Intelligence ban

Intelligence ban

I didn't expect Masli Arman would still savor his victory (of
not having me and a lot of other people watch Schindler's List)
with Marlon Brando as his new ally (The Jakarta Post, April 15,
1996).

I was one of those who opposed his stance regarding the
banning of Schindler's List, and after two years I still very
much regret that I haven't had a chance to see the movie. I still
can't accept that this art work was banned for being about Jews,
and made and financed by Jews. This whole highly artistic
creation was judged with bias, unfairly condemned, and was guilty
by association. Why can't we just enjoy a work of art as art
without political, religious, and racial bias and prejudice?
Especially one which has done nothing wrong by simply depicting
the truth that happened and was recorded in the history of
mankind; the truth which sadly is now being repeated in many
parts of the world.

Those who don't believe in tyranny, either of a minority or a
majority, don't believe in a ban of expression. The banning of a
film, as well as a seminar, a book and other art works, on purely
idealistic or, worse still, biased grounds is merely an attitude
of selfish, arrogant and paranoid human beings and an insult to
other people's intelligence.

I have no doubts there was some truth in what Marlon Brando
said, and that Zionist Israel has caused unbearable sufferings to
thousands of civilians in some Middle Eastern countries both in
the past and in the present, for which I am deeply concerned. But
let's not allow these issues to blur our vision and make us fail
to separate those who are responsible and those who are simply
guilty of association.

One would have hoped that the censor board would have
recognized this highly acclaimed film's ability to provoke
thought about universal humanitarian issues rather than shelving
it as a product of an unacceptable ideology. Wide-reaching issues
like those addressed by Schindler's List should be made available
to the people of this country rather than suppressed in the
erroneous belief that the people are not shrewd and intelligent
enough to protect themselves from mental corruption or to
distinguish good from evil; truth from falseness. The paradox of
this issue is that I believe this movie has been a victim of
overextended stereotyping, the very act Masli Arman preached
against in his letter.

RAHAYU RATNANINGSIH

Jakarta