Asia Dance Channel

Traditional-Popular Performance and the Southeast Asian Cosmopolis

Matthew Isaac Cohen in conversation with Eddin Khoo

12 September 2009, 3 - 4 pm

CHAI House

By Hon Jia Xuan

“Traditional-Popular Performance and the Southeast Asian Cosmopolis” is a conversation between Eddin Khoo (founder of the cultural organisation PUSAKA) and Matthew Isaac Cohen(senior lecturer at the Department of Drama and Theatre, Royal Holloway, University of London). Cohen’s expertise is in Southeast Asian theatre studies, in particular Indonesia during the pre-war period. His book Komedie Stamboel: Popular Theatre in Colonial Indonesia 1891-1903 published in 2006 is, in Khoo’s words, “one of the leading examples of social history of Southeast Asia”.

In this conversation, Khoo had definitely picked Cohen’s brains and their discussion touched on a wide range of topics - from the notion of “traditional” versus “contemporary” of puppet theatre to the notion of nationalism in viewing pre-war histories; from Indian poet Rabindranath Tagore’s travels to Southeast Asia in 1927 to Cohen’s own practices as a dalang (shadow puppeteer) in Indonesia.

All these discussions, however, were not for nothing. While the younger generations under 35 years old like myself, learnt about the history of Malaysia and multiculturalism through textbooks, Khoo suggested that social history serves to provide an alternative to what we already know (a.k.a. national history) and this is important in understanding the true culture of our country. The issues or topics mentioned in the conversation, categorized into social history, acted as the few alternative reference points to understand the contemporary culture of Malaysia and Southeast Asia.

The framework for discussion was first set up when Khoo questioned the use of “cosmopolis” as a concept in discussing the multicultural aspect of Southeast Asia, whether it was an opportune or if it really had its rooting. Cohen specifically pinpointed four key moments that are worth exploring while examining the formation of the cosmopolitan identity in Southeast Asia - the Sanskrit cosmopolitan culture 2000 years ago (which were systems of science, writings and belief around the region of Southeast Asia); The Age of Commerce (1450 - 1680) as termed by historian of Southeast Asia Anthony Reid; the 19^th century (the age of steamship and telegram which encouraged the mass migration of people); the early 20^th century (when performance companies such as Komedie Stamboel toured around the archipelago).

Later in the conversation, Khoo invited Cohen to talk about the significance of Tagore’s visit to Southeast Asia (this will form a chapter of Cohen’s upcoming book). Cohen explained that upon discovering Javanese court dances as a model to revitalize Indian dance Tagore sent a number of his students to Indonesia to watch and learn the dances, creating an intercultural experience between India and Indonesia in the 1930s. A video clip entitled “Learning to Dance in Bali 1937” was shown, in which we saw a dance lesson given by I Mario (the most famous Balinese dancer) to Nataraj Vashi (Tagore’s student). It was a scene not uncommon these days but given that context, the role Tagore played in making it happen was clearly important.

When Cohen gave an account of himself, it seemed most natural that he was an ideal speaker to talk about “multiculturalism”. An American by birth, Cohen studied at Harvard when interculturalism was being celebrated. Fascinated by the non-Western contemporary and traditional art practices that were constantly happening around him, Cohen chose to trace the roots of these practices in Indonesia and one led to another, he ended up learning wayang at Institut Seni Indonesia Surakarta. He lived in Indonesia for seven years and now teaches in London. Cohen revealed that the motive behind writing Komedie Stamboel was almost by chance. As there were no key textbooks on Indonesian theatre studies, he was piecing sources to study the subject in an archive at The Hague. He saw “Komedie Stamboel” being mentioned in one of the materials and out of curiosity he searched for it in other materials, only to find that there was almost too much coverage of the company in Indonesian newspapers, and this eventually led to the birth of his prize-winning book. In fact, even the company Komedie Stamboel was a prime example of multiculturalism in the region - it originated in Surabaya; its actors were primarily Eurasians; its original backers were Chinese; its productions included the Arabian Nights and The Sleeping Beauty; and its audiences were of all races and classes.

Khoo gave his observation on the complex patronage culture of Indonesian theatres and the use of the term “traditional” for an art form as vernacular as the wayang. He too argued that theatre performance, no matter given by dalangs or performance companies such as Komedie Stamboel, were encapsulation of societies and communities of that time. Together with other eccentric events, they formed social history - the volubility and dynamics of which shed a new light in the way national history could not have done. In view of this, he voiced his concern regarding how nationalism could affect the way social history is being looked at and valued. As a response, Cohen said that though it is impossible to eliminate the element of nationalism, social history is important in a way that it provides reference points and guidance of some sort especially for one to make a life and really think in this globalised era. He emphasized that what we should all keep in mind is that social history especially of the Southeast Asia should not be forced into the models of national awakening movements. Social history is not histories of colonialism and anti-colonialism.

Speaking of which, I was reminded about the recent debates on enlisting or declaring a song, a dance, an art and a dish as national cultural heritage in Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore. This conversation then seemed to have happened at an appropriate time. It was incredibly rich in content and it felt that there was still much to talk about and to research into. Most importantly it provided insights, or rather, alternative perspectives on dealing with these recent debates and rethinking the cosmopolis situation in Southeast Asia. As Cohen pointed out, the events identified as key moments or reference points to understanding the cosmopolis situation in Southeast Asia happened without a rigid sense of national boundaries. How are we, citizens of our own countries as well as being Southeast Asians to make sense of our identity and the culture and the society that we live in now? A full picture of our past - inclusive of both national and social histories - would most probably point us, as a nation, to a direction, hopefully a future of more confidence, and less confusion.

Hon Jia Xuan is a dance major with the University of Surrey. She interns with AsiaDanceChannel.com