The process of molding national character

Mochtar Buchori, Jakarta

In an article titled Character Is Destiny (International Herald Tribune, Jan. 13, 2005, p.9), William Safire wrote that character is an essential element in the ensuring of long-running success. For any individual, any political group and any nation, real success can be achieved only through concerted efforts buttressed by character. Without character, all the other elements necessary for success will be rendered useless.

What is "character"? According to one dictionary, it is "the combination of qualities or features that distinguishes one person, group or thing from another." The word comes from the Greek word kharakter which means "imprint, distinctive mark."

Is character permanent or can it change? Can a person's character, a group's character or that of a nation change?

Careful examination of the definition cited above suggests that character is permanent. If a person's character is considered to be "unscrupulous and opportunistic", for instance, this means that the person in question has been seen displaying this pattern of behavior again and again. But what if that person at one stage in his or her life really repents, and he or she begins displaying a totally different kind of behavior?

This is rather unlikely in real life. But, if it does happen, then we say that the person has assumed a new character, which usually is not entirely different from the old one. The old character is modified in some important respects, and this creates the impression that a new character is born.

What happens in this hypothetical case is, in my view, that the person changes his or her value system. The values that underlie the perceived "unscrupulous and opportunistic" character have been gradually replaced by values that underlie his new character. We will not notice this gradual process unless we observe closely on a continuing basis the behavior of that person. Generally speaking, we will say that a person's character has changed only after we compare impressions obtained from two observations at two different times separated by a relatively long period. According to Felix Frankfurter (1882--1965), the true character of a person will be revealed only after a person becomes old and sickly.

What about the character of a nation? Is it also capable of change?

William Safire does not seem to think so. My impression is that in his view the character of a nation is there to stay. Once a nation's character is formed, it will be upheld by that nation, generation after generation. Its modes of expression may change from period to period, but the substance remains the same. He describes the national character of America as the "temper of the pioneer, the gambler and the booster: The religion of economic and political optimism."

Perceived in this way, the national character of America does not seem to have changed. Until today we can still see traces of this American temper and optimism. The Iraq invasion is a product of this American political and economic optimism.

However, I view the question differently. I think that the American national character has gradually changed throughout that country's history. The influx of Asian migrants, just to mention one example, has in my view altered the American character in several ways. And this process of character change has not finished yet. Paraphrasing Fankfurther, we can say that the American character has not reached a ripe old age yet. It is still vigorous, and it is still rejuvenating itself. It is still too early, in my view, to define the American national character in a final way.

What about the national character of Indonesia? Is it already definitively shaped, or does it still have the potential for change?

There are contrasting impressions about the Indonesian national character. On the one hand there is the contrived image that the Indonesian character is marked by tolerance, mutual respect and a continuous search for harmony. But on the other hand, there is the damning impression that the Indonesian character is predominantly corrupt, prone to disregarding the law, and persistently inclined toward fragmentation. Which of the two more truly reflects the Indonesian character?

I think both reflect different parts of the Indonesian character. The good image reflects latent potential, while the ugly image reflects what is the present reality. We will see similar contrasts if we look at the behavior of the Indonesian nation during different periods of Indonesian history. During the physical revolution of 1945-1949, we see character images clearly marked by a strong sense of unity, political and economic resilience, and love of human freedom. But images from the 1975- 1997 period reflect a completely different character. Images from this period reflect an abrupt disappearance of democracy, the gradual emergence of totalitarian practices in public administration, and increasing inequality in the distribution of national wealth.

In short, through a historical lens we can see changes in the nature of the Indonesian character. This is to say that the Indonesian national character is still in the process of becoming. The big question is, what should we do to steer this process into the direction that we, Indonesians, commonly aspire to?

If I am not mistaken, Goethe once said that "genius is formed in quiet, but character is formed in the stream of human life." And Helen Keller (1880-1968) said in 1930 that "Character cannot be developed in ease and quiet. Only through experience of trial and suffering can the soul be strengthened, vision cleared, ambition inspired, and success achieved." And there is one other important quotation in this regard. This is from a Russian poet, Yevgeny Yevushenko (born in 1933), who said that "Character begins to form at the first pinch of anxiety about ourselves."

The recent earthquake and tsunami disaster is a powerful event in our national life. It has brought home to us experiences of trial and suffering. It has also made us feel a pinch of anxiety about ourselves. It will, if we are smart, strengthen our soul, clear our vision, inspire our ambition and bring us success. In short, this disaster has all the elements needed to form our national character. This is a historic opportunity we should not miss.

The writer has a doctorate of education from Harvard University.