THE IMPACT OF POLITICAL CHANGES ON WOMEN’S LITERATURE: The Case of Post-Soviet Russia and Indonesia’s Reformasi

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].