Our Little Secrets

I believe that despite of our negative self-image, almost all of us perceive ourselves as good, unique, smart, cool, popular, open-minded, noble, modest, or/ and other positive attributes anyone may think of.

The thing is that, unconsciously, we all want this good self-image of ours to be reflected on the eyes of others. We want others to validate the self-image we have been tirelessly building and polishing in our entire life. That is why we depend too much on others. We are all too busy searching for validation and approval from others that we are the noble/ smart/ calm/ open-minded/ modest/ popular person after all. 

We all want to be great.

We want to be perceived as popular person. At times, we forget that we are too busy uploading stuffs—either true or fictitious—to uphold our popularity. We are so excited when we get the ‘likes’ and positive comments. In fact, that is what we are looking for. We are crazy about it. The affirmation that we are the popular person after all.

We want to be perceived as classy person. When we go to some places, we are so neurotic to share that we go to some classy places that only classy people can go. Sometimes, we even fake the hotel or restaurant we go in (in social media) simply to ‘wow’ people. While at the same time, we are losing the essence of the moment.

We want to be perceived as creative person. We like to see what others may comment positively on what we create. When they give positive comment, that is when we come at the realization that we are the creative and unique person after all. 

We want to be perceived as calm person. In the evening before final test, sometimes, we are so proud to announce that we are not going to study. Also, two hours before the deadline of research submission, we are so proud to announce that we have not done anything. We want to be different, cool, and calm in facing things that scary most of our friends. We get more excitement when others comment on how calm we are, and how smart we are that we require no time to do all those things we are about to face.

We want to be perceived as open-minded and smart person. Sometimes, we post or boast something we actually do not understand. Some other time, we are trying so hard to be the Humanist, Liberalist,  and open-minded person whose thought is so deep and profound so that no religions and tradition can outsmart us. We secretly browse the topic—sometimes plagiarize the whole idea—we are about to post or boast to ‘wow’ everybody, even any professors in the field we are engaging on. 

We want to be perceived as good and kind-hearted person. That is when we fake everything and agree on things that we basically do not agree on. We are too busy being the fairy and good person to avoid tension; and by that, we forget that tension only comes when the interacting people are being authentic; and authentic tension is the one that enlightens situation and tightens up relationship.

The idea is quite ridiculous, sometimes, when we even want the validation from some random strangers on the street. We are all very curious, thinking what is going on in every mind of those strangers, what they think about our looks, our speaking pattern, the way we walk, etc. We expect them to think positively about us by doing anything required to be perceived as good person.

We are ave very caring creature. We care too much.

Indeed, sometimes, we just want a feedback from others. We want to know what they think of our creation, our trip, our profound thoughts, etc; but, at the same time, we also do not want any criticism. We hate it!

We want as much as confirming evidences of our greatness rather than the disconfirming ones.

Those are some of our secrets. There are still so many more secrets, but they are too secret[ous] to be told.

Rasional dan Irasional

Sebagai lulusan Bahasa dan Sastra Inggris, kerap kali teman-temanku meminta bantuanku untuk menyunting atau mengoreksi artikel, esai, dan bahkan skripsi (dalam Bahasa Inggris) mereka secara cuma-cuma. Bila aku sedang tidak banyak pekerjaan, biasanya dengan senang hati aku melakukannya. 

Aku terkadang bingung ketika mereka memaksa untuk membayar, aku bukanlah seorang penyunting—berbeda cerita bila mereka memintaku menerjemahkan teks. Alhasil, suasana hangat pertemananpun terlelan oleh kecanggungan. Hal yang menurutku paling aneh adalah aku bisa menerima jika temanku membayar dengan sesuatu yang bukan uang (makan siang, minuman, dsb) atau bahkan cuma-cuma, namun ketika mereka membayar dengan uang senilai Rp. 20.000 (seharga makan siang) atau lebih, aku mulai berpikir mengenai standar acuan upah penyuntingan, dan akhirnya menolak.

Aku suka menulis dan menyunting teks berbahasa Inggris; namun, ketika aku dibayar untuk itu, entah mengapa aku kehilangan ketertarikanku.

Di SMA, aku pernah belajar ilmu Ekonomi, dan aku tahu hal ini jelas-jelas bertentangan dengan prinsip dasar Ekonomi bahwa manusia adalah mahluk yang rasional dan selalu berpedoman  pada cost and benefit. 

Aku lebih suka menggunakan istilah dalam versi Bahasa Inggisnya karena istilah versi Bahasa Indonesianya, ‘biaya dan manfaat’ menurutku kurang pas. Istilah ‘cost’ yang diartikan sebagai ‘biaya’, memiliki makna yang relatif lebih sempit karena istilah ini sangat erat kolokasinya dengan uang, padahal istilah ‘cost’ mengemban makna yang sangat luas. 

Dalam studi Ekonomi, hampir segala hal bisa dianalisis menggunakan kacamata ‘cost and benefit’ ini. Contohnya, menyikapi kebijakan Kemenkominfo baru-baru ini untuk memblokir Tumblr yang dituding banyak menyebarkan konten pornografi. Kebijakan Kemenkominfo ini menuai banyak kritik pedas karena cost-nya—memblokir Tumblr—dinilai tidak sebanding dengan benefit-nya—berkurangnya penyebaran konten pornografi. Bahkan, banyak yang berpendapat bahwa benefit yang diharapkan Kemenkominfo, tidak akan terasa karena banyak media lain selain Tumblr yang dapat digunakan untuk menyebarluaskan konten pornografi tersebut, sehingga, yang terasa hanyalah cost-nya. 

Contoh lainnya adalah kebijakan  pejabat Disbudpar Kabupaten Bandung Barat mengenai kemacetan di Bandung pada Desember 2015 lalu. Saat itu, aku yang terjebak macet ketika sedang melakukan kegiatan pemanduan turis di Bandung, menyalakan radio untuk mendengarkan pantauan lalu-lintas. Pejabat dari Disbudpar, yang ketika itu diwawancara oleh radio Pikiran Rakyat, mengatakan bahwa cara agar Bandung tidak macet ketika musim liburan adalah dengan cara tidak pergi liburan ketika musim liburan. Beliau menambahkan bahwa jika ingin berlibur, sebaiknya ambil cuti kerja saja. Komentar ini, tentu saja terdengar sangat konyol karena cost-nya—menghimbau agar wisatawan tidak berlibur di saat liburan—sangat timpang dengan benefit-nya—tidak macet; terlebih, yang mengungkapkannya adalah seorang pejabat Disbudpar yang seharusnya mempromosikan pariwisata di Kota Bandung dan sekitarnya.

Sepertinya aku terlalu jauh ngelantur mengenai topik ini. 

Kembali pada bahasan mengenai mahluk Ekonomi yang seharusnya bertindak dan berpemikiran rasional.

Lantas, apakah tindakanku itu tidak rasional? 

Apakah tindakanku merupakan sebuah deviasi dari prinsip manusia yang merupakan mahluk ekonomi?

Perilakuku diatas tadi dapat dianalisis melalui kacamata Behavior Economics, atau Ekonomi Berbasis Perilaku.

Mazhab Ekonomi ini berbeda dengan aliran Ekonomi Konvensional yang telah aku jelaskan di atas. Berdasarkan dari apa yang aku baca, Behavioral Economics (aku memilih versi Bahasa Inggrisnya karena istilah Ekonomi Berbasis Perilaku sering tertukar dengan teori Perilaku Konsumen pada Ekonomi Konvensional) mengikutsertakan studi Psikologi dan Sosiologi ke dalam studi Ekonomi konvensional untuk menjelaskan alasan mengapa manusia membuat keputusan yang tidak rasional.

Oleh karena itu, tindakan tidak rasional yang aku jelaskan di awal tulisan ini jelas dapat dianalisis dengan menggunakan lensa Behavioral Economics.

Mengutip dari buku ‘Predictably Irrational’ yang ditulis oleh Dan Ariely, dalam satu waktu yang sama, kita hidup di dua ranah yang berbeda. Di ranah yang pertama, berlaku norma-norma sosial yang penuh dengan kehangatan dan persahabatan, serta kebutuhan sosial manusia untuk berkomunitas dan saling membantu. Seperti ketika kita meminta orang lain untuk membantu mengangkat sofa ketika pindah rumah, atau membantu orang yang mobilnya mogok di tengah jalan. Timbal-balik tidak diharapkan disini. Sesaat setelah aku membantu seseorang mendorong mobilnya yang mogok. Orang tersebut tidak semerta-merta harus mendorong mobilku—yang 1. tidak mogok, dan 2. Tidak ada (hehe)

Di ranah yang kedua, norma-norma pasar dan marketing yang berlaku. Di ranah ini, semuanya berlandaskan cost and benefit, seperti, upah, gaji, keuntungan, bunga, dsb. Contoh yang paling mudah adalah ketika kita bekerja, pasti kita mengharapkan upah. 

Bukanlah karena kebaikan hati seorang petani, kita dapat makan; dan bukanlah karena kebaikan hati seorang tukang GoJek, kita bisa sampai ke tujuan; melainkan karena prinsip pasar dan interdependensi.

Pada kedua ranah ini, tidak ada hal yang lebih baik atau buruk. Kita menentukan ranah mana yang akan kita jadikan sebagai pedoman berpikir dan berperilaku, dan kemudian perlu kita sesuaikan dengan konteks.

Di bukunya, Ariely memberi contoh ‘seks’ sebagai ilustrasi. Seks dapat berada di ranah manapun sesuai dengan konteks, dan sangat tidak dianjurkan untuk mencampuradukan kedua ranah ini. Kita dapat mendapatkan seks secara gratis di ranah sosial dimana kita mengharapkan hubungan emosional. Namun, ada juga seks di ranah dimana norma-norma pasar berlaku; seks yang harus dibayar. 

Singkatnya, tidak ada suami atau istri yang meminta bayaran kepada pasangannya; dan tidak ada juga PSK yang mengharapkan hubungan percintaan serius dan berkepanjangan dengan kliennya.

Pelanggaran terhadap kedua ranah ini acapkali terjadi, dan menimbulkan berbagai macam masalah. Bila ingin membuktikan, Anda bisa mengambil sejumlah uang, kemudian datangilah pacar Anda, setelah itu, keluarkan semua uang Anda sambil memintanya apakah ia mau melakukan hubungan seks dengan Anda bila anda bayar dengan sejumlah uang itu (sebaiknya Anda laki-laki dan pacar Anda perempuan, karena jika pacar Anda laki-laki, Anda tidak perlu mengiming-iminginya dengan uang (?) ). Contoh lain, cobalah Anda pergi ke lokalisasi dan setelah melakukan hubungan seks, katakanlah bahwa Anda tidak akan membayarnya karena Anda mencintainya, lihatlah reaksinya. 

Woody Allen, menjelaskan permasalahan ini dengan tepat “The most expensive sex is free sex” 

(sebenarnya aku ingin menerjemahkan kata-kata ini, namun cukup sulit untuk menimbulkan efek yang sama, karena kata 'free' dalam Bahasa Inggris dapat berarti 'bebas' dan 'gratis' secara bersamaan, jadi tidak jadi).

Kembali ke topik awal. Lantas mengapa aku lebih bersedia melakukan penyuntingan dengan hanya diberi jus seharga Rp. 6000 atau bahkan tidak diberi apa-apa, daripada dibayar dengan jumlah uang seharga jus itu? Atau mengapa aku lebih memilih melakukan sesuatu secara cuma-cuma?

Anda sudah tahu jawabannya.

Semicolon and Anti-Suicide Movement

It happened around three years ago; I was in a Grammar course when this lecturer taught us Complex Clause—clause that has a main clause and more than one subordinate clauses. This lecturer, then, asked us to compose as long as sentence as possible. That was when I started to like making long sentences; and by the way, at that time, I made a sentence that exceeded a full-page.

My habit—which can either be good or bad; I don’t know—continued for a few semesters. I got excited even more when I met and befriended Semicolon (;), this punctuation that helps me lengthen my sentence. 

I don’t know; I just like to write a long sentence—it is not OCD for sure.

It was until a lecturer came, reproved me and said that it is bad; he explained to me that it is as if we spoke without stopping. It hurts the listener or the reader. 

That was when I realized that that writing style of mine sucks.

I tried to shortened my sentence ever since.

A few years later—because I was too busy; or too lazy; I don’t know—I googled the use of semicolon and found some unique articles about semicolon.

It says that there is this Semicolon Project, a worldwide project where people got a tattoo of Semicolon on their wrist dedicated to those who suffer from depression and suicidal behavior. It is an anti-suicide movement enforcing the idea that we should choose to continue, instead of stopping; because we can.

The message is that “[a] semicolon represents a sentence the author could have ended, but chose not to. That author is you and the sentence is your life”.

That sentence struck me for a moment. 

I did not know that a punctuation can matter this much. It perpetuates some existentialist idea, though, that we are the master of our own fate, instead of thinking that we are the puppet played by the unseen hands that we have no control over.

Suicide, I think, is a permanent action for a temporal problem. We are all going to die someday, just be patient, please. 

There have been too many great people died by committing suicide and every time it happens, the world cries. 

I am not exaggerating.

I have been missing the literary works I could have read if the author did not commit suicide. 

There are some more things we could have had, though.

When rules and grammar compel a sentence to stop, an author can always decide to put semicolon and continue writing;…

Are Human Evil?

After bombarded constantly by news about corruption, murder, tyranny, brutality, cruelty, and some other unspeakably immoral evil-attributes. I feel that I start losing my faith in humanity. I am neither an angel nor saint, yet, I am disappointed because we could have been better than this. I am disappointed by the corrupted politicians, drug dealers, extremists, thieves, pick-pockets, terrorists, plagiarizers, and all those cheaters.

Well, I am—and you are—actually not in the position to judge others since I am not experiencing what they are experiencing; and there is always a possibility that I may do what they do if I were on their shoes.

I remember reading a philosophy book—which I forget what the title is. There is this chapter—which I even forget—that discuses human nature. There, Thomas Hobbes claims that human are inherently evil. He supports his claim by explaining ancient pictorial symbols on a cave walls depicting people killing each other—which is supported by some anthropologists. Also, he corroborates his notion by mentioning wars. War is indeed a big theme that shapes human civilization, political stance, relations. It also creates states and their ideology. In some literary works that I encountered, I find that (some) people who go to war perceive it as a sort of transcendence and opium that keeps their adrenalin pumping; not to mention that there are also people who go to war because they intended to do legitimate killings. Hobbes concludes that human are inherently evil because there is this ancient savagery running in our blood.

On the other side, Rousseau (you may have heard his name in Civic Education course) theorizes otherwise. He claims that human are naturally peaceful until civilization comes along.

From the perspective of Social Psychology, however, it is quite complicated. In fact, we need to differentiate behavior between Dispositional (by nature/ personality) or Situational (determined by situation). For instance, when we saw Asep was a bully at school while also a loving brother at home; we cannot judge that he has personality disorder, multiple personality, or even as a psycho. As a matter of fact, we need to know whether his behavior is dispositional or situational.

I read a research on Social Psychology conducted by Zimbardo. Around 50 years ago, he conducted an experiment in Stanford Prison. There are 24 participants who are, by flipping a coin, divided into two groups: 12 prisoners and 12 guards (which they did not know of, and did not know each other). Few days later, the prisoners were arrested by real cops (Zimbardo wanted to create a very realistic setting for his experiment) under charges of robbery and then turned in to prison to the fake guards. The guards were told that it is the prisoner that is being experimented, while the prisoners did not know anything. The role play went really real when the guards—who can do anything they want except hurting the prisoners—turn cruel and hostile. The supposedly-fourteen-day experiment was stopped at the sixth day when the prisoners start breaking down, others rebel, and some others become passively resigned as if they deserved to be treated so badly. The prisoners were relieved when they were set free while, interestingly, leaving the fake guards feeling angry. A few weeks after the experiment, Zimbardo finds out that both the prisoners and the guards come back to their normal life.

The conclusion is that the aggressive behavior and hostility are situational—mostly, perhaps.

When a person was granted a certain power at a certain situation, therefore, his/ her personality is prone to be clouded and overridden.

Maybe, if I were a member of the house of representative, I would corrupt too; if I were given the opportunity, I would steal too; if I were a distressed Jedi, I would turn into Darth Vader too. 

I may say, ”I am not inherently evil. It is just the situation that forces me to.”

Still, I do not justify corruption, murder, thievery, terrorism, and all of those misconducts. 

We still have choices. What matters is the choice we make.

I do not believe in the assumption/ theory/ hypothesis that human are inherently evil—deceitful, bad, corrupted. I still can find some who stop under a red traffic light at 4 in the morning; or those who return a wallet when they could have taken it. 

Energi

Bintang

Dari sekian banyak konsep-konsep Sains yang saya pelajari di SMA, hanya ada beberapa yang masih saya ingat sampai sekarang, salah satunya adalah konsep Fisika mengenai Energi yang bunyinya kira kira seperti ini: ‘Energi tidak dapat diciptakan ataupun dimusnahkan, namun energi dapat berubah bentuk’. Selain itu, saya juga ingat bahwa segala sesuatu yang ada di alam semesta ini terbuat dari energi. Jika diurutkan dari elemen penyusun yang paling kecil, manusia terbuat dari energi yang kemudian membentuk atom; kumpulan atom itu kemudian membentuk sel, jaringan, organ, dan terbentuklah manusia. Begitu pula dengan hewan dan tumbuhan. 

Bukan hanya makhluk hidup saja yang tercipta dari energi, namun benda mati juga tersusun atas kumpulan energi yang membentuk atom-atom. Selain hal-hal kecil tersebut, benda-benda besar juga terdiri atas energi dan atom-atom. Sebut saja bintang yang ada sebelum masa-masa adanya manusia. Ketika terjadi ledakan Big Bang, energi dari bintang tersebut tidaklah musnah, melainkan tersebar dan sebagian membentuk bumi, tanah, samudera, pepohonan, dan bahkan manusia. Ya, jika ditelusuri, bintang merupakan nenek moyang dari manusia. Kita memiliki elemen penyusun yang sama dengan bintang-bintang di atas sana, sehingga ketika kita meneropong sebuah bintang (yang mungkin sudah mati jutaan tahun yang lalu), berarti sekumpulan energi sedang mengamati kumpulan energi lainnya.

Kerapkali terngiang di benak saya bahwa kita sebenarnya tersusun atas materi yang abadi. Kita sudah berada di sini milyaran tahun atau bahkan dalam waktu yang tak dapat dibayangkan oleh akal pemikiran manusia paling jenius sekalipun. Ketika saya mati nantipun, saya akan tetap berada di sekitar sini dan mungkin akan menjadi pembentuk makhluk hidup lainnya atau mungkin benda mati. Satu yang pasti, saya hanya akan berhenti mejadi seorang Hananta.

The Paradoxically Paradoxical Paradox

I was infatuated by social media, a media with which I felt extremely safe. I did not have to worry about my outfit, expression, intonation, and body odor. Seriously, I could walk over everyone’s timeline with my worst physical appearance unjudged; I could stalk anyone in the face of earth unnoticed; and I could edit or delete what will or had come out of ‘mouth’ uncaptured.

There is a paradox in social media. It is the least form of social activity someone has ever invented. I got it when I was socializing in my room, alone; when I was chatting to someone a far, while uttering no words to my friends close by; or when I felt it easier to post on my timeline, the specific thing I wanted a specific person to keep in mind.

I was a part of the society who felt the gradation and range of a changing era. No generation had ever witnessed the beauty in this ugly alteration. My hormones were trained and stimulated by positive reinforcement of a mere ‘like’. I was turning into a narcissistic person with excessive self-chauvism whose ego could only be satisfied when I shared everything I felt, thought, ate, and got the ‘like’ as the societal affirmation that would make me crave for some more.

Timeline is but an eternal bucket to and from which people defecate and eat and defecate and eat again. I had always been with that bucket, unaware that my body was getting frail; my hair is turning white; yet I did not know how long I have been holding that bucket.

In a late afternoon, my grandson asked me a help for his homework on History. I felt so dumb for I could not answer any of the questions. I had always been good at History and Wars. At that time, however, I did not even know the history of the tweet war in the House of Representative.

I was rescued when I parted from my devices. I was buried down the earth. My friends and relatives were up there; I saw them sharing their condolences on their timeline, and it was a relief that many people posted about me and got many ‘likes’.

I was a trending topic for twenty-four hours.

Literary Criticism: Contrastive Analysis of Bildungsroman across Cultures

The Concept of ‘Enlightenment’ in Bildungsroman across Cultures: An Analysis on Anglo and Native American Culture

Bildungsroman can be defined as a genre of novel in which the protagonist undergoes transformation from childhood / naiveté into maturity/ sophistication. The journey of that transformation usually peaks with an epiphany or realization before the protagonist in bildungsroman reaches or achieves ‘the enlightenment’ as a result of their journey. Although the definition of the term ‘the enlightenment’ is quite clear—i.e. when the protagonist in the bildungsroman finally realizes the meaning of something—the characteristics are unclear in one culture to another; for that reason, the concept of ‘enlightenment’ in bildungsroman across cultures worth analyzing. In this essay, I am going to identify the concept of ‘the enlightenment’ in two cultures that are reflected in the two literary works: James Joyce’s A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man (Anglo culture) and Louise Erdrich’s The Porcupine Year (Native American culture). Both Joyce and Erdrich seem to say that the process of reaching the enlightenment is often initiated by hardships and ended by gaining higher self. However, Joyce seems to invest the value of individualism while Erdrich emphasizes on collectivism accompanying the process of ‘the enlightenment’.

Both Joyce and Erdrich seem to say that the process of reaching ‘enlightenment’ is often initiated by hardships, for instance, both the protagonists in their novel have to face the troubles and conflicts, either it is internal or external. In the case of Stephen, he faces many external conflicts with the prefects and friends in his school as well as with his family in his home. He, moreover, experiences internal conflict when he was overwhelmed by the feeling of guilt and sin after he went to the brothel. Similarly, Omakayas experiences external conflicts when she lost her beloved and when LaPautre robbed her family. Besides, she faces her internal conflict when she was struck with confusion when she met Two Strike whom she hates and pities at the same time. The journey of development in both novels, however, peaked when the protagonists achieve—or start to achieve—an epiphany that they finally step to the stage of enlightenment or their higher self. Stephen achieves his enlightenment at the end of the novel when he finally finds his passion in life i.e. to express himself in some mode of life or art as freely as and as wholly as possible (Joyce, 1916, p. 212). Likewise, Omakayas gets her enlightenment also at the end of the novel when she get her menarche, which means that she is a woman who is ready to learn about what life would be like for the adults. From this point, the enlightenment is portrayed as a moment when the protagonists finally find the meaning of life (or something) and achieve their higher self.

James Joyce’s protagonist, Stephen Dedalus, clearly depicts the value of individualism in many ways. One of which, is by the fact that he is a loner and introvert who withdraws himself from his surroundings. For instance in relation with family Stephen seems to feel alienated and forsaken. It can be seen in the novel when: “[h]e felt that he was hardly of one blood with them [his family] but stood to them rather in the mystical kinship of fosterage…” (Joyce, 1916, p.83). Moreover, in relation with friendship, he thinks that “he was different from others. He did not want to play.” (Joyce, 1916, p.53). Even when he was in a kind of party, he “withdrawn into a snug corner of the room he began to taste the joy of his loneliness” (Joyce, 1916, p.57). This attribute that Stephen holds is one of the attributes that finally bring him into the enlightenment. It is in line with a famous modern Anglo psychologist, Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. He described the concept of self-actualization as the hierarchically the highest of human’s need that is a state when human realize their potential, fulfill themselves, and do the best they are capable of doing (Maslow, 1954, p.150). The concept of self-actualization, by that definition, is juxtaposed with the concept of ‘the enlightenment’ in bildungsroman. Interestingly, Stephen’s characteristic are corroborated by Maslow’s (1954) description of the characteristics of self-actualized person, which are to be detached from societal influences, autonomous, and independent; an individual who acts upon his own will. For these reasons, the concept of the enlightenment in A Portrait centers on being individualist.

Conversely, in Erdrich’s The Porcupine Year, it is obvious that the protagonist privileges the value of collectivistic culture. On the contrary with Stephen’s life, the mood of togetherness in Omakayas and her family is apparent as it is shown in the novel when ”they would all be together, just the way they had been back in the golden days on the  golden island, when she was small.” (Erdrich, 2008, p. 48). Besides, they are a harmonious family like when they are on the way to Muskrat, “[t]he way was long, but they would find their family in the end. The family sang together, back and forth between the canoes.” (Erdrich, 2008, p. 60). The collectivistic culture can also be seen when “[a]t night, as they sat together around the fire, they were closer than ever in their determination” (Erdrich, 2008, p. 108). This value is supported by Smith’s and Schwartz’ concept of self-transcendence that reflects the value promoting universalism, which is “understanding, tolerance and protection for the welfare of all people and nature.” (1997, p. 86). For these reasons, the concept of the enlightenment in The Porcupine Year centers on being a collectivist.

The interesting part is the fact that the concept of self-transcendence is a kind of critic to Maslow’s concept of self-actualization (Koltko-Rivera, 2006) because it does not appear  to  be  a  cross-culturally  valid  concept,  in  that  the  characteristics measured in Maslow’s concept are not applicable to collectivistic cultures in the same way that they are to individualistic cultures (Ivtzan, n.d., p.132). This critic coincides with the one toward the centeredness of Anglo culture regarding bildungsroman. As stated by Boes Tobias (2006, p. 239), in these years, there is a shift of studies and attention toward post-colonial and minority groups’ writing. Based on this argument, it is clear that The Porcupine Year is a symbol of critic toward the hegemony of the western culture—more specifically Anglo culture—that has established meaning according to their own perspective. It is corroborated by Bubíková et. al. (2008, cited in Adámková, 2011: 26) who says that the writings from minority groups also aim to clarify the stereotype, prejudice, judgments, and meanings made to them in attempt to establish their own identity to preserve their ethnic or racial roots.

The centeredness of this issue can be seen when Adámková mentions that one of the characteristics of bildungsroman is that “it does not need adults to play the most important role”. Parents should be in the background to mark the distance between them and the authority (2011, p. 24); besides, Hamilton Buckley (1974, cited in Brändström Camilla, 2009) also mentions a typical feature of the Bildungsroman i.e. seeking a substitute parent due to a symbolic or actual loss of his real father. These characteristics fit perfectly to A Portrait. However, Chang Li Ping, et al defy that characteristic by saying that The Porcupine Year and other marginal groups have created a new Bildungsroman based on their own perspective in attempt to “evinces a revaluation, a transvaluation, of tradition Bildung by new standards and perspectives” In The Porcupine Year, Omakayas is educated by her elders, and the self she is taught to present is partly formed with their values in mind. (2011, p. 2).

Even though the concept of ‘the enlightenment’ in bildungsromans in Anglo and Native American culture is similar i.e. the realization and awareness of the meanings in life; the characteristic accompanying the process is, however, different in both cultures that are represented in the two novels. While the Anglo culture centers on the individualistic attributes that lead the protagonist to do a deep thinking to the self-actualization, a concept postulated by a famous Anglo psychologist, Maslow; in the Native American culture, however, the concept of ‘the enlightenment’ is different to the one in Anglo for it emphasizes on the value of collectivism that characterizes the protagonist’s self-transcendence—a concept of higher self that is a critic toward Anglo’s concept of higher self that is said to be compatible only in individualistic culture. The interesting fact is that the inclusion of collectivist attributes in the concept is geared by the shift of studies and attention toward post-colonial and minority groups so that they can make meaning to their own culture.

  

References

Adámková, Hana. (2011). Young Adults in the Writing of Sherman Alexie. Diploma Thesis. Masaryk University.

Boes, Tobias. (2006). Modernist Studies and the Bildungsroman: A Historical Survey of Critical Trends. Literature Compass. Vol. 3, no. 2, 230-243. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-4113.2006.00303.

Brändström, Camilla. (2009). "Gender and Genre": A Feminist Exploration of the Bildungsroman in A Portrait of the Artist As a Young Man and Martha Quest. Thesis. Gävle University.

Chang, Li, Pang et al. (2011). A Native American Girl’s Coming of Age in Louise Erdrich’s The Porcupine Year. World Journal of English Language. Vol. 1, No. 2. 1-9. doi:10.5430/wjel.v1n2p43

Erdrich, Louise. (2008). The Porcupine Year.  New York: HarperCollins Publishers Ltd.

Ivtzan, Itai. (n.d.). Self Actualisation: For Individualistic Cultures Only?. Thesis. University College London.

Joyce, James. (1916). A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man. Pennsylvania: A Penn State Electronic Classic Series Publication.

Koltko-Rivera, Mark, E. (2006). Rediscovering the Later Version of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs: Self-Transcendence and Opportunities for Theory, Research, and Unification. Review of General Psychology. Vol. 10, No. 4, 302–317. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.10.4.302

Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper.

Smith, P. B., & Schwartz, S. H. (1997). Values. In J. W. Berry, M. H. Segall, & C. Kagitcibasi (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology: Vol. 3. Social Behavior and Applications (2nd ed., pp. 77–118). Boston: Allyn & Bacon

Response Essay: Jane Eyre

The Features of Western Bildungsroman and its Significance to the Western Culture

Bildungsroman can be defined as one of the genres in novel in which the protagonist experiences the development—social, psychological, or spiritual—from youth into maturity through the process of realizing. In this realizing process, there are some features accompanying the protagonists’ development. By doing intertextualization, I will describe those features in Brontë’s Jane Eyre and two Western Bildungsroman protagonists—Holden Caulfield (J.D Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye, 1951); and Hazel Grace (John Green’s The Fault in Our Star, 2012) —regardless the era and time of publication, I find some patterns in the western Bildungsroman and its implications to the western culture.

The first feature accompanying the protagonists’ development implied the importance of novels/books. All of these protagonists are influenced or passionate by novels and/or books. Jane Eyre reads The History of British Bird which then formulates her consciousness about being free; this desire to be free makes her feel insecure and afraid over something that might bind her passion, for example when she rejects to marry St. John. Similarly, Hazel is passionate to The Imperial Affliction from which she learns about life and let the bygone go. She, moreover, refers it as her personal bible (pg. 10); Holden, among all courses, loves English language and literature best for English is the only course he passes, besides, he is personally close to his English teacher, he reads a lot of classical books (pg.10). From this pattern, we can see that reading books or novels is the practice involved in forming protagonists’ consciousness to reach the realizing process.

The second feature that is typical in Bildungsroman’s protagonists is being critical or freethinkers, especially toward society and religion. Jane, from early age, has been thinking of common sense related to social paradigms about being dependent and also the characteristics of being a woman that she thought she will never fit into. She, moreover, thinks about religion and all evangelical movements when she met three characters—Helen, Brocklehurst, and St. John—who have certain perspective about religion, however she rejects all the three kinds of religion types. I consider Hazel as freethinker when she thinks that the universe is insensitive and the world is not a “wish granting factory”, despite of that, she can still get the meaning in the meaningless life; that is what she learns from the novel she reads. Furthermore, Holden criticizes everything about adult world and call them as “phony”. He also says that he is “sort of an atheist” who despises Jesus’ disciples that he considers as useless (p.54).

Western Bildungsroman, to conclude, has some patterns that reflect the development of personality in western culture regarding the importance of reading and then being a freethinker. In these three Bildungsroman novels, the importance of book is prominent from which the protagonists are influenced and then develop their own ideology and belief about the world around them. This is maybe the reason why western countries have a reading-culture. In addition, the western people mostly are atheist and the freethinkers; or it can be that the western Bildungsroman novels are the reflection of the western cultures.

Bibliography:

Brontë, Charlote. (1847). Jane Eyre.New York: The Book League of America.

Green, John. (2012). The Fault in Our Stars.New York: Penguin Young Readers Group.

Salinger, J.D. (1951). The Catcher in the Rye.New York:Little, Brown and Company.

Literary Criticism: Antigone

Panopticism in Antigone

Power relation between human and the God in Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex seems to be the recurring theme; similarly it is in the third sequel of his trilogy, Antigone. Speaking of power relation, it is inevitable to not mention Foucault’s writings. In his work entitled The History of Sexuality, Foucault (1978) says that power is characterized as being repressive and it takes the form of a law and demands obedience. Where there is power, however, there is always resistance that balances it. He adds that power does not rely on anyone, which means that it is the entity on its own (impersonality); power always exists in a relationship (relationality); there is no source of it (decentredness); it goes and come from anywhere (multidirectionality); and it can be placed in where it is needed (strategic nature). In this play, I find that both God and Creon use the same way as the means of power to control the people. In this essay, therefore, I am using Foucauldian reading as the framework to make a close observation on how God and Creon exercise their power through several means which are discipline and punishment; also to see whether there is an absolute power or not in this play.

From his work Discipline and Punish: the Birth of the Prison, Foucault (1975) states that discipline is used to create docile people so that the power can be exercised in an unobstructed way; to control those docile people, they must be constantly observed and recorded—or at least they should feel that they are. He adds that this concept to discipline people is similar to Jeremy Bentham's Panopticon—the architectural model for perfect prison which is structured in a way that cells would be open to a central tower. In the model, individuals in the cells do not interact with each other and are constantly confronted by the panoptic tower (pan=all; optic=seeing). They cannot, however, see when there is a person in the tower; they must believe that they could be watched at any moment: "the inmate must never know whether he is being watched at any one moment; but he must be sure that he may always be so" (p.201). In Antigone, both God and Creon use this method of panopticon to discipline the people and to exercise their power. In the case of God, the panopticon is portrayed as the sun which is described by the chorus in the Parodos:

Now the long blade of the sun, lying  

Level east to west, touches with glory

Thebes of the Seven Gates. Open, unlidded

Eye of golden day! O marching light

Across the eddy and rush of Dirce’s stream,

Striking the white shields of the enemy  

Thrown headlong backward from the blaze of morning!  

(Sophocles, 441B.C. Parodos. 85-91)

In this excerpt, the sun is associated with the open and unlidded eye that sees all what happen beneath it and watch those who break the God’s law. In the play, Creon conspicuously breaks the law by stating that nobody shall neither burry nor pray for Polyneices; in short, Creon breaks the law by abandoning the dead under the God’s ‘surveillance’ undisguisedly for he does it in the day; under the sun. In the same way, Creon also uses this panoptic means to demand people’s obedience by putting his ‘surveillance’ to observe those who break his law. Creon’s ‘all seeing eye’ is the Sentry as it is portrayed in the scene 2 of the play when the Sentry says:

I saw her with my own eyes…

So we sat on a hill to windward and kept guard….

…And then we looked, and there was Antigone!

I have seen…

…And then she brought more dust

And sprinkled wine three times for her brother’s ghost.

.

(Sophocles, 441B.C. 2. 320-341)

This excerpt clearly depicts the Sentry as Creon’s ‘surveillance’ because the Sentry guards and observes what happens beneath him before he reports all what he sees to Creon. Both the sun and Sentry function as the embodiment of God’s and Creon’s eyes as the means of their power to discipline the people so that they will not break the law. Interestingly, those who breaks the law—Creon and Antigone—do it conspicuously under the ‘surveillance’ of the ‘all-seeing eye’ for Creon do it before the sun and Antigone do it before the Sentry, both of them do it in the day.

The second means of power is punishment, which according to Foucault (1975) is a certain mechanism of power that is unhesitant to exert itself directly on people and strengthened by its visible manifestations as means of maintaining order. In Antigone, punishment is used by both God and Creon to give the sense of repentant and deterrent effect for those who break the law as well as to warn other people. In the case of Creon, he punishes Polyneices by abandoning his dead body unburied. He, moreover, punishes Antigone who breaks his law by incarcerating her in the stone chamber. All of his efforts are meant to maintain his power and discipline the people he is ruling. Similarly, God punishes Creon by crushing him the tragic fate that his son and wife dead. Likewise, the reasons are to maintain his power and discipline the people.

After all, God’s and Creon’s means of power are the same that they both exert discipline and punishment to maintain their order. However, there are differences between their power in term of the panopticon and punishment system. In Creon’s panoptic system, the Sentry is not consistent and omnisentient; it is described in scene 1 when the Sentry reports that someone has partially buried the dead body:

I did not it. I did not see who did it. You must not punish me for what someone else has done.

…A dreadful thing… I don’t know how to put it––

(Sophocles, 441B.C. 1. 200-208)

This excerpt shows that Creon’s panoptic system is imperfect because it fails to see what happen to the dead body at the first time Antigone pours the sands and wine as the ceremony to properly burry Polyneices. However, the God’s panopticon never fails because it sees all what happen beneath it. Moreover, in term of the punishment, the God’s and Creon’s perseverance is totally different. In the case of Creon, he finally withdraws his own law after Teiresias remind him about the God’s will and power. The withdrawal is described in scene 5 after Teiresias left; Creon talks to Choragos that he will withdraw his edict:

It is hard to deny the heart! But I will do it: I will not fight with destiny…

…I will go.    ––Bring axes, servants: Come with me to the tomb. I buried him, I  Will set her free… / …Oh quickly!  My mind misgives––

The laws of the Gods are mighty, and a man must serve them to the last day of his life!

(Sophocles, 441B.C. 5. 874-880)

This excerpt shows that Creon finally surrenders to the God and takes back his words. Conversely, God do not; although Creon has redeemed and compensated for his sin, the God is persistent to what He says that tragic fate will befall those who break his law.

Until this point, it seems that God has the absolute power for He strikes those who break his laws. Nevertheless, Foucault (1978) will disagree with this assumption because—as it is mentioned in the first paragraph—he states that power is decentered, multidirectional, and strategic. For these reason there is no source of power since it comes from and goes anywhere depend on where it is needed. The power of God in this play is contested by Polyneices as it is described in Scene 1 when Creon says that Polyneices “broke his exile to come back with fire and sword against his native city and the shrines of his fathers’ gods” (Antigone, 441B.C. 1. 165-166). This excerpt shows resistance from Polyneices toward God. Polyneices consciously excerts his power to resist God by striking with fire and sword against the shrines of the Gods as well as Thebes; the feature of power exerted by Polyneices is the strategic one for it is placed in where it is needed. Similarly, as it is seen in whole the play, Creon—to some extent—resists God by averting from His rules. From the analysis, the spread/ division/ source of power in this play is random because there are exertion and resistance toward power. I analogized the spread/ division/ source of power in this play with the child’s game Rock-Paper-Scissors. Rock beats scissors, scissors cuts paper, and paper beats rocks—but in term of power in Antigone, the source and direction is not that neat, instead, it is way too random to be analogized with anything. There is, therefore, no such thing as absolute power in the play since the power is always balanced by the presence of resistance.

Both the God and Creon are the hierarchically high figures in Antigone who exert their power through discipline and punishment. In term of discipline they both have panoptic system to observe all that happen in their territory. Moreover, in term of punishment, they both punish those who break the law to maintain their order as well as to give the sense of repentant and deterrent effect to the people. However, there are also differences in term of the discipline and punishment applied by Creon and the God; when Creon’s is respectively limited and dynamic, the God’s is omnipresent and static. The God’s power, however, is not absolute for there are resistances that balance it is like when Polyneices strikes the God’s shrines and when Creon averts from God’s rules. Therefore, the spread/ division/ source of power in this play are random because there are exertion and resistance of power.

References

Foucault, M. (1975). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of The Prison. (Alan Sheridan, Trans.). New York: Vintage Book.

Foucault, M. (1978). The History of Sexuality. New York: Pantheon Books.

Sophocles. (441B.C). Antigone. (Dudley Fitts and Robert Fitzgerald, Trans.). Literature: Reading Fiction, Poetry, and Drama. Ed. Robert Di Yanni. (6th ed.) Boston: McGraw-Hill.