TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
The author is not dead
These days when someone tries to offer criticism, they will be quickly labelled a “hater”. Worse still, they are sometimes considered unsupportive of the works of anak bangsa, in other words, dismissive of works created by Indonesian nationals.
Change Size
(Left to right) Abdul Khalik, the moderator, Nirwan Dewanto, poet and literary critic, Sanaz Fotouhi, assistant executive director of Asia Pacific Writers and Translators and Endy Bayuni, editor in chief at The Jakarta Post, talk during a discussion entitled "Media and Literature" at the 2016 ASEAN Literary Festival in Jakarta on May 8. (JP/Viriya Paramita Singgih )
T
he author is dead, says French literary theorist Roland Barthes. Barthes wants the author dead, so readers will be free to interpret and offer literary critiques of the author’s work regardless of whether the author is a senior poet, a Twitter celebrity or a president.
In this internet age, the author is not dead. The author tweets every minute about his latest novel, which has just become available for pre-order. He keeps retweeting his reader’s tweets that praise his work, and waging dramatic war against his haters.
The author is more alive than before. Gone are days when a reader, fascinated by a novel, could only imagine the omnipotent, untouchable author. These days, a reader can easily see their favorite author talking about everything under the sun, be they traveling, sharing motivational updates on Facebook, giving political support on Tumblr, or, most likely, offering tips on how to become a successful writer.
And look, that grand old poet has just published a compilation of his tweets in hard cover, autographed for the first 50 people to order it online.
But nothing is said about all of this. It is the critic who has died, not the author.
Being a critic is difficult these days. The most apparent obstacle for the birth of a new critic is the absence of the media. Most mainstream media do not spare a space for art criticism. There is even a trend of reducing the space dedicated to the arts in newspapers.
In her auto-biography Dari Ngalian ke Sendowo (2015), prominent Indonesian novelist NH Dini recounts how important critics were in the development of her career. One of her short stories was reviewed by HB Jassin, Indonesia’s last influential literary critic, in the magazine Kisah. Magazines like Kisah, which was dedicated to literature and literary criticism until its demise in 1957, is what we don’t have today.
On the other hand, the media for new authors is abundant. Most mainstream media, even local newspapers, provide room for short stories or serialized fiction. It is even normal for national newspapers to dedicate one page entirely to poems. Major publishers channel a lot of resources into the publishing and endorsing of novels.
Critics do not have such luxury. Quite to the contrary, in fact. These days when someone tries to offer criticism, they will be quickly labelled a “hater”. Worse still, they are sometimes considered unsupportive of the works of anak bangsa, in other words, dismissive of works created by Indonesian nationals.
There is also an inexplicable phobia of the word kritik, or criticism. Indonesians are used to using euphemisms to offercriticism, usually “constructive criticism”, an acceptable kind of criticism, all other kinds being considered forms of hatred. There is also an adage that goes: “If you want to criticize someone’s work, you have to be able to produce better work.” To this I say, in short, good luck with producing a film each time you want to criticize a film.
All such negative attributions cloud the fact that literary criticism is actually a science, and one that is important to the development of our culture. It is true that sometimes criticism is harsh, with people ranting about pretentiousness and boring stories. But it is usually pure analysis, ranging from plot analysis to probing ideas of human existence portrayed in a work.
With all this lack of support or proper understanding, new critics cannot be expected to appear naturally. It must be engineered, and this is actually not difficult. Let us start with the abundant literary criticism already available. In universities, literary criticism is available in the form of academic writing. Unfortunately, this has not yet been made accessible to the public partly due to a lack of exposure in the popular mainstream media.
I want to suggest an answer to the question of who should undertake the engineering of a stronger literary criticism scene. First, publishers. Literary criticism generates conversation about books. Even if critics give negative comments, publishers might still benefit from that publicity for the book.
A debate is far better than a quiet yet costly book launch. Publishers could start a magazine or journal for literary criticism. It doesn’t have to be another The Paris Review, but something should at least be started.
Second, as counterintuitive as it sounds, the authors should be our engineers. Authors need to contribute to the encouragement of criticism, especially those who are commercially successful. These days, our writers are thirsty for acknowledgement and that thirst cannot be satisfied only by sales. If we had a reputable institution of literary criticism, our writers would not need to claim that they had received awards for their work that might not turn out to be literary awards at all.
***
The writer is a member of the faculty of humanities at Diponegoro University.
---------------
We are looking for information, opinions, and in-depth analysis from experts or scholars in a variety of fields. We choose articles based on facts or opinions about general news, as well as quality analysis and commentary about Indonesia or international events. Send your piece to community@jakpost.com.
