Tradition and change

Anachronism, according to the dictionary, is something or someone that seems very much out of date or old-fashioned -- in short, something or someone that belongs to bygone times. One might therefore agree that in this era of modernization and change, the royal and princely courts which used to reign over tiny kingdoms and principalities throughout the country, can be included in this definition.

It would be beyond the scope of this column to examine in detail the past political significance of those tiny kingdoms and principalities. It is suffice to say that up to the outbreak of World War II, their existence served the colonial authorities well, as they helped in administering this vast and ethnically diverse archipelago. In return, indigenous Indonesian rulers were allowed to maintain many of the feudal privileges which their forerunners enjoyed in precolonial days, when the kingdoms had real power.

All that ended when Indonesia proclaimed its independence in August 1945. Obviously, there was no longer any place for feudal systems to exist in a democratic republic. Several of the old kingdoms were abolished or had their powers curtailed by popular pressure. Some continued to exist, and a few of them became beacons of nationalism and democracy to the new republic. But all that remains of their former glory today is a symbolic role.

Considering all this, one may ask, why hold a kraton (court) festival like the one that opened yesterday in the coastal town of Cirebon? One obvious explanation is tourist development. Encouraged by the growth of tourism over the past few years, the authorities have realized that there are benefits to be reaped for this country's tourist promotion drive from the pomp and circumstance that is associated with Indonesia's court arts and traditions.

Another explanation may be that among many Indonesians some of the old royal and princely courts still enjoy considerable prestige among the population as bulwarks of local art and tradition. Some old courts have found their postindependence Maecenas in the country's rich and powerful, who help them preserve part of their former grandeur. In return, aristocratic titles are sometimes bestowed upon these new patrons, who thereby -- unwittingly perhaps -- help to sustain the old feudal system.

But if there is one downside to the current efforts to preserve this country's old courtly traditions -- for tourism or otherwise -- it is that it could somehow encourage new feudalist attitudes among Indonesians. With economic conditions improving, many newly rich Indonesians today have both the power and the money to search for nobler roots to bolster their social status.

Obviously, an entrenchment of what Indonesians now refer to as neo-feudalism would endanger our present efforts at democratization. It would lead this country further away from the ideals that inspired our founding fathers into wresting this country from colonialism and proclaiming it an independent republic.

All this is not to say that we should discard all that is traditional -- especially the values of which our royal and princely courts were once the beacons. While staunchly rejecting a revival of feudalism, we would do well to remember that some of the most notable recent examples of democratic behavior have come from our royal courts. The point is, it is the feudal system and the feudal attitudes we should reject -- not the benign, colorful customs and traditions with which our royal and princely courts are associated.