Nonsense

What if I fall in love with you?
I would want to tell the world that it feels like I am wrapped in stars
I float and I float and stardusts glitter my hands and my feet
You would take me far from the harsh words I speak every so often
Then we would fly in a balloon of music because music is sweet
And this imaginary bliss is sweet

And if you fall in love with me
You would sing me songs they play on the radio on Saturday nights
You text me and call me and talk about the things we'd do on dates
I would listen to you; bring me up to speed with everything I missed
Then we would drive to a place where pipe dreams are lived
And towards where prayers and illusions head

But any announcement and I would jinx it
And one day I would wake up to a withered rose
of what used to be a cherished friendship and a possible romance

Thoughts I Had When Watching "Captain America: Civil War" (2016)

(This post is completely subjective and not professional. Contains spoilers.)

1. I never really liked Steve Rogers/Captain America. What a goody two-shoes. So righteous.

2. Despite the great opening action scene, I didn't get the feel of the movie. 

3. Probably it was because I was exhausted when I watched this.

4. Tony Stark's sarcastic humor was not as sharp as usual--still adequate, but not as satisfying.

5. I forgot this wasn't an Avengers movie.

6. Somehow I didn't like Wanda/Scarlet Witch.

7. They should've emphasized the importance of the peace treaty or something like that more. 

8. I like Black Panther. He's like this wise character the Avengers needed (since none of them was).

9. Couldn't help but think of Thor and how this must be trivial for him.

10. I like Scar-Jo. Black Widow was always cool.

11. Didn't think of Hulk until he was mentioned.

12. Who's that kid? What, Spiderman!?

13. Tony Stark definitely looked tired and worn out the whole time.

14. I didn't like Capt, but Bucky was great. Poor Bucky.

15. Where the fuck did the Doctor come from?

16. Zemo was the only person I hate more than Capt. America.

17. Oh, Martin Freeman!

18. I could not dislike Paul Rudd since Friends, hence the love for Ant-Man.

19. Oh, they're fighting. What a cute Spider-ling.

20. "What an eagle vision," when Vision spotted Capt and Bucky approaching the jet. Pun intended.

21. Poor Tony Stark.

22. Despite him being wrong, I'm still #TeamIronMan.

23. Can't believe Bucky did that to Tony's parents. Poor, brainwashed Bucky.

24. I hated the Capt almost immediately. Gosh, he's so nosy and frustrating.

25. Everyone was okay but him. And Zemo.

26. Zemo's motivation was... not strong enough? It was kind of forced.

27. The end of the movie was near, what was the point of the whole movie??????

28. Seriously, tell me. This was almost aimless.

29. The conflict was there, the team divided, but the reason was a bit forced?????

30. Shocked because the plot was actually simple.

31. There was nothing strong in the plot.

32. This movie was a total bridge. I need to see the next sequel.

33. Just realized I never really liked Captain America movies. The second was fun, but the first was totally out of question. Wouldn't have watched it had I not seen the second one.

34. Capt, you have a big heart to be able to offer help for Tony. Doesn't mean I like you.

Erasing Regrets with "Orange"

Courtesy of image: Google

Orange is a short manga created by Takano Ichigo published in 2012. The story revolves around a group of friends who received a letter from their future selves, telling them to erase the regrets related with the death of their friend in common. Bittersweet; both the plot and the tone of the drawings used by the mangaka contributed to the beauty of the story.

My friend introduced me to Orange. She said that it was cool and all, and it was short, so it wouldn't take much of my time to finish it. It was indeed short, consisting of only 22 chapters (compare it with Naruto--about 700 chapters!), and indeed, it didn't take me more than half a day to devour it. What she didn't tell me was how sad this would be and how it would affect me in ways I had not expected.

Because the main characters were high school students, and the story started with this main female character who received letter from her future self--for God's sake--I thought, "Ah, this would be another typical shoujo manga." It would be sweet, and it would be full of love, vigorous. Very much like Proposal Daisakusen (dorama, 2007). However, soon it was proven otherwise, as the story took a rather dark twist with suicidal potential.

Well, I won't spoil the story. You really should read it for yourselves if you're a fellow masochistic, who likes to abuse your own feelings, because this book will bring you to tears. My friend actually has a great advice to read this: grab your blanket, cover yourself, and read it alone. Of course, do not read it at the office. Seriously, who is stupid enough to read a melancholic story at the office??? Where people could see them cry??? I was dumb.

Anyway, because it's me, what I want to share is the message I thought this manga tried to convey. After reading it, it occurred to me that probably this was about how to be more sensitive to people with depression. Those main characters were high school students; for sure their main concern was themselves. They were living the time of their life. Unfortunately, the fleeting happiness of high school turned into regrets for them in the future. They tried to erase those regrets, to save their friend, from the inevitable death. Hence, the letters.

The way they treat this certain friend changed after receiving the letters. They became more sensitive to his feelings, his action, his choices. . .and they became wary with how they behave around him because it could affect him ever so slightly. They encouraged and supported him. I believe this is important.

As a loud and straightforward person, I realized I may have overlooked someone's voice. I was not sure of what had happened to me, but somehow I turn out to be a person who expects other people to be as 'loud' as me; to be as straightforward and honest with their wants and needs. I don't think being myself is wrong, but I do believe I have to listen more. There's more than meets the eyes.

After all, even if you don't save someone from depression, at the very least you can make the day a happy day for people. You don't want to regret it sometimes in the future.

5/5 for Takano Ichigo for turning a 22 chapters ride into a simultaneously beautiful and meaningful reading!

Rereading Myself

Instead of rereading myself, I should've named the title "Rereading What I Wrote On My Previous Post." I wrote that piece while being mad, or, quoting myself, enraged about what is happening in Indonesia. Of course, it turned out to be an unprofessional, nonintellectual long rant that even I doubt the causes and effects mentioned were actually causal. Shouldn't have so easily related Indonesia's fear and hatred toward LGBTQ with Indonesia's forceful censorship on TV. My bad. I was naive and immature (I still can't guarantee I'm over that, but we all grow up everyday, and enough sleep always helps).

This is 2016, and it feels like London in 1988. How do I know it when I am still 23? Well, Alan Moore in 1988 voiced exactly what it feels like to be in a situation like this: "The government has expressed a desire to eradicate homosexuality, even as an abstract concept, and one can only speculate as to which minority will be the next legislated against." And if this general statement is not enough, he added a personal statement that also speaks for me: "I'm thinking of taking my family and getting out of this country soon, sometime over the next couple of years. It's cold and it's mean spirited and I don't like it here anymore." Although the family to which I refer would not be my husband and children, and Indonesia is definitely not cold, the rest of the sentence works well to describe what's been accumulating in my head. Thank you, Alan Moore, and your preface for V for Vendetta (1989). 

Indonesia has it more or less the same now with U.K. then. Only it was Christianity, not Islam, that stood as the grounding rule. As I have mentioned in my previous post, Abrahamic religions rule homosexuality as sinful. This newly discovered fact about which you can read all in Wikipedia (of course, if you're looking for some strong facts backed by evidence and legal historical record, never put your faith in Wikipedia--I have nothing against the page, but it is editable. Meaning anyone can alter the content. Helpful, but not reliable) makes me rethink of how public figures and much-publicized institutions shape religions in the eyes of the society. London was famous for its Christianity as well as Indonesia (or I should say, Jakarta and the surrounding areas) is famous for our Islam.

I don't know how people perceive these religions then and now, but I do know that it will be small wonder if there are people who think Islam is too dominant in Indonesia. I mean, the public figures and institutions here truly have no chill. Referring to (again) my previous post, I have described how it is here and now--childish instant reaction to things they don't understand. 

Anyway, I will not make this about religion. Religions are religions, with their set of rules. They are neither to be challenged nor are they to be altered to suit our own needs and wants. The only thing that sadly turns religions into reasons for judging other people is that they are open to interpretation. It just so happens that sometimes, the people who interpret it become the face of the religion--while in the process, smudging its purity and kindness.

Regarding the LGBTQ issue, because the authorities has called it out as sinful, there has been a publication from Indonesia Broadcasting Commission about the prohibition from displaying transgender women and related behavior on TV. A mosque for transgender community in Jogjakarta is closed. Hate speech mushroomed. An ex-minister tweeted a misinterpreted/incompletely interpreted hadith allowing the killing of transgender people. It is dangerous, what these public figures could do with their hastily shallow understanding about their own faith and their own people.

I said I will not make this about religion. However, it is almost unavoidable to see that amidst this controversy about LGBTQ, a strong sense of Islamic solidarity is formed among the majority of Indonesians. It is natural, I must say. After all, Islam is against homosexuality (right, about that, I'm trying to say this, but. . .yeah, I can't help myself: Islam is against homosexuality, true, but Islam is never against embracing people. Go, read some history on Islam. Read the story of our Prophet Muhammad [PBUH] and tell me it isn't right. You will know what I'm suggesting here). 

I cannot say that this solidarity and this sudden re-realization of "Islamic values" are directly related to censorship in media (or even if it is related at all), but before you know it, everywhere things are blurred. Censorship at its best. It has been disturbing for quite some times since they decided to censor cigarettes and even the slightest cleavage on TV, but only recently I found out they also made up their mind to censor guns. In a frenzy action movie culture, censoring guns means mosaics here and there. Still, what blew everyone's mind was these two outrageous censorship: the one on cartoons and the one on kebaya, our own traditional dress. The skirt worn by Shizuka from Doraemon is considered too short (she is a 5-year-old). The bikini worn by Sandy from Spongebob Squarepants is considered inappropriate (she is a squirrel). The kebaya worn by the beauty pageant contestants is considered showing too much skin (. . . .it is our own traditional attire?).

Whether or not Islamic values are related to this unfortunate event, what happens happens. As insane as it is, this is the face of Indonesian media these days: frightened by women's body. Pardon the use of words; I am a woman and I am offended. Cigarettes are dangerous for our health, as it is scientifically proven. Guns are dangerous because it is a weapon, it harms people and breaks things. Is women's body dangerous? If you say so with whatever reason you might have (apart from religion, because it is complicated to elaborate women's position in Islam and it will need a whole another post), congratulations. You see the world through men's eyes. As Naomi Wolf said, "Beauty provokes harassment, the law says, but it looks through men's eyes when deciding what provokes it." (The Beauty Myth, 1990). If any, women's body are dangerous for themselves. Some men are so used to having excuses justifying women's objectification.

You might challenge me and argue, "You said 'apart from religion', which means it can be that these censorship guys censored TV according to rules set in religions! We see this from religions' eyes, you insolent writer!" Well, think again. Which religion forbids women from showing their skin? If your answer is Islam, think again. Is Indonesia an Islamic country? The majority of us are Muslims, I know, but is it an Islamic country? Is Indonesian law supposedly rooted from Islamic rules? You just gotta think and think again. Indonesia is home to diversity. Different languages, skin colors, religions, beliefs, norms, social values, lifestyles. There is never a rule that says majority is law. You know, you might think I'm kafir by now, and I disrespect Islam by wearing hijab while having an opinion like this. It's fine. I'm a Muslim neither because of nor for you (that, if I'm a Muslim at all; you and I both know only Allah can pass someone as a true Muslim). 

All in all, again, I made this too intertwined with religion (okay, Islam). But, really, you cannot talk about these two issues without relating it with Islam. The country that was once famous for its friendly pluralism is no longer. And sometimes, to me, it is as if the government forget that they are the leaders of diverse people--they play favorites with only some groups. Coincidentally, it is Islam. Still, recalling the history of LGBTQ in London, I doubt this parade will last for long. The same goes for women's objectification. 

What is happening!?

I cannot stay silent about the fear and condemnation of women's bodies in media around here. From Ke$ha's denied plea to be released of her contract, to Indonesia's extreme censorship on TV... there are too many unhappy things about women's place in the world.

Gender issues (right, because this is not exclusively about feminism; this is also about the recent popularity of LGBTQ) are surfacing in this world. Last year, America has ruled same-sex marriage as legal. For a so-called free country, I should say, it is not something that raises questions (or eyebrows). It doesn't change their foundation, which is--should it be underlined--"freedom for all." However, it doesn't take a freakishly intelligent person to tell that the move will change the whole world. Or at least Indonesia.

For all my life, and I'm in my early 20s, I have always known America as the Capital of the World. It is the center of film industry, of technology, of politics, of fashion... and as of late, of its attention on humanity issues. FYI, this humanity issues include attention on same-sex relationship. It was not the first country to legalize same-sex marriage, but it was America. Sooner or later, it will change something. The perspectives. The paradigm. The courage to change and speak up.

It just has to be that in Indonesia, it happened sooner rather than later, because earlier this year, there emerged, from a national university, a study group that supposedly discuss about LGBTQ and how to be a part of LGBTQ and deal with both themselves and the society within which they live.  Of course, the university was quick in disclaiming the group, saying that it had never asked for their permission in using the uni's name--and, in the process, severing any relationship between them. The university cannot be held responsible for the radical event.

What, radical, you say? Yes. So, you see, Indonesia is not the U.S. Its legal foundation is the faith to the one and only God. Plus, the majority of the population is Muslims. Same-sex relationship is haraam in Islam. I am a born Muslim. Believe me, I know. It's true. But I'm here neither to persuade you readers (if there's any) to go against LGBTQ, nor am I here to ask you to challenge my own religion. No.

I am here simply because I am enraged of what is happening.

The "coming out" of aforementioned sexuality study group (which, tbh, I am totally interested to join, since, in case you're not paying attention, it provides space to study sexuality; NOT, as what some people strongly believe, promoting LGBTQ--come on, people, be open-minded!) was thought to be an insignificant, seemingly fleeting problem. Especially, since the related uni has publicly disclaimed it.

Unfortunately, some people just cannot let go (and I cannot blame them, truly) because they are concerned with the well-being of their children in the future. To put it simply, this is considered as a rotten image of today's generation (if not another sign of how doomsday is near), and now is a rotten era.

Dicussions were held, both among peers and on TV. I watched it, once. I saw a journalist around my age, a woman, a hijabi, speaking out about freedom--and pretty much what people who have studied humanities would say. Needless to say, I agreed with her. Man, she wasn't even trying to convince anyone. She simply stated her opinion... and she received a counterattack in the form of a raised, emotional, provocative voice (at least that's how it sounded to my ears) by people who doubtfully know anything about humanities at all.

It is, however, saddening to bear the fact that the majority of this country are the ones with that difference. This position of power makes differences more than simply what they are. What began as different stands on LGBTQ ends up as a set of boundaries separating the characteristics of men and women. If I hadn't known better, they seem like a frightened little children who hate something alien to them; little children who fear and avoid what they don't understand. Or are they, really?

Anyway, the boundaries of men and women spell stereotype. And here is where it is connected to feminism, simply because its movements are the ones that soundly fight for gender equality. With the stereotypes coming back, women's objectification comes along. And with that, the second sex situation all over again. TV shows are imposed with drastic censorship, to the point where the slightest bit of skin showing is decorated with mozaics even in cartoon movies. Then also, what blew everyone's mind, the skin of our beauty queens on their beauty contest, while wearing our traditional kebaya. Then, Indonesian Broadcasting Commission publicly published prohibitions to TV stations from displaying males dressed, act, and speak in females manner. Then a mosque for "waria" (men crossdressing as women) was forced to close. It is as if GENDER STEREOTYPES are stressed in almost every aspect in media because we fear we will forget them, and we will turn into LGBTQ once we forget.

Look, I know this piece of writing is not organized and not very comprehensive. You might not even understand what I'm writing. So here's the point of me ranting on and on and wasting your precious minutes: I am enraged (yep, highlighting my feeling) that some people are so tangled in this gender issue without even knowing what gender issue really is. They got a glimpse of the world beyond them, they were not ready... and they pass judgment while looking at that world through their tinted eyeglasses. Again, I'm not asking you to challenge my own religion (this is because Islam is the only religion I mentioned which actually forbids same-sex relationship, while actually it is also forbidden in other Abrahamic religions); I'm just asking you, readers, to learn a bit about humanity without filtering it with any values you may have hold before. You can change your mind after learning it, you can stay with your own perspectives. . . but you can at least learn before you freaked out and condemning I'm, and people like me, kafir.

I am not a part of LGBTQ because I, a woman, like men. It does not mean I am normal and they aren't. It simply means we are different. I am not suggesting to promote or to empower the groups supporting LGBTQ. It does not mean I would ban and/or condescend them. I just let them be. I would not alter the world to suit my values. And regarding the extreme censorship. . . well, I must say it is stupid. I watched the same movies when I was younger, the same movies they now censor but then didn't, and I didn't have any weird thoughts. Truly, censoring it only makes people wonder what's behind those disturbing small boxes that give people the wrong idea of what's really going on. For this, I have something to say: "the pot calling the kettle black." Censoring everything means those people are assuming other people see what they see, which means they are probably the most perverted ones in the whole country.

Review: Come on, Cinderella.

When I heard that there is a live action remake of Disney's Cinderella, I had hoped for a plot twist like they did with Maleficent. But, alas, what I got was a two-hours of beautiful dresses and a tale of a girl who was too kind for her own good.

Perhaps this was because I'm a skeptic and I don't believe pure kindness can get you anywhere at all. There's a fine line between kind and stupid, and Ella was more to the stupid side. She couldn't stand up for herself, she couldn't say no, she couldn't protect the house she kept saying she loved for her mother and father... so what did she actually do for good? She waited for the right prince to come and sweep her off her feet. Only then was she able to chin up and waltz out of the house. 

There was an additional scene where Ella and the Prince met in the forest for the first time. I don't know if it was meant to show that the Prince fell for Ella's natural beauty/charming wit in contrast with the original version where they met for the first time at the ballroom with Cinderella wrapped in her all princessy dress, still...

Well said, Elsa! You see, with Frozen and Maleficent, I thought Disney had made a change of direction and is heading to a more women-empowering approach for their movies. However, because of this too high of an expectation, I am disappointed with how Cinderella turned out to be. The additional scene changed next to nothing, especially because her 'wit' was not so much of a wit. "Just because it's what's done, it doesn't mean it should be done" -  really? Sounded like simply quoting from another source. (Okay, maybe I'm too harsh. I know it was supposed to refer to the tradition of princes marrying princesses because in the end, Kit the Prince disobeyed the tradition and married Ella the commoner). 

Speaking of wit (and advice), the "Have courage and be kind" advice from Ella's mother seemed to be ignored by Ella in most of her life because simply, none of her action after her father died represented courage and kindness. She couldn't say no, so it wasn't kindness. She was okay being moved to the attic, so it wasn't courage. She remained quiet while being treated less than what she deserved so it wasn't a form of kindness - it was stupidity and cowardice. The only time she was able to say no to her stepmother was when the Prince came to her house and officially asked for her to see him.

I had expected too much... Part of me had expected to see a breathtaking and mind-shaking retelling like the one Intan Paramaditha did in Perempuan Buta Tanpa Ibu Jari. Another part of me had expected more elaboration on the step-family's characters, but even that they didn't do. However, I couldn't blame Disney because Cinderella is one of the most famous classic story, and despite the truth that she is no princess, the truest princess with all the magic and transformation.

Probably even Disney doesn't have the heart to ruin Cinderella's magically happy ending for their audience.

Courtesy of images: Google

The Whole of Two Haikus

#1
Grey winter sky hid
the sun and stars and glory
But now - it is spring!

#2
For the boy, the rain
fell; flowers bloomed; animals
sang; nature, too, smiled

Season

the change of season
turns hearts restless, expectant
though beauty awaits

August Sky

a clear august sky
day, it is bright and bluish
night, it is starry

A Monsoon Midnight

a monsoon midnight
reluctant and hesitant
and to us, distant

Dandellion

now the flower blooms
a dandellion, that is
floating after him

Spring

the spring comes and goes
in front of my watching eyes
it seems I am late

Disillusioned

I miss the idea
Of you and what we can be
I wish you do, too

Review: "Reluctant Fundamentalist" by Mohsin Hamid

 

Last year, I have written an amateurish review of the Reluctant Fundamentalist movie. It mesmerized me so much that I had wanted to read the book that inspired it until recently, I was able to get my hands on the book. 

As mesmerizing as the movie, the book was a strong voice of someone almost directly damaged by the 9/11 tragedy - that is, Changez's voice. The narration was so sophisticated - that of a well-educated man with high culture - and it made me rethink my first impression of the movie. For a moment, I almost thought the movie was a vulgar interpretation of the book. What I meant by vulgar was that the movie has failed to bring the rich and sophisticated voice Changez had. It turned him into another immigrant pursuing his American dream. The very culture Changez brought with him wasn't felt. But that's the thing with interpretation; it depends on each person. I just happen to have different interpretation with the director of the movie.

By mentioning that, I have shown you how I feel toward the book. It awed me. But then again, I'm a book-person, so you can tell I'm a bit biased (for someone who discussed adaptation theory in her thesis, I have to admit the sin of comparing the book and the movie to find the better one is unforgivable - but please do! This is, after all, my preference. I will not do such thing were I to compare them in analytical term).

On the other hand, I realized many interesting things in the book, such as the possibility that Erica was the symbol of America, and so Changez's relationship with Erica symbolized his relationship with America. When I watched the movie, I was quite confused to relate the two relationships. The book gave better illustrations. The simultaneous recollections of the relationship with Erica and America was clear when it was shown that Erica suffered from severe nostalgia regarding her relationship with Chris. What followed was an explanation of how America seemed to have gone back to its postwar condition with the patriotism and devotion after the 9/11. (Considering this, the way Erica used Changez as her model/art object in the movie might meant that that was how America treated the Pakistanis after the tragedy: as something distant, something observable, displayed in the name of preservation. Erica in the movie, after all, seemed to have wanted to preserve her relationship with Changez.)

Another thing I realized is the significance of beard (outer appearance) of a certain race. I have read an analysis on Reluctant Fundamentalist about how beard has something to do with forming your identity, not just a facial accessory. It's a blessing that the world today seemed to not consider outer appearance as a matter so huge. . . since things like prejudice and stereotyping are now our concern (or could it be that I'm naive? After all, I don't live in America.)

I will not go deeper into this; I'm sure someone has analyze it somewhere (or if no one has, I would explain it properly in my analysis later). All in all, the book is great and it affects me so much, both in the content and the writing style. As a person whose dream is to be a writer, Mohsin Hamid's writing style is one of those I wish to be able to use (another one is Hamka's). Who knows I might write a novel about Indonesia in such a sophisticated and rich tone? 

(REVIEW) "Reluctant Fundamentalist": Facts Flooring

Terrorism has been very closely related to Muslim, at least in the United States post-9/11 living hell. Books, articles, songs, and even movies have taken their part in recording and repackaging the tragedy... with one of the most well-known: "My Name Is Khan", starring Shahrukh Khan. Some still think terrorism is Islam, while others start to reconsider their thought.

"Reluctant Fundamentalist" (2013) is another movie bringing up the issue of terrorism. However, instead of focusing on who's to blame, this extraordinary movie flashes the spotlight on both sides of coin. Adapted from Mohsin Hamid's novel under the same title, the story revolves around a man named Changez Khan, pre- and post-9/11.

As the movie's played, you will find your thoughts swayed between blaming the Pakistanis or judging the Americans. Changez was a rising star in his American company before the WTC bombing occurred. Following the event are drastic changes in Changez' life. There are scenes where Changez seems so unfairly judged just because he looks like a part of the supposedly terrorist's racial clan. Other scenes, however, show how rough the Pakistanis can be for receiving poor treatment from their fellow Americans. This, especially, is shown by Changez' change of behavior.

Overall, this movie talks about how an event which, at first, believed irrelevant can really turn one's life upside down. Then, there is also a talk about identity. Indeed, Changez has his life turned upside down just because he comes from the same race with the terrorists. Too bad, no matter how hard he tries to show his colleagues that not all of them Arabs are ruthless, people already distant themselves from Changez.

"Reluctant Fundamentalist" is one of the successful movie to be wishy-washily neutral. It can be confusing more often than not, but it surely is great. This movie surely deserves to be glorified. Be them facts or fiction, this movie has shown the 'truth' of the 9/11 effect without preferring any sides. So, folks, stop whatever it is you're doing right now and go grab your copy to see how Changez deals with things!

(Courtesy of image: Google)