[Nasional-e] Politically incorrect smiles: Bali incident

[Ambon]

The Jakarata Post
Nov. 25, 2002

 Politically incorrect smiles: Bali incident
Ariel Heryanto, Sociologist, University of Melbourne, Australia

The Australian public is rightfully outraged by the interview between
Indonesia's Police Chief Da'i Bachtiar and Bali bombing suspect Amrozi. At
issue was the series of smiles, laughter, and handshakes between them, and a
few other attending law enforcers. The whole event has been taken as a gross
offense, incredibly insensitive to the sufferings of the victims, and their
families.

However, what most angry commentators, Australian and non-Australian alike,
have failed to understand is the extent to which similar gestures, and
smiling in particular, has been embedded in social lives of most Indonesians
with diverse meanings. The same is true about many societies across
Southeast Asia.

This is neither to exonerate the crime against humanity of the Bali bombing
perpetrators, nor to excuse the police officers' failure to understand the
regrettable implication of the widely reported interview. Rather, this is an
alternative interpretation of what is indisputably a blunder, underscoring
the need for better understanding of, and consideration for different
cultures, including their respective parochialism.

Instead of simply a failure to express sympathy for the victims, the
problematic interview has in fact reflected the Indonesian law enforcers'
failure to understand that there exist sensibilities and ethical codes that
are radically different from those prevailing in contemporary Indonesia.

Unfortunately, the foreign media and analysts have not understood any better
the failure of these less than cosmopolitan Indonesian state officials. The
event has been misconstrued, although with good reasons.

To the Australian public several sympathetic Australian journalists and
Indonesian commentators have offered explanations about the disturbing
scene. Most of them attribute it to "cultural differences" between the two
peoples, plus the difficult circumstances under which the Indonesian police
operate.

Those giving cultural explanations correctly stressed that the smiles did
not necessarily imply delight, amusement, friendliness between the suspect
and the officers, nor antagonistic attitude towards the victims of the Bali
bombing. They "laughed", but they did not "laugh at" anything or anyone as
often incorrectly, though understandably, understood in the Australian
context.

I share the cultural explanations, but would take issue when they are
presented, as often the case in Australian media, with additional
rationalist reasoning by Indonesians and experts of Indonesia alike. Such
reasoning was provided in effect to show the "objective rationality" behind
the smiles by considering the political contexts.

The smiles were interpreted as if they were a well calculated gesture, a
part of a larger strategy on the part of the suspect and his captors to
achieve political gains (for instance, for the police to appear humane in
public, and for the suspect to avoid heavy sentencing).

Cultures have no objective reasoning outside themselves. I believe the
controversial smiles have been done unconsciously. Most likely no
calculation, clever or otherwise, was involved. No real political
circumstances seem relevant here. Those people appeared to have smiled
because they could not help it, because that's the way they were brought up
since childhood.

For the same reason, most ordinary members of the Indonesian public did not
notice the very same smiles, and took issues, because these smiles appeared
so insignificant. Significantly, with the exception of The Jakarta Post, no
Indonesian press has picked up the interview as an issue. What several
dailies reported as newsworthy was the Australian outrage, not what had
provoked it.

As French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu said, "cultures are those what goes
without saying", as they have come without questioning, or reasoning. They
are like languages or accents. To ask why Amrozi and the police should smile
is almost like asking why English speaking people always open an official
letter with the greeting "Dear", even if this is a letter of very serious
complaint or protest.

It is also comparable to the controversial 1998 pose of IMF Executive
Director Michel Camdessus. He stood straight, arms folded, next to then
president Soeharto who bowed down to the table to sign a new reform package.
Indonesians took offense of the pose, despite their being impatient to see
Soeharto step down!

Smiles are built-in in many languages in Indonesia, just as tenses or gender
in European languages. Thousands of Australians have enthusiastically
learned to speak Bahasa Indonesia.

One common pitfall for them, as for most English native speakers learning
the language, is to pronounce words that start with c-, j-, t-, or p-. One
can only do it properly if one spreads one's lips widely enough. In other
words, one has to smile as one speaks. Indonesians unconsciously and
effortlessly smile as they meet people, speak with others, or encounter
experiences that are neither funny, nor delightful.

For these reasons, many first-time visitors to Indonesia (or Asia) have been
misled to think that Indonesians are unusually always happy, hospitable, or
courteous people. Their smiles have been taken more seriously than
warranted. When these foreigners told their impressions of, and to the same
Indonesians ("Indonesians are so gentle, graceful, hospitable"), the latter
have often misunderstood the remarks, taking it more seriously than
necessary. Indonesians do not -- as they are taught not to since
childhood -- habitually express such complementary remarks, or any other
strong feelings, directly to strangers or new acquaintances.

Likewise, Indonesians learn to express embarrassment, shame, sorrow,
sympathy, or affection in ways that are not necessarily familiar to
outsiders. One example has to do with death and funeral. Several overseas
observers have described the highly elaborate and capital-intensive funerals
in several ethnic groups in Indonesia (e.g. Toraja, Balinese) with great
amazement, commenting that "they live in order to die".

Foreigners are often baffled when visiting urban middle class Indonesian
families. While conversing casually in the living rooms, their Indonesian
hosts grab family photo albums in the room, and show a large number of
pictures of the funeral of a deceased member of the family, with no apparent
remorse or sense of loss.

Lest be misunderstood, cultural differences do not rigidly follow the
boundaries of nation-states. Neither do any of these cultural differences
remain unchanged. There are as profound cultural differences across
sub-national groups in Indonesia, along gender, ethnic, religious,
residential, and linguistic lines as they are internationally. The same is
true with inter-cultural borrowings. Indonesian cultures, whatever these may
mean, are nothing but hybrids of diverse world and local traditions, under
constant change.

Despite these complexities, one can still recognize that the smiles that
Amrozi and the Indonesian law enforcers demonstrated are so common among
many Indonesians. Theirs in Denpasar may be somewhat more excessive than
usually observed in Indonesia. Such smiles can mean different things within
their immediate social environment, some are more commendable than others.
In any case, they do not solely and unambiguously imply malice to the
victims of the Bali bombing, and obviously not to the Australians in
particular.

The Bali bombing is seriously deplorable. The excessive smiles in the Nov.
13 interview are regrettable, for reasons suggested above rather than those
indicated in the Australian media and The Jakarta Post.

The painful incident provides yet one more opportunity for Indonesians to
understand better other people's sensibility, and for their friendly
Australian neighbors to understand why Indonesians' have not learned this
any better. It would be a pity if this opportunity is lost.