Marsinah still controversial, even in art

By A. Wisnuhardana

YOGYAKARTA (JP): For a state with a coercive apparatus, Marsinah, a worker who died a few years ago because she had fought for her rights, has remained a "pebble in its boot".

However small, it is a sharp pebble that keeps prodding the foot.

During her life, Marsinah was a fighter for herself and her colleagues, poor workers in a stifling factory. In the "Gramscian" perspective, she could be categorized as an organic intellectual who fought for workers' rights when confronted with unfair business owners.

After her murder, Marsinah continued to be a bothersome pebble. The failure to bring anybody to justice for her murder has seriously tarnished the credibility of the Indonesian justice system. Marsinah's story has given a human pulse to those who still hope for justice in this country. Her life and death have been portrayed through poetry, painting, music and theater. Her case has also become a topic of discussion and debate among human rights activists.

The pebble continues to aggravate the foot even today because Marsinah is still being stepped on.

Ratna Sarumpaet, the head of Teater Satu Merah Panggung, tried some time ago to stage a theater portrayal of Marsinah's labor activism in a play Marsinah Accuses. The performance took place in several cities. Unfortunately, security officers forced the cancellation of performances scheduled in Bandung and Surabaya, sparking protests and criticism from art activists and the public. Police justified the ban of the play by saying that the performers had not acquired a permit for the event.

The banning of the play deserves serious attention. If the show could be staged without a permit in some cities, why was it banned in others? Furthermore, a 1995 decision by the chief of police -- stating that cultural and artistic activities did not require a permit -- has yet to be revoked.

The ban indicates police in different jurisdictions tend to act on their own interpretation of the law, and that politically powerful people can manipulate the implementation of the law.

In the case of the ban, Marsinah became again a pebble that rubbed the feet of certain power holders.

Marsinah was a figure of opposition and at the same time, a symbol of resistance against each act of injustice committed by the powerful.

The ban itself is now being sharply attacked by various sides for two reasons. First, it created a bad precedent for legitimizing the actions of power holders who prohibited the performance only because it was against their interests. Second, the ban has proven that the portrayal of such a human story is deemed as politically threatening.

Have we, as a nation, forgotten how to give and take constructive interpretations of events and criticism? Have we forgotten how we should laugh at ourselves, how we should convey facts as facts or how we should fairly implement regulations and laws? Should constructive criticism be viewed as insulting and result in punishment or penalization?

Repressive measures against forms of expression are counterproductive in a nation where the government aims to fulfill the aspirations of the people. The more so if each repressive measure is not based on law. When repressive measures become increasingly intensified, the result does not create political obedience. It causes increasing resistance.

Expressions of resistance can take various forms. However, if repression is too exacting, it can result in explosions of violence on a small or widespread scale. Others vent their feelings through apathy and skepticism toward political decisions and policies made by political authorities.

It is clear that the closed-room performance of Marsinah Accuses was interpreted as a threat to certain power holders and to political stability.

But because appreciation of artistic expression is an individual matter, there is no reason to believe that such a stage performance would have resulted in political upheaval or violence. The arbitrary ban of the play, however, may give rise to unexpected manifestations of anger.

Because one of the objectives of the expression of art and culture is to bring about catharsis; plugging the road to catharsis could give rise to further problems.

A. Wisnuhardana is a researcher at the Humaniora Social Studies Forum and lives in Yogyakarta.