Dimensiones del conocimiento

I used a cultural studies approach to analyse the intensified struggle for hegemonic masculinity in Indonesia. Cultural studies acknowledge the importance of media and culture in the maintenance and reproduction of societies. Forms of media and culture, such as television, film, music, magazines, and advertising, offer role and gender models, fashion hints, lifestyle imageries and icons of personality reflecting proper and improper behaviour, moral messages and ideological conditioning, and often times sugar-coats social and political ideas (Kellner and Durham 2006: ix). This is the point at which I depart from many other scholars who previously examined Indonesian gender politics. Cultural studies have allowed me to explore commercial cinema as an arena of political struggle for hegemonic masculinity. It allowed me to examine cinematic representations as important political tools to contest the legitimacy of the existing cultural ideal masculinity.

My main reason for deploying a cultural studies approach to the study of gender politics, particularly the struggle for hegemonic masculinity, is that it has allowed me to explore the politics pursued in popular culture. Cultural studies recognises that popular representations, including those in the cinema, are cultural products which are produced, circulated and consumed in the context of uneven power relations between agents, that are themselves partly shaped by the dominant social constructions of gender. Simon During asserts:

Evi Eliyanah

[C]ultural objects are simultaneously ‘texts’ (that is, they have meaning) and events and

experiences, produced out of and thrown back into, a social force field constituted unevenly by power flows, status hierarchies and opportunities for many kinds of transportation, identification and pleasure (2005: 6).

In other words, cultural studies allow researchers to view commercial cinema as more than a cultural product dedicated for mere pleasure. Instead, commercial cinema is also an arena of struggle through which to channel certain political view(s), including those of gender. It is an arena of struggle to contest or defend certain social

constructions and beliefs. In the case of my research, commercial cinema is a field where the struggle to challenge and defend the hegemonic ideal and legitimise alternative ideals can also take place. In that sense, commercial cinema is a site of struggle where hegemonic masculinity is established and maintained by the dominant group, and also where subordinate masculinities are negotiated. Commercial cinema is not an arena which is won once and for all by the dominant group espousing hegemonic masculinity. In fact, in contemporary Indonesia, cinema is one of the key arenas of struggle for hegemonic masculinity.

Certainly, it is not my intention to suggest that gender representations in films mirror social reality. Yet, cinematic representations and social reality display a

dialectical relationship. Cinematic representations are not produced in a social vacuum. They are partly inspired by their contemporary social reality. As Heryanto suggested, intended or otherwise, commercially produced films constitute a collective statement about what is considered ‘normal’ (for that matter what is considered ‘not normal’: the odd, the humorous, the attractive, or scary) within a particular state-regulated social setting (2014: 51). Consequently, researching masculinity in commercial cinema will yield an equally rich analysis of gender politics.

In order to glean the historical dynamics of the representations of ideal

masculinities, I watched films produced during the New Order (1966–1998) and after its 30

Chapter 1. Introduction

demise. I watched around 20 films produced during this time. I also watched four films produced during the period of economic and political crises in 1997–1999. In addition, I watched around 60 Indonesian films produced between 2000 and 2015. I watched most of the films in 2013 prior to doing my fieldwork in order to equip me with information on the representations of gender as well as any controversies surrounding their

production or distribution. By doing so, I could glean the historical dynamics of the cinematic representations of ideal masculinity.

I use the Indonesian filmmakers’ struggle to legitimise a ‘new man’ masculinity as an alternative ideal as my magnifying lens to understand the broader gender politics of hegemonic masculinity staged in Indonesian cinema. The ‘new man’ is a hybrid configuration which incorporates gender practices which have been exclusively associated with femininity, in addition to other conventional masculine features. The ‘new man’ is characterised by emotional sensitivity, a willingness to compromise breadwinning roles and to share day-to-day domestic and caring responsibilities, paying attention to fashion and physical performance, and fostering equal gender relations of power (Beynon 2002: 100). The ‘new man’ first became popular in the American and British media and popular culture of the 1980s. It was promoted as an alternative to the older Western hegemonic masculinity: machismo masculinity (Beynon 2002; Chapman 1988; Gill 2003; MacDonald 2007).8

Following the filmmakers’ journey to legitimise the ‘new man’ became an important method of investigation into Indonesia’s gender politics staged in Indonesian

8

There are two strands of this ‘new man’ masculinity: the nurturer and the narcissist. The nurturer strand emphasises men’s emotional sensitivity and involvement in day-to-day domestic and caring duties, while the narcissist emphasises emotional sensitivity and fashionable looks (Beynon 2002: 100). While the narcissist strand was mostly inspired by the expansion of fashion to appeal to male customers, the emergence of the nurturer strand was arguably stimulated by men’s reaction to the social change and changing gender roles evoked by feminism (ibid.). The nurturer strand of the ‘new man’ has since been given weight by political leaders. One example would be Barack Obama’s personalisation campaign which shows him displaying a ‘“softer” form of masculinity, complete with “hands-on” fatherhood experiences’, which contrasts him with more macho political leaders such as Vladimir Putin and Boris Yeltsin (A. Smith 2016: 27).

Evi Eliyanah

cinema in the twenty-first century firstly because the ‘new man’s’ features contrast with the bapakism ideal in many ways. The gender practices, personalities and culture

constituting this particular ‘new man’ ideal challenge the features of bapakism.

Bapakism generally emphasises men’s ability to be family breadwinners and

authoritative patron leaders of a family collectivity. Bapakism discourages men from

being involved in day-to-day domestic and caring duties and emphasises them being more focused on their breadwinning role. Also, unlike the ‘new man’ ideal, bapakism

does not condone equal power relations between men and women in the context of the household. In terms of the gender relations of emotion, ‘new man’ masculinity is open to homosexuality, while bapakism valorises heteronormativity. Thus, the struggle to

legitimise ‘new man’ masculinity provides rich insights in to which masculinity features have become more acceptable and which ones are still largely rejected in screen

representations during the period under investigation and why. After all, what can and cannot be visually screened in cinema is highly political and closely linked to off-screen politics.

Moreover, the ‘new man’ stood out as a formidable challenge to the hegemonic ideal in films produced between 2000 and 2014. A proto ‘new man’ alternative

masculinity promoted through Rangga, the male protagonist of Ada Apa dengan Cinta?

became a legitimate alternative ideal as the film soared to popularity in 2002. Rangga’s masculinity featured emotional sensitivity, interest in literature, disavowal of masculine aggression and competitive sports, willingness to share domestic work, in addition to a steadfast belief in democracy. Yet, this masculinity was not able to totally depart from the authoritative male/patron/leader norm—a quality constantly challenged by his love interest, Cinta. Rangga’s emotional sensitivity, rejection of masculine aggression and willingness to share domestic work were then reproduced by other cinematic

representations of ideal masculinities. Moreover, the gay ‘new man’ in the Arisan!

Chapter 1. Introduction

franchise who supported more fluid and equal gender relations of production and power, as well as embodying a subversive form of gender relations of emotion has been lauded by many scholars, such as Maimunah Munir (2011), Tilman Baumgärtel (2012),

Fatimah Rony (2014) and Murtagh (2013) as the contemporary canon in representing gay men in more positive light, despite there being a few reservations (see Chapter 6).

I assume as filmmakers promote alternative ideals which undermine the prominent gender practices that constitute the most culturally exalted forms of masculinity, they have to negotiate their different views of what constitutes an ideal masculinity with the long-held ‘common sense’ cultural ideal. It is their interest in projecting an alternative like the ‘new man’ and their negotiation with other parties involved in the production of such an alternative image of the masculine ideal which are my main research interests, in addition to how they actually cinematically depict the alternative ideal in relation to the hegemonic ideal on screen. Taking into account the ‘new man’s’ popularity, I question further which direction the filmmakers aim to steer the gender debate amidst the gender-order crisis in Indonesia and why.

I combined critical textual analysis of selected film texts, field research and interface ethnography to collect data for this research. Reading the texts allowed me to look at how relations between multiple forms of masculinity, as well as between masculinities and femininities were portrayed on screen. Furthermore, reading the film texts in context allowed me to analyse why certain representations of masculinity and gender relations were able to be produced at that particular moment in history. I

specifically selected five films to be analysed in this thesis. These films clearly promote the ‘new man’ masculinity as an alternative ideal that renders bapakism obsolete. I

again watched the selected films and other films which are arguably connected to the production of these five during my analysis stage. I conducted discourse analysis on the

Evi Eliyanah

film texts to elicit the narrative strategies, such as plot, framing of gender issues and characterisation that were deployed in promoting the ‘new man’.

I conducted field research to explore filmmakers’ experiences during the production and circulation of images of alternative ideal masculinities. In 2014, I spent six months in Jakarta, where most commercial films are produced and where most filmmakers working for commercial cinema reside. I conducted semi-structured personal interviews with 27 filmmakers, mainly producers, directors and scriptwriters, whose works featured the ‘new man’ masculinity. I also interviewed two actors. I maintained correspondence with some of them to obtain further information on certain aspects. I conducted another personal interview with a producer in April 2016 via video call to follow up on some information I had gathered previously from other filmmakers. Examining the production and circulation of cinematic images of ideal masculinities, as narrated by the filmmakers in personal interviews and publicly available statements, afforded me rich data on the gender politics behind, on and around the screen. These insights were valuable in developing an understanding of personal and structural levels of engagement with particular forms of masculinity among filmmakers and how such forms could shape the production of certain representations of masculinity in films.

I combined interviews with filmmakers with a more general interface

ethnography method to unpack the political struggle that shaped the representations of masculinities in cinema. As experienced by John T. Caldwell (2008) and Sherry Ortner (2010, 2013) in their research among Hollywood film communities, I felt the need to experience live and relatively natural encounters with the selected filmmakers. Yet, due to their busy schedules and the difficulties associated with obtaining permits to be on a film set, such opportunities were impossible during my field research. Thus, following Ortner’s innovation (2010, 2013), I complemented my interviews with interface ethnography by attending events in which the target participants interface with the

Chapter 1. Introduction

public (Ortner 2013: 26). In my case, I participated in special screenings and film festivals. I did so in order to have more opportunities to interact with the filmmakers. After special film screenings, the principal filmmakers usually discussed their creative processes and the film’s distribution. In film festivals, not only did similar opportunities present themselves, but I also had the opportunity to explore further contemporary representations of ideal masculinity in films that had been selected to compete for prestigious awards.

Additional material was acquired from interviews with activists in feminist women’s organisations and the men’s movement. Their insights enriched my analysis of the dynamics of masculinities off screen and possible representations on screen. During my fieldwork, I spent roughly two months travelling to Jakarta, Yogyakarta and

Semarang to pursue this part of the research. I interviewed seven activists, three of whom were active in the Aliansi Laki-Laki Baru (New Men’s Alliance), a profeminist men’s movement established in 2009 to support the Indonesian feminist movement to promote gender equality and eliminate gender-based violence and discrimination. The female activists I interviewed were also involved in the establishment of Aliansi Laki- Laki Baru. Five of the filmmakers were either directly or indirectly connected to Aliansi Laki-Laki Baru. It was from them that I could confirm my hypothesis that ‘new man’ masculinity was a significant alternative to bapakism not only on-screen but also off-

screen.

Finally, I also gathered information from media publications and other related sources publicly available on the internet and social media. I collected material concerning the production and circulation of films from news reports. Prior to the release of a film, filmmakers and the film production companies involved usually released press statements, as part of the marketing campaign for the film. I also gathered news reports concerning the production and circulation of the selected films, including

Evi Eliyanah

any controversy surrounding the production process. Unlike press releases, these news reports capture incidents, controversies, as well as positive credits for the films. At times, they incorporate filmmakers’ and other stakeholders’ responses to films. In addition, I gathered information from interviews with filmmakers that had been conducted by the media. Publicly available film reviews and criticisms were also valuable data which provided me with insights into how certain films were received by this critical segment of the audience.

These methods of data collection yielded abundant material on the gender politics engaged by filmmakers in their attempts to reconfigure hegemonic masculinity. My discourse analysis on film texts, interviews and other additional material helped me to explore the filmmakers’ strategies and compromises in challenging hegemonic masculinity and promoting an alternative ideal masculinity.