Throughout history, political reforms
have brought about changes in literature. This is particularly true for
literature written by women. In the case of political changes which brought about
new democracies, these changes paved the way for the voices of marginalized
groups, such as women, to be heard and thus exposed issues that were previously suppressed.
The emergence of new democracies over the last two decades was marked by the
rise of new women authors and along with it appeared a new literary discourse
on femininity and sexuality, as well as a different perspective on social and political
issues.
Under authoritarian rule, most of women’s
literature and the media in general tend to reflect the state’s gender
ideology. Subsequently, when changes in the political setting provided more
space for women writers and different views, women writers took on new and
controversial themes as well as portrayed a different image of women. Women
authors raised marginal issues, voiced out issues that were previously taboo,
and exposed experiences that were once before silenced. We will explore this
matter further by looking at the political reform of post-Soviet Russia and
Indonesia, known as the Reformasi.
The
Case of Post-Soviet Russia
 |
| www.studentpulse.com |
The glasnost era in Soviet Russia opened the opportunity for more women
writers to publish their work. The 1980s to 90s marked a phenomenon of the new women’s
prose in Russia and was considered a major literary event of the era. Women’s
prose and literature changed dramatically in Soviet Russia in the early 1990s
with big publishing houses in the late ’90s publishing the work of women
writers (Sutcliffe, 2011). Contemporary Russian women writers include Mariia
Arbatova, (Menia Zovut Zhenshchina (My Name is Woman), 1997), Ludmila Ulitskaya
(Medea and Her Children, 1996), as
well as women writers who would not like to be identified as part of ‘women’s
literature’, such as Tatyana Tolstaya (On the
Golden Porch, 1987), and those who were writing prior to the women’s prose era,
such as Ludmilla Petrushevskaya (The
Time: Night, 1991).
Characteristics particular to these
women’s writing are narratives that are women-centered and generational
(Rytkoren, 2012) and themes that focus on motherhood. The Russian people’s
close association of womanhood with motherhood is related to traditional values
about women’s ultimate fulfillment and purpose in life which is being able to
produce children and become mothers, as reflected in the term “Mother Russia” (Muff,
2008). In order to ensure labor power and achieve the state’s economic goal,
Soviet labor policies strengthen these values by promoting the importance of women’s
role in biological and social reproduction for the nation (Harden, 2009). This notion of ‘compulsory’ motherhood became
a source of oppression for Russian women. Thus, contemporary themes about
motherhood voice out what was once silent resistance towards traditional patriarchal
ideal images of women (Rytkoren, 2012)
as well as represent a form of rebellion towards state ideology (Muff, 2008).
Narratives with mother and daughter
relationships being a significant theme in contemporary women’s writing in post-Soviet
Russia also suggest the suppression of the feminine in Russian culture (Marsha,
2012). As an effect of this long history of suppression, women’s literary work which
emerged from this new political era and which exposes the feminine was viewed
as derogatory and subordinate; hence the refusal of some women writers to be
associated with women’s literature (Muff, 2008).
While it would be a mistake to think
that a discourse similar to that of Western women’s liberation arose in
post-Soviet Russia, some scholars view that the work of a number of contemporary
Russian women writers confronts gender binarism or even deconstructs it by
opposing the cultural conceptualization of motherhood and femininity (Muff,
2008). In contrast to this view, other scholars argue that instead of breaking
gender binaries, narratives of the new women’s prose tend to center on the
biological and social experiences of women. Women writers of this era did not
attempt to deconstruct gender roles but instead aimed to reconstruct sexual
difference (through their women-centered and mother-centered narratives) and recollect
the past in order to uncover the suppressed (through the intergenerational
relationships of the female characters). This representation of the female
reflects post-Soviet women’s past traumatic experience living under the
ideology of equality (Rytkoren, 2012).
In her study of post-Soviet media, Pavlenko
(2002) found that the discourse on gender presented in contemporary Russia is
that of the women’s place is in the home and men are the breadwinners. It
reflected that women no longer wanted to be the laborer and mother; they wanted
to be in a situation where they can choose to be a homemaker. A chance to stay
at home was seen as a form of liberation for women. At the same time, contemporary
media representation of women depicts old-age patriarchal values that were
maintained but repressed throughout Soviet rule, in particular, the sexual
objectification of women. Women’s sexuality and women’s image as sexual object
tend to be exploited by the media and supported by the overall cultural environment.
All these reflect the repression of the past, where Russia’s dominant
patriarchal culture lived alongside the ideology of equality.
The
Case of Indonesia’s Reformasi
Reflection of the past is also
apparent in women’s writing during and following Indonesia’s 1998 political
reform (Reformasi) which ended over
30 years of authoritarian rule. After a
long period of women being portrayed in literature in accordance with their
culturally and government ascribed role as good mothers and dutiful wives,
women writers of Indonesia’s Reformasi
era link experiences in the private sphere to the public as well as to the political
landscape; thus revealing women’s (and the Indonesian people’s) past
experiences of various forms of oppression.
Known as Generation ’98, women writers
of the Reformasi marked a new
important era in Indonesian literary history. Nonetheless, these women were presented
with mixed reviews: they were praised by some but highly condemned by others for
bluntly expressing women’s sexuality. However, in general, the writers’ political
stance or social concerns conveyed in their stories were majorly overlooked and
instead themes about sexuality caught most of the public’s attention.
After the publication of her controversial
novel, Saman (1998), Ayu Utami is said
to have pioneered the Generation ’98 of Indonesian literary writers and
particularly what is now termed as Sastrawangi
(literally fragrant literature) to refer to young, physically attractive,
educated, middle-class, urban female writers which emerged during and following
the Reformasi era. However, this term
is somewhat derogatory (Eagling, 2011: 3) and underrates these writers as it
associates them with novels containing themes of sex and of low quality work.
In contrast to public perception,
studies on Indonesian women’s writers of 1998 onwards suggest that writers such
as Ayu Utami, Djenar Maesa Ayu (Jangan
Main-Main (dengan Kelaminmu), 2004) Dewi Lestari (Supernova 1, 2001), Linda Christanty (Makam Keempat, 2004), Helvy Tiana Rosa (Jaring-Jaring Merah, 2008), and Laksmi Pamunjtak (The Dairy of R.S.: Musings on Art, 2006)
raise issues concerning intergeneration relationships, political and social
changes (Eagling, 2011), pluralism, as well as alternative discourses on nation-building
(Budiman, 2011). Breaking free from over 30 years of authoritarian rule, women
writers of the Reformasi era unleash
past oppression related to gender inequality, sexuality, ethnicity and
religion, violence against women, political violence, human rights abuses, and
national identity. This is what set them apart from notable fiction women
writers of the 1970s (e.g., N.H. Dini, Marga T., and Maria W.) who—maybe due to
the tight censorship of the past regime—largely did not take on political
issues nor display critical notions about gender inequality. Moreover, the women
authors of this era tend to affirm the dominant gender ideology.
The dominant gender ideology of the
past regime, the New Order, promoted the role of women as good mothers and
dutiful wives and men as breadwinner and household head. These gender roles
were influenced by the dominant (Javanese) culture and found their legitimacy
in religious beliefs and were further strengthened by laws, regulations, and
state bureaucracy. This gender ideology was extended from the family to the
state through civil servant organizations and policies to ensure political
control. Women writers of the Reformasi
mainly grew up during the New Order period and were raised in an environment affected
by the dominant gender ideology of this regime (Eagling, 2011; Budiman, 2011) and
a culture which imposes a double standard on women’s sexuality. Being writers emerging
during (post-)Reformasi allows them—while
still being affected by the powers of the past—to look at the past from a
different perspective. Ambivalence is apparent in the work of the authors,
still they bring alternative discourses and remain at the periphery. They are,
however, not marginalized, as “they speak…on an equal footing” with the
dominant powers. Furthermore, by adopting the strategy of marginality, they are
able to envision an alternative construct of the nation (Budiman, 2011: 224–229).
Conclusions
The work of women writers of
Post-Soviet Russia and Indonesia’s Reformasi
reflect how drawing on past experiences of living under a repressive state has helped
uncover the forms of oppression the people and particularly women were subjected
to. In this process, these authors looked at the past from the perspective of
the present, giving voice to what was previously silenced.
As a strategy for repression and to
meet economic or political goals, state policies during the authoritarian rule
of the two countries discussed unify women as mothers who serve their family
and the state. Past experiences of motherhood being used as a means for repression
are reflected in some of the works of the writers discussed above.
Furthermore, the work of both Russian
and Indonesian women writers of the new political era symbolizes resistance and
challenge. However, women writers of the former tend to demonstrate resistance
towards Soviet ideology of equality and critically center on motherhood, womanhood,
and women’s social experiences (of living under Soviet rule) in relation to their
biological capacity. On the other hand, women writers of the latter tend to
challenge the present gender ideological discourses and political repression which
have their roots in the power of the past regime and dominant culture, and
therefore they move towards deconstructing ideologies and notions of the nation.
Thus, the public image constructed of the work of these women writers as being derogatory,
ignores the political relevance of their work and depoliticizes the issues
raised by these writers.
List of References
Budiman,
Manneke (2011) ‘Re-Imagining the
Archipelago: The Nation in Post-Suharto Indonesian Women’s Fiction.’ Thesis. The
University of British Columbia (Vancouver) [online]
<https://circle.ubc.ca/bitstream/id/119491/ubc_2011_spring_budiman_manneke.pdf
>[4 January 2015].
Eagling,
Caroline Melita (2011) ‘Socio-Political Issues in Women’s Fiction of the Reformasi.’ University of Tasmania
[Online]
<http://eprints.utas.edu.au/12434/1/Caroline_Melita_Eagling_ID_923828_Master_of_Arts_Thesis_pdf.pdf>
[18 November 2014].
Harden,
Jeni (2002) ‘Beyond the Dual Burden Theorising Gender Inequality in Soviet Russia’
[online]<http://demo.st-peter-files.digitalkombinat.net/Dateien/Session_5_-_Theorising_Gender_in_Soviet_Union_1.pdf>
[1 December 2014].
Marsha, Rosalind
(2012) New Mothers for a New Era? Images of Mothers
and Daughters in Post-Soviet Prose. Modern Language Review (MLR),
107 (4), pp. 1191-1219 [online] <http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5699/modelangrevi.107.4.1191>
[24 December 2014].
Muff, Rebecca A. (2008) ‘Contemporary Russian Women
Writers: Rejecting Definition in Literary Rebellion.’ Thesis. Texas A&M
University [online]
<http://repository.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/85752/THESIS.pdf>[16 January
2015].
Rytkönen,
Marja (2012) ‘Memorable Fiction:
Evoking Emotions and Family Bonds in Post-Soviet Russian Women’s Writing.’ Argument Vol. 2 1/2012, pp. 59–74. 14
[online]
http://www.academia.edu/7934202/Memorable_Fiction_Evoking_Emotions_and_Family_Bonds_in_Post-Soviet_Russian_Womens_Writing>[14
December 2014].
Pavlenko, Aneta (2002) ‘Socioeconomic Conditions
and Discursive Construction of Women’s Identities in Post Soviet Countries.’ In
Critical Management Research in Eastern Europe, Managing Transitions.
Mihaela Kelemen and Monika Kostera (eds.). London: Palgrave [online]
<apavlenk/pdf/Socioeconomic_Conditions_and_Discursive_Constructionof_Womens_Identities_in_Post-Soviet_Countries.pdf>[24
December 2014].
Sutcliffe,
Benjamin M. (2011) Publishing the
Russian Soul? Women’s Provincial Literary Anthologies, 1990-1995. Oxford:
Ohio, USA [online] <http://sc.lib.muohio.edu/bitstream/handle/2374.MIA/4423/sutclibm-2011-04-21T20-56-03-0400-Publishing%20the%20Russian%20Soul%20Sutcliffe.pdf?sequence=1>[24
December 2014].
