Bali: The exotic island made to order

Bali: The exotic island made to order

By Michael Hitchcock

AN ARTICLE in a lifestyle magazine neatly summed up the mix of
attractions that makes Bali an irresistible destination: "guests"
(never tourists) stay in a "traditional Balinese house" (in
reality, a luxurious villa with ensuite bathrooms, balconies and
antique furnishings), dine on exquisite "local organic foods" and
are tended by two personal members of staff.

They can relax by their private pool - or wander along to the
neighboring fishing village to sample the local color.
Snorkeling can be arranged, as can a visit to a market, a spice
farm, and a temple: the perfect place to discover "traditional
Balinese life with added luxe".

Given the collapse of the Indonesian currency, all of this can
be enjoyed at bargain prices.

The proliferation of luxury hotels, secluded villas and spas
complete with Ayurvedic treatments and detox diets panders to an
image of Bali that travelers have been nurturing since the
cocktails and kampongs experience sampled by the likes of Charlie
Chaplin, Noel Coward and Barbara Hutton. Doing the round of
caves, temples, artists, and trance dances, it is easy to see
what enticed well- heeled travelers back in the 30s and 40s.

But Bali is not all tame and laid back - witness the modern
visitor's fascination with demon masks, witch dances and
cremations. The Balinese are also a people who fought ferociously
to maintain their independence, engaged in the slave trade and
practiced the Hindu custom of suttee (widow burning).

One should also not forget the appalling mass suicides of the
last independent Balinese ruling families in the face of imminent
Dutch colonization. Yet the image we relax with is that of the
old South Sea island paradise. Bali is savage, but safe.

Or is it? Certainly the social and political upheavals that
have blighted the rest of Indonesia since the overthrow of
Soeharto in May last year appear to have largely bypassed the
island.

Bali is calm, Bali is peace-loving, Bali is not quite like the
rest of Indonesia, argues the tourism industry (although the
government shut down the Indonesian Tourism Promotion Board last
year in response to the deteriorating security situation).

A representative of the Sheraton Nusa Dua was last year quoted
as saying: "People should understand that there are a lot of
direct flights to Bali. And consulates and embassies must
differentiate between Bali and the rest of Indonesia."

Why has Bali been singled out for this special treatment? The
name, of course, is more internationally evocative and has a much
longer history than "Indonesia". Moreover, the name "Bali" has
been appropriated as almost a hallmark of high-quality exoticism.

Ever since Dutch crewmen jumped ship in 1571, helplessly drawn
by the charm of Balinese women, so the story goes, Bali has
attracted an assortment of lotus eaters in search of both short-
and long-term refuge.

Walter Spies, the "German Gauguin", introduced Bali to the
outside art world, emphasizing and sometimes shaping the
aesthetic proclivities of Balinese culture. Other artists
followed, and were soon joined by anthropologists, musicologists,
filmmakers and, more recently, designers. Bali had become an
inspiration, a creative catalyst and valuable resource.

This last aspect was not restricted to the art world, but was
seized on by the Dutch partly to atone for their behavior during
the conquest of the island.

Bali also lacked land suitable for the colonial plantation
economy, and thus tourism was a realistic proposition. The Dutch
launched a "Balinization" policy that was designed to salvage,
remold and promote those elements of Balinese culture they
regarded as most interesting to the outside world.

Similar tactics were adopted by Soeharto's "New Order"
government to realize two goals: to promote the growing economic
significance of tourism as a source of much needed foreign
exchange; and to capitalize on those colorful features of
Balinese arts and crafts already partly familiar to other parts
of the world to raise the cultural profile of Indonesia abroad.

Tourism as an industry now employs almost as many people as
does agriculture. In material terms Bali has grown to become one
of the wealthiest Indonesian provinces. The expansion of roads,
airports and hotels has supported the development of small
factories producing handicrafts designed to appeal to the modern
visitor. Indeed the "made in Bali" logo has become so successful
that local entrepreneurs (not all of them Balinese) have begun to
amass goods from other parts of Indonesia, happily selling them
alongside indigenous products, often without any indication of
where they came from.

That the Balinese should want to protect their hard-won
achievements in turbulent times is understandable, but other
factors need to be taken into account.

It is well known that former Indonesian president Soeharto
capitalized on the island's international fame by building luxury
resorts and a new airport to impress wealthy state guests. What
may not be so widely known is that certain members of the
Soeharto family, using holding companies to blur direct
ownership, are believed to have strong links with the
conglomerates investing in luxury tourism in Bali.

Time magazine alleges that the Soeharto family have amassed an
estimated US$2.2 billion in assets in hotels and tourism, and
that the family has worked hard behind the scenes to safeguard
their investments.

Some of the island's most controversial developments, such as
the Bali Nirwana Resort overlooking the sacred temple of Tanah
Lot and the environmentally-disastrous Turtle Island project,
have been linked to the Soehartos and their cronies.

Bali appears to have become something of an offshore haven for
Jakarta, no doubt anxious to promote the island's safety while
protecting private assets. The "Boycott Bali" campaign recently
initiated in New Zealand and Australia in response to Indonesia's
treatment of East Timor threatens not only the luxury market but
also the small- and medium-sized enterprises built up by the
indigenous islanders. Is it fair that the Balinese should suffer
alongside the Jakarta conglomerates?

Whether or not we take up the boycott, there are equally
persistent and complex questions to address in Bali itself: have
we self- indulgently condoned the manipulation of the island's
cultural heritage for so long that we can only visit the
fabricated myth?

Professor Michael Hitchcock lectures at the University of
North London.

-- Guardian News Service