T

he growing enthusiasm for batik fashion in recent years has marked the reemergence of the Indonesian batik industry. Batik is no longer only formal clothing for the elderly but is part of modern fashion for all age groups.

It looks like we have a better appreciation of our cultural heritage and national identity in batik, but the current trend is leading the industry onto the commercialization highway where, to some extent, its cultural preservation is being neglected.

Modernization and profit maximization are two key factors to such a scenario.

Along with new technological innovation, batik processing has changed from a conventional handmade industry to a machinery-based one.

Canting (a copper pen stylus) and stamping tools are substituted with manual print screening and a fully mechanized printing processes. The use of natural dye is substituted with synthetic dye.

All these changes correlate to rapid batik demand over time. Faster and cheaper production costs are the reasons behind this change. Moreover, there is a common perception in our society of batik as a decorative fashion design, motif and profitable commodity.

In fact, traditional batik processing permeates excellent cultural value transfers over generations, particularly rooted in Javanese traditions.

From the mothers to teenage daughters, batik skills are taught at home. Life principles are also transferred during these casual sessions, to strengthen the character of younger generations.

In batik workshops, traditional processing creates a gendered division of labor where juragan batik (batik masters) are commonly the wives whereas the husbands are responsible for production control. The female batik masters take the lead in running a home-based batik business and marketing networks.

The labor division between buruh batik (batik workers) applies in forms of detailed processing. The females work on batik tulis (handwritten batik) and other detailed processes while their male coworkers are responsible for batik cap (stamped batik), dyeing, wax removal and finishing.

In addition, vertical family-like relations are maintained between batik masters and workers, through which the employees are treated as extended family members.

Since the industrial modernization of batik has taken place, socio-cultural values have disappeared. Many facets of human relations have been replaced by conditional contracts.

As a result, social relations within the batik industry have been downgraded and profit maximization has become the industry'€™s main concern. In turn, batik players are encouraged more to become individual economic creatures who ignore the importance of social improvements.

Another key factor rests in government hands. Double-standards and inconsistent policies supporting the national batik industry'€™s growth are ineffective in promoting its cultural preservation. The government emphasizes economic output, industry size and employment creation.

If the government is serious about national batik industry development, there should be protective trade policies to limit imported batik products. In the domestic market the government should regulate batik distribution in order to distinguish between traditional and modern batik products.

There are no specific market locations and trading events to ascertain batik market segmentation. All batik products are tradable everywhere either in traditional markets, via door-to-door delivery, boutiques, or shopping malls.

Worse, such '€œfree-market competition'€ provides opportunities for a number of batik producers or
traders to cheat.

By combining printed batik with additional handwritten or stamping processes, they may be sold as expensive as authentic batik products. Dealing with such unfair competition, the government has no reliable control instruments for law enforcement. As the batik market goes wild, both traditional batik producers and general consumers are those most burdened with economic losses.

To conclude, promoting batik industry sustainability should take care of its economic feasibility and cultural preservation. Routine government programs delivered to traditional batik producers in the forms of technical assistance and equipment grants are insufficient in meeting that objective.

The early initiative from the Industry Ministry to encourage batik standardization is ineffective because of the nature of batik making, which facilitates the unavoidable imitation process.

Batik training facilitated by public schools, the government and batik firms seem far away from the intention of creating future batik generations. The absence of a concrete industrial roadmap is likely to create doubt in the minds of younger generations to follow the batik business as a career.

The government must step in at the trading level to correct market failures. Through appropriate trade regulations, both batik producers and consumers will be more secure to make transactions.

In turn, educating public consumers about batik could be done simultaneously to make them aware of authentic Indonesian batik.

The writer is a lecturer and researcher at the Department of Urban and Regional Planning at Diponegoro University, Semarang.