term ‘essentials of religion’ in Deism’s basic principles shows that religion’ rituals have no strong role in this ism. For these people, religion is no more the only way for God to communicate with men. These people appreciate every individual to ‘customize’ their own religion based on their own understanding. Religious leadership should be separated with governmental issue. Therefore, religious institution has less authority to control society and personal thought is well acknowledged. At the end of the day, Deism put God as the parameter of identity, not by formalizing the belief into certain religion (rituals).
Conclusion
The changing of God’s authority upon American society during the era of Puritanism, Deism, Unitarianism, and Transcendentalism creates different characteristic of group of people. Since belief is strongly related with one’s identity, to frame American identity by portraying its religion means to identify each personal idea of God. The history of US religion shows process of religion development in particular of its way of seeing God and the application of principles answering His existence.
From the journey of Puritanism until Transcendentalism, I conclude the way of thinking of American as a ‘protestant’ to always re-considering their belief and fix it with the current condition. The existence of a religion is determined by its ability to confer with current condition; what the society needs (demand).
In term of religion identity, US society attached themselves to a group (congregation) identity in the era of Puritanism. Later on, Deism creates the sense of ‘religious essentialism’ which concerns more in the personal relation with God; therefore communal identity is no longer glorious. The two late beliefs (Unitarianism and Transcendentalism) are way more moderate by strengthen the concept of vertical relationship and put human in a highest position of authority and dignity. Those ideas create some notion of not obeying outer authority, one way to personally interpret and ‘customize’ their own religion.
Bibliography
Amstrong, K. (2003). Sejarah tuhan: Kisah pencarian tuhan yang dilakukan oleh orang-orang yahusi, kristen, dan islam selama 4.000 tahun.Bandung: Mizan Media Utama.
Blau, J. L. (1965). Men and movements in american philosophy.New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Finke, R. (1997). The illusion of shifting demand: Supply-side interpretations of american religious history. In T. A. Tweed (Ed.), Retelling u.S. Religious history.Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Foerster, N. (1980). Image of america: Our literature from puritanism to the space age.London: University of Notre Dame Press.
Horton, R. W., & Ewards, H. W. (1974). Background of american literary thought.London: Prentice Hall International, Inc.
Marty, M. E. (1988). Religion in america. In L. S. Luedtke (Ed.), Making america: The society and culture of the united states.Washington DC: United States Information Agency.
Sardjana, B. M. (1988). Ambivalensi pikiran nathanael hawthorne dalam the scarlet letter. Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta.
Suseno, F. M. (2006). Menalar tuhan.Yogyakarta: Penerbit Kanisius.
Civil Disobedience and Individual Right Empowerment in US Society
Introduction
Civil Disobedience is recognized as the pioneer of formal action of society resistance toward government in the history of United States. This term comes in the essay of Henry David Thoreau written in the time of war between America and Mexico during the territorial expansion on purpose of applying the notion of ‘manifest destiny’(Diggins, 1987; Horton & Ewards, 1974; Luedtke, 1990; Sardjana, 1988; Zinn, 1980).
Comes with the idea of not directly obeying every single rule made by the government, civil disobedience has awakened US society to the importance of self dignity and sovereignty. This concept later helps US philosophers to generate the basic principles of individualism in the US history until today’s struggle of individual rights empowerment.
As one of the most significant events in US history, the emergence of civil disobedience shapes the character of US society (Sardjana, 1988; Stevenson, 1998). For being known as the most open and critical society, US citizens have their democracy development as the fastest as well as the role model in the world. This fact is shown clearly in the improvement number of struggle of democracy and human rights –which increases not only in term of amount but also types and medium. Even if US society is hardly involved politically by registering themselves to be part of House of Representatives, their political involvements are expressed through the new form of nowadays civil disobedience. This is exactly tracking the line of Thoreau’s struggle concept of civil disobedience that the regeneration of society must begin with self-regeneration, not political participation (Diggins, 1987).
Most of the previous civil disobedience studies focus merely in portraying this action and relating it with political policy of US government (Diggins, 1987; Horton & Ewards, 1974; Luedtke, 1990; Sardjana, 1988; Taylor, 2000; Zinn, 1980). Somehow, as a democratic country, US put the people to have the highest authority through the idea of government of the society, by the society, and for the society. Therefore democracy gives a big portion of any individual to take part in the running of government, particularly in the decision-making process. *I should explain more: the relation between civil disobedience and the character shaping of US society –something ended with ‘therefore’*
This paper is aimed to improve new understanding of US civil disobedience in the history and the significant effect of its emergence toward US development, specifically in the shaping of US society character as democratic individual.
Discussion
Civil Disobedience
Opposing the war between US and Mexico, Henry David Thoreau, a writer living in Massachusetts, refused to pay his poll tax in 1846. He was jailed for three days and released after his friend paid it secretly. Thoreau made his lecture of “Resistance to Civil Government” based on essay entitled Civil Disobedience as a critique to government’s decision in Mexican war. Nevertheless, Thoreau did not specifically write his protest toward US government in the detail of the war. As a transcendentalist, he concern more in the idea of self-government; how to see individual as the owner of a high independent authority (Diggins, 1987; Horton & Ewards, 1974; Sardjana, 1988; States, 2005; Zinn, 1980).
Civil Disobedience explain some ‘eternal’ pro-contra issues in many types of society around the world such as majority and minority right, social and individual right, government and society interest, liberal individualism and liberal pluralism, and a brief concept explanation of radical individualism (Diggins, 1987).
Considering the historical emergence background, civil disobedience can be applied whenever any government breaks the role to protect people’s right and safeguard their interest. However, in the case of today’s US application of civil disobedience, many scholars put ‘lack of management’ as the problem of ‘controlling’ civil disobedience (Diggins, 1987; Luedtke, 1990; Stevenson, 1998).
The formula of existence
It is not Thoreau who is the first thinker of civil disobedience even since the idea even has existed in the era of John Locke. The spirit of ‘people as the owner of highest authority’ is actually the main idea of self-government. The typical questions of what so importance important with civil disobedience and why it survives until today can be answered at least by three points of reason; the strong historical background (Mexican War), the political grounds (Declaration of Independence), and the helps of internalized myths in US society (self-made man and woman, American Dream, the Chosen people) that helps the existence of civil disobedience to be one of the nature characterization of today’s US society.
Why does it matter?
The reason why civil disobedience matters for US development can be seen for the society (characteristic) development after the introduction to with the idea of civil disobedience. US society is now well known as the most open and critical society where every governmental action can be viewed more easily through mass media. This nation characteristic is shaped by many factors; one of them is the idea of civil disobedience because of its huge space available for them to be critical toward power and authority outside a man’s.
To be a critical citizen can be simply defined as a ‘protestant’ –who loved nothing so much s to protest, to question, and deny authority(Diggins, 1987; Moten, 2007). For these people, there will be no submissive without questions. The scenario when the people approve the government system or rule only happens after the negotiation, at least one which placed inside them. The negotiation, also known as US culture of self-criticize, deals with questioning and re-thinking its benefits to take decision or action. It can be sum up that there is no ‘governmental works’ which is not under their supervision. As a form of civil disobedience, this culture is now still exist –and even grows bigger– in US society.
Civil Disobedience in US society nowadays
Today’s civil disobedience comes with the different reasons, forms, and media. Their acts are legally protected by the government under some specific laws such as The Freedom of Information Act (1966) and The Privacy Act (1974) that allow all Americans to see whatever information government agencies, federal, state, and local, might have on them (Stevenson, 1998). Considering Thoreau’s proposal of the not-a-big-sense for politically involved in the parliament, US people tend to express their disobedience through some popular products and art works.
Movies, music, and literary works protesting government policies are spread out and consumed with no boundaries. The birth of new media significantly helps the people to ‘shout’ their protest to government more easily. In all cases of this new movement, the idea of civil disobedience is highlighted in the individual effort of preserving the self-dignity over every outer authority and power. However, critiques rise to these new ways of civil disobedience as it is judged to be less effective compared to its historical victory.
Conclusion
The spirit of civil disobedience comes since the revolution of US which is manifested in the Declaration of Independence. This concept still exists as the process of democracy development of US society. Civil disobedience expands as one of the political idea of US government as well as the indicator of US people’s characteristic. To be a critical-minded individual as part of US society means to have a society consist of people who are aware of their power and authority. Therefore, in the development of US society, the emergence of civil disobedience is significant to create the idea of individual rights empowerment of which self dignity, authority, sovereignty is uphold.
Bibliography
Diggins, J. P. (1987). Civil disobedience and american political thought. In L. S. Luedtke (Ed.), Making america: The society and culture of the united states.Washington DC: United States Information Agency.
Horton, R. W., & Ewards, H. W. (1974). Background of american literary thought.London: Prentice Hall International, Inc.
Luedtke, L. S. (1990). A reader's guide to making america: The society ans culture of the united states.Washington DC: United States Information Agency.
Moten, F. (2007). Democracy. In B. Burgett & G. Hendler (Eds.), Keywords for american cultural studies.New York: New York University Press.
Sardjana, B. M. (1988). Ambivalensi pikiran nathanael hawthorne dalam the scarlet letter. Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta.
States, B. o. I. I. P. U. (2005). Outline of u.S. History. In D. o. State (Ed.).
Stevenson, D. K. (Ed.). (1998). American life and institutions.Washington DC: Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs US Information Agency.
Taylor, R. L. (2000). Government of the people: The role of the citizen. In R. T. Targonski (Ed.), Outline of us government:Office of International Information Programs US Department of State.
Zinn, H. (1980). A people's history of the united states.New York: Harper Collins Publisher.
Civil Disobedience is recognized as the pioneer of formal action of society resistance toward government in the history of United States. This term comes in the essay of Henry David Thoreau written in the time of war between America and Mexico during the territorial expansion on purpose of applying the notion of ‘manifest destiny’(Diggins, 1987; Horton & Ewards, 1974; Luedtke, 1990; Sardjana, 1988; Zinn, 1980).
Comes with the idea of not directly obeying every single rule made by the government, civil disobedience has awakened US society to the importance of self dignity and sovereignty. This concept later helps US philosophers to generate the basic principles of individualism in the US history until today’s struggle of individual rights empowerment.
As one of the most significant events in US history, the emergence of civil disobedience shapes the character of US society (Sardjana, 1988; Stevenson, 1998). For being known as the most open and critical society, US citizens have their democracy development as the fastest as well as the role model in the world. This fact is shown clearly in the improvement number of struggle of democracy and human rights –which increases not only in term of amount but also types and medium. Even if US society is hardly involved politically by registering themselves to be part of House of Representatives, their political involvements are expressed through the new form of nowadays civil disobedience. This is exactly tracking the line of Thoreau’s struggle concept of civil disobedience that the regeneration of society must begin with self-regeneration, not political participation (Diggins, 1987).
Most of the previous civil disobedience studies focus merely in portraying this action and relating it with political policy of US government (Diggins, 1987; Horton & Ewards, 1974; Luedtke, 1990; Sardjana, 1988; Taylor, 2000; Zinn, 1980). Somehow, as a democratic country, US put the people to have the highest authority through the idea of government of the society, by the society, and for the society. Therefore democracy gives a big portion of any individual to take part in the running of government, particularly in the decision-making process. *I should explain more: the relation between civil disobedience and the character shaping of US society –something ended with ‘therefore’*
This paper is aimed to improve new understanding of US civil disobedience in the history and the significant effect of its emergence toward US development, specifically in the shaping of US society character as democratic individual.
Discussion
Civil Disobedience
Opposing the war between US and Mexico, Henry David Thoreau, a writer living in Massachusetts, refused to pay his poll tax in 1846. He was jailed for three days and released after his friend paid it secretly. Thoreau made his lecture of “Resistance to Civil Government” based on essay entitled Civil Disobedience as a critique to government’s decision in Mexican war. Nevertheless, Thoreau did not specifically write his protest toward US government in the detail of the war. As a transcendentalist, he concern more in the idea of self-government; how to see individual as the owner of a high independent authority (Diggins, 1987; Horton & Ewards, 1974; Sardjana, 1988; States, 2005; Zinn, 1980).
Civil Disobedience explain some ‘eternal’ pro-contra issues in many types of society around the world such as majority and minority right, social and individual right, government and society interest, liberal individualism and liberal pluralism, and a brief concept explanation of radical individualism (Diggins, 1987).
Considering the historical emergence background, civil disobedience can be applied whenever any government breaks the role to protect people’s right and safeguard their interest. However, in the case of today’s US application of civil disobedience, many scholars put ‘lack of management’ as the problem of ‘controlling’ civil disobedience (Diggins, 1987; Luedtke, 1990; Stevenson, 1998).
The formula of existence
It is not Thoreau who is the first thinker of civil disobedience even since the idea even has existed in the era of John Locke. The spirit of ‘people as the owner of highest authority’ is actually the main idea of self-government. The typical questions of what so importance important with civil disobedience and why it survives until today can be answered at least by three points of reason; the strong historical background (Mexican War), the political grounds (Declaration of Independence), and the helps of internalized myths in US society (self-made man and woman, American Dream, the Chosen people) that helps the existence of civil disobedience to be one of the nature characterization of today’s US society.
Why does it matter?
The reason why civil disobedience matters for US development can be seen for the society (characteristic) development after the introduction to with the idea of civil disobedience. US society is now well known as the most open and critical society where every governmental action can be viewed more easily through mass media. This nation characteristic is shaped by many factors; one of them is the idea of civil disobedience because of its huge space available for them to be critical toward power and authority outside a man’s.
To be a critical citizen can be simply defined as a ‘protestant’ –who loved nothing so much s to protest, to question, and deny authority(Diggins, 1987; Moten, 2007). For these people, there will be no submissive without questions. The scenario when the people approve the government system or rule only happens after the negotiation, at least one which placed inside them. The negotiation, also known as US culture of self-criticize, deals with questioning and re-thinking its benefits to take decision or action. It can be sum up that there is no ‘governmental works’ which is not under their supervision. As a form of civil disobedience, this culture is now still exist –and even grows bigger– in US society.
Civil Disobedience in US society nowadays
Today’s civil disobedience comes with the different reasons, forms, and media. Their acts are legally protected by the government under some specific laws such as The Freedom of Information Act (1966) and The Privacy Act (1974) that allow all Americans to see whatever information government agencies, federal, state, and local, might have on them (Stevenson, 1998). Considering Thoreau’s proposal of the not-a-big-sense for politically involved in the parliament, US people tend to express their disobedience through some popular products and art works.
Movies, music, and literary works protesting government policies are spread out and consumed with no boundaries. The birth of new media significantly helps the people to ‘shout’ their protest to government more easily. In all cases of this new movement, the idea of civil disobedience is highlighted in the individual effort of preserving the self-dignity over every outer authority and power. However, critiques rise to these new ways of civil disobedience as it is judged to be less effective compared to its historical victory.
Conclusion
The spirit of civil disobedience comes since the revolution of US which is manifested in the Declaration of Independence. This concept still exists as the process of democracy development of US society. Civil disobedience expands as one of the political idea of US government as well as the indicator of US people’s characteristic. To be a critical-minded individual as part of US society means to have a society consist of people who are aware of their power and authority. Therefore, in the development of US society, the emergence of civil disobedience is significant to create the idea of individual rights empowerment of which self dignity, authority, sovereignty is uphold.
Bibliography
Diggins, J. P. (1987). Civil disobedience and american political thought. In L. S. Luedtke (Ed.), Making america: The society and culture of the united states.Washington DC: United States Information Agency.
Horton, R. W., & Ewards, H. W. (1974). Background of american literary thought.London: Prentice Hall International, Inc.
Luedtke, L. S. (1990). A reader's guide to making america: The society ans culture of the united states.Washington DC: United States Information Agency.
Moten, F. (2007). Democracy. In B. Burgett & G. Hendler (Eds.), Keywords for american cultural studies.New York: New York University Press.
Sardjana, B. M. (1988). Ambivalensi pikiran nathanael hawthorne dalam the scarlet letter. Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta.
States, B. o. I. I. P. U. (2005). Outline of u.S. History. In D. o. State (Ed.).
Stevenson, D. K. (Ed.). (1998). American life and institutions.Washington DC: Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs US Information Agency.
Taylor, R. L. (2000). Government of the people: The role of the citizen. In R. T. Targonski (Ed.), Outline of us government:Office of International Information Programs US Department of State.
Zinn, H. (1980). A people's history of the united states.New York: Harper Collins Publisher.
Personality Disorders Reflected in the Short Story “Letter to America” by Claire Capel-Stanely
*without abstract*
Introduction
Human personality has been the focus of psychology for decades. Psychologists examine human personality through their object’s attitude, behavior, and product (Hawasi, 2009; Nencini, 2009; Paris, 1997; Purnama, 2012; Takwin, 2007; Wishart, 2011). Using those media, they conceptualize human personality as well as its disorder and find the problematic childhood as the main cause of human personality disorder (Freud, 2006; Moroz, 2005; Shpancer, 2011).
As the product of human being, examiners have used literary works in their observation of human personality development since Sigmund Freud introduce the concept of psychoanalysis and unconscious aspect of human psyche (Baker, 2007; Wishart, 2011). From the point of view of psychology, literature and literary studies have often “represented and still represents both a source of psychological data and a theoretical source of insight for psychologists” (Nencini, 2009).
Findings of literature as cultural product depicting reality through its story and character, make it being used as a tool for understanding human as the general aim of psychology (Baker, 2007; Hawasi, 2009; Nencini, 2009; Paris, 1997; Takwin, 2007; Wishart, 2011).
More specifically, psychological approach has been used in analyzing the character of literary works. According to Paris (1997), imagined character in the literary work reflects the real character of human in the real world. Psychologists meet their limit when they unable to explain some extraordinary personality disorders. Authors, on the other hand, had been successfully portraying those conditions into their stories and used in psychological research (Paris, 1997; Takwin, 2007; Wishart, 2011). These conditions create new mainstream in psychology called narrative psychology, which previously is a branch of literature study (Takwin, 2007).
Almost all of the studies above focus only on the linear pattern research; author’s psychological condition reflected through the product (writing), or character’s psychological condition shown by the attitude in the story. I hardly find the study of story’s main character using the character’s product (writing) as the cross pattern of analysis. Many recent studies of psychological symptom in literary works mainly spotlight the act of the character which physically can be observed.
In this research, I examine short story entitled Letter to America written by Claire Stapel-Stanely. This story published by Australian National University (ANU) in 2009 as one of finalists of ANU’s annual short story competition. I choose this story since the writer provides it in form of main character’s full-version letter to his old friend. This unusual form of literary work, especially short story, contributes significantly in the character analysis. For the reason that short story in form of letter is infrequently produced, this sufficient analysis on how the writing (letter) of the character reflects his personality disorder and psychological problem becomes part of important new views in literature study.
The objective of this paper is to observe the personality disorder of Letter to America’s main character. I examine the psychological symptoms indicated only in the main character’s writing (letter) as the object to conceptualize the character’s characteristic. The personality analysis focuses on the story told in the letter as the text of psychological symptoms of the main character.
In the following part, the study of psychological approach of literature is appraised. I observe the personality disorder of the main character by defining the basic cause of disorder and explicating the psychological symptoms I find in the short story. In this analysis, I categorize the symptoms of personality disorder into three main parts; neurosis, narcissism, and childhood phobia.
The last section of this paper shows how the understanding of the character’s personality disorder through his letter and relationship in a literary work (imaginative world) create better understanding upon the psychological condition and personality disorder of people in the real world.
Discussion
Psychological approach in literature analysis
Psychological approach in literature analysis reflects the modern psychology’s effect upon literature criticism. Sigmund Freud firstly introduced it with his psychoanalytic theories. Psychoanalysis deals with human beings in conflict with themselves and each other, and literature portrays it and is read by such people (Paris, 1997).
This concept changes the common way human behavior being explored through contentious ideas including “wish-fulfillment, sexuality, the unconscious, and repression” as well as expanding the understanding of how “language and symbols operate by demonstrating their ability to reflect unconscious fears or desires” (Baker, 2007; Kennedy & Gioia, 1995; Takwin, 2007).
Literature is considered as a significant part of society and “the most ancient form of mass communication” which is still being explored by other disciplines “as an impressive example of an explanation (or rather, a description) of our world, our feelings, relationships” (Hawasi, 2009). Psychological approach is used to the human behavior, attitude and also the mind of the character since psychological factor is the main cause of the character’s personality.
Two approaches commonly used in psychological analysis are; 1) Looking closely at the characters and the psychological symptoms shown in their story, and 2) Looking closely at the life of the author to determine what in his/her life caused him/her to write characters in a specific way and give the characters specific attributes. (Wishart, 2011). In this paper, I use the first approach in the character analysis.
Two of psychology methods I use in this research are biography and data collecting. These methods require me to examine the object using biography and self-product of the object. Biography contains the data of past events written by the doers themselves. Purnama (2012) believes writing such as autobiography, journal or diary, prose, poem, as the product of the object can be used in biography and data collecting method. Therefore, as a writing telling past events written by the object, the letter of the short story I explore is eligible as a psychology tool.
Behind realistic literature there is a well-built “psychological pulse” that tends headed for appearance of “highly individualized figures that resist abstraction and generalization”. When we encounter a fully drawn mimetic character, "we are justified in asking questions about his motivations based on our knowledge of the ways in which real people are motivated" (Paris, 1997).
In analyzing this short story, I focus more on the psychology activity of the main character, who is the writer of the letter. The character desperately tries his sick effort on how he writes the letter to be a common letter to the girl from his past. However, I instead feel a deep feeling of missing an old friend and a wish to meet in this letter although there is no word or phrase clearly states them so.
Psychological Symptoms in Letter to America
The story which is the letter itself tells about the childhood of the main character with the recipient of the letter. The unfinished past event which is going to be confirmed by “I” is exercised as the main point to reveal the character and psychology symptoms of “I” in this story. I sum up the mental concept of the main character as someone who has not enough self-confidence, living with problems of self-actualization, denial, narcissism, and desperately stuck in his childhood trauma.
After opening the letter with some trivial greetings which the writer himself claimed it as unnecessary words, “I” start to retell his past event with the recipient. The different sex of main character (“I”) as a boy shown in the 13th paragraph (You never made fun of me for being such a child, such a stupid boy) and the recipient as a girl shown in the 5th paragraph (I still think you are a little girl) gives enough contribution in revealing the likelihood of their relationship.
According to Abraham Maslow theory of humanistic psychology (Goble, 1995; Moroz, 2005; Shpancer, 2011), some unconscious conflicts in childhood are the starting point of some emotional disorders in the future. I consider the unfinished event in the silo – that the main character has not know what his friend want to show him – (paragraph 21) as the main object causing “I” trapped in his past.
I still don’t know what you wanted to show me. Was that it? (paragraph 21). In the closing part of the letter, he is still questioning what actually the objective of the girl to take him in the silo is.
Psychological Interpretation
Psychology syndromes in this short story can be seen using ‘interpretation’ theory in psycho-analysis by Freud. This will be highly related with a big restlessness of “I” for not knowing something or being failed to relate a thought with another one. This feeling of “I” is shown by his failure to tell something which he really wants to tell at the very first beginning. Instead, he is telling a bunch of trivial stuffs in the first and second paragraph of his letter. He then starts his true story (or question) to the girl in the 9th paragraph. I view this as too much ‘intermezzo’, since Freud concepts denial by identifying the ‘long space’ of giving prologue to the real speech. However, it may be his tools on defending his self ego. It is on how he always tries not to say something directly but with so many denials.
Neurosis symptom
The main character in this short story has a psychological problem called neurosis. Neurosis, also known as psychoneurosis, is a personality disorder as the result of frequently avoiding unfulfilled childhood willingness. The process starts when children are afraid to tell what they actually want and oppositely repress it. The willingness, however, continues living in the unconscious mind and starts disturbing the mental development while the person is in trauma or stress (Baker, 2007).
First clues indicate the character has neurosis symptom is his lack of time focus (The time zones are different, I can’t think how it works now, backward or forward... 1st paragraph). It is not because he is not aware or not knowing the exact time of America and Australia, but he is trying not to put detail attention to his prologue. Freud (2006) on his theory of neurosis explains someone with this symptom will not think about his recent and future but merely spending his life thinking his past.
Someone with neurosis is trapped in his past. He will busy to get his mind back to the past, seek for all happiness happen in the time he obtains it. Moreover, this character has no care upon the recent news about death of Heath Ledger, although he used it as his opening and closing mark of the letter, and focuses more on his question of unfinished story in the silo (20th paragraph).
Another indication of people with neurosis symptom is the repetition of particular action (Baker, 2007; Freud, 2006). This is reflected in the way the main character habitually gives several rhetoric questions for the girl. He does not really want the girl to answer his questions but he keeps asking. I discover those issues in 5th paragraph (... Do you go to uni? Or ‘college’? Don’t answer that...), 8th paragraph (You know what it sounds like when there is such a loud, constant noise like that?), 9th paragraph (Do you remember the day we drank...?). Those rhetoric questions can be the way of the main character to communicate with the girl. He aims to get in to his main point by stating some rhetoric as its prologue.
As a man with neurosis symptom, he also has a problem of relationship with the girl for the lack of acceptance. He seems to try his best to look good in his letter, but he hopes the girl has no concept in her mind what he looks like. This condition leads him to another psychological problem in term of self denial. Denial is an act of refusing to accept one’s unacceptable desires or fears, or refusing to accept a traumatic event (Wishart, 2011).
He is afraid the girl knowing what he looks like (I want you to be able to read this and hear the story and not have any idea about me now, what I am like, how I have changed or grown up, or whatever – 3rd paragraph) but keeps telling his self image and life by describing it indirectly from his feeling of his work (I don’t like my work, but I like not liking it. I like to complain about my co-workers, and the pay and the music we have to play –paragraph 4), his point of view of music (If Dizze Rascal implores me one more time, through pounding base and shuddering electro, at more decibels that is conversationally appropriate, to ‘fix up, look sharp’ swear I will scream –paragraph 4), and reaction of social issue (death of Heath Ledger), which shows his real desire to be recognized by the girl.
This denial also shows me that he has a deep affection with the girl. This condition is hand in hand with Freud’s theory on how sexuality passions everything in human’s life (Baker, 2007; Freud, 2006). He attempts to say his feeling to the girl that he is not so important for her as well as the girl is only seen as ‘people from past’ in his eyes. This is contradict with the whole substance of the letter on how he remembers all little things he spent with the girl. However, the story's contradictions become intelligible if it is seen as part of inner conflicts of the character (Paris, 1997).
The biggest consequence following the character’s neurosis symptom in this short story is this denial. He confesses not to be able to say something (I know you think I’m being ridiculous, but see, now I’ve already given you ideas about me, just by saying nothing. I’m not making sense, I’m sorry -2nd paragraph). He acknowledges that he is ashamed to do something, that something is more about someone else, not him (I’m not sure why. It is probably more your memory than mine, I guess- 20th paragraph). After elucidating many issues, he then says that what is actually in his mind is not essential (...Besides, I don’t have any plans to visit you anytime soon (I can’t afford it) and I don’t think you have plans to visit me. So it would be pointless. So I will just tell the story- 3rd paragraph).
Lack of self-confidence is another psychological problem owned by the main character as the cause of neurosis. Due to his sentiment of less accepted and acknowledged by the girl in his childhood, he puts his self-image in a low degree. It is proven in the 2nd paragraph (I’m not making sense. I’m sorry), 3rd paragraph (I don’t think you have plans to visit me), 13th paragraph (...I felt pretty stupid anyway), 16th paragraph (I had this feeling that you were running away from me), and 20th paragraph (It is probably more your memory than mine...). Those feelings cause the main character builds his self image as someone minor in the girl’s eyes.
As the effect of his lack of self confidence, he reinforces the denial in his idea that he is excessively unintelligent (You never made of me for being such a child, stupid boy, but you didn’t have to because I felt pretty stupid anyway- 13th paragraph), yet very peculiar and bizarre (I know you think I’m being ridiculous, but see, now I’ve already given you ideas about me, just by saying nothing. I’m not making sense. I’m sorry- 2nd paragraph).
Narcissism Symptom
I consider the main character as someone with narcissism by identifying his style of writing. Someone with this syndrome always uses himself as the main point of the story (Castor, 2010; Walters, 2012). Moreover, this is related with his denial once he tries not to ask too much detail about the girl therefore it automatically puts him as the center of the story. Generally, when someone writes a letter to his friend, he will be normally ask or tell things which are more about ‘them’, not only ‘himself’. The whole letter tells about “I” from “I” point of view. He has no effort in putting the memories as ‘theirs’ since it will be only about him or her, not them, in his point of view (20th paragraph).
Some paragraphs indicate “I” as narcissist by the way he persuade the girl to agree with his views (Castor, 2010; Walters, 2012). It is actually when “I” explain his thinking or feeling about something and it sounds as a tendency to make the girl have the same opinion with him. The letter exposed this in his thought of old friend (Friends that you have when you are a kid always seem unreal later on .... I know it must be the same for you- 5th paragraph), his view of other’s judgment (It is just that it is always strange to watch people when they don’t know you’re there- 7th paragraph), along with feeling and interpreting of rain (... It sounds like the buzz in our head before you go to sleep and the sound of it sounds like your own brain thinking, until you realise that you are, actually, thinking- 8th paragraph).
On the surface narcissistic people are "rather optimistic" and "turn outward toward life," but "there are undercurrents of despondency and pessimism" (Paris, 1997, p.9). This unique idea of narcissism is appropriate with the previous notion of the main character as someone with lack of self confidence.
Childhood phobia
Phobia can be another psychological problem of “I” which builds the personality disorder of the main character. Phobia is typically in form of physical fear such as headache, sweaty body, increasing heart’s pulse, or shocked (Baker, 2007).
The main character’s dark phobia is not only shown by the increasing production of sweat and heart’s pulse in the silo (paragraph 12 and paragraph 19), but also on how darkness plays big role in driving his mind. He starts thinking his past when he is sitting alone in the darkness waiting for the rain (6th paragraph). In this darkness, he stops over his mind on past when he and his friend (the girl whom he write the letter for) are playing in the summer. The past moment ended with a big question in the silo –and in the darkness, too.
For children, darkness and loneliness can be their first phobia and this will last forever (Freud, 2006; Moroz, 2005; Shpancer, 2011; Zanden, Crandell, & Crandell, 2007). I cannot specifically put any term to describe their activity in the dark silo (18th and 19th paragraph). However, they explore their intimate both physical and psychological which cause the main character has his increasing production of sweat and heart’s pulse.
...Then, do you remember, you stretched out your arm and felt around for my ankle, to pull me into your little hole, and once I realised what you were trying to do I moved forward and let you. I sank my knees into the grain and curled up facing you, and the little granules fell away around us and made the hole bigger for us, but also closed us in like a blanket... (paragraph 18)
The main character, by his unanswered question in the silo, has a tendency to get traumatic effect. This is because the unfinished story of past during his childhood. It is believed that tendency of unfinished stage of development is the reason of raising traumatic effect (Freud, 2006; Moroz, 2005; Shpancer, 2011; Zanden et al., 2007).
Besides, the main character experienced some problematic emotional affection with the girl in his unfinished story. Moreover, he himself failed to understand the cause of all anger or sadness or ignorance of the girl in front of him. This is shown in his assumption of being rejected by the girl (16th paragraph), confused with the girl’s anger (17th paragraph), and not knowing the reason of crying girl (20th paragraph).
Whereas, children’s knowledge of emotional experiences normally changes markedly from ages 7 through 12 by: 1) learning to read facial expressions, and 2) being able to identify inner states and attach labels (Zanden et al., 2007).
I find another unique point about Heath Ledger. The main character states this name in the first and last part of the letter. Both of them merely appear to inform the death of this actor of Brokeback Mountain. It may raise an assumption on what the relation about Ledger, “I”, and the girl is. However, I argue that Ledger’s name appearance in this short story is barely in reason of channeling one part to another. As an element of intermezzo made by “I”, it should be only the two of them (“I” and the girl) who know the exact relation between Ledger and their story.
In study of psychology, this similar condition appears when there is a song in our head with no specific reason. Freud (2006) believes we can find some fantasies behind that song by exploring our mind. However, only the owner of the head where the song is played can interpret the song correctly. That is why different reader may have different interpretation of probability relation between Heath Ledger, “I”, and the girl.
Conclusion
A letter as the cultural text (human’s product) can be used to reveal and conceptualize the writer’s personality and psychological condition. In the short story Letter to America, the personality disorders of the character I found as he writes the letter are basically related to neurosis and narcissism symptom, and childhood phobia. As the field of psychology, using letter as the object of personality research has been commonly examined. Literature analysis, however, rarely portrays this character’s product of writing as the instrument of analyzing and conceptualizing the character’s personality.
Nevertheless, as a non-fiction literature, a letter of character is qualified to be used as a psychology device. Furthermore, this paper shows the fact that writing’s of imaginative character reflects the character’s personality disorder in imaginative writing’s world (short story) as well as it occurs in the real world.
References
Baker, R. (2007). Sigmund freud: Di seberang masa lalu (J. Firdaus, Trans.). Yogyakarta: Penerbit Sketsa.
Castor, G. (2010). Symptoms of narcissistic personality syndrome (or disorder). Retrieved July 10, 2012. 10 PM, from http://suite101.com/article/characteristics-of-narcissistic-personality-disorder-a285383
Freud, S. (2006). Pengantar umum psikoanalisis.Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
Goble, F. G. (1995). Mahzab ketiga psikologi humanistik abraham maslow.Yogyakarta: Penerbit Kanisius.
Hawasi, D. K. (2009). Character analysis of avanti in ernest hemingway's cat in the rain: A psychological approach. Retrieved July 16, 2012. 5 PM, from http://papers.gunadarma.ac.id/index.php/letter/article/viewFile/2351/2253
Kennedy, X. J., & Gioia, D. (1995). Literature: An introduction to fiction, poetry, and drama.New York: Harper Collins.
Moroz, K. J. (2005). The effects of psychological trauma on children and adolescents. Retrieved July 10, 2012. 10 PM, from http://mentalhealth.vermont.gov/sites/dmh/files/report/cafu/DMH-CAFU_Psychological_Trauma_Moroz.pdf
Nencini, A. (2009). A matter of shared knowledge. Retrieved July 16, 2012. 4 PM, from http://www.psyartjournal.com/article/show/nencini-a_matter_of_shared_knowledge
Paris, B. J. (1997). Imagined human beings: A psychological approach to character and conflict in literature. Retrieved July 16, 2012. 4:07 PM, from http://grove.ufl.edu/~bjparis/books/imagined/imagined.pdf
Purnama, D. S. (2012). Metode-metode dalam psikologi. Retrieved July 16, 2012. 4:37 PM, from http://staff.uny.ac.id/sites/default/files/pendidikan/Diana%20Septi%20Purnama,%20M.Pd./%283%29%20Metode%20Psi.pdf
Shpancer, N. (2011). Dealing with childhood trauma in adult therapy: Facts and follies. Retrieved July 9, 2012. 11 PM, from http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/insight-therapy/201109/dealing-childhood-trauma-in-adult-therapy-facts-and-follies
Takwin, B. (2007). Psikologi naratif: Membaca manusia sebagai kisah.Yogyakarta: Jalasutra.
Walters, G. (2012). Narcissistic personality disorder (npd). Retrieved July 10, 2012. 11 PM, from http://outofthefog.net/Disorders/NPD.html
Wishart, C. (2011). Psychogical approach to literary analysis. Retrieved July 16, 2012. 4 PM, from http://www.google.co.id/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=psychological%20approach%2C%20literary%2C%20analysis&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CFYQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.easyliteracy.com%2Fpsychologicalapproach.ppt&ei=e9cDUImbEYq8rAf82KCrBg&usg=AFQjCNHuE3SacOQc1446iZ-p95vJxumnCA&cad=rja
Zanden, J. W. V., Crandell, T. L., & Crandell, C. H. (2007). Human development (8th edition ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Introduction
Human personality has been the focus of psychology for decades. Psychologists examine human personality through their object’s attitude, behavior, and product (Hawasi, 2009; Nencini, 2009; Paris, 1997; Purnama, 2012; Takwin, 2007; Wishart, 2011). Using those media, they conceptualize human personality as well as its disorder and find the problematic childhood as the main cause of human personality disorder (Freud, 2006; Moroz, 2005; Shpancer, 2011).
As the product of human being, examiners have used literary works in their observation of human personality development since Sigmund Freud introduce the concept of psychoanalysis and unconscious aspect of human psyche (Baker, 2007; Wishart, 2011). From the point of view of psychology, literature and literary studies have often “represented and still represents both a source of psychological data and a theoretical source of insight for psychologists” (Nencini, 2009).
Findings of literature as cultural product depicting reality through its story and character, make it being used as a tool for understanding human as the general aim of psychology (Baker, 2007; Hawasi, 2009; Nencini, 2009; Paris, 1997; Takwin, 2007; Wishart, 2011).
More specifically, psychological approach has been used in analyzing the character of literary works. According to Paris (1997), imagined character in the literary work reflects the real character of human in the real world. Psychologists meet their limit when they unable to explain some extraordinary personality disorders. Authors, on the other hand, had been successfully portraying those conditions into their stories and used in psychological research (Paris, 1997; Takwin, 2007; Wishart, 2011). These conditions create new mainstream in psychology called narrative psychology, which previously is a branch of literature study (Takwin, 2007).
Almost all of the studies above focus only on the linear pattern research; author’s psychological condition reflected through the product (writing), or character’s psychological condition shown by the attitude in the story. I hardly find the study of story’s main character using the character’s product (writing) as the cross pattern of analysis. Many recent studies of psychological symptom in literary works mainly spotlight the act of the character which physically can be observed.
In this research, I examine short story entitled Letter to America written by Claire Stapel-Stanely. This story published by Australian National University (ANU) in 2009 as one of finalists of ANU’s annual short story competition. I choose this story since the writer provides it in form of main character’s full-version letter to his old friend. This unusual form of literary work, especially short story, contributes significantly in the character analysis. For the reason that short story in form of letter is infrequently produced, this sufficient analysis on how the writing (letter) of the character reflects his personality disorder and psychological problem becomes part of important new views in literature study.
The objective of this paper is to observe the personality disorder of Letter to America’s main character. I examine the psychological symptoms indicated only in the main character’s writing (letter) as the object to conceptualize the character’s characteristic. The personality analysis focuses on the story told in the letter as the text of psychological symptoms of the main character.
In the following part, the study of psychological approach of literature is appraised. I observe the personality disorder of the main character by defining the basic cause of disorder and explicating the psychological symptoms I find in the short story. In this analysis, I categorize the symptoms of personality disorder into three main parts; neurosis, narcissism, and childhood phobia.
The last section of this paper shows how the understanding of the character’s personality disorder through his letter and relationship in a literary work (imaginative world) create better understanding upon the psychological condition and personality disorder of people in the real world.
Discussion
Psychological approach in literature analysis
Psychological approach in literature analysis reflects the modern psychology’s effect upon literature criticism. Sigmund Freud firstly introduced it with his psychoanalytic theories. Psychoanalysis deals with human beings in conflict with themselves and each other, and literature portrays it and is read by such people (Paris, 1997).
This concept changes the common way human behavior being explored through contentious ideas including “wish-fulfillment, sexuality, the unconscious, and repression” as well as expanding the understanding of how “language and symbols operate by demonstrating their ability to reflect unconscious fears or desires” (Baker, 2007; Kennedy & Gioia, 1995; Takwin, 2007).
Literature is considered as a significant part of society and “the most ancient form of mass communication” which is still being explored by other disciplines “as an impressive example of an explanation (or rather, a description) of our world, our feelings, relationships” (Hawasi, 2009). Psychological approach is used to the human behavior, attitude and also the mind of the character since psychological factor is the main cause of the character’s personality.
Two approaches commonly used in psychological analysis are; 1) Looking closely at the characters and the psychological symptoms shown in their story, and 2) Looking closely at the life of the author to determine what in his/her life caused him/her to write characters in a specific way and give the characters specific attributes. (Wishart, 2011). In this paper, I use the first approach in the character analysis.
Two of psychology methods I use in this research are biography and data collecting. These methods require me to examine the object using biography and self-product of the object. Biography contains the data of past events written by the doers themselves. Purnama (2012) believes writing such as autobiography, journal or diary, prose, poem, as the product of the object can be used in biography and data collecting method. Therefore, as a writing telling past events written by the object, the letter of the short story I explore is eligible as a psychology tool.
Behind realistic literature there is a well-built “psychological pulse” that tends headed for appearance of “highly individualized figures that resist abstraction and generalization”. When we encounter a fully drawn mimetic character, "we are justified in asking questions about his motivations based on our knowledge of the ways in which real people are motivated" (Paris, 1997).
In analyzing this short story, I focus more on the psychology activity of the main character, who is the writer of the letter. The character desperately tries his sick effort on how he writes the letter to be a common letter to the girl from his past. However, I instead feel a deep feeling of missing an old friend and a wish to meet in this letter although there is no word or phrase clearly states them so.
Psychological Symptoms in Letter to America
The story which is the letter itself tells about the childhood of the main character with the recipient of the letter. The unfinished past event which is going to be confirmed by “I” is exercised as the main point to reveal the character and psychology symptoms of “I” in this story. I sum up the mental concept of the main character as someone who has not enough self-confidence, living with problems of self-actualization, denial, narcissism, and desperately stuck in his childhood trauma.
After opening the letter with some trivial greetings which the writer himself claimed it as unnecessary words, “I” start to retell his past event with the recipient. The different sex of main character (“I”) as a boy shown in the 13th paragraph (You never made fun of me for being such a child, such a stupid boy) and the recipient as a girl shown in the 5th paragraph (I still think you are a little girl) gives enough contribution in revealing the likelihood of their relationship.
According to Abraham Maslow theory of humanistic psychology (Goble, 1995; Moroz, 2005; Shpancer, 2011), some unconscious conflicts in childhood are the starting point of some emotional disorders in the future. I consider the unfinished event in the silo – that the main character has not know what his friend want to show him – (paragraph 21) as the main object causing “I” trapped in his past.
I still don’t know what you wanted to show me. Was that it? (paragraph 21). In the closing part of the letter, he is still questioning what actually the objective of the girl to take him in the silo is.
Psychological Interpretation
Psychology syndromes in this short story can be seen using ‘interpretation’ theory in psycho-analysis by Freud. This will be highly related with a big restlessness of “I” for not knowing something or being failed to relate a thought with another one. This feeling of “I” is shown by his failure to tell something which he really wants to tell at the very first beginning. Instead, he is telling a bunch of trivial stuffs in the first and second paragraph of his letter. He then starts his true story (or question) to the girl in the 9th paragraph. I view this as too much ‘intermezzo’, since Freud concepts denial by identifying the ‘long space’ of giving prologue to the real speech. However, it may be his tools on defending his self ego. It is on how he always tries not to say something directly but with so many denials.
Neurosis symptom
The main character in this short story has a psychological problem called neurosis. Neurosis, also known as psychoneurosis, is a personality disorder as the result of frequently avoiding unfulfilled childhood willingness. The process starts when children are afraid to tell what they actually want and oppositely repress it. The willingness, however, continues living in the unconscious mind and starts disturbing the mental development while the person is in trauma or stress (Baker, 2007).
First clues indicate the character has neurosis symptom is his lack of time focus (The time zones are different, I can’t think how it works now, backward or forward... 1st paragraph). It is not because he is not aware or not knowing the exact time of America and Australia, but he is trying not to put detail attention to his prologue. Freud (2006) on his theory of neurosis explains someone with this symptom will not think about his recent and future but merely spending his life thinking his past.
Someone with neurosis is trapped in his past. He will busy to get his mind back to the past, seek for all happiness happen in the time he obtains it. Moreover, this character has no care upon the recent news about death of Heath Ledger, although he used it as his opening and closing mark of the letter, and focuses more on his question of unfinished story in the silo (20th paragraph).
Another indication of people with neurosis symptom is the repetition of particular action (Baker, 2007; Freud, 2006). This is reflected in the way the main character habitually gives several rhetoric questions for the girl. He does not really want the girl to answer his questions but he keeps asking. I discover those issues in 5th paragraph (... Do you go to uni? Or ‘college’? Don’t answer that...), 8th paragraph (You know what it sounds like when there is such a loud, constant noise like that?), 9th paragraph (Do you remember the day we drank...?). Those rhetoric questions can be the way of the main character to communicate with the girl. He aims to get in to his main point by stating some rhetoric as its prologue.
As a man with neurosis symptom, he also has a problem of relationship with the girl for the lack of acceptance. He seems to try his best to look good in his letter, but he hopes the girl has no concept in her mind what he looks like. This condition leads him to another psychological problem in term of self denial. Denial is an act of refusing to accept one’s unacceptable desires or fears, or refusing to accept a traumatic event (Wishart, 2011).
He is afraid the girl knowing what he looks like (I want you to be able to read this and hear the story and not have any idea about me now, what I am like, how I have changed or grown up, or whatever – 3rd paragraph) but keeps telling his self image and life by describing it indirectly from his feeling of his work (I don’t like my work, but I like not liking it. I like to complain about my co-workers, and the pay and the music we have to play –paragraph 4), his point of view of music (If Dizze Rascal implores me one more time, through pounding base and shuddering electro, at more decibels that is conversationally appropriate, to ‘fix up, look sharp’ swear I will scream –paragraph 4), and reaction of social issue (death of Heath Ledger), which shows his real desire to be recognized by the girl.
This denial also shows me that he has a deep affection with the girl. This condition is hand in hand with Freud’s theory on how sexuality passions everything in human’s life (Baker, 2007; Freud, 2006). He attempts to say his feeling to the girl that he is not so important for her as well as the girl is only seen as ‘people from past’ in his eyes. This is contradict with the whole substance of the letter on how he remembers all little things he spent with the girl. However, the story's contradictions become intelligible if it is seen as part of inner conflicts of the character (Paris, 1997).
The biggest consequence following the character’s neurosis symptom in this short story is this denial. He confesses not to be able to say something (I know you think I’m being ridiculous, but see, now I’ve already given you ideas about me, just by saying nothing. I’m not making sense, I’m sorry -2nd paragraph). He acknowledges that he is ashamed to do something, that something is more about someone else, not him (I’m not sure why. It is probably more your memory than mine, I guess- 20th paragraph). After elucidating many issues, he then says that what is actually in his mind is not essential (...Besides, I don’t have any plans to visit you anytime soon (I can’t afford it) and I don’t think you have plans to visit me. So it would be pointless. So I will just tell the story- 3rd paragraph).
Lack of self-confidence is another psychological problem owned by the main character as the cause of neurosis. Due to his sentiment of less accepted and acknowledged by the girl in his childhood, he puts his self-image in a low degree. It is proven in the 2nd paragraph (I’m not making sense. I’m sorry), 3rd paragraph (I don’t think you have plans to visit me), 13th paragraph (...I felt pretty stupid anyway), 16th paragraph (I had this feeling that you were running away from me), and 20th paragraph (It is probably more your memory than mine...). Those feelings cause the main character builds his self image as someone minor in the girl’s eyes.
As the effect of his lack of self confidence, he reinforces the denial in his idea that he is excessively unintelligent (You never made of me for being such a child, stupid boy, but you didn’t have to because I felt pretty stupid anyway- 13th paragraph), yet very peculiar and bizarre (I know you think I’m being ridiculous, but see, now I’ve already given you ideas about me, just by saying nothing. I’m not making sense. I’m sorry- 2nd paragraph).
Narcissism Symptom
I consider the main character as someone with narcissism by identifying his style of writing. Someone with this syndrome always uses himself as the main point of the story (Castor, 2010; Walters, 2012). Moreover, this is related with his denial once he tries not to ask too much detail about the girl therefore it automatically puts him as the center of the story. Generally, when someone writes a letter to his friend, he will be normally ask or tell things which are more about ‘them’, not only ‘himself’. The whole letter tells about “I” from “I” point of view. He has no effort in putting the memories as ‘theirs’ since it will be only about him or her, not them, in his point of view (20th paragraph).
Some paragraphs indicate “I” as narcissist by the way he persuade the girl to agree with his views (Castor, 2010; Walters, 2012). It is actually when “I” explain his thinking or feeling about something and it sounds as a tendency to make the girl have the same opinion with him. The letter exposed this in his thought of old friend (Friends that you have when you are a kid always seem unreal later on .... I know it must be the same for you- 5th paragraph), his view of other’s judgment (It is just that it is always strange to watch people when they don’t know you’re there- 7th paragraph), along with feeling and interpreting of rain (... It sounds like the buzz in our head before you go to sleep and the sound of it sounds like your own brain thinking, until you realise that you are, actually, thinking- 8th paragraph).
On the surface narcissistic people are "rather optimistic" and "turn outward toward life," but "there are undercurrents of despondency and pessimism" (Paris, 1997, p.9). This unique idea of narcissism is appropriate with the previous notion of the main character as someone with lack of self confidence.
Childhood phobia
Phobia can be another psychological problem of “I” which builds the personality disorder of the main character. Phobia is typically in form of physical fear such as headache, sweaty body, increasing heart’s pulse, or shocked (Baker, 2007).
The main character’s dark phobia is not only shown by the increasing production of sweat and heart’s pulse in the silo (paragraph 12 and paragraph 19), but also on how darkness plays big role in driving his mind. He starts thinking his past when he is sitting alone in the darkness waiting for the rain (6th paragraph). In this darkness, he stops over his mind on past when he and his friend (the girl whom he write the letter for) are playing in the summer. The past moment ended with a big question in the silo –and in the darkness, too.
For children, darkness and loneliness can be their first phobia and this will last forever (Freud, 2006; Moroz, 2005; Shpancer, 2011; Zanden, Crandell, & Crandell, 2007). I cannot specifically put any term to describe their activity in the dark silo (18th and 19th paragraph). However, they explore their intimate both physical and psychological which cause the main character has his increasing production of sweat and heart’s pulse.
...Then, do you remember, you stretched out your arm and felt around for my ankle, to pull me into your little hole, and once I realised what you were trying to do I moved forward and let you. I sank my knees into the grain and curled up facing you, and the little granules fell away around us and made the hole bigger for us, but also closed us in like a blanket... (paragraph 18)
The main character, by his unanswered question in the silo, has a tendency to get traumatic effect. This is because the unfinished story of past during his childhood. It is believed that tendency of unfinished stage of development is the reason of raising traumatic effect (Freud, 2006; Moroz, 2005; Shpancer, 2011; Zanden et al., 2007).
Besides, the main character experienced some problematic emotional affection with the girl in his unfinished story. Moreover, he himself failed to understand the cause of all anger or sadness or ignorance of the girl in front of him. This is shown in his assumption of being rejected by the girl (16th paragraph), confused with the girl’s anger (17th paragraph), and not knowing the reason of crying girl (20th paragraph).
Whereas, children’s knowledge of emotional experiences normally changes markedly from ages 7 through 12 by: 1) learning to read facial expressions, and 2) being able to identify inner states and attach labels (Zanden et al., 2007).
I find another unique point about Heath Ledger. The main character states this name in the first and last part of the letter. Both of them merely appear to inform the death of this actor of Brokeback Mountain. It may raise an assumption on what the relation about Ledger, “I”, and the girl is. However, I argue that Ledger’s name appearance in this short story is barely in reason of channeling one part to another. As an element of intermezzo made by “I”, it should be only the two of them (“I” and the girl) who know the exact relation between Ledger and their story.
In study of psychology, this similar condition appears when there is a song in our head with no specific reason. Freud (2006) believes we can find some fantasies behind that song by exploring our mind. However, only the owner of the head where the song is played can interpret the song correctly. That is why different reader may have different interpretation of probability relation between Heath Ledger, “I”, and the girl.
Conclusion
A letter as the cultural text (human’s product) can be used to reveal and conceptualize the writer’s personality and psychological condition. In the short story Letter to America, the personality disorders of the character I found as he writes the letter are basically related to neurosis and narcissism symptom, and childhood phobia. As the field of psychology, using letter as the object of personality research has been commonly examined. Literature analysis, however, rarely portrays this character’s product of writing as the instrument of analyzing and conceptualizing the character’s personality.
Nevertheless, as a non-fiction literature, a letter of character is qualified to be used as a psychology device. Furthermore, this paper shows the fact that writing’s of imaginative character reflects the character’s personality disorder in imaginative writing’s world (short story) as well as it occurs in the real world.
References
Baker, R. (2007). Sigmund freud: Di seberang masa lalu (J. Firdaus, Trans.). Yogyakarta: Penerbit Sketsa.
Castor, G. (2010). Symptoms of narcissistic personality syndrome (or disorder). Retrieved July 10, 2012. 10 PM, from http://suite101.com/article/characteristics-of-narcissistic-personality-disorder-a285383
Freud, S. (2006). Pengantar umum psikoanalisis.Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
Goble, F. G. (1995). Mahzab ketiga psikologi humanistik abraham maslow.Yogyakarta: Penerbit Kanisius.
Hawasi, D. K. (2009). Character analysis of avanti in ernest hemingway's cat in the rain: A psychological approach. Retrieved July 16, 2012. 5 PM, from http://papers.gunadarma.ac.id/index.php/letter/article/viewFile/2351/2253
Kennedy, X. J., & Gioia, D. (1995). Literature: An introduction to fiction, poetry, and drama.New York: Harper Collins.
Moroz, K. J. (2005). The effects of psychological trauma on children and adolescents. Retrieved July 10, 2012. 10 PM, from http://mentalhealth.vermont.gov/sites/dmh/files/report/cafu/DMH-CAFU_Psychological_Trauma_Moroz.pdf
Nencini, A. (2009). A matter of shared knowledge. Retrieved July 16, 2012. 4 PM, from http://www.psyartjournal.com/article/show/nencini-a_matter_of_shared_knowledge
Paris, B. J. (1997). Imagined human beings: A psychological approach to character and conflict in literature. Retrieved July 16, 2012. 4:07 PM, from http://grove.ufl.edu/~bjparis/books/imagined/imagined.pdf
Purnama, D. S. (2012). Metode-metode dalam psikologi. Retrieved July 16, 2012. 4:37 PM, from http://staff.uny.ac.id/sites/default/files/pendidikan/Diana%20Septi%20Purnama,%20M.Pd./%283%29%20Metode%20Psi.pdf
Shpancer, N. (2011). Dealing with childhood trauma in adult therapy: Facts and follies. Retrieved July 9, 2012. 11 PM, from http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/insight-therapy/201109/dealing-childhood-trauma-in-adult-therapy-facts-and-follies
Takwin, B. (2007). Psikologi naratif: Membaca manusia sebagai kisah.Yogyakarta: Jalasutra.
Walters, G. (2012). Narcissistic personality disorder (npd). Retrieved July 10, 2012. 11 PM, from http://outofthefog.net/Disorders/NPD.html
Wishart, C. (2011). Psychogical approach to literary analysis. Retrieved July 16, 2012. 4 PM, from http://www.google.co.id/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=psychological%20approach%2C%20literary%2C%20analysis&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CFYQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.easyliteracy.com%2Fpsychologicalapproach.ppt&ei=e9cDUImbEYq8rAf82KCrBg&usg=AFQjCNHuE3SacOQc1446iZ-p95vJxumnCA&cad=rja
Zanden, J. W. V., Crandell, T. L., & Crandell, C. H. (2007). Human development (8th edition ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Homosexuality between Two Ages: Solution Remains Similar
Short Story to Film Analysis: Brokeback Mountain
Released in 2005, Brokeback Mountain have no huge change as an adaptation work of a short story published in 1997 with the same title. Generally, the movie and short story have similar setting, character, characterization, plot, and theme. Most of the words used in movie’s dialogue are even written as exactly the same as the texts found in the short story. The adaptation of 28 pages short story into 130 minutes film is done well through some extensions and additional characters without changing the story itself.
The setting of mountain, country, and many beautiful types of scenery helps the creation of romantic atmosphere between Ennes and Jack. The cliché genre of gay cowboy sends image of manhood in some senses; for instance through manly physical appearances and activities showing the masculinity of Ennes and Jack. The blend of men’s adventure in wilderness as the background of same sex relationship between two cowboys also employs certain contrast of setting in an uncommon harmony. This way of framing seems to counter the idea of queer as ‘manless’, besides showing the nature of ‘love’ as human.
Generally, the grand timeline of both artworks are similar. The different parts are actually the minor ones, though it gives certain sense of the story. Those are the inexistence of the opening of the short story (the first paragraph) which sum up the story in the film and the end of the story (how Ennes lives his life after the dead of Jack). However, these dissimilarity do not hamper the gist of the story but adding new ‘tastes’ and ‘perspectives’.
The different length of these artworks becomes another reason of the emergence of more additional conflicts in the film. I think the problems depicted in the film are richer since they are not only focusing on Ennes and Jack’s romance but also exploring their ‘real’ domestic life out of their same sex relationship.
Since both of them are married with their heterosexual partners, the story of their relationship with their wives happens to be another interesting point; such as the different acceptance of Alma and Lureen to their husband, their ‘professional’ concept marriage or less-lovable husband (Ennes’ reproduction function, Jack’s business-partner relationship), and the love story of their wives (the disappointment of Alma knowing her husband is queer, the sad expression of Lureen losing his husband while Jack’s dead).
Besides, Ennes and Jack’s relationship with their children are also more explored in the film. The deep relation between them is seen from the visits and stories of Alma Jr, Ennes’ payment of his child support, the choice of Ennes for taking care of his children than having date with Jack in a time, and the way Jack teach his son to drive and behave in a dinner.
Essentially, there is no distinct characterization of the character. However, in some way, I feel Ennes character is more explored in the film (through his emotions as a lover, husband, and father). Physically, the choice of Heath Ledger is excellent since he represents Ennes very similarly with the way Proulx describes him. Jake Gyllenhaal characterizes Jack less emotionally than the short story Jack did. This is due to the different physical appearance of them and the focus point of view of Ennes makes less space for him to expose.
The use of third-person omniscient point of view in both artworks leads to free interpretation of the spectator since the narrator only functions as the story teller of what happened, including the emotional emotion of the stakeholders. Regarding to the controversial issue of the artwork, it will be depend on spectator’s stance; whether they will support or against the ideology after watching or reading the works. The using of this point of view, somewhat is quite fair for this sensitive issue.
However, on the other hand, this narrative style gives less space of emotional release of the character. It will be different, for example, using first person point of view of Ennes in delivering the story. The human side of queer probably can be felt deeper and more on the idea of why same sex relationship is justifiable. Nevertheless, I personally agree with the using of this omniscient point of view for its more ‘fair-narrow-knowledge’ on what happens with other characters.
Generally, the artworks tell about same sex relationship, particularly the faithfulness of homosexuals in maintaining their relationship for 20 years under certain fear of being revealed as the unwanted part of society. The problems occurred during their dilemmatic choices between normal family, children, work, social paradigm, and love. The loyalty to partner is one of the key points of the story. At the end of the works, this faithful is depicted in different ways. Ennes’ faithfulness to Jack is seen through his longing for Jack by having emotional dreams with him.
The movie, however, has different way of defining faithfulness by letting Ennes move on from his past (indicated with his agreement to attend his daughter’s marriage) without forgetting his deep affection and story with Jack (reflected when he is crying, saying ‘I swear’ in front of their united shirts).
Published in different time, these works still bring the same issue of homosexual’s human side. One of the social issues brought in these works is the killing of revealed homosexual. This kind of problem remained in the time between the short story published and the film released. Moreover, this case is still unfixed in today’s American life by only 10 out of 50 states in America legalizing same sex marriage. The dilemmatic condition of these queer is always portrayed without clear solution for their civic right’s fulfillment.
In the short story, this condition is represented through Ennes’ way of keeping his feeling muted, as it is stated in the last sentence of the story, “if you can’t fix it you’ve got to stand it”.
Released in 2005, Brokeback Mountain have no huge change as an adaptation work of a short story published in 1997 with the same title. Generally, the movie and short story have similar setting, character, characterization, plot, and theme. Most of the words used in movie’s dialogue are even written as exactly the same as the texts found in the short story. The adaptation of 28 pages short story into 130 minutes film is done well through some extensions and additional characters without changing the story itself.
The setting of mountain, country, and many beautiful types of scenery helps the creation of romantic atmosphere between Ennes and Jack. The cliché genre of gay cowboy sends image of manhood in some senses; for instance through manly physical appearances and activities showing the masculinity of Ennes and Jack. The blend of men’s adventure in wilderness as the background of same sex relationship between two cowboys also employs certain contrast of setting in an uncommon harmony. This way of framing seems to counter the idea of queer as ‘manless’, besides showing the nature of ‘love’ as human.
Generally, the grand timeline of both artworks are similar. The different parts are actually the minor ones, though it gives certain sense of the story. Those are the inexistence of the opening of the short story (the first paragraph) which sum up the story in the film and the end of the story (how Ennes lives his life after the dead of Jack). However, these dissimilarity do not hamper the gist of the story but adding new ‘tastes’ and ‘perspectives’.
The different length of these artworks becomes another reason of the emergence of more additional conflicts in the film. I think the problems depicted in the film are richer since they are not only focusing on Ennes and Jack’s romance but also exploring their ‘real’ domestic life out of their same sex relationship.
Since both of them are married with their heterosexual partners, the story of their relationship with their wives happens to be another interesting point; such as the different acceptance of Alma and Lureen to their husband, their ‘professional’ concept marriage or less-lovable husband (Ennes’ reproduction function, Jack’s business-partner relationship), and the love story of their wives (the disappointment of Alma knowing her husband is queer, the sad expression of Lureen losing his husband while Jack’s dead).
Besides, Ennes and Jack’s relationship with their children are also more explored in the film. The deep relation between them is seen from the visits and stories of Alma Jr, Ennes’ payment of his child support, the choice of Ennes for taking care of his children than having date with Jack in a time, and the way Jack teach his son to drive and behave in a dinner.
Essentially, there is no distinct characterization of the character. However, in some way, I feel Ennes character is more explored in the film (through his emotions as a lover, husband, and father). Physically, the choice of Heath Ledger is excellent since he represents Ennes very similarly with the way Proulx describes him. Jake Gyllenhaal characterizes Jack less emotionally than the short story Jack did. This is due to the different physical appearance of them and the focus point of view of Ennes makes less space for him to expose.
The use of third-person omniscient point of view in both artworks leads to free interpretation of the spectator since the narrator only functions as the story teller of what happened, including the emotional emotion of the stakeholders. Regarding to the controversial issue of the artwork, it will be depend on spectator’s stance; whether they will support or against the ideology after watching or reading the works. The using of this point of view, somewhat is quite fair for this sensitive issue.
However, on the other hand, this narrative style gives less space of emotional release of the character. It will be different, for example, using first person point of view of Ennes in delivering the story. The human side of queer probably can be felt deeper and more on the idea of why same sex relationship is justifiable. Nevertheless, I personally agree with the using of this omniscient point of view for its more ‘fair-narrow-knowledge’ on what happens with other characters.
Generally, the artworks tell about same sex relationship, particularly the faithfulness of homosexuals in maintaining their relationship for 20 years under certain fear of being revealed as the unwanted part of society. The problems occurred during their dilemmatic choices between normal family, children, work, social paradigm, and love. The loyalty to partner is one of the key points of the story. At the end of the works, this faithful is depicted in different ways. Ennes’ faithfulness to Jack is seen through his longing for Jack by having emotional dreams with him.
The movie, however, has different way of defining faithfulness by letting Ennes move on from his past (indicated with his agreement to attend his daughter’s marriage) without forgetting his deep affection and story with Jack (reflected when he is crying, saying ‘I swear’ in front of their united shirts).
Published in different time, these works still bring the same issue of homosexual’s human side. One of the social issues brought in these works is the killing of revealed homosexual. This kind of problem remained in the time between the short story published and the film released. Moreover, this case is still unfixed in today’s American life by only 10 out of 50 states in America legalizing same sex marriage. The dilemmatic condition of these queer is always portrayed without clear solution for their civic right’s fulfillment.
In the short story, this condition is represented through Ennes’ way of keeping his feeling muted, as it is stated in the last sentence of the story, “if you can’t fix it you’ve got to stand it”.
European Colonialism to American Military Invasion
Novella to Film Analysis: Heart of Darkness and Apocalypse Now
Apocalypse Now is known as the most famous adaptation of the novel Heart of Darkness. As an adaptation art work, the movie changed the novel in some way. However, the soul of ‘darkness’ remains both in the novel and movie.
The strongest similarity between the novel and the movie is the plot structure. In a straight and open plot, both works are started with a mission to accomplish through a hairy journey of the main character to find the so-called ‘evil’ character. The journey physically ended when the main character (as well as the narrator) met the so-called ‘evil’ character, but at the same time continued in a more psychological way –in which the character had to deal more with his inner thought and standard of morality. Both of the works got the climax when the so-called ‘evil’ character died, and the story ended with the way go home of the narrator. The novel and the movie gives a free space for the reader and viewer to interpret whether there is finally a ideological change inside the main character; thus I conclude them both as an open plot.
As an adaptation, Apocalypse Now has a quite big difference in the way the director change the setting from Congo, Africa (in the Heart of Darkness) to Vietnam and Cambodia. In term of time setting, both of the movies got the tense of ‘conflict area’ in the era of European explorer’s colonialism (Heart of Darkness) and American military invasion during the height of Vietnam War (Apocalypse Now).
Depicting the gloomy atmosphere, the novel uses words of the narrator (Marlow) while the movie employs the setting of atmosphere through cinematographic technology such as lighting, camera angel, sound effect, and framing. Using this high technology, I feel the ‘darkness’ in the movie more easily. The harsh of European colonialism –portraying by the savage to native African– is adapted in a different sense of seeing how cruel war is during the suffering of civil Vietnamese.
Basically, both the novel and the movie have the same character composition: Marlow and Willard against Kurtz. However, these characters are developed in a different characterization. As an assigned worker to find Kurtz, Marlow and Willard employed the same psychological denial to fulfill their mission during the journey. Facing the fact that materialism leads the company to treat native America as non-human workers trigger Marlow to jump to Kurtz’s side. This inner conflict also happened as Willard witnessing how war fails to get the righteous people. However, Willard seems to have more stable (or in any case, unclear) stance of this, since he was able to assassinate Kurtz himself after his lecturing of the psychology of war and the idea of morality.
The character of Kurtz –both in the novel and movie– is described as a brilliant (even genius) designed to get high position before his unsound way is considered as a threat to the ‘institution’ he comes from. His power to establish own ‘government’ with native tribe worshiping him as a high spiritual figure is seen as mental illness to curry or even, terminate. The ‘Novel’ Kurtz seems did nothing but sharing his ideas to Marlow before his dead, while the ‘Movie’ Kurtz got the chance to show his ‘power’ by imprisoning Willard and killing one of Willard’s crews. Following the different behavior, this character is also physically built in different way. The genius ivory agent is described as a lifeless thin of illness man; while the genius colonel appears as a huge man with military-well built body.
Using the first person point of view, both of the works tell the story through the eyes of Marlow and Willard. However, the different development of these characters of the narrator for me, somehow, impact to the atmosphere of the story. As the narrator, Marlow tends to be more active than Willard. He is actively share his thoughts and perspectives of what he sees and feels of every moment during the journey. On the other hand, Willard performs as a more passive character who functions as the ‘silent camera’ during the movie. The major actions done by him are only the killing of woman survivor in the civil small ship and the killing of Kurtz.
As the reader, I felt –as if I am– led by the author to judge ‘the others’ (concerning racism issue) the same way as it is narrated by Marlow. The journey he experienced is told in a story of his thoughts, leaving less space for the reader to have their own judgment. However, through the eyes of Willard as a ‘silent camera’, I got more space to take my own perspective toward certain issues and the existence and the ‘civilization degree’ of ‘the others’.
The major similarity of the works is the theme, even though they both are served in a different taste. Shifting European Colonialism into American Military Invasion, Apocalypse Now does not diminish the issues of White superiority. Critiques of the idea of civilization (native African and Vietnamese are less civilized than European or American), ‘foreign’ superiority (to enslave African is justifiable as well as to take military invasion during Vietnam War), prejudice mentality and standard of morality (Marlow and Willard are forced to take Kurtz based on the owner of authority’s prejudice), and notion of insanity (they who refuse any cooperation with the ‘righteous’ people and extend their life with ‘uncivilized’ society will turn to be insane) are expressed in this two art works.
Carrying these values, there is no way to deny these two works as the critique of so-called White supremacy.
Apocalypse Now is known as the most famous adaptation of the novel Heart of Darkness. As an adaptation art work, the movie changed the novel in some way. However, the soul of ‘darkness’ remains both in the novel and movie.
The strongest similarity between the novel and the movie is the plot structure. In a straight and open plot, both works are started with a mission to accomplish through a hairy journey of the main character to find the so-called ‘evil’ character. The journey physically ended when the main character (as well as the narrator) met the so-called ‘evil’ character, but at the same time continued in a more psychological way –in which the character had to deal more with his inner thought and standard of morality. Both of the works got the climax when the so-called ‘evil’ character died, and the story ended with the way go home of the narrator. The novel and the movie gives a free space for the reader and viewer to interpret whether there is finally a ideological change inside the main character; thus I conclude them both as an open plot.
As an adaptation, Apocalypse Now has a quite big difference in the way the director change the setting from Congo, Africa (in the Heart of Darkness) to Vietnam and Cambodia. In term of time setting, both of the movies got the tense of ‘conflict area’ in the era of European explorer’s colonialism (Heart of Darkness) and American military invasion during the height of Vietnam War (Apocalypse Now).
Depicting the gloomy atmosphere, the novel uses words of the narrator (Marlow) while the movie employs the setting of atmosphere through cinematographic technology such as lighting, camera angel, sound effect, and framing. Using this high technology, I feel the ‘darkness’ in the movie more easily. The harsh of European colonialism –portraying by the savage to native African– is adapted in a different sense of seeing how cruel war is during the suffering of civil Vietnamese.
Basically, both the novel and the movie have the same character composition: Marlow and Willard against Kurtz. However, these characters are developed in a different characterization. As an assigned worker to find Kurtz, Marlow and Willard employed the same psychological denial to fulfill their mission during the journey. Facing the fact that materialism leads the company to treat native America as non-human workers trigger Marlow to jump to Kurtz’s side. This inner conflict also happened as Willard witnessing how war fails to get the righteous people. However, Willard seems to have more stable (or in any case, unclear) stance of this, since he was able to assassinate Kurtz himself after his lecturing of the psychology of war and the idea of morality.
The character of Kurtz –both in the novel and movie– is described as a brilliant (even genius) designed to get high position before his unsound way is considered as a threat to the ‘institution’ he comes from. His power to establish own ‘government’ with native tribe worshiping him as a high spiritual figure is seen as mental illness to curry or even, terminate. The ‘Novel’ Kurtz seems did nothing but sharing his ideas to Marlow before his dead, while the ‘Movie’ Kurtz got the chance to show his ‘power’ by imprisoning Willard and killing one of Willard’s crews. Following the different behavior, this character is also physically built in different way. The genius ivory agent is described as a lifeless thin of illness man; while the genius colonel appears as a huge man with military-well built body.
Using the first person point of view, both of the works tell the story through the eyes of Marlow and Willard. However, the different development of these characters of the narrator for me, somehow, impact to the atmosphere of the story. As the narrator, Marlow tends to be more active than Willard. He is actively share his thoughts and perspectives of what he sees and feels of every moment during the journey. On the other hand, Willard performs as a more passive character who functions as the ‘silent camera’ during the movie. The major actions done by him are only the killing of woman survivor in the civil small ship and the killing of Kurtz.
As the reader, I felt –as if I am– led by the author to judge ‘the others’ (concerning racism issue) the same way as it is narrated by Marlow. The journey he experienced is told in a story of his thoughts, leaving less space for the reader to have their own judgment. However, through the eyes of Willard as a ‘silent camera’, I got more space to take my own perspective toward certain issues and the existence and the ‘civilization degree’ of ‘the others’.
The major similarity of the works is the theme, even though they both are served in a different taste. Shifting European Colonialism into American Military Invasion, Apocalypse Now does not diminish the issues of White superiority. Critiques of the idea of civilization (native African and Vietnamese are less civilized than European or American), ‘foreign’ superiority (to enslave African is justifiable as well as to take military invasion during Vietnam War), prejudice mentality and standard of morality (Marlow and Willard are forced to take Kurtz based on the owner of authority’s prejudice), and notion of insanity (they who refuse any cooperation with the ‘righteous’ people and extend their life with ‘uncivilized’ society will turn to be insane) are expressed in this two art works.
Carrying these values, there is no way to deny these two works as the critique of so-called White supremacy.
GJ
Para sesepuh sering menasihatinya untuk alon-alon waton kelakon pada tiap pertemuan keluarga, karena ketergesaan mendekatkan seseorang pada lalai yang disebabkan gangguan setan. Menurutnya perkataan para simbah itu berlebihan; orang-orang yang senantiasa pelan lah yang sedang dalam pengaruh setan. “Kan nggak cak-cek,” pikirnya. Lagipula manusia sudah terlalu sering menyalahkan setan dalam kelalaian mereka. Dia ingin sedikit bijak untuk menyalahkan keteledoran hari ini pada dirinya. Benar-benar utuh karenanya.
Aturan itu menyuruhnya untuk tidak memikirkan dunia saat jiwa dikembalikan pada tubuh di pagi hari mata terbuka dan kesadaran nafas pertama kali berhembus. Namun data ratusan megabyte yang menghilang semalam memaksanya menghubungi nomer itu. Bukan untuk menelepon, karena dia tidak suka perbincangan tidak langsung, terlebih dengan lawan jenis. Dua pesan tak berbalas. Padahal dia sangat yakin orang itu adalah pelakunya: penjahat akademik yang tega menghapus data kuliah di laptop temannya hanya karena gagal mendapatkan gosip terbaru tentang gebetan. Terlalu kekanakan.
Pukul sembilan lewat sepuluh menit saat akhirnya pesan-pesan itu berbalas. Bahkan perlu beberapa pesan untuk membawa kembali data-data yang menginap di flashdisk tersangka. Setelah menit-menit menyebalkan dengan sosok dingin itu, delapan ratus lima puluh tiga megabyte data kuliah terselamatkan. Pikirnya, larangan merisaukan dunia di saat bangun tidur tidaklah benar.
“Kaan, Dia nggak benar-benar niat berantakin urusan duniaku?” batinnya terkekeh. Dia melupakan nasihat lain para sesepuh. Untuk tidak sombong, terlebih dalam bahasa menantang Pencipta.
Satu tulisan selesai dalam dua jam, tepat saat ajakan makan ramen terdengar olehnya. Ada diskon dua puluh persen untuk promo minggu awal pembukaan resto Jepang di daerah Manahan. Bagi mahasiswa dengan keuangan akhir minggu, momen seperti ini sangat penting. Dengan senyum kepuasan memandang tulisan di laptop, dia menuju kamar mandi. Pukul sebelas lewat tujuh menit menjadi awal petualangan ramen. Sebenarnya jika bisa dia enggan meninggalkan kos saat matahari berada pada jadwal menyombongkan diri yang teramat. Tiduran di atas lantai porselin jauh lebih nyaman daripada motoran sepajang Kentingan-Manahan di siang panas demi semangkuk ramen diskon dua puluh persen yang panas.
“Dua puluh persen!” tiba-tiba semangat juang mahasiswa angkatan 98 terpatri di dadanya. Toh mereka sama-sama berjuang untuk menanggulangi kelaparan rakyat.
Lampu merah pertama. Sayangnya angka tujuh puluh dua berkedip dengan genit menyertainya. Ditengoklah ponsel dari saku roknya, kebetulan – yang dikarenakan kondisi bahan bakar – kali ini dia hanya membonceng. Meskipun selalu sebal pada mereka yang bermain ponsel saat berkendara – dengan hak khusus bagi para pembonceng –dia jauh lebih sebal membaca empat pesan masuk di ponselnya. Semua bernada tipikal: menagih tulisan untuk majalah, karya tulis, diskusi, dan tugas kuliah. Perbedaan penguasaan linguistik pengirim yang menjadikan sensasi membaca yang berbeda pada tiap pesan. Tetapi efek kebahasaan itu tidak merangsangnya menemukan ide tulisan. Otaknya sedang tidak encer, bahkan dengan dipanggang terik surya seperti itu.
“Sepertinya kita tersesat” adalah pikiran buruk yang menjelma kenyataan. Dia dan dua teman kosnya bukanlah penjelajah Solo yang baik. Anak rumahan seperti mereka akan sangat mudah tersesat dengan percabangan jalan kota kecil ini. Tiba-tiba dia membenci mereka yang gemar menggelar acara hajatan di tengah jalan kompleks seolah antero jalan adalah warisan leluhurnya. Tanpa penghalang seperti itu, seharusnya mereka tidak perlu berputar-putar dalam temperatur tinggi sebelum mendapati rumah mungil berhiaskan lampion-lampion merah bertuliskan kanji Jepang. Dia tidak bisa membaca kanji Jepang, tetapi pasti tulisan itu tidak terlalu jauh dengan kata ‘ramen’, menetapi fungsinya sebagai penghias resto ramen.
Suara-suara panggilan dari kedua temannya baru disadarinya ketika matanya tertuju pada kertas HVS terlaminating bertuliskan satu kata yang paling dihindarinya siang ini: TUTUP. Rasanya seluruh cairan di tubuhnya meminta pengganti ekstra secepatnya. Anggukan lemas dipersembahkannya dengan manis pada setiap tawaran tempat makan yang diajukan kedua temannya. “Hari ini geje sekali,” batinnya kesal.
Dua warung makan pertama memutuskan menolak rejeki akhir pekan dengan menutup diri sebelum akhirnya dua motor itu melaju ke tempat yang seharusnya bisa ditempuh lima menit dari kos mereka. Dengan hawa panas, tubuh berkeringat, dan kepala pusing, dia menambah penderitaan dengan kesalahan pilihan menu. Nihilnya nametag di tiap menu membuatnya memilih oseng-oseng kikil yang sangat pedas dan mengharuskannya merasakan lidah serta perutnya terbakar. Kondisi tidak menyenangkan muncul saat rombongan wanita keluar dari bangunan di depan tempat makan mereka.
Merasa tidak enak karena sempat menolak memberi bantuan pada salah satu wanita itu, dia berusaha bersembunyi di balik kawannya. Untungnya rombongan itu tidak menetapkan tempat makan itu sebagai pemberhentian mereka. Untungnya lagi, dia mendapatkan hiburan merakyat di sana: musik melayu, yang katanya menghianati musikalitas anak bangsa karena nggak banget, tetapi justru mampu menciptakan tawa kelegaan setelah pusingnya berpanas-panasan dalam ketidakjelasan hari ini.
Menurutnya kelalaian hari itu resmi berakhir dengan tiga kemenangan berturut-turut pada game komputer yang dimainkannya sesampainya di kos. Dia hanya belum menyadari waktu luang yang seharusnya digunakan menyelesaikan setumpuk tugas. Tepat saat masjid di samping kamarnya berkumandang, dia terlelap. Padahal, kata para simbah, tidur sehabis ashar itu tidak baik, bikin cepat pikun. Menurutnya pikun adalah kata yang kurang etis ditujukan bagi remaja sepertinya, karena meskipun terbangun oleh ingatan deadline tugas yang tinggal menghitung jam, toh dia masih bisa mengingat.
Sisa sore itu menjadikannya sadar bahwa membuat tulisan akademik tidak pernah mudah, terlebih saat membuatnya dengan mengganti tulisan tidak akademik untuk terlihat akademik. Dia lantas paham kenapa pekerjaan editor bisa menjadi sangat sulit sekaligus menyebalkan. Terlebih dengan intensitas cap sok tahu oleh penulis asli. Terlebih menjadi ‘editor’ tulisan dosen. Dengan selang waktu makan-minum-makan-game, revisi tulisan akademik diselesaikannya dalam tiga jam, menyisakan satu jam sebelum pintu e-mail dosen tercinta tertutup untuknya.
Dia berharap pertolongan langit menghampirinya dengan membersihkan tubuh untuk kedua kalinya sebelum kembali menyapa udara luar. Tetapi rupanya hujan ingin bermain-main dengannya sedikit lama. Sudah hampir setengah jam saat hujan yang dilema – dengan frekuensi rintik yang tidak jelas – akhirnya berhenti. Dia telah menenggelamkan diri dalam kesibukan modem-email-pulsa sebelum pada akhirnya memutuskan mengizinkan motornya menyapa dunia malam. Hujan tak lagi bertahan dengan rintik kecilnya saat dia melaju dalam semangat anti-che. Dia sempat meyakini dugaan bahwa dosen itu merupakan pengagum Che Guavera dengan kegemarannya melabuhkan bulan sabit (meskipun bukan bintang) di kartu hasil studi para mahasiswa.
DONE adalah kata terindah yang membuatnya mencintai Yahoo saat ini, meskipun hatinya masih terus berdoa agar Tuan Failure Daemon tidak mengunjungi kotak masuknya. Beberapa arsip harus diunduh dari e-mail seorang teman ketika kedua tangannya mendadak lemas. Tawa kecil spontan keluar dari bibirnya memikirkan deretan kelalaian yang membawanya pada ketidakjelasan hari ini. Seingatnya dia masih mendapati rakaat-rakaat sunnah fajar dan sepenggalah matahari, tetapi entah mengapa pertolongan langit tidak menyapanya hari ini. Dia lantas semakin terkekeh saat menyadari empat dan dua rakaat wajib yang justru terlewatkan olehnya di awal hari ini.
Tubuhnya yang lemas memaksa jari-jarinya menekan layar sentuh ponselnya yang low bat. Nada sambung yang cukup lama sebelum suara familiar siang ini didengarnya. “Mbak, tolong ke CoreNet. Uangku ketinggalan...”
Solo, 25 Februari 2012
Surat dari Negara
Title :Surat dari Negara
Tags : sosial, politik, pemilu, remaja, dilema
Character : siswa/i kelas 2 SMA, 17 tahun
Synopsis :
Tokoh aku cukup syok ketika mendapati dirinya terdaftar sebagai pemilih pada Pilpres 2014. Meskipun secara fakta usianya telah memenuhi kualifikasi pemilih, baginya umur tidak menentukan kedewasaan seseorang. Kebetulan saja takdir menjadikannya lebih tua dari teman-teman sebayanya. Dia merasa belum cukup bijak menggunakan hak pilih. Latar belakang politiknya nol, pengetahuan profil calegnya sangat jauh dari kurang, dan utamanya dia belum ingin mengemban tanggung jawab sebesar itu.
Baginya memilih presiden bukanlah sebatas soal partai mana yang paling populer atau visi-misi capres mana yang terbaik dan paling feasible dilaksanakan. Memilih presiden berarti ikut menentukan nasib bangsa lima tahun ke depan.
Dia tidak ingin asal pilih hanya karena kakak sulungnya sering berceramah ‘abstain itu dosa’ atau menjalankan amanat guru kewarganegaraannya ‘ikut berpastisipasi dalam pemilu berarti menyukseskan demokrasi’. Terlebih kawan-kawan seusianya tidak pernah serius memikirkan ini. Mungkin karena mereka belum pernah mendapat kartu pemilu, atau karena ‘urusan negara’ selamanya hanya menjadi kepentingan pihak-pihak tertentu.
Maka dia mulai memikirkan capres mana yang mewakili kepentingan-kepentingannya.
Sebagai pelajar pada umumnya, dia tidak suka pengadaan ujian nasional yang selalu menjadikan para guru dan kakak kelas overreacting. Dia juga tidak suka libur pendek saat bulan puasa yang membuatnya harus terserap hawa lemas teman-temannya. Dia tidak pernah bagus pada sains tetapi menonjol di kesenian, maka dia mengharapkan sistem pendidikan yang ‘mendalam’ sejak awal, agar mereka yang tidak dapat melanjutkan sekolah selepas SMP/SMA (seperti salah satu temannya) tidak bingung menggunakan banyaknya cabang ilmu yang terlalu dangkal.
Soal putus sekolah juga harus diatasi. Dia mengenal orang-orang berpola pikir pragmatis di desanya yang mencela sekolah akibat tujuan pembelajaran yang menurut mereka terlalu teoritis dan abstrak, maka sistem pendidikan yang mengutamakan life skill harus dioptimalkan.
Dia juga –meskipun benci perpolitikan– menginginkan capres yang benar-benar berani menjadi pemimpin, yang kata guru agamanya ‘bertanggung jawab dunia-akhirat atas umatnya’. Soal DPR apalagi. Dia ingin capres yang bisa menciptakan parlemen yang keren, yang apabila rapat tidak norak dan porno. Dia pernah mengidolakan kakak-kakak kelasnya yang menjuarai debat parlemen internasional. Menurutnya ‘yang seperti itu baru bisa dibilang mikir’.
Setelah mendaftar kriteria capres idaman, dia mencoba mengenal keempat profil capres melalui perantara Mbah Google yang melebihi oang pintar. Bahkan dengan mengulang pencarian itu selama satu minggu, dia harus menerima kenyataan figur capres idamannya tidak pernah muncul dalam surat suara.
Dia tidak mengikuti pemilu legislatif sebelumnya karena (kebetulan) sakit, sehingga tidak perlu bingung dengan ratusan nama yang menimbulkan peluang dosa tinggi (karena salah pilih anggota dewan). Tetapi hanya dengan empat nama sebagai ‘produk’ yang ditawarkan, kegalauannya tidak menipis. Pertimbangan-pertimbangan pengalaman politik, intelektualitas, spiritualitas, gender, bahkan perupaan semakin membingungkannya.
Sudah lima menit dia berdiri dalam bilik suara, tetapi tangannya belum menyentuh alat contreng tersedia. Dia bisa merasakan pandangan sebal dan pemikiran negatif orang-orang yang mengantri nyontreng di luar bilik. Tidak ada suara selama lima belas menit, hingga sosok itu jatuh dan dikerumuni panwaslu.
Surat suara yang hampir terlipat itu tidak meninggalkan contrengan apapun kecuali kotak tambahan di bawah keempat capres. Sebuah silhuet tanpa nama, gelar, partai. Tambahnya di bawah silhuet itu ‘DICARI: pemimpin beriman, cerdas, dan merakyat’.
Tags : sosial, politik, pemilu, remaja, dilema
Character : siswa/i kelas 2 SMA, 17 tahun
Synopsis :
Tokoh aku cukup syok ketika mendapati dirinya terdaftar sebagai pemilih pada Pilpres 2014. Meskipun secara fakta usianya telah memenuhi kualifikasi pemilih, baginya umur tidak menentukan kedewasaan seseorang. Kebetulan saja takdir menjadikannya lebih tua dari teman-teman sebayanya. Dia merasa belum cukup bijak menggunakan hak pilih. Latar belakang politiknya nol, pengetahuan profil calegnya sangat jauh dari kurang, dan utamanya dia belum ingin mengemban tanggung jawab sebesar itu.
Baginya memilih presiden bukanlah sebatas soal partai mana yang paling populer atau visi-misi capres mana yang terbaik dan paling feasible dilaksanakan. Memilih presiden berarti ikut menentukan nasib bangsa lima tahun ke depan.
Dia tidak ingin asal pilih hanya karena kakak sulungnya sering berceramah ‘abstain itu dosa’ atau menjalankan amanat guru kewarganegaraannya ‘ikut berpastisipasi dalam pemilu berarti menyukseskan demokrasi’. Terlebih kawan-kawan seusianya tidak pernah serius memikirkan ini. Mungkin karena mereka belum pernah mendapat kartu pemilu, atau karena ‘urusan negara’ selamanya hanya menjadi kepentingan pihak-pihak tertentu.
Maka dia mulai memikirkan capres mana yang mewakili kepentingan-kepentingannya.
Sebagai pelajar pada umumnya, dia tidak suka pengadaan ujian nasional yang selalu menjadikan para guru dan kakak kelas overreacting. Dia juga tidak suka libur pendek saat bulan puasa yang membuatnya harus terserap hawa lemas teman-temannya. Dia tidak pernah bagus pada sains tetapi menonjol di kesenian, maka dia mengharapkan sistem pendidikan yang ‘mendalam’ sejak awal, agar mereka yang tidak dapat melanjutkan sekolah selepas SMP/SMA (seperti salah satu temannya) tidak bingung menggunakan banyaknya cabang ilmu yang terlalu dangkal.
Soal putus sekolah juga harus diatasi. Dia mengenal orang-orang berpola pikir pragmatis di desanya yang mencela sekolah akibat tujuan pembelajaran yang menurut mereka terlalu teoritis dan abstrak, maka sistem pendidikan yang mengutamakan life skill harus dioptimalkan.
Dia juga –meskipun benci perpolitikan– menginginkan capres yang benar-benar berani menjadi pemimpin, yang kata guru agamanya ‘bertanggung jawab dunia-akhirat atas umatnya’. Soal DPR apalagi. Dia ingin capres yang bisa menciptakan parlemen yang keren, yang apabila rapat tidak norak dan porno. Dia pernah mengidolakan kakak-kakak kelasnya yang menjuarai debat parlemen internasional. Menurutnya ‘yang seperti itu baru bisa dibilang mikir’.
Setelah mendaftar kriteria capres idaman, dia mencoba mengenal keempat profil capres melalui perantara Mbah Google yang melebihi oang pintar. Bahkan dengan mengulang pencarian itu selama satu minggu, dia harus menerima kenyataan figur capres idamannya tidak pernah muncul dalam surat suara.
Dia tidak mengikuti pemilu legislatif sebelumnya karena (kebetulan) sakit, sehingga tidak perlu bingung dengan ratusan nama yang menimbulkan peluang dosa tinggi (karena salah pilih anggota dewan). Tetapi hanya dengan empat nama sebagai ‘produk’ yang ditawarkan, kegalauannya tidak menipis. Pertimbangan-pertimbangan pengalaman politik, intelektualitas, spiritualitas, gender, bahkan perupaan semakin membingungkannya.
Sudah lima menit dia berdiri dalam bilik suara, tetapi tangannya belum menyentuh alat contreng tersedia. Dia bisa merasakan pandangan sebal dan pemikiran negatif orang-orang yang mengantri nyontreng di luar bilik. Tidak ada suara selama lima belas menit, hingga sosok itu jatuh dan dikerumuni panwaslu.
Surat suara yang hampir terlipat itu tidak meninggalkan contrengan apapun kecuali kotak tambahan di bawah keempat capres. Sebuah silhuet tanpa nama, gelar, partai. Tambahnya di bawah silhuet itu ‘DICARI: pemimpin beriman, cerdas, dan merakyat’.
Ruang Publik Agama (Pemaknaan Agama di Ruang Publik)
ini artikel ketiga yang saya kirimkan ke surat kabar. alhamdulillah dimuat di Mimbar Mahasiswa Solo Pos edisi 25 Maret 2013. anyway, statistik media saya benar-benar payah. ternyata terakhir ngirim tulisan ke media massa satu tahun lalu T.T
nah, di bawah ini naskah asli yang belum diedit penyuntingnya Solo Pos.
--
Ruang Publik Agama
Wacana Indonesia sebagai negara demokratis penyedia kebebasan beragama kembali dipertanyakan dengan pembongkaran paksa Gereja HKBP Filadelfia Setu, Bekasi, Kamis (21/3) lalu. Dinilai meresahkan masyarakat, kelompok agama ini telah berulangkali mengalami aksi kekerasan berbasis keagamaan.
Kelompok-kelompok minoritas, baik dalam identitas liberalis maupun fundamentalis, seringkali menjadi obyek anti-keberagaman di negara yang masih menggunakan semboyan Bhineka Tunggal Ika ini. Deretan aksi intoleransi tersebut bukan hanya lahir sebagai bentuk kekerasan fisik keagamaan, melainkan sedimen kekerasan intelektual terhadap agama.
Keberadaan masyarakat yang memilih jalan kekerasan untuk ‘menyelamatkan’ keyakinan dapat dilihat sebagai ‘aksi peduli’ terhadap agama. Namun, kepedulian intrareligius tanpa dibarengi komunikasi silang justru berpotensi melahirkan intoleransi interreligius. Nihilnya upaya orientasi terhadap golongan lain semakin meningkatkan paranoid terhadap eksistensi ‘the other’ yang berbeda pandangan ideologi. Tanpa komunikasi, semua perbedaan lantas diselesaikan dengan kekerasan.
Dihapuskannya iklim dialog keagamaan sebagai upaya ‘penyelamatan agama’ jalur damai tidak lepas dari ketiadaan ruang publik untuk agama di negeri ini. Penafikan luar biasa pada besarnya fenomena keagamaan (baik kekerasan terhadap ‘terduga’ teroris hingga maraknya ‘aliran sesat’) tampak pada apatisme keagamaan masyarakat beragama ini.
Konsekuensinya, berdiskusi dalam wacana keagamaan dinilai berbahaya. Membicarakan keyakinan dianggap pelatihan terorisme. Dalam level ketakutan selanjutnya, mempelajari agama (golongan) lain adalah sesat, lengkap dengan asumsi ‘usaha pengubahan keyakinan’ oleh pihak-pihak penyelenggara dialog.
Ketakutan yang berkembang menjadi apatisme hidup dalam atmosfir beragama dan keberagaman bukan tidak berbahaya. Secara sosial, intoleransi muncul dari apatisme keberagaman di bumi nusantara. Secara keagamaan, ketakutan ini berdampak tidak sehat pada keimanan. Tanpa ruang publik keagamaan, dialog (pembelajaran) agama berhenti pada level pendidikan formal.
Diskusi keagamaan di luar ruang kelas menjadi sangat ekslusif; terpusat pada titik-titik pertemuan ‘religius’ (rumah ibadah) dan oleh orang-orang ‘religius’ (pemuka agama, santri). Paskapembelajaran sembilan tahun dalam pendidikan formal, seorang penganut agama negeri ini akan mudah merasa cukup dengan ilmu agama dan agamanya.
Ketakutan diskusi beragama yang terlalu lama dipelihara bangsa ini lahir dari kebiasaan nrima masyarakat yang kebablasan. Agama pun dikenal sebagai warisan identitas turun-temurun yang harus diterima begitu saja, seringkali tanpa kesadaran. Sebagai bawaan lahir yang sudah fix, pengayaan maupun pembelajaran lebih mendalam tentang warisan tersebut dianggap tidak perlu, bahkan berbahaya karena ‘segala kebaruan’ di luar agama nenek moyang adalah sesat.
Agama: Ilmu dan Iman
Kesadaran agama menempatkan agama sebagai ilmu (knowledge) dalam budaya kesukarelaan beragama (voluntary religion) di Amerika. Dengan porsi demikian, terdapat ruang lebih luas dan bebas untuk mempelajari agama tanpa batas pelaku dan tempat. Ketika dialog dan pembelajaran keagamaan terselenggara dengan tingkat penerimaan antargolongan yang baik, peluang terciptanya harmoni pemahaman atas perbedaan akan lebih besar.
Meski begitu, dialog keagamaan, utamanya yang melibatkan golongan lain, selalu ditakutkan akan mengubah keyakinan seseorang. Melalui Dialogue Principal, Guru Besar Kajian Katolik dan Interreligius Dialog, Leonard Swidler, menyanggah pernyataan tersebut. Dalam dialog, seseorang tidak perlu menjadi salah agar orang lain menjadi benar, sebagaimana kompromi (compromise) tidak diperlukan dalam kajian ideologis. Ketakutan kompromi ini pula yang seringkali menjadi alasan penolakan dialog keagamaan.
Kenyataannya, kode etik dialog tidak membenarkan penarikan garis merah dengan keras untuk menyamaratakan semua agama dalam dialog antarideologi. Tanpa disadari, pergeseran makna ‘harmonisasi’ menjadi ‘sinkretisasi’ ini telah menutup kesempatan belajar agama (golongan) sendiri dan orang lain.
Argumen lain para penolak dialog keagamaan mengerucut pada tuduhan pendangkalan keimanan. Padahal dengan menjamurnya dialog agama –dalam variasi ruang dan peserta, kemungkinan tegaknya kesadaran agama dalam semangat kesukarelaan akan lebih besar. Sebagaimana penjelasan Michael Warner dalam Keyword for American Cultural Studies (2007) tentang voluntary religion, agama yang dipilih di atas kesadaran dan pembelajaran menggiring seseorang pada tingkatan religiusitas personal tertentu. Hal ini baik dalam rangka penciptaan hubungan vertikal dengan Tuhan. Dalam pemahaman lanjutan, ekspansi hubungan vertikal dimanifestasikan melalui pemahaman terhadap the others dalam variasi hubungan horizontal.
Masyarakat selalu ditakut-takuti dengan pemberitaan agama yang menyeramkan. Pembatasan dialog keagamaan di ruang publik diselenggarakan dalam pemahaman ‘damai itu diam’. Pelabelan golongan tertentu sebagai aliran sesat menjadi cerita horor baru yang menghapus semangat berkelompok dalam budaya keagamaan kita. Maka menjadi penganut agama yang biasa-biasa saja populer sebagai justifikasi pelabelan sesat dan kekerasan terhadap the others.
Saat ini kekerasan keagamaan seolah masih ‘dimaklumi’ negara atas dalil penistaan agama. Maka, bukankah sebuah penistaan bagi agama pula, jika negara mengharuskan masyarakat menuliskan agama tertentu dalam KTP tanpa kebebasan belajar dan membicarakan agama di ruang publik?
--
banyak komentar soal tulisan saya ini. yang mendukung dan tidak. yang positif dan tidak. bahkan ada yang menilai saya sebagai sepiliser. whatsoever. Tuhan yang tahu kucinta Dia... :)
nah, di bawah ini naskah asli yang belum diedit penyuntingnya Solo Pos.
--
Ruang Publik Agama
Wacana Indonesia sebagai negara demokratis penyedia kebebasan beragama kembali dipertanyakan dengan pembongkaran paksa Gereja HKBP Filadelfia Setu, Bekasi, Kamis (21/3) lalu. Dinilai meresahkan masyarakat, kelompok agama ini telah berulangkali mengalami aksi kekerasan berbasis keagamaan.
Kelompok-kelompok minoritas, baik dalam identitas liberalis maupun fundamentalis, seringkali menjadi obyek anti-keberagaman di negara yang masih menggunakan semboyan Bhineka Tunggal Ika ini. Deretan aksi intoleransi tersebut bukan hanya lahir sebagai bentuk kekerasan fisik keagamaan, melainkan sedimen kekerasan intelektual terhadap agama.
Keberadaan masyarakat yang memilih jalan kekerasan untuk ‘menyelamatkan’ keyakinan dapat dilihat sebagai ‘aksi peduli’ terhadap agama. Namun, kepedulian intrareligius tanpa dibarengi komunikasi silang justru berpotensi melahirkan intoleransi interreligius. Nihilnya upaya orientasi terhadap golongan lain semakin meningkatkan paranoid terhadap eksistensi ‘the other’ yang berbeda pandangan ideologi. Tanpa komunikasi, semua perbedaan lantas diselesaikan dengan kekerasan.
Dihapuskannya iklim dialog keagamaan sebagai upaya ‘penyelamatan agama’ jalur damai tidak lepas dari ketiadaan ruang publik untuk agama di negeri ini. Penafikan luar biasa pada besarnya fenomena keagamaan (baik kekerasan terhadap ‘terduga’ teroris hingga maraknya ‘aliran sesat’) tampak pada apatisme keagamaan masyarakat beragama ini.
Konsekuensinya, berdiskusi dalam wacana keagamaan dinilai berbahaya. Membicarakan keyakinan dianggap pelatihan terorisme. Dalam level ketakutan selanjutnya, mempelajari agama (golongan) lain adalah sesat, lengkap dengan asumsi ‘usaha pengubahan keyakinan’ oleh pihak-pihak penyelenggara dialog.
Ketakutan yang berkembang menjadi apatisme hidup dalam atmosfir beragama dan keberagaman bukan tidak berbahaya. Secara sosial, intoleransi muncul dari apatisme keberagaman di bumi nusantara. Secara keagamaan, ketakutan ini berdampak tidak sehat pada keimanan. Tanpa ruang publik keagamaan, dialog (pembelajaran) agama berhenti pada level pendidikan formal.
Diskusi keagamaan di luar ruang kelas menjadi sangat ekslusif; terpusat pada titik-titik pertemuan ‘religius’ (rumah ibadah) dan oleh orang-orang ‘religius’ (pemuka agama, santri). Paskapembelajaran sembilan tahun dalam pendidikan formal, seorang penganut agama negeri ini akan mudah merasa cukup dengan ilmu agama dan agamanya.
Ketakutan diskusi beragama yang terlalu lama dipelihara bangsa ini lahir dari kebiasaan nrima masyarakat yang kebablasan. Agama pun dikenal sebagai warisan identitas turun-temurun yang harus diterima begitu saja, seringkali tanpa kesadaran. Sebagai bawaan lahir yang sudah fix, pengayaan maupun pembelajaran lebih mendalam tentang warisan tersebut dianggap tidak perlu, bahkan berbahaya karena ‘segala kebaruan’ di luar agama nenek moyang adalah sesat.
Agama: Ilmu dan Iman
Kesadaran agama menempatkan agama sebagai ilmu (knowledge) dalam budaya kesukarelaan beragama (voluntary religion) di Amerika. Dengan porsi demikian, terdapat ruang lebih luas dan bebas untuk mempelajari agama tanpa batas pelaku dan tempat. Ketika dialog dan pembelajaran keagamaan terselenggara dengan tingkat penerimaan antargolongan yang baik, peluang terciptanya harmoni pemahaman atas perbedaan akan lebih besar.
Meski begitu, dialog keagamaan, utamanya yang melibatkan golongan lain, selalu ditakutkan akan mengubah keyakinan seseorang. Melalui Dialogue Principal, Guru Besar Kajian Katolik dan Interreligius Dialog, Leonard Swidler, menyanggah pernyataan tersebut. Dalam dialog, seseorang tidak perlu menjadi salah agar orang lain menjadi benar, sebagaimana kompromi (compromise) tidak diperlukan dalam kajian ideologis. Ketakutan kompromi ini pula yang seringkali menjadi alasan penolakan dialog keagamaan.
Kenyataannya, kode etik dialog tidak membenarkan penarikan garis merah dengan keras untuk menyamaratakan semua agama dalam dialog antarideologi. Tanpa disadari, pergeseran makna ‘harmonisasi’ menjadi ‘sinkretisasi’ ini telah menutup kesempatan belajar agama (golongan) sendiri dan orang lain.
Argumen lain para penolak dialog keagamaan mengerucut pada tuduhan pendangkalan keimanan. Padahal dengan menjamurnya dialog agama –dalam variasi ruang dan peserta, kemungkinan tegaknya kesadaran agama dalam semangat kesukarelaan akan lebih besar. Sebagaimana penjelasan Michael Warner dalam Keyword for American Cultural Studies (2007) tentang voluntary religion, agama yang dipilih di atas kesadaran dan pembelajaran menggiring seseorang pada tingkatan religiusitas personal tertentu. Hal ini baik dalam rangka penciptaan hubungan vertikal dengan Tuhan. Dalam pemahaman lanjutan, ekspansi hubungan vertikal dimanifestasikan melalui pemahaman terhadap the others dalam variasi hubungan horizontal.
Masyarakat selalu ditakut-takuti dengan pemberitaan agama yang menyeramkan. Pembatasan dialog keagamaan di ruang publik diselenggarakan dalam pemahaman ‘damai itu diam’. Pelabelan golongan tertentu sebagai aliran sesat menjadi cerita horor baru yang menghapus semangat berkelompok dalam budaya keagamaan kita. Maka menjadi penganut agama yang biasa-biasa saja populer sebagai justifikasi pelabelan sesat dan kekerasan terhadap the others.
Saat ini kekerasan keagamaan seolah masih ‘dimaklumi’ negara atas dalil penistaan agama. Maka, bukankah sebuah penistaan bagi agama pula, jika negara mengharuskan masyarakat menuliskan agama tertentu dalam KTP tanpa kebebasan belajar dan membicarakan agama di ruang publik?
--
banyak komentar soal tulisan saya ini. yang mendukung dan tidak. yang positif dan tidak. bahkan ada yang menilai saya sebagai sepiliser. whatsoever. Tuhan yang tahu kucinta Dia... :)
KTP (cerpen)
Katakanlah kamu seorang WNI. Saat lahir, tinjauan ius soli dan ius sanguinis mendukung keberadaanmu sebagai WNI. Tetapi tanpa mendaftarkan diri sebagai penduduk, akankah kewarganegaraanmu diakui? Lantas, jika kelak kamu mendapatkan masalah, masihkah pemerintah wajib membelamu tanpa kejelasan identitas?
Sebenarnya dia tidak berharap mendapatkan masalah tentang keberadaannya di kemudian hari. Tetapi pada akhirnya dia membuat KTP di tahun keduapuluhtiganya menjalani hidup.
“Bikin KTP kan nggak bikin kamu rugi. Malah banyak sekali manfaatnya buat kamu. Bisa milih di Pemilu, bisa jalan-jalan ke luar negeri, dan yang paling penting bisa nikah!” nasihat ayahnya, mencoba mempengaruhi.
Dia masih terdiam di balik komputer, mengetik artikel untuk zine komunitas kebudayaannya. Dia sama sekali tidak tertarik mengikuti Pemilu. Hanya akan menambah daftar dosa karena turut menghancurkan negeri dengan kepemimpinan busuk, pikirnya. Apalagi ke luar negeri. Menurutnya berlibur ke luar negeri berpuluh kali tanpa sekalipun mengunjungi pojok-pojok eksotisme negara sendiri tidak menambah gengsi apapun. Menikah? Sepertinya dia akan mulai memikirkan ini. Tetapi sesungguhnya, bukan itu penyebabnya melangkah ke Balai Desa untuk mengurus kartu identitas kewaranegaraan pertamanya.
Kakaknya yang penulis pernah mencaci cerpennya. Menurut orang itu, dia memang cukup lihai bermain teknis dan diksi, tetapi sangat bermasalah dengan jati diri. Identitas kepenulisan. Dalam esai-esai budaya pada zine-nya selama ini, dia hanya mangumpulkan teori-teori dan menganalisisnya dalam kesempitan cakrawala. Dia tidak cukup mengenal dirinya, bagaimana dia bisa menulis sesuatu yang mewakili dirinya? Tidak ada kesadaran lokal, terlebih internalisasi nilai-nilai yang diyakini.
Mungkin membuat KTP akan membantunya mengenali diri.
“Mas, saya mau bikin KTP,” katanya pada petugas Balai Desa yang terlihat sibuk memanfaatkan akses internet kantor dengan mengakses jejaring sosial siang itu.
“Perpanjang?”
“Bukan, bikin baru.”
Petugas itu tampak kaget dan meragukan kalimatnya. Dia pun cukup sadar diri dengan tidak memiliki wajah yang awet muda.
“Umur saya baru dua puluh tiga tahun. Telat enam tahun nggak papa, kan?” katanya buru-buru.
“Oh, iya. Mau dipakai buat daftar nikah ya?”
Sialan. Petugas ini mulai sok akrab. Tetapi jauh lebih baik daripada bersikap sok sangar dengan berbagai ketentuan birokrasi desa yang dibuat terlihat penting.
“Nggih, Mas. Sampun wayahe,” jawabnya berbohong sambil terkekeh. Juga berusaha sok akrab.
“Silahkan diisi formulirnya. Kalau sudah, nanti dimintakan cap ke Mbak di pojok itu. Habis itu diserahkan ke kantor Kecamatan,” jelas petugas itu cukup cepat dan kembali sibuk dengan internetnya. Dia segera menuju kursi panjang dan mulai menulis.
Nama : Muhammad Al Fatah
Namanya memang tertulis seperti itu, tetapi dia lebih menyukai panggilan Cungkring dari teman-teman zine-nya. Menurutnya lebih bernafaskan kekeluargaan, dan dengan sederhana lebih mewakili dirinya yang kurus dan jangkung. Dia terkadang justru malu jika ditanyai nama ‘sebenarnya’. Dirinya tidak semulia kandungan makna Muhammad Al Fatah untuk menyandang ‘gelar seumur hidup’ seperti itu. Terkadang dia berpikir untuk mengganti namanya.
Tempat, tanggal lahir : Yapen Waropen, 13 Maret 1989
Dia memang terlahir di pojok timur negaranya. Lima belas tahun pertama hidupnya dihabiskan di tanah multikultural itu, sebelum keluarganya yang merasa sudah cukup ‘menabung’ memutuskan kembali ke Jawa. Tetapi kehidupannya di pulau masyarakat ‘berwarna’ itu tidak menyisakan sedikitpun kepribadian daerah yang mewakili tanah kelahirannya. Ingatannya tentang Papua hanya sebatas enaknya papeda, indahnya pantai Aromarea di Yapen, murahnya berbelanja di pasar ikan, dan seringnya bentrok pribumi dan pendatang. Poin terakhir pula yang semakin mempercepat kepulangan keluarga mereka.
Sebenarnya dia tidak menyukai tanah kelahirannya itu. Dengan mengaku orang kelahiran Papua, teman-temannya akan langsung mendekatinya sebagai manusia primitif untuk diwawancarai. Apakah dia berpakaian selama di sana. Apakah semua penduduk Papua berwarna gelap. Apakah di sana ada televisi dan internet, dan pertanyaan bodoh lain yang menunjukkan derajat pengetahuan mereka. Dengan mencantumkan identitasnya sebagai putra Papua, tatapan kawan-kawannya seolah menyiratkan ada kertas bertuliskan ‘Orang Papua’ menempel di punggungnya. Tetapi pada akhirnya dia menuliskan kata itu sambil berharap suatu saat dapat kembali bermain pasir putih di pantai-pantainya.
Jenis kelamin :
Dia berhenti sejenak. Sebenarnya dia tidak menyukai kolom ini disertakan dalam kartu identitas. Dia mengenal seorang teman yang kesulitan menentukan identitas kelaminnya. Meskipun teman itu secara fisik hanya memiliki satu alat kelamin yang mengharuskannya mengaku sebagai golongan tertentu, temannya merasa tidak mewakili golongan tersebut.
Menurut teman itu, “Manusia ya manusia. Aku tidak mau disebut laki-laki. Bukan juga perempuan. Aku ya... manusia. Sudah.”
Dia sempat meragukan identitas kelaminnya saat berkenalan dengan orang itu. Penjelasan manusiawi yang memukau dari kawan itu membuatnya semakin yakin kolom jenis kelamin diadakan dalam rangka ‘mengkhianati’ perasaan kelompok-kelompok seperti temannya.
Tetapi dia pernah membaca perihal kemutlakan jenis manusia dalam buku kakaknya yang religius. Dan entah mengapa, dia lebih menyukai konsep itu. Pada titik tertentu terkadang dia merasa manusia terlalu rumit dengan menyusahkan diri mereka dalam perumusan golongan-golongan tertentu berdasar isme-isme ciptaan mereka. Perlahan, dituliskannya ‘laki-laki’ pada kertas di hadapannya.
Alamat : Bulusari, RT 07 RW 09 Bulusulur, Wonogiri, Jawa Tengah
Sinyal putus-putus internet yang selama ini membuka horison pengetahuannya di luar daerah ini. Pertama kali pindah ke Jawa, dia selalu protes atas pemilihan tempat tinggal yang terlalu ke dalam tersebut. Saat itu bahkan jalan menuju rumahnya masih berupa telasahan yang rusak di berbagai tempat. Tetapi ayahnya selalu berkeyakinan lingkungan yang asri akan mempengaruhi perkembangan jiwa seseorang. Beliau yang mengetahui hobi menulisnya bahkan menambahkan manfaat tinggal di daerah bagi karir kepenulisan seseorang.
Dibandingkan dengan tempat tinggalnya sekarang, jujur dia lebih nyaman bermukim di Papua. Masyarakat yang katanya guyub itu lebih sering kompak dalam bergosip tentang tetangga. Saat di Papua, keluarganya dan masyarakat Jawa lain terhubung dalam ikatan persaudaraan dan rasa senasib sepenanggungan yang kuat dan abstrak. Meskipun mereka tidak tercatat sebagai keluarga dalam ikatan darah, kekeluargaan yang dirasa sangat besar. Terkadang dia merasa harus kembali menjadi minoritas untuk merasakan kuatnya ikatan tanpa hubungan darah.
Agama :
Sekali lagi dia terhenti. Hampir satu jam dia mengisi formulir itu, tetapi baru empat kolom yang berhasil dilengkapinya. Menulis di atas titik-titik itu seperti menguras energinya. Dia merasakan tatapan mencurigakan para pegawai Balai Desa yang seolah mengisyaratkan tawaran bantuan. Tetapi tentu saja dia tidak akan menerimanya. Ini kan tentang dirinya, akan lebih menyedihkan saat orang lain lebih memahami dirimu dibandingkan pemahamanmu.
“Masih lama, Mas?” tanya petugas yang sama di balik komputernya.
“Ng, tidak, Mas. Sebentar lagi. Maaf. Ngapunten,” tambahnya buru-buru, dengan nada yang diusahakan mengandung penyesalan. Penggunaan bahasa daerah seperti itu bukanlah kesadaran lokal baginya. Dia hanya merasa lebih sopan dan enak saat meminta maaf dengan gaya njawani.
Matanya kembali menatap kolom di hadapannya: Agama. Saat SMA dia pernah mengikuti diskusi-diskusi yang mempertanyakan eksistensi agama. Sama seperti jenis kelamin, menurutnya ini adalah hal sensitif yang seharusnya tidak perlu dicantumkan dalam kartu identitas. Jika sesuatu diciptakan hanya untuk menciptakan kebencian dan permusuhan, sebaiknya sesuatu itu dilupakan atau dimusnahkan saja. Tetapi kakaknya sekali lagi membantahnya habis-habisan.
“Namanya saja agama. A artinya tidak, gama artinya kacau. Tujuan agama ya biar nggak ada kekacauan. Kalau orang-orang ngaku beragama tapi justru bikin kacau, jangan salahkan lembaganya. Itu kan urusan oknum. Personal!”
Dia sempat menyetujui itu dan kemudian kembali yakin dengan pilihan beragamanya selama ini. Tetapi ternyata bagi kakaknya dia tidak benar-benar serius menjadikan agama sebagai bagian identitasnya. Parameternya tentu saja dalam nilai-nilai ‘kering’ pada setiap tulisannya. Dia seperti menjadi orang lain dalam setiap esai dan cerpennya. Pikiran, perkataan, dan perbuatannya bertemu dalam hubungan kontradiktif yang sangat kontras. Bahkan tidak dapat dikategorikan abangan seperti tuduhan kakaknya selama ini.
“Mas kalau minggu ke gereja?” tanya petugas yang sama, tiba-tiba telah duduk di sampingnya.
Dia menggeleng. “Aneh,” pikirnya. “Dia kan bisa baca namaku.”
“Kalau jumat ke masjid?” tanyanya lagi.
Dia mengangguk. Sebenarnya dia ingin menjawab “jarang” tetapi dia yakin tatapan lebih menyebalkan yang akan diterima dari pria di hadapannya.
“Ya sudah, ditulis itu.” Petugas di sampingnya bahkan mengulurkan telunjuknya pada kolom kosong tempat pengisian ‘agama’ sebagai identitas.
Perlahan, dia menuliskan kata yang dianjurkan. Ada rasa bersalah dan ketakutan luar biasa seiring tinta-tinta dalam bolpoin di tangannya menjelma menjadi satu kata sakral. Dia bukan tipe orang yang ingin mewarisi keyakinan nenek moyang begitu saja. Dia yakin, pengetahuan agamanya saat ini akan kalah dengan menyedihkan jika disandingkan dengan pencari keyakinan yang sebenarnya.
Pekerjaan : Penulis
“Mas nulis buku?” tanya petugas itu, masih dengan jarak teramat dekat dan dengan pandangan mengawasi khas satpam toko swalayan tidak laku. Menyebalkan.
“Enggak. Belum, ding,” ralatnya buru-buru.
“Nulis di koran?”
“Nggak juga. Isinya politik terus sih, saya nggak minat,” jawabnya mencoba ramah.
“Nulis di majalah, pasti, ya?”
“Semacam itulah, namanya zine. Z-I-N-E,” ejanya.
“Ditulis wiraswasta aja, Mas.”
“Lho kenapa? Kan saya nulis, bukan dagang.”
“Kan saya nggak nyuruh sampeyan nulis pedagang. Nggak ada daftar pekerjaan ‘penulis’ kalau di KTP, Mas.” Petugas itu beranjak dan kembali dengan tipp-ex di tangannya.
“Pemerintah bisa ribet Mas, kalau harus nerima semua pekerjaan ditulis di KTP. Susah bikin statistiknya. Kemarin malah saya baca isu katanya ada orang homo mau bikin identitas di KTP. Lha yo rusak negarane nek carane ngono.”
Dia hanya mengangguk dan segera menuliskan kata wiraswasta di kolom pekerjaan. Berbicara dengan orang ini soal hak asasi rasanya tidak akan efektif.
“Mas tahu soal yang begituan?” tanya petugas itu penasaran. Mungkin wajahnya terlihat cukup berpengetahuan luas, jika tidak petugas itu menduganya sebagai homo.
“Homo?”
“Iya. Teman Facebook saya ada yang begitu lho, Mas. Begitu saya nyadar dia nggak beres, langsung saya remove. Ndak nulari-nulari. Kalau Indonesia tambah penuh sama yang begituan, saya mau ikut demo anti-mereka saja lah Mas. Biarpun capek, paling tidak saya kontribusi, gitu,” kata petugas Balai Desa itu bersemangat.
“Ya kan orang banyak, Mas. Anaknya orang banyak juga. Beda-beda, lah.” Dia mencoba netral dengan tidak terlibat jauh dalam obrolan itu. Masih ada beberapa formulir yang harus dilengkapinya, dan dia mulai terusik dengan obrolan sensitif ini. Statistiknya selalu menunjukkan akhir yang tidak baik dalam setiap diskusi tema-tema ini.
“Tapi lak yo nggak boleh egois to, Mas? Harus menghormati yang lain juga. Yang hidup di Indonesia kan nggak cuma mereka itu. Kita-kita yang normal ini juga mau hidup nyaman,” tandasnya. Raut wajah arogan berbalut nada sok tahu petugas itu semakin membuatnya muak.
“Nah, itu Mas. Yang hidup di Indonesia kan nggak cuma kita. Mereka juga mau hidup nyaman. Mas pernah dengar soal multikulturalisme?” katanya membalik keadaan. Berusaha tenang, merasa akan menang.
“Pernah. Lukisan coreng-moreng, kan?” jawab petugas itu, kembali menyulut sekam di hatinya.
“Maksudnya?” tanyanya berusaha menahan emosi.
“Banyak warna dan disatukan. Kalau diibaratkan Mas lagi melukis wajah orang dan Mas bingung harus diwarnai apa karena karakternya terlalu banyak, akhirnya semua warna dipakai. Hasilnya ya coreng-moreng nggak jelas,” kata pria itu kalem tetapi sangat sukses mengesalkannya.
BUK!
Refleks tangannya meninju petugas Balai Desa di hadapannya. Entah mengapa ucapan wajah coreng-moreng itu begitu melukai hatinya. Seolah kegagalannya memahami identitas diri yang selalu ditutupinya dengan idealisme multi menjadi begitu hina di mata petugas Balai Desa. Diambilnya kembali formulir-formulir yang hampir terisi penuh.
“Nggak jadi bikin KTP aja, Mas.”
Kertas-kertas itu kemudian berakhir dalam tong biru plastik bertuliskan ‘sampah organik’ di depan kantor Balai Desa.
-0-
Surakarta, 15 Maret 2012
*cerpen ini alhamdulillah masuk antologi cerpen Joglo 7 Taman Budaya Jawa Tengah. sebenarnya, nulis ini karena motivasi tugas creative writing dan kebanyakan mengonsumsi isu politik identitas. haha
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)