SOCIAL REALISM; BETWEEN TRUTH AND BEAUTY

Pramoedya Ananta Toer’s Criticisms against Priyayi, Capitalism, Cultural Imperialism and Neo-Colonialism
(Ary Cahya Utomo/ 11499173)

Introduction

Each work of literature is the autobiography of its author at a certain stage and in a certain context. Hence
it is also the product of an individual and is individual in character. Presenting it to society is no different
from contributing to the collectivity. Also in regard to the relations of power, and to the prevailing standard
of culture, the writer's attitude as an individual is disseminated, aware of it or not (Toer, 1995, ¶ 5)

Reflecting from Pramoedya’s statement above, we will come to the arguments that the Social Realist
literature analysis also cannot be separated from the writer’s political ideology since Social Realist
literature is always political. As it is widely understandable, Social Realist art as a product of Russian
culture could be said simply had a basic on the Marx’s dialectical theory, where reality is placed as the
basis of the material. Nonetheless, Social Realism brought by Lekra tends to concern more in their position
who took sides on the society rather than Marxism although many of its members were joining PKI too.

Pramoedya Ananta Toer’s style of writing can be analyzed based on the growth of his literary activities that
give some influences in his style especially in the way he inserts his ideology in his works. In spite of the
fact that his character in struggles for the humanity and justice that he believes never changes until now,
the three periods in Pramoedya’s life are still substantial for being discussed here since it will support the
analysis of Pramoedya’s criticisms that shown through his Social Realist works.

The first period was the period before he joined Lekra (Lembaga Kebudayaan Rakyat/ Institute of People’s
Culture). In this period, his political statements as reflected in his works like Perburuan and Di Tepi Kali
Bekasi were still not more than a result of his disappointment over the world. The second period was when
he joined Lekra; it was the time when he became an editor of Lentera journal. His disappointment toward
the failed revolution had been accommodated in Lentera which was parallel to his ideology and made him
become a stubborn, fierce, uncompromising character who likes to make polemics. In this period, he had
made some works containing a lot of political contents such as Korupsi, Midah si Manis Bergigi Emas, and
also Cerita dari Jakarta in 1957, which is a collection of short stories that I discuss. Later, we can see what
happened with Pramoedya that influenced the works he made at that time. The last period was the period
after Lekra, it came after the destruction of PKI (Indonesian Communist Party) and its mass organizations
including Lekra. This is the time when he comes to the mature standard and creates many ideological
works that are highly appreciated by the readers all over the world including his great Buru Tetralogy and
Arus Balik Tetralogy (Kurniawan, 2002, p.126).

Cerita dari Jakarta (Tales from Jakarta) was written during a period when Pram joined Lekra. Tales from
Jakarta (the English version) was published by Equinox Publishing in 2000 as a collection of thirteen short
stories written during the years 1948-1956. In the stories, we can see that even though the Indonesian
people at that time have reached their independence from the Dutch and Japanese, in fact, they still have
not got their freedom from poverty, corruption and greed. Most of the short stories illustrate the condition
of the Indonesian people at that time who suffered from poverty because of the corruption and the
greediness of the haves or the capitalists. Pramoedya criticized those realities through the characters of
the story from his humanist point of view.

“Stranded Fish” and “Creature behind the Houses” would be the two sample stories that are discussed
here. When we read the two short stories, they looks like as two opened letters from Pramoedya that
represent his idealism, meaning that through those two short stories we can see clearly his idea of Social
Realism. By using the dialogue method in “Stranded Fish” and reportage method in “Creatures Behind
Houses” these two stories shows more obvious messages and criticisms than the other short stories in the
book.

Reading Pramoedya’s works is reading Pramoedya’s political criticism. Some artists might often misjudge
it as a kind of creativity boundaries as happened to Soviets Social Realist artists in Stalin regimes.
However, the answer has been given by Pramoedya as cited from his interview (Toer, 1995, ¶ 17):

Perhaps there are some who are surprised, (wondering) why for me literature is so closely tied to
politics. I will not reject that fact. In my view each person living in society, let alone in a nation, is
always tied to politics. That a person accepts, rejects or affirms a particular citizenship is a political stance.
That a person waves the flag of her nationality, is a political act. That a person pays taxes, is an
acknowledgment of power, so it also means political obedience. Literature too can not be free of politics,
since literature itself is brought into being by humanity. As long as there are human societies and Power
that regulates or ruins them, each individual in them is tied to politics.

The statement above has given a clear understanding how the ideology/ politics cannot be separated from
our life as a human being. Then, an artist has been given the duty to portray the reality happen in the
society as a product of political system because for him politics means every aspect of that which involves
power, and as long as society exists power also exists (Toer, 1995, ¶ 17). From the statement, we can
make a straight line to Mukadimah Lekra which is said that “Culture” refers to “art, science and industry”,
and the aim of cultural struggle is to take control of the hands of elite and place them under popular
democratic control (Foulcher, 1986, p.19). Analyzing Pram’s works that have been very popular in the
world and also have ever been banned in Indonesia because of his idealism that always criticizes the unfair
systems in our society structures, it is very important to know whether his idea is really dangerous and
disturbing the stabilities as the New Order government always said.

The Criticism against Feudal Priyayi Mentality

The term priyayi basically refers to the group of Javanese elites in Dutch colonization era. The history of a
priyayi itself began at the time of Mataram kingdom. They were a force of bureaucrats called “Pangreh
Praja” or the ruler of the state, precursors of the modern pegawai negeri (the civil servants), who were
recruited by the king to carry out administrative matters and also to maintain peace and order within the
state. These positions initially were the exclusive preserve of the aristocracy (Brownlee, n.d, ¶ 12). In
Central Javanese periods, roughly the early eighth century through 938 C.E. systems of hierarchy was
developing on both the village and state levels of society and government. By the Eastern Javanese period,
lasting through the fifteenth century, an increasingly complex bureaucracy developed alongside further
social stratification. Later, in Mataram periods, concepts of hierarchy and duty were becoming further
developed as well as the notion of an aristocratic class known as the priyayi. The contract between the king
and his subjects is outlined in a fairly abstract way by the kawula - gusti (servant - lord) relationship.
Theologically, the goal is for the servant to achieve union with God, an adaptation of the Indian concept of
moksha. On a more practical level, it is a concept that outlines the relationship of the king with his subjects
and, more generally, between superiors and inferiors (Brownlee, n.d, ¶ 11).

However, in the post-revolution era, the new authorities was still adapted the Dutch colonization system
and combined by the traditional system especially the Javanese traditions as the dominant group in the
governmental elites. The new authorities who implant the Javanese and Dutch governmental system have
preserve and raise a group of elites called the priyayi class who still regards the feudalistic values and its
infrastructure (not only the power structure, but also the morality, life perspective and mysticism). This is
happen since the national revolution era in 1945 was nothing than a power taking process from the Dutch
to the indigenous bourgeoisie who is a mutation of the aristocrats’ class or they who service the king who
used to become a collaborator of the colonial authorities in the pre-independent era.

Priyayi mentality in the post-revolution era emerges not only in the real priyayi or they who have the royal
blood but also in the new priyayi or they who used to serve the aristocrats family. In Javanese tradition,
they are called as the kawula, servants (of the king) and they stand between the king, the nobility, the class
of princess royal blood on the one hand and the commoners on the other (Koentjaraningrat).

The masters in the story represent the new priyayi class who still always adapt the feudal priyayi mentality.
In the beginning of the story, Pram has giving an interesting comparison between the maids of Javanese
new priyayi with the maids of Chinese and European masters.

If maids in Chinese families eventually come to have clean faces and their features come to
resemble those of Chinese, and if maids in European families grow to be careful and polite, it’s
rather different with the maids of Djakarta’s prijaji. It is true that several months after they are
imported from upcountry they too become clean and look like true city folk. But not long after that
they become filthy once more. Not because these maids are necessary slovenly, but because their
masters have stopped spoiling them (p.179).
This comparison is very interesting because in fact, in those two cultures (Chinese with their very long
history of aristocracy and patriarchy system and the concept of feudum or the authorizing of a region in
Europe) the feudalism has already settled rather than the Javanese who have unstable political condition
with a not well developed society institution (Ong, 2003, p.29). Since the development of the Feudalism in
Indonesia is not the same as the Feudalism in Europe. Marx identifies it with the Asiatic Mode of
Production to explain this unique characteristic of Feudalism. For example in Java, there are no landlords
like as the Feudalism in Europe. It is true that Javanese kings also posses the land but it has distributed to
the kingship servants who have their own portions (for example: the lurah and his tanah bengkok) yet there
are also no hierarchical and strict rules of the landowners structures. The land with its limited area has also
differentiate Javanese village with the European villages in the amount of the peasantry, even in many
cases in Java, the village (or perdikan) has tended to be autonomic.

Thus, that kind of Feudalism system progress is slower than European Feudalism. It is so rare to find out
any peasants revolution happened in Indonesia, on the other hand, the invasion from outer Java and other
higher foreign culture occurred so many times. Then, since the power taking process in Java was always
followed by the riot, it generates a weak power authority and easily occupied by, for example the
Portuguese and the Dutch. The reflection of the power loss creates the king’s form of escapism in their
mysticism that can help them to pretend that they still have the authority of their people, for example is the
relationship between the Sultan of Mataram with Nyi Roro Kidul (the ruler of South Ocean) because of the
Javanese losing possession of sea.

Another criticism of priyayi mentality is its concept that identifies themselves as the class which should not
do any works since they have the power of authority.

Then, there’s the maid over there—the maid whose master just married a virgin from his home
town. And it was this virgin who brought the maid with her. Mrs. Newlywed sat every morning under
a cherry tree and stayed there until her husband returned from the office, giving a masterly
impression to all who passed I front of her that she had not been accustomed to working in her
home town: a true prijaji. Not accustomed to working! In this age when work is sought from and by
everyone! Prijaji morality again! (p. 182)

The mentality of the priyayi in the story is defined shortly as “the one who is not accustomed to working” or
at least they give the impression to the others that they are not accustomed to working. The newlywed
masters does not want to do any house works because she wants to preserve the priyayi concept which in
the past is identified as the people who do no works because they are the ones who have the political and
religious illusion as in the social hierarchy as happens in the kawula-gusti relationship occurs in priyayi
class and the society relationship with their necessity of devotion. This is because in the colonialism
periods, the Dutch uses the priyayi in duties like keeping the peace, and collecting and delivering the
required produce and in order to bring the illusion of a ruling class, they are treated differently as a higher
class. The differences occur such as by increasing availability of European education to priyayi families
where this has made the Dutch into a dilemma. On one hand, they require higher levels of education in the
administration: on the other, many are worried about the possible social consequences of too much native
education. So, to protect the nobility of the regents, the Dutch separates them from all practical matters
and essentially reduces their role to a symbolic one through which Dutch interests are promoted (Brownlee,
n.d, ¶ 26).

However, the explanation has show how the feudal priyayi mentality is seems so ridiculous because the
“not accustomed to working” morality is definitely inappropriate to be used in the modern era. Comparing
to Marx, who stated: man should work as his ability and earn as his made or in brief an ideal society is
society without exploitation (Njoto, n.d, ¶ 8), the “not accustomed to work” morality is something that has
been mocked by the socialist, who considers this feudal concept as a concept that is already out of date to
be applied in this present time. At this point, the narrator mocks the masters as the priyayi udik or rural
priyayi with their out of date mentality with more colors and rhythms, in accordance with modernity (182).
Since in the modern society structure, working is the only way to increase their life. The criticism toward the
priyayi morality conveys especially related to their ideal of idleness when the consequences taken by the
maids and their houseboys who have to take all the responsibilities in their house works.

The other criticism toward the priyayi mentality as the out of date culture shows in their superstitious
believes
 According to the dukun’s advice, in order to have health family and well-being in this world and the
next, and in order that wealth might flow to the family for generations to come, several conditions
had to be fulfilled. One of these conditions (in addition to those that profited the dukun in an
indirect way) was: if the mistress cooked, she shouldn’t cook more than two liters of rice. And since
there were so many members in the family, the maid had to cook three times a day. I know the
maid didn’t understand her mistress’s situation at all. This was the conclusion that I reached myself
when I saw the mistress sneak out and bury a protective charm in front of her house, and hide
others above the front, back, and kitchen doors. (p.183)

The quotation shows that, as referring to Koentjaraningrat (1990) Javanese people including the priyayi
still strongly believes in superstition and magical practices with the dukun as the one considered
possessing special ability in healing, numerology, magic and sorcery. On other hand, Marxism as the root of
Social Realism has the tendency in atheism, the belief of superstition as well as religion are considered as
something that only function to lull the society with such promises like salvation above the mass hunger
and misery (Ramly, 2000, p.164).

Feudal mentality that occurs in the priyayi class who remain in the authorities has been also criticized in
their way they preserve the class stratification between the superior elites and the inferior kawula or they
who does not linked to the authorities. The example can be seen in the military report done by Idulfitri in
“Stranded Fish” where he must rejected by the military because he gives an “improper” response to one of
the government official (p. 59). Idulfitri’s failure to apply the bureaucrats courtesy has make the
government gives him a poor attention to him although he is also the former freedom fighter in the pre-
revolution era.

Feudalist culture is being criticized here since its values and morality has become very contradictive with
the Socialist values. Their needs of total devotion and honor have become the main target of the criticism
in the stories. Socialism which always opposes the culture that resists human’s equality by creating a
social caste as occurs in feudalist culture has made the feudalism and its morality, mysticism and life
perspective as their main enemy. While the feudalist life perspective such as their ideal of idleness is also
something that is considered as a decadent perspective since in Socialist perspective, a revolutionary
progress can be achieved only by working and using our potency.

Criticism against the Injustice of Capitalism

In the perspective of Socialist concept, an ideal society is a structure of society without any exploitation in
it. In this case, the Capitalist concept with their orientation to the needs of capital owner by exploiting those
who have the labor power is recognized as the main enemy of the Socialism after the downfall of the
Feudalism.

The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles (Marx and Engels, 1848, ¶ 1).
Since the main characters in the stories (Idulfitri, However and the maids) are represents the low class
society, in the two stories we can see also the other class that represents the capitalist class that identifies
with their capital possession and their exploitation toward the lower class.

In Indonesian society, the class exploitation occurs in economic system where capitalism raised with its
strong oppression especially from the local bourgeoisie. This oppression however has been maintained as
an impact of the Dutch colonizer’s class division that divides the society’s status into three division: the
Dutch and the priyayi class in the first division, the Chinese and other Far East society in the second, while
the indigenous people has been placed in the bottom level.

The criticisms against the injustice of Capitalism can be shown in the exploitation which I will trace through
the texts. In “Stranded Fish”, even though the capital owner such as Mr. Tjong and the hawker basically
categorized in the class of proletarian lumps, however, in the case of Mr. Tjong, he is the capital owner who
exploits Idulfitri, as a thief who supplies the goods for him. The practice of injustice appears when Mr. Tjong
rejects the stolen jeep brought by Idulfitri after Idulfitri refuses the offered price, five hundred rupiahs for
the jeep and makes an excuse that the jeep is his nephew’s that causes Idulfitri to be angry and hits him
with a monkey wrench (p.49-50). This physical confrontation between Idulfitri and Mr.Tjong can be
interpreted as a confrontation or a conflict between classes. Here, the class struggles are revealed while it
happens in the scope of criminal life. In the scene when Tjong refuses the jeep simply without
reconsidering his decision, this rejection was happen because Idulfitri is not more than a tool for him. The
efforts and the risks are taken by Idulfitri and However, but, Mr.Tjong, on the other hand does not give any
appreciation to their efforts. Instead, he only offers five hundred rupiahs for the jeep. It shows how Mr.Tjong
who has the capital can do whatever he wants while Idulfitri and However who need the capital or the
money have to submit to the demand or these kinds of exploitation by Mr.Tjong. This exploitation at last
comes to the incident when Idulfitri hits Mr.Tjong. Even though later Idulfitri regrets his anger and his action
(p. 48-49).

The similar action happens at the end of the story when Idulfitri offers However’s wallet to a hawker. The
wallet is bought by However for two hundred fifty peraks a month ago but at last it is only worth for ten
peraks although the hawker knows that it should be worth more than that. However, this time those two
people cannot do anything to the hawker as the one who owns the capital.

“ten perak, that’s it”…

the hawker departs joyfully. The wallet is truly fine, a one-of-a-kind example of delicate
craftsmanship. Idulfitri strides joyfully in the other direction. And However follows behind him,
hunched over, with an obscene face—bereft of his grandeur and the object of his faith.
”two hundred fifty I paid,”However laments.. (p.72)

This time Idulfitri and However simply accept the hawker’s offer who buys the fine wallet for ten peraks. It
is so different with what they do the day before when they hit Mr.Tjong, This time there is no form of
resistance except making a short bargain with the hawker who comes as the winner.

Pramoedya’s criticism toward capitalist value, however, appears in the beginning of the story. In the
beginning of the story, I can see it in the scene when they see the pictures of naked thighs and people
kissing in the posters at the lobby of a movie theater (p.48).

“Maybe” thinks Idulfitri, “if I had some food in my stomach again, I could understand the beauty of
this leg art created by people of refined sensibilities-creations full of naked thighs and kisses, why
aren’t there any pictures showing how hunger twists and turns in my guts?” (p.50)

From the quotation above, Idulfitri thinks that the picture, which can arouse sexual desire, is unable to
satisfy him or to be enjoyed by people like him who only need some food to eat. As Idulfitri says that he can
not understand the beauty of the leg art because he does not have some food in his stomach since the day
before. Another irony is portrayed here because, at that time, although in Djakarta and Indonesia in
general, people like Idulfitri are the majority, yet, there is no art concerning the problem of poverty. The
capitalist as the one who takes the benefit from the condition tries to bring the society into
unconsciousness, forgetting the reality and their struggle to get their rights to be free from hunger and
poverty while they are lulled by beauty by creating the sexual arousing pictures as the form of escapism
from those struggles. The pictures of foreign movies with its naked thighs and people kissing symbolize the
bourgeois art and also an allusion toward its values that only bring beauty without any solution of people’s
needs, although, in fact, hungry people need rice more than that kind of art. However, the quotation proves
that they have failed. At this point, it does not only show the ulcer of capitalist culture but I can see also the
criticism toward bourgeois influence that has made art only as an art. Even it only shows sexual
exploitation that does not educate people and only gives much attention to the meaningless, unreal and
exaggerating beauty.

In “Creatures behind the Houses”, there are some examples of the exploitation made by the masters to
their maids. The masters and their maid’s relationships are regarded as a capitalist-proletarians
relationship since it performs the relation between a capital owner and the labor owner, where in this story
the relationship always gives more benefit to the masters and at the same time requires the maids to be
exploited. The very obvious example happens to Miss Two who receives no salaries and only usually gets
one meal a day (p. 180-181)

The class exploitation that happen in capitalist society nevertheless seems similar to slavery as a primitive
form of the exploitation between man to the others. Under her master’s power Miss Two loses her freedom,
feels alienated and misses her parents and her home. In this occasion, Miss Two suffers from her
alienation as a human who is not treated as a real human being. Lukacs uses the term “reification” in
explaining the human’s alienation when human’s quality is not different from the instrument of
production’s quality. This is an example that capitalism considers the human relationship not more than a
production aspect relationship while consequently eliminates the social relationship (Karyanto, 1997,
p.86). The relationship occurs in Miss Two needs in meal while the masters need the labor power. Even
though we can see the unfair relationship between them, Miss Two as the other maid in this story does not
show any resistance for years. In Gramsci’s theory of hegemony, this consensus caused by more than the
influence of state and capitalist propaganda, but workers are influenced by messages unconsciously
imbedded in culture itself (Mendonsa, 1999, ¶ 1). In this way, the messages deal with the religious illusion
of the priyayi concept in Javanese society.

However, as a part of the dialectical process in society, Miss Two represents the resistance toward the
unjust and oppression made by the masters by strayed from her masters (p. 186-187). By doing so, she
performs the class rebellion against the master who exploits her. Miss Two’s resistance at last produces a
revolutionary change in her life; she is able to go back to her parents and is released from the master’s
exploitation. Meanwhile, at the same time she loses her job but she also generates a revolutionary act to
struggle for her rights as a human being with all of her potentials, not only for an absolute freedom from
any oppression which after all is the product of bourgeois ideology. This resistance, however, symbolizes
Marx’ prediction that the working class will eventually come to an understanding of their own oppressed
state, and then of their power in unity, and then they will rise up and establish the "dictatorship of the
proletariat”.

However, in fact, not all of them (the proletarians) have already raised this self consciousness, there are
still many of them who have not realize their rights and that they live in a pattern of capitalist mode of
production which has dehumanized them. In fact, they seem to be going to the opposite direction, to wits;
they support greater control by dictators at the top, those who controlled the state for the benefit of the
capitalists.

a few among them are truly happy with their fate. With a laugh and a smile always ornamenting
their lips, they earnestly defend their employers from people’s talk. For this defense they certainly
receive no bonus. Nor a raise in wages. One of them had served for eight years. She got a raise only
once: three ringgit. (p. 185)

Surrender from the injustice is very dangerous for the class struggling process. When the proletarians have
lost their consciousness to struggle for their rights, the capitalist will find their way to dominate and exploit
more potency of the proletarians for their own desires, to achieve much more profit. The way the maids are
controlled and manipulated is a direct consequence of the practice of a ‘false consciousness’ and the
creation of values and life choices which are to be followed. The false consciousness maintains in the way
the maids defend their oppressors because they are truly happy with their fate. This perception that the
maids have already born with their fate as a maid is made by the master’s domination that makes the
maids fail to aware that they are equal as human beings. This is the process which Gramsci’s theory of
hegemony refers to when he tries to explain the way in which an organization of people controls the
thought and actions to create a state of domination through the creation of dominant ideologies.

From this story, Pramoedya has show two different facts happen in working class’s struggle, those who
have come to an understanding of their oppression and the other who still settle down in their false
consciousness. Thus, it presents the urgency of working class people to unite in order to fight for their
rights against any oppression made by the capitalist system.

Criticism against Imperialism and Neo Colonialism

Imperialism, as Lenin (1979) believes, is the highest state of Capitalism. The state where Capitalism has
reached its further development, where Capitalism –as a mode of production- has expanse way beyond the
political, geographical, or cultural boundaries of every nation in this world. (Lenin, 1979, p.120-121). Also,
since the 20th century the term has been expanded to apply, in general, to any historical instance of the
aggrandizement of a greater power at the expense of a lesser power. The term is also used by some to
describe the policy of a country in maintaining colonies and dominance over distant lands, regardless of
whether the country calls itself an empire. In addition, Edward Said (1993) makes a distinction between
the two terms; Imperialism that refers to ideological force and Colonialism that refers to the practice.

In the story, the background of the society in which the characters exist is the new born state of Indonesia.
This new state, however, had to face two forms of domination and their exploitation, imperialism and
colonialism in their new shapes. First, with its rich natural resources and human labor, Indonesia is very
potential for the growth of capitalism –especially after World War II- which seeks new market and natural
resources for its development. This opportunity has been used by the dominant country in penetrating their
indirect methods of exerting control on –particularly- economy, politics and also culture with their
attributes. Almost conversely, the new authorities and the indigenous bourgeoisie who used to be a Dutch
collaborator in the Dutch colonization era had also duplicated the colonialism system by legitimizing or
promoting this system, especially the belief that the mores of the colonizer are superior to those of the
colonized.

An example that can be seen explicitly in this story is the western cultural imperialism (especially American
and European) that had invaded and replaced the local culture’s role. In the beginning, the symbol of
cultural imperialism emerges in the western movie posters that Idulfitri and However have observed. Yet, it
also should be mentioned that in the context of Social Realism in Indonesia, Western movies as the
product of Western culture should not always be claimed as the part of cultural imperialism movement, as
asserted in the Mukkadimah Lekra “The essence of foreign cultures will be drawn on critically, and on the
basis of the practical interest of the Indonesian People” (Foulcher, 1986, p.217).

Idulfitri says that the pictures of naked thighs and kisses are useless to hungry people (p.48), it means that
the art and the ideology behind it cannot give any answer to the human’s problems since it cannot bring
marginalized people like Idulfitri to a better life. On the other hand, the movie posters have been used by
the capitalist to lulls the oppressed class from their consciousness, to make the low class neglect their
struggles to get their rights although the illusion of such pleasures are not real. As a comparison, Idulfitri’s
criticism is very appropriate with what Pramoedya once said in his speech in Lekra’s Plenary Meeting in
1964 in his criticism to American cultural imperialism: “the main purpose of American’s imperialist culture
is to collaborate with the comprador’s culture in order to weaken our youth revolution”. The comprador
culture itself is a culture made by Indonesian people that represent the American imperialist culture (Toer,
1964, ¶ 9).

Later some scenes also show the changing culture of Djakarta’s society as reflected with the betjaks that
carry prostitutes back to their stables from their respective costumers in a daylight (p.58). This scene is
quite an interesting illustration to notice concerning its relation to Western imperialist cultures and values
that has successfully spread their impact to the Indonesian culture. First of all, the scene gives an example
of the changing culture of the Indonesian when it shows how the betjak drivers drive their vehicles
comfortably though they carry prostitutes to their home. This scene is quite odd when it happens in a
daylight, in the middle of a crowded town because it shows how the Indonesian culture that always keeps a
high regard to such a politeness and modesty in term of sexuality as a private things (means still cannot
consent with the prostitution practices), has changed to a new values and culture that give the highest
position to an individual freedom while neglecting sexuality as a private thing. This new value is a value
that commonly happens in the Western and bourgeois cultures that consider freedom as the lack of forces
which prevent an individual from doing whatever they want (Basgen, 2003, p.6).

The cultural changing in the Jakarta society is equivalent to James Petras definition of the process of
cultural imperialism which he defines as a systematic penetration and domination of the cultural life of the
popular classes by the ruling class of the West in order to reorder the values, behavior, institutions and
identity of the oppressed peoples to conform with the interests of the imperial classes (Petras, 2002, ¶ 3).
The process has been shown in this scene either to the betjak drivers, the prostitutes and also the Djakarta
people who already accept a free sexual concept as an ordinary issue. As a matter of fact, those examples
have explain clearly, not only Idulfitri’s criticism toward the Western imperialist values and behavior that
are represented in the posters, but also the fact that the cultural imperialism has already penetrated and
dominated as well as it spread its influence among Indonesian society in their way and behavior.

In the relationship between the dominant and the dominated class, cultural imperialism also penetrates
through the symbolization of the dominant class. This has been shown in an example of a maid who has
imitated her master’s style.

She had clear skin, of a color that often aroused the envy of her mistresses. She had a beautiful silk
dress that went very well with the color of her skin. At every occasion she considered important,
she wore that dress. From her movements it was apparent that she had dreams of possibilities.
Each time she wore her beautiful dress she would carry with her some kind of film or other
entertainment magazine. I don’t know whether she bought or borrowed these magazines. What is
clear is that from a distance she gave the impression of an educated person. But if she were to
approach us, and we could see her mouth hanging open, our impression of her education would
 disappear completely, and would gradually be replaced by our earlier impression of her as a maid.
(p. 186)

In the quotation above, the maid has imitated the master’s culture by dressing up and acting in the same
way as her masters. This action gives an example of, as referring to the theory of hegemony; how the ruling
class (the masters) is successful in promoting their interest (their values, style, customs and behaviors) in
society especially to the oppressed class that commonly occurs in the colonized or de-colonized people. The
maid who suffers from her oppression wants to imitate the mastery culture voluntarily, taking it as a
desired culture whose in Gramsci theory, this group is called as “subaltern” who are the subject to the
hegemony of the ruling classes (Ashcroft, 1998, p.215). Subaltern class has existed since they have less
access to cultural and social institutions (Gramsci, 1976, ¶ 2).

“What is the significance of the Revolution for these maids, the Revolution that has claimed thousands of
victims from their families? From time to time this question flits through my head. And I can’t answer it!
(p.184). This rhetoric question shows how the maid’s less access to her society as she has been forced to
work and stay behind the house has made her and the other maids are never able to realize the meaning
of their political independence gained by their nations since they still live under the new colonization by
their masters. This lack of access has become the main problem for the subaltern class that makes them
cannot speak for their rights and causing a cultural inferiority (Salleh, n.d, ¶ 4). As a result, the maid would
try to adapt her master’s style and culture as the “superior” and dominant class in order to identify her self
with her society.

The subaltern class is the oppressed class who has been exploited by the masters who make them lose
their independence and make them only depend on the master’s power. Similar to a colonized country, the
colonizer has made them deny any independent national identity, with the language, culture and values of
the foreign power imposed on (Basgen, 2003, p.3). This exploitation is regarded as a further development
of Capitalism, made by the masters as the representatives of the priyayi class in Indonesia also reflects
how those priyayis and other elites have raised the neo Colonialism practices even after the political
independence has been achieved. This condition has happened since it achieves domination by the
methods of capital, in much the same way as wage-labour is a development from feudal exploitation or
slavery.

Within their oppression and exploitation toward their maids, the masters are considered as the
compradors, a term that refers to the local bourgeoisie who owes their privileged position to foreign
monopolies and hence maintain a vested interest in colonial occupation (Ashcroft, 1998, p.55). These
compradors are also the main target or the common enemy of socialism.

The exposition of the maid exploitation and her way in adapt her masters cultures as a consequence of her
oppression is the indirect criticism toward the neo colonialism and cultural imperialism practices in
Indonesia. Imperialism and Neo Colonialism as the special stage of Capitalism in the stories has
penetrating their influence through the cultural access. The interest of the capitalist society has been
spread out over the exploited society as a consequence of their possession of capital power. Cultural
Imperialism has been criticized since it always promotes a capitalist culture which campaigns an absolute
freedom for its own individual, not for everyone. Thus, the Neo-Colonialism as the other phase of classic
Colonialism that is promoted by the compradors like the masters in the story has also being criticized since
it also degenerates the oppressed class from their rights to develop their potencies.

Conclusion

Pramoedya Ananta Toer’s criticisms in “Stranded Fish” and “Creatures Behind Houses”, has portray the
reality that is parallel with real historical facts which include the exposition of the ills of Djakarta’s society.
It means that the stories been based on dialectic contemplation within the artists and their society. Then,
by showing and giving the criticisms, the stories have revealed two facts: first, the oppression made by the
Capitalism, Feudalism and Imperialism/ Colonialism has caused the oppressed class being alienated from
their humanity. Second, throughout the criticisms in the stories, the false consciousness of the capitalist
values has been exposed clearly and inevitably gives a new consciousness to the society to revolt
Without leaving the literary artistic values, Pram has successfully use his works as a tool to speak out
against the injustice that happen in his society although it must be paid by his own freedom, as he confess:
 “In effect, He cries out, resists, even rebels. It is no accident if this writer-- naturally type three--
has been called an oppositionist, a rebel, even a revolutionary, alone in his muteness” (Toer,
1995, ¶ 5)

Reference

Ashcroft, Bill, Griffiths, Gareth, Tiffin, Hellen., 1998, Key Concepts in Post Colonial Studies, Routledge,
London
Basgen, Brian, Blunden, Andy, (2003), Encyclopedia of Marxism, Retrieved 01/04/04 from World Wide
Web:
http://www.marxists.org/glossary /frame.htm
Brownlee, John M., (n.d), Colonial Knowledge and Indigenous Power in the Dutch East Indies, Retrieved
21/09/02 from World Wide Web:
http://www.hawaii.edu/~seassa/explorations/v2n1/art2/v2n1-art2.html
Foulcher, Keith., 1986, Social Commitment in Literature and the Arts: The Indonesian “Institute of People’s
Culture” 1950-1965, Aristoc Press Pty Ltd, Victoria, Australia
Gramsci, Antonio., (1976), Escritos Políticos, Retrieved 20/04/2004 from World Wide Web:
http://www.terravista.pt/Aguaalto/1018/subaltern.html
Karyanto, Ibe., 1997, Realisme Sosialis Georg Lukacs, Gramedia Pustaka Utama, Jakarta
Koentjaraningrat, 1994, Kebudayaan Jawa. Jakarta: Balai Pustaka
Kurniawan, Eka., 2002, Pramoedya Ananta Toer dan Sastra Realisme Sosialis Jendela,Yogyakarta
Lenin, V.I., 1979, Imperialism, The Highest Stage of Capitalism, International Publishers, New York
Marx, Karl, & Engels, Frederick (1848). Manifesto of the Communist Party, Retrieved 07/09/02 from World
Wide Web: http://www.hartfordhwp.com/archives/26/176.html
Mendonsa, Eugene. L., (1999), Gramsci and Marx, Retrieved 24/03/2004 from World Wide Web:
http://csf.colorado.edu/forums/ipe/99/msg01787.html
Njoto., (1962), Marxisme: Ilmu Dan Amalnja, Retrieved 12/03/04 from World Wide Web:
http://www.geocities.com/nurrachmi/marxist/pki/njoto/sos-ina.htm
Ong, Hok Ham., 2003, Wahyu yang Hilang Negeri yang Guncang, PDAT, Jakarta
Petras, James., (2002), Cultural Imperialism in the Late 20th Century, Retrieved 12/03/2004 from
World Wide Web:
http://national@mail2.factsoft.de national@mail2.factsoft.de
Ramly, Andi Muawiyah., 2000, Peta Pemikiran Karl Marx, LKiS, Yogyakarta
Salleh, Ariel., (n.d), Social Ecology and “The Man Question”, Retrieved 20/04/2004 from World Wide Web:
http://www.cat.org.au/vof/versions/salleh.htm
Toer, Pramoedya Ananta., (2000), Tales from Djakarta, Carricatures of Circumstances and their
Human Being, Equinox Publishing, Jakarta-Singapore
Toer, Pramoedya Ananta, (1995), Literature, Art and Censorship, Retrieved 10/09/02 from World Wide
Web: http://www.radix.net/~bardsley/censor.html#1