Dianaira

Petrichor

Archive for the category “Essays”

Androgyny Feminism in “ NAMAKU MATA HARI” by Remy Sylado: Man Write about Woman

“ Namaku Mata Hari ” is a novel that made by Remy Sylado which published on 2011. Actually, this fiction novel is based on the true story whose named Mata hari “ Margaretha Geertruida Zelle”. She is double agent for German and French in World War I at the end of nineteenth century. She worked as exotic dancer and prostitute while performing her duties. At the end she got the execution for treason of Germany that addressed to her with shoot way.
Interesting, the novel is made by man and the main character is a woman. Of course, the power of feminism will appear in this novel. But how Remy creates this real character ( Mata Hari) with his man mind to figure out of Mata Hari’s mind as woman, even he is a man?
The terminology to show the same role of masculinity and feminine called androgyny, as Plato revealed that the original human being was a hermaphrodite. The original person was two halves, one male, one female. Then these got separated. That’s why everybody’s always searching for their other half. Except for us. We’ve got both halves already( in Hargreaves: 2005). Remy tries to applied it in his novel “ Namaku Mata Hari”. But actually this technique also cause the problem about feminism, again man put his perception about woman.
Showalter explained in her essays that the woman as the reader makes woman perception about themselves to be misunderstanding, its impact of imagery man about woman. Woman claimed as literature consumer and man as creator. In this case, Remy put his perception about Mata Hari who is worked as erotic dancer. Vulgarly, Remy wrote about Mata Hari’s mind that’s something impossible to say as woman “ Ibuku wafat ketika aku berusia 14 tahun, bersamaan dengan saat-saat getaran badani mendambakan lelaki dalam imajinasi wortel dan kentang.” (19)…. “Dia menjulurkan lidahnya ke mulutku, dan aku merespon secara otomatis mengulum lidahnya itu… aku menikmati permainan burung merpati ini dengan gairah yang masyuk.” (24)
I assumed this excerption is man’s side of Remy. Actually a woman has sexual desire that different with a man. Man frontally says what in his mind, but woman not like that even Mata Hari is prostitute. I revealed this is sides of masculinity that is created by Remy Sylado to construct a woman. He created Mata Hari as his perception, he tries to figure out Mata Hari as prostitute with using vulgar words. Mata Hari is also imagined by Remy as stubborn woman and dependable like a man but cannot live without sex.
In this novel Remy also seemed exploit part of body and sexuality of Mata Hari “ Cremer selalu mencuri-curi pandang di tengah gelap malam yang diterangi obor-obor melihat payudaraku.” (100) …” Tahu-tahu dia telah membuka bajuku, dan mencium payudaraku… kemudian dia mendorong aku ke ranjang, dan di situ sambil terus mencium, dia copot semua kain di badanku. Gerakannya cepat sekali. Begitu juga, gerakannya dia mencopot pakaian-pakainnya atas dan bawah, sampai akhirnya kami sama-sama seperti dua ekor swike yang baru dikuliti, siap menarikan tarian ajaib dengan irama suka-suka. Artinya, memang kemungkinan-kemungkinan yang aku pikirkan itu, kini benar-benar terjadi…” (212-213) “ di hotel ini kami menginap tiga hari dan tak lupa saban malam senggama” (215) “ dengan goyang pinggul dan payudara yang sangat erotik.”(216). Remy exploit of sexuality of Mata Hari and make her become an object of satisfication of man’s lustful. But in this novel Remy creates Mata Hari as someone who can snare men with her body, beauty, and erotic dance.
Cixous says in the laugh of the medusa that for men, woman is an abyss which could omitted man (penis) which is symbolized by Medusa ( beautiful woman who cursed by Athena become woman whom her head full of snakes. Everybody who stare in her eyes woul be petrified) “Men have committed the greatest crime against women. Insidiously, violently, they have led them to hate women, to be their own enemies, to mobilize their immense strength against themselves, to be the executants of their virile needs. They have made for women an antinarcissism! Anarcissism which loves itself only to be loved for what women haven’t got! They have constructed the infamous logic of antilove”. This is imagined by Remy Sylado, even actually Mata Hari is an object of men she has controlled about who that she will tricked. Man have no controlled when met Mata Hari and paralyzed by her.
Sex for life became the main theme in novel “ Namaku Mata Hari”, she is the symbolism of woman that is constructed by man ( Remy Sylado). In this novel Mata Hari created as woman who could elude men and make them to be depend on her. This happened to government of French and German. They were so abided to Mata Hari and made her to be an agent to spy French (to German) and German ( to French). She is like a snake who has forked tongue, she used her sexuality to tricked men and knew their secret. Finally, men felt cheated and executed Mata Hari similar with Medusa in Greek Mythology beheaded by hero Perseus. “ Saya bukan penghianat… tolong. Jangan siksa saya. Saya hanya seorang manusia perempuan yang lemah…” (528) … “ “baik” kataku sambil mengangkang, menyingkap rokku. “yang didapatkan Von Kalle dari saya , ini, vagina saya, dan yang saya dapat dari dia, penisnya. Puas?”” (528)
“ Pendusta” (528). Finally man claimed her as a liar and traitor. Actually, man realized that Mata Hari is a poison that disturb the stability of state. So, she must be perished and executed. But once again Remy put his Masculinity in Mata Hari caharacter, she didn’t afraid of the consequent that should she face. “ Sudah selesai tuan-tuan. Silahkan tembak. Saya sudah memilih mati dengan cara betina seperti ini. Terimakasih, Tuhan” (559).
Androgyny showed by Remy to enter feminine world as Mata Hari, but of course he also cannot separated his masculinity because he is man. It caused sometimes Mata Hari looks like a man who independent, idealist, frontal and says vulgarly. In one sides she is a woman that constructed by man whom exploit her body and beauty to tricked men, sometimes she cries, feel in love, and sometimes she becomes a real mom.
Remy Sylado established Mata Hari with his perception about woman, erotic dancer and prostitute. This maybe different from real character of Mata Hari’s mind. Because man and woman are different. This novel maybe different if it is wrote by woman. Mata Hari is possible become dependent and has mysterious’mind. But again when woman writes woman (feminine writing) about something lability, emotional and illogical story. Isn’t also construct by a man?
If it’s yes, it is good when Remy Sylado put Mata Hari as independent woman and vulgarly. Maybe, woman also has to do something like Remy did. To be Woman even he is a man, and woman become a man even she is woman, to construct they perception abou men and women.
References
Cixous, Helene. 1976. Chicago Journals :The Laugh of The Medusa. Chicago : The University of Chicago Press.
Benstock, Shari; Suzanne Ferish; Sussanne Woods.2002. A Handbook of Literary Feminism Elaine Showalter “ Towards a Feminist Poetics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hargreaves, Tracy.2005. Androgyny in Modern Literature. New York : Palgrave Macmillan.
Sylado, Remy.2011. Namaku Mata Hari. Jakarta : Gramedia Pustaka Utama.

Novel into Film: TRANSFORMATION CHARACTERIZATION of “ HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON”

I should assume that literature and film is a natural marriage and sometimes it would be shotgun wedding. It’s because film is more commercial than novel. So the director or producer has to composing about the story and plot. Not only plot but also the character must be commercial enough to be watched. This occurred to ones character of the adaptation animation film that was directed by Dean De Blois and Chris Sanders with titled How To train Your Dragon I.
How to Train Your Dragon is animation adaptation film from the first of serials novel with the same titled by Cressida Cowell on 2003. Actually, How to Train Your Dragon movie is worked by Dreamworks and directed by Dean De Blois and Chris Sanders which released on 2010. As we knew about adaptation film we’ll find the differences about both of them. One of them occured to the main character of the story, he is Hiccup Horendus Huddock III.
There is some differences from Hiccup, I argue that Hiccup in the film is more commercial than novel. Especially, as the physical I can imagine that Hiccup in novel version is someone who has small body and his face is full of acnes like Cowell imagined at the illustration of the novel Hiccup is weirdo. Whereas in film I claimed that Hiccup has good looking even his body is small than the other. Hiccup also has the same posture with Astrid ( The addition girl character in the film whose didn’t exist in the novel version). It meant that main character must be commercial, because almost people want and expected the main character as someone who has good looking character.
Besides physic, there is some differences about the characterization. In the story Hiccup is a Viking who different from others. His dad is a leader of Viking who has huge body, tall, and long-whiskered. Hiccup is an heir, the candidate of the next leader. But there is something different from Hiccup, he didn’t like his father. His body is too small to be a leader, he is also regarded as a loser by his friends. Many Viking says, he is not appropriate to be a leader.
Hiccup as the main character in this story has his own way to be an hero. In novel version Hiccup is someone who has no ambition in his life, he is described as a coward and useless.  “ kalian mungkin sekarang sudah menebak bahwa Hiccup tidak terlahir sebagai seorang pahlawan sejati..” “Kalian tidak akan pernah memilih Hiccup dari kesepuluh anak laki-laki itu untuk menjadi pahlawan dalam cerita ini” (Cressida Cowell: 15).
I assumed that Cowell tries to deliver to us about ‘ to be an hero we can start it with the zero’. Even in film version the director also  wanted to delivered the message like Cowell did, actually he have his own way to imagined Hiccup. Hiccup character in film version has almost the same physical characteristics with the novel (even in the film version Hiccup is more commercial) but not mentally. In movie Hiccup seems as ambitious person. He is smart but he was underestimated by his friends because his body is too small as the Viking. As the excerpt of the script “ owh, their jobs so much cooler.” “ oh come on,let me out please I need to make my marked” “ please, two minute I’ll kill the dragon my life will get infenitely better I might even get a date:”
At those excerption of the script, I argues that Hiccup in movie version is more brave than in novel version. At the beginning I can feel that Hiccup really wanted to be a hero, he bored about his safe zone, it’s different from the novel Hiccup’s character seem like a loser.
In Cowell’s Hiccup is someone really nerd because he can speak Dragonese. He used to hide his ability in order to not get the nerd reputated by his friends. Actually he was looser even he was kind. In film version Hiccup found Toothless ( Night Fury Dragon) and adopted him. Hiccup as someone who has ambitious character changing into charitable because acquainted by Toothless.
Toothless in both version are also different. I revealed that Toothless is the symbol of Hiccup bravery. In book version Toothless is only Garden Dragon which has brown colour and toothless. Whereas in the film version Toothless is more powerful, he has black colour and named as Night Fury ( The most dangerous dragon in Viking). I concluded that Hiccup in film is more competent because he has the wild dragon. In the film Toothless also more commercial with his cute face.
“ Despite his physical shortcomings, Hiccup does his best to succeed as a Viking. He is smart and is constantly creating inventions for various uses throughout the film, including a bola sling, a prosthetic tail, a saddle, and a riding vest. At first, however, Hiccup is almost obsessed with proving himself to the rest of his tribe; he often doesn’t think things through and is more determined to gain the recognition of his peers than he is heedful of others’ orders, often causing problems for the rest of the tribe, and himself. Despite this, Hiccup shows great aptitude at being a leader and a strategist: he leads his Dragon Training classmates into battle, using his friends’ strengths wisely in the battle against the Red Death. Hiccup also has very good observational skills which come in handy during his time with Toothless and during Dragon Training. For example, he’s able to hypothesize that Dragons have a natural disdain for eel when his own Dragon companion refuses to eat one himself, and uses this to successfully drive back a Hideous Zippleback later.” (Wiki.2010)
But in the conflict Hiccup become awkward person, he was not too confident by his dad. Actually in the novel his dad named Stoick the Vast is a gentle dad he really loved Hiccup. Slightly different from film version Stoick is really feel embarrased about Hiccup.
The climax of the film is similar, Hiccup has to marked himself as hero by defeating the huge dragon. Even, the the resolution is different. Hiccup in novel version can speak Dragonese and acquired to have a dreaded dragon but actually he just get the garden dragon named toothles. Whereas in film version Hiccup knew how to train the dragon with make a friend with dragon named Toothless which is really dreaded by Viking, hi genus is Night Fury, different from the book. He knew to paralyzed the dragon with teached Toothless, in novel version he paralyzed the dragon with speak dragonese.
Bogs (2008) revealed that some film makers seem to assume that very few filmgoers wil know the novel. These filmmakers disregard the basic spirit of the novel inadapting it to film, thus destroying the film completely forthose amiliar with the book. In such cases, the film must be judged as a completely distinct work of art… Ironically, a loose adaptation may seem a better film to those who are not familiar with tl1e novel than to those who have read and loved it. Thus, a viewer who read the book before seeing the film may have a distinct advantage when the film depends on the viewer’s knowledge of the book. As Cowell said in the interview
Actually, if we watch the film version first. We feel didn’t need to watch the book because, actually in this film has the difference version as the new story. Even, this movie is animation adaptation. Dreamworks remark the story with commercial side. But I assumed that this film is also has the allure more than the book. As Cowell said that “I think it changes the theme particularly. The themes are very much in the same territory, but I have to say, my feeling going into the whole thing, and still now, is that films and books are very different mediums. I can only speak for myself, I suppose, and the way that I approach it, which is I don’t think for a film, even when I go see a film (let alone have my own book developed into a film), I don’t go seeking for it to be exactly the same as the book. I look for it to be a wonderful movie. And that is the criteria by which I judge a film.” ( Cowell)
To those convinced that novels and movies are mutually exclusive endeavours, each with its own incontestably unique properties and effects, it is useful to remember that the modern novel actually anticipated many effects and storytelling techniques, like temporal, causal, and spatial disjunctions, that we are all too accustomed—sometimes erroneously—to regard as essentially “cinematic.” ( Tibbets: xvi)
I concluded that novel and film has unique things that filled each other. Film has cinematography which focused on effect and animation in order to make the story more realistic. Actually, novel can make the reader to put their perception about the story. Compared that in How to Train Your Dragon in both version have the powerful story. In novel we found the zero to hero besides, in film we found Hiccup-Toothless friendship.
The ending of film version has the powerfull feeling. Actually, in the novel is also make us affected about the story. But but the incident when Hiccup must accept the fact that his leg amputated due to sacrifices for the many people is the best scene. Besides he must accepted that his legs got amputated, the friendship between Toothless and Hiccup is really intimated.
The film , by arranging external sign for our visual perception, or by presenting us with dialogue, can lead us to infer thought. But it cannot show us thought directly. It can show us characters thinking, feeling and speaking but it cannot show us their thoughts and feelings. A film is not thought ; it is perceived. ( George Blustone : 1956).
We can’t pick which is best or better on these same story because, the media is different. The story is appropriate with the requirement. In the novel Hiccup is one person who really zero to be hero, the story is also told about friendship. In the movie Hiccup is one person who really brave to give his sacrifice to Viking. But the similar thing about Hiccup is the gentle and kind boy. He really loved friendship and Toothless.
Besides the differences of characteristic of Hiccup. In the film we can find the romance between Hiccup and the main girl character named Astrid. Of, course in the novel we would not found her, because Astrid is the addition character that is made by Dreamworks. Astrid came to balance Hiccup character. Maybe, Astrid is commercial character in order to make the story more dramatic and romantic.
If we compared both of them, actually film version is more complicated then the novel. The story of the novel is simple and appropriate to read by kids. In the book is also added the ilustration and the interesting notes. Whereas in film version the complexity make adults wants to watch this animation film. Actually, IMDb surveyed that this film get the gratify rating with 8,2.

References
Cowell, Cressida. How To Train Your Dragon. Trans. Mutiara Dharma, 2010. Bandung: Mizan. print
Bogs, Joseph M and Denis W Petrie. The Art of Watching Film, 2008.Lisa Moore: New York
Blustone, George .Novels into Film, 1965. University Of California: Los Angeles. Print.
Wiki. Hiccup Horrendus Haddock III, 2010.web. 31 May, 2014. http://howtotrainyourdragon.wikia.com/wiki/Hiccup_Horrendous_Haddock_III
How To Train Your Dragon. Dir. Dean De Blois; Chris Sanders. Perf. Jay Baruchel, Gerard Butler, Christopher Mintz-Plasse. DreamWorks, 2010.dvd
IMDb. How To Train Your Dragon.2010. web. 1 June 2014. http://www.imdb.com
Tibbets, John C; James M Welsh. The Encyclopedia of Novels into Films: Second Edition. 2005. New York : Facts on File. Print.

Social Criticism of Indonesian Feminism : Indecision of Culture transition Between Equality of Gender and Responsibility as woman In Novel “ Belenggu”

 

All of us absolutely knew about feminism, minimal we knew about the emancipation. Equality of rights is always demanded by women all of the world, from west to the east. Surely we understood feminism is begun from western and spread to Asia included on our country, Indonesia. Actually Indonesia itself had have one figured of feminism, She is R.A Kartini and in western we knew Mary Walstonecraft from England, maybe she is the first person who introduced us about feminism.

We didn’t talk about general feminism in the world, we just talk about social criticism of feminism in a Indonesian novel by Armijn Pane. At this story, we will find two women figured whose different enough, they are Tini and Ny. Eny / Yah/ Rohayah/ Siti Hayati. Tini is the modern woman who exalt prestige as the woman, she insisted that become woman should be independent opposites, there is Ny. Eni/ Yah/ Rohayah/ Siti Hayati she tended as the traditional woman. She is tractable and graceful which reflected to real traditional  woman.

Actually both of them also have similarity, it is decided to choose her own way. This two figured are also reflected the reality of Indonesian woman. Not as usual like the other novel, Armijn Pane openly expressing the rebellion of women to demanded their feminism. But, in this novel Armijn Pane also didn’t forget about tradition that entreched in Indonesia. That is system of partriarch, all things is in man control. This is criticized by Armijn Pane, that Indonesian woman felt confused about the culture transition between feminism and traditional culture. This thing occurs to Tini who against her conscience for the sake of her dignity as a woman this indesicion happened on pages 55 “… tergambar dalam hatinya Kartono masuk, letih menjinjing, menjinjing valiesnya. Dia berdiri menyambut suaminya, diambil valies itu, disuruhnya duduk Kartono di kerosi. Di simpannya valies itu. Dia kembali lagi akan membukakan sepatu suaminya, sambil bertanya tentang orang-orang sakit yang baru dikunjunginya. Ah, dia tiada cakap menjadi isteri sejati.”

Tini felt confused about her own lustrous, in a side she wanted to be perfect woman for her husband but in other sides s he also won’t underestimated as woman. It is the reality of feminism, most of woman didn’t want underestimated by men. Almost of them also instead forgot about her obigation as a woman especially from high educational realm. They felt that they are independent, won’t be under men, and may choose the decision. Actually, Tini become a confused woman, she also didn’t know about what she must doing. She won’t make love to be self servitude to men, but she also could not established esteem in her family. We should be recall about what Mary Wollstonecraft insisted in her essays titled “ A Vindication of The Rights of Woman” she claimed that we have to braid esteem with the partner (man). Love is, in a great  degree an arbitrary passion and will reign, like some other stalking mischiefs , by its own authority, and it may also be easily distinguished  from esteem, the foundation of friendship, because it is often excited by evanescent beauties and graces, though, to give an energy to the sentiment, something more solid must deepen their impression and set their imagination to work, to make the most fair- the first good.

Here, Character Tini seem failed to delivery means of feminism. She didn’t get the esteem in her family. “ …Mardani berbisik: Tono pergi hampiri isterimu bisikkan engkau perlu pergi…. dihampirinya isterinya. Tini agak terkejut. Bisik Tono agak cepat : “ Aku pergi….” itu saja yang terdengar oleh Tini, Tono sudah jauh lagi. Pergi, pergi buat apa dikatakannya, hendak menjengkelkan hatiku saja.

Tono and Tini not seem like as usual family, both of them so rigid. Tini not only failed build esteem but also failed to raise love. This is the critical social which Armijn Pane inserted in Belenggu, sometimes women think too much about the social status of her future husband. This happened to Tini, she really wanted to be doctor’s wife and when ambition comes true she didn’t get comfort as a wife. her heart was always afraid that he would be humiliated as a woman.

Social criticism also appear between traditional and modern culture. Tini who actually reflected as modern woman was criticized by her fellows “ …buat apa mendengarkan lagu Eropa disini. Orang tiada mengerti… yang berpendidikan semata-mata itu. Lupa kebudayaan sendiri, lupa lagu gamelan.” I assumed that Armijn Pane has purpose that Indonesia colided with modernism and traditions ( Feminism vs traditions).

Differently with Tini, Siti Rohayah reflected traditional woman. She is graceful and obedient. “ Yah memeluknya : Benar Tono, aku menunggu engkau . kau tadi rusuh, aku merasa kau akan datang lagi. mengapa merasa rusuh Tono?” katanya membelai-belai kepala Tono.” She is really respect to Tono. At least woman like Rohayah to be able to mollify Tono. She is be desired by Tono. But I also found feminism side on Yah. Not similar with Tini whose showed the power behind her vacilation, she exactly showed weaknessess behind her toughness. Evidently, when Yah lied to Tono about her identy. She said that she is Ny. Eni but then she said she is Siti Rohayah, finally she claimed she is Siti Hayati. She is so tricky woman.

Siti Rohayah’s life is also filled with struggle I could took the quotitations “ aku dikawinkan dengan laki-laki yang tidak disukai… aku dibawanya ke Palembang.. aku kemudian lari sampai ke Betawi, pulang ke Bandung… aku tiada berumah tetap, rumahku dihotel berganti-ganti, pindah dari ke kota satu ke kota lain.”

“  didalam hatiku tertawa sebagai setan tertawa, kalau ada lelaki terpikat olehku. Kalau dia merendahkan diri tidur dengan aku, aku senang, aku gembira karena dia tertarik dengan ke lumpur tenpat aku hidup.”

It was clearly showed her hearts she seems weak but actually she also could decided her own decision. Even, she also trapped in “Belenggu”. Actually, these three characters were fittered by each life. Tini with her prestige, Tono with affair, and Yah with her past. In this novel nothing is worth all the blame, everyone have respective defense. Armijn Pane let the readers to interpret it.

Mentioned of social criticism, we need refer to Matthew Arnold’s Theory about his Essay “ The Function of Criticism at The Present Time”.  He claimed that literature is one of unifier nation which conduct the moral. In this study I will combined two theories between Mary Wollstonecraft and Matthew Arnold.

Feminism as the object of social criticism based on the reality in our life, especially in Indonesia. As described previously, I insisted that our nation experienced cultural transition those are : modernism and tradition. Feminism is reflected as modernism that could be able to changed patriarchy rather than to achieve structural social change (Deborah L Madsen, 2000). But unfortunately Indonesia felt confused about this modernism. Belenggu interpreted that Tini not succes to portray herself as modern woman her heart is still in doubt.even, at ending she managed to break free from the shackles that have been chained as woman. It is sign that this transition is need time.

Armijn Pane also describe women who have higher education. Usually they become independent woman and feel no need man because, they are able to support them own self. This resulted dilemma of women as Anne Taylor Allen (2005) states that many of women feel doubt about equality of gender and her obigation as women, At the turn of the twentieth century, many feminists extolled motherhood as the highest of human achievements. Indeed, claimed the influential Swedish author Ellen Key, it was “the most perfect realization of human potential that the species has reached.”5 In the political realm, this view was expressed

through an ideology that historians call “maternalism,” which asserted the public importance of motherhood and child-rearing. Some even includedlife-giving motherhood with death-dealing military service among the rightsand obligations of citizenship.

Most of women let their obigation as women, this things is not only happened by Tini but also Rohayah. At the beginning,  as a woman Rohayah also may called failed in feminism. She become the slave of love and justifies any way, even she was reflection of traditional woman.

I could explained that these theories (Matthew Arnold and Mary Wollstonecraft) are the mimesis approach. Because, my statement is in line with M. Keith ( 1994) that fiction is reflected by reality, specifically designed to divert attention from social problems in the “real” world.

At the ending of the novel “Belenggu” finally Tini and Rohayah have  been able to understand the essence of feminism itself. That is decided her own decision, realising all the chains in her heart without any sense of doubt and wavering. That’s proof that all things must have a process from traditional into modernism.

Became woman doesn’t easy. Sometimes she has to be “woman” and sometimes she has to be “ a man”. women can not let go of his nature as a woman but also he should get equal rights as a human. I think, woman should be like a chameleon that can adapt in order to survive her own self.

 

 

 

Reference:

Allen Taylor Anne.2005. Feminism and Motherhood in Wester Europe: 1890-1970. New York: Palgrave Macmillan

Booker M, Keith.1994. The Dystopian Impulse in Modem Literature : Fiction as Social Criticism. USA : Greenwood Press

Madsen, L Deborah.2000. Feminist Theory and Literary Practice. London: Pluto press

Nurrachman, Dian.2013. Classical Critical Theory: A student Course Book. Bandung: Elsa

 

An Allegory Through Ernest and Algernon : A Conquest Named Ernest between Worthing and Moncrieff

 

We should agree that The Importance of Being Earnest has powerful men characters, those are Jack Worthing and Algernon Moncrieff. Jack Worthing is the Major (protagonist) character in drama which made by Oscar Wilde, he called Jack in the country and Ernest in the city. He used it named in the city because he was pretending that he has a brother named Ernest. Robert Russel (2004) argues the another reason why he used it named because of he wants to escape about his responsibility as guardian of Cecily1, until he met Gwendolen Fairfax a young lady that make him crushed and was enchanted about named Earnest2.

 In the Minor Character the Importance of being Earnest has Algernon Moncrieff, he was Jack’s friend simultaneously as Gwendolen’s cousin. He felt in love with Cecily and pretended to be Ernest too. Cecily knew that Jack has brother and it name is Ernest. So, she believe that Ernest is Algernon and Algernon is Ernest. Algernon pretend to be Ernest in order to get attention from Cecily.

In this drama we can see that these two role characters have same mission to get their love with pretending to be Ernest. in the different characteristics, they have same motives to marrying the girl whom they loved, they hide their own identity just to get good image. The Ernest itself is a symbol of valor, wisdom, and honesty. That’s why every women will be falling in love with the man name Ernest.

If we analyzed Ernest and Moncrieff are allegory of Victorian age3. Zaidan (2004)  argues that allegory is the symbol (figurative language) of human life which  connected  with its values  i.e. : loyalty, honesty etc. The author hide her/his mind  simultaneously to published it.  We agree with her statement, we found that Oscar Wilde actually wanted to hide and published his mind through The Importance of being Earnest. He  criticize about the era Victoria age through  satire comedy genre. He tried to showed the reality of Victoria age which full of hypocrisy and untruthfulness towards role of Jack and Moncrieff to get something named Ernest. It’s a dream to get honesty and loyalty. Initially, if we watched this drama we never know what Wilde meant to be  but when we analyze we’ll find a propaganda to figured out about the importance of honesty.

Victorian age is symbol of luxury and glory whereas, actually Victorian also regarded by some people as the era of hypocrisy, decadence, and lies. Modernism also the sign of the Victorian age, 1899’s was the first published of the importance of Being Earnest that’s meant its drama was including to the latest Victorian age.

Allegory seemed when Jack Worthing lies about his name, initially he asked to Gwendolen how’s if his name is not Ernest and Gwendolen answered that the only really safe name is Ernest (The Importance of Being Earnest act II) and it makes Jack to continue about his lying. In different way, Algernon was criticize about Jack’s behavior but actually he also do what Jack did.. Hypocrisy and untruthfulness happened in these two characters. It happened in the reality of Victorian age Murfin ( ) revealed that generally perception of Victoria era is the hypocrisy, politeness, and close-minded. Victoria age also changes every section of life especially to middle-social class. Many of people from middle-social wants to joined in aristocrat peoples. The second Allegory happened again when Gwendolen and Cecily wanted Marry with the people whom named Ernest. they felt  their class will be up when they marry with Ernest.

 Especially, this drama came when the latest of Victorian era so, it clearly seemed that Victorian era has bad sides. The other sides Victorian age also has good sides William J. Long (2004) states Victoria Era  is the climax of Democracy. It means  that’s an age of popular education, of religious tolerance, of growing brotherhood, and of profound social unrest. We concluded that Victorian age has mission to reached a good human-values towards the wrong way which is filled by hypocrisy. It happened to Jack and Moncrieff, they hide their hypocrisy with the good willing that’s to marry with the girl whom they love. They also hiding in the name of Ernest in order to get the good image.

In the Ending of story we knew that Jack is the real Ernest ( The importance of being Earnest : act III) , it suppose that Ernest need not to be pretend about his identity to protect his image because the truth (honesty, loyalty, etc image) will be approach without pretending. Nor,  Algernon even he wasn’t the real Ernest, he still get his love ( Cecily) it showed that he doesn’t need to be hypocrite to get the happiness. It happened with Victoria age which showed the hypocrisy to get glory image. Even its also has the good  result, Wilde himself still asked the decadence of the end of Victoria age.

Realism is the wilde’s way in drama “The importance of being Earnest”. Luxemburg ( 1987 in tentang sastra )  revealed realism is the importance literature in 19th centuries, its genre try to reflect the fact in real life but in 20th centuries  realism doesn’t meant like that “Realism” isn’t use in genre of literature but  to reflect the way of language. We provoke that the meant of  realism in this drama are both of them those are realism in 19th  and 20th centuries because this drama came in the first half 20th centuries (1899). Luxemburg also add that realism writer tried to give objective information which has coherences with the real life that’s depend on point of view the author, themes, character, etc.

In realism the main character acts in problematic and they usually against the norms. It actually happened in Jack who had against the right norm with hypocrisy. The way of language also has realism characteristics, Wilde wrote the script with to the point, if we try to connect this drama with real life surely there are  connections. The first point is about marriage, then about honesty, class social and the last is satire about victoria (aristocrats) age which really happened in its era.

Prophecy also fill The Importance of Being Earnest, prophecy is the prediction  about the things that will be happened in the future or that period. Surely story like that will be happened in each period from passed, now, or future because this story tells about trivial comedy which maybe happen to anyone. The relationship that is  filled by lying and hypocrisy maybe happen in the future or now.

Comedy satire which showed The Importance of Being Earnest has obvious Allegory if we watched it with appreciate. Eagleton (1996) argues there are connection between development literature and politic also ideology in 20th  centuries. This connection is not only about war, economy, and revolution but also about they were in, such as : crisis of human-relation,  simultaneously social phenomenon. This is it The Importance Being Earnest that full of crisis human-relation, social phenomenon and trick of human behaviour which package with comedy.

Oscar Wilde is the  smart person to place the Allegory. Indirectly he criticism about Victoria age  and surely the social phenomenon which happened in that period. He made this story seems easy but also meaningful. He also has good technique to serve the literature. Maybe that’s why The Importance being Ernest also called as trivial comedy for serious people.

 

1 Granddaughter from a man named Thomas Cardew, who has passed away. Cardew adopted Jack as a baby and  now Cecily has been entrusted to Jack.

2Ernest is the symbol of masculinity1

3 victorian age begun from 1837-1901

 

References

Zaidan, Abdul Rozak dkk . 2004.Kamus Istilah Sastra. Jakarta: Balai Pustaka

Luxemburg, Jan Van dkk. 1991. Tentang Sastra. Jakarta: Intermassa

Eagleton,Terry. 1996. Literary Theory: An introduction, 2nd edition. Massachusetts: Blackwell publisher.

Long, William J. 2004. English literature. England : Proofreaders

Russel, Robert. 2006. The Importance of Being Earnest. England: New Mermaids.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Keunikan Yogyakarta : Antara Monarki dan Republik

Yogyakarta memang selalu menyimpan berjuta keistimewaan didalamnya. Di mulai dari budayanya yang terasa masih sangat kental sampai ke status ke istimewaannya itu sendiri. Seperti yang sudah diketahui, Yogyakarta masih memegang teguh tradisi keraton dan kesultanan. Dibalik sistem politik Indonesia yang menganut Republik Demokrasi, Yogyakarta menjadi salah satu tempat istimewa yang memiliki sistem otonomi yang khusus yaitu bersifat monarki, namun jangan berpikir bahwa Yogyakarta memiliki sistem monarki yang absolut seperti sistem pemerintahan yang lainnya.

Sistem monarki  di Yogyakarta hanyalah monarki budaya seperti yang dijelaskan Suryono seorang peneliti dari Universitas Gadjah Mada  bahwa Sistem Monarki di Yogyakarta bukan monarki murni alias hanya sekadar monarki budaya bukan monarki politis. Sultan menjadi raja di Yogyakarta adalah tuntutan budaya keraton bukan karena ambisi kekuasaan. Dan yang terpenting meskipun sultan berkuasa di provinsi DIY namun memiliki kepatuhan yang tinggi terhadap sistem-sistem politik-ekonomi yang berlaku di Indonesia. Namun, walaupun begitu para masyarakat Yogyakarta sangat menghargai sang Sultan dan tidak pernah merasa terganggu. 

Satu lagi hal yang istimewa dari Yogyakarta, rakyat Yogyakarta berbesar hati untuk memilih sultan sebagai gubernurnya sama hal hanya yang dikatakan oleh Djoko bahwa Monarki konstitusional sistem pemerintahan yang berjalan sesuai dengan undang-undang, raja hanya sebagai simbol. Menurt Djoko sebagian masyarakat yogya masih mengakui sultan sebagai pemimpin dan itu dinilai tidak bertentangan dengan  aturan tatanan pemerintahan. Buktinya, sampai saat ini semuanya baik-baik saja. Tapi kalau dipilih masyarakat bisa pecah. Nantinya Gubernur pemerintahan itu bukan lagi sultan, tapi partaimu.

Kita tentunya masih ingat pada tahun 2010 yang lalu, presiden hendak membuat RUU tentang keistimewaan Yogyakarta yang baru. Pada saat itu masyarakat Jogja merasa tersakiti hatinya bahkan seorang seniman Jogja sampai besiap untuk mengasah keris mereka berkata bahwa Kami ini demokrasi yang berdasarkan kultural, bukan demokrasi yang justru memecah belah.

Terlihat sekali kesetiaan rakyat Jogja kepada sang Sultan, mereka juga tidak setuju kalau Daerah Istimewa Yogayakarta disebut monarki. Bagi mereka rakyatlah yang memilih, bagi mereka itu adalah sebuah demokrasi; demokrasi kultural, bukan demokrasi yang mengatasnamakan politik. Setidaknya itulah yang dipegang teguh oleh masyarakat Yogya.

Sungguh tak ada salahnya kalau Yogyakarta mendapatkan tempat istimewa bagi Indonesia karena dilihat dari sisi historisnya. Seharusnya pemerintah pusat juga tidak perlu merasa takut kalau sistem politik republik demokratisnya akan tercoreng, presiden juga tak perlu khawatir kalau nantinya rakyat justru akan lebih takluk kepada sultan. Karena sebenarnya dibalik sistem monarki itu ada kekuasaan yang lebih absolut yaitu kekuatan pemerintah pusat. Monarki di Yogyakarta hanyalah semata-mata untuk melestarikan kebudayaan, tak ada sama sekali ambisi untuk memperoleh kekuasaan.

Kesultanan dan Keraton memang menjadi daya tarik bagi siapapun yang melihatnya. Mereka seakan-akan sudah menjadi urat nadi Yogyakarta. Dari turis lokal sampai mancanegara  mengakui hal itu. Yogyakarta memang selalu menyimpan hal unik, dari bangunannya sampai ke sistem pemerintahannya.

Referensi :

Ismoko Widjaya.2010. Betulkah raja Yogya monarki.Dikutip dari vivanews.com. Diunduh pada tanggal 10/11/2013

MUH Syaifullah.2010. Tolak istilah monarki, seniman Yogyakarta ngasah keris.Dikutip dari tempo.com. Diunduh pada tanggal 10/11/2013

Surono.2010. Demokrasi versus Monarki Yogyakarta.Dikutip dari nasional.kompas.com. Diunduh pada tanggal 10/11/2013

Post Navigation