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.

My Hogwarts House

Not exactly a Potterhead, but who doesn't like Harry Potter? I've always been proud of my bold and daring quality and of the fact that I've always been sorted into Gryffindor whenever I took the Sorting Hat Quiz at the web. . .but when I took the official one at Pottermore, it turned out I'm a Slytherin!

Now, I know - Slytherin is considered the evil house! With Voldemort and Malfoy being the graduates of Slytherin, not to mention Crabbe and Goyle and Pansy, it's hard to imagine someone wants to be a Slytherin. However, once sorted into it, I take pride in being a Slytherin. We are, after all, cunning, ambitious, resourceful, determined, and shrewd. And you cannot just forget Snape's sincerity and Malfoy's innocence (that's right - I think he's the one who's actually confused about what he wants in the whole series; we all have been there). Plus, despite being evil, Voldemort is actually brilliant. We have to admit that. He won't be the Dark Lord just by existing!

Anyway, here's to all proud Slytherin! 

Quarter-life Crisis

Reaching the peak of our 20s (plus the fact that we are all so sinfully ambitious), my friends and I are probably facing our biggest quater-life crisis right now: the choices. 

For me, it always starts with the longing to escape from my job. You see, I'm working my second job. Unlike my first job as a teacher, I love it here. I love translating movies, I love the friends (although you really can't love everyone), I love the routine. It is all perfect except for the shifting (from which I finally managed to escape due to a case with a night company driver) and the management (which is unfitting its famous name), and sometimes the ones who got away (you know, the would-be friends but drifted apart with spite once we encountered the, ahem, night company driver-case). Sometimes it occurs to me that I might be an escapist who simply doesn't like authority, with little trust to people and quick to judge. But it is not for me to say so; it's your job to judge me as I other people. Be honest, we live in a judgmental world.

Anyway, my friends (with each to their own reasons) and I then went to the same intersection that leads to the desire to pursue higher education. Why education? I don't know. My reasons include the confusion of what I really am doing with my life. I feel incapable, lost, stuck, unfulfilled, dissatisfied, and generally unhappy. I noticed, of course, that this is not only my problem. Some people try to provide reasons. I agree to some of them: the conviction that I can do better--I can be at a better place, I am destined to be great, not just another employee in another company--more often than not, backfires. It becomes a burden.

20s is the age of deadlines. Perhaps this deadline's extended to our 30s, but sooner or later it will end. Name it. Marriage, family, education, career... most people want theirs to settle before 30, 35.  In our quarter-life, that leaves us with only 5-10 years. Meanwhile, there are lots of things we want to pursue and those things are no longer the small stuff like the highest grade in class or the books we want to buy. We want a partner in love, not just husband or wife. We want the romance as well as the punctuality. We want a family before we're too old to do anything. We want to learn, to study, to travel, and to know the world. We were told that we can. We want to keep concerning ourselves with issues in life, be it social or humanities or scientific. We want to become a part of the world; we want to contribute. We want to climb our stairs career-wise. We have big dreams, but it all takes time.

I want to study culture and gender and feminism and theology and Islam and media and film and advertising and journalism and creative writing and literature, but I can't study them all. I have to have one focus to pursue. Would I rather pursue practical skills that can be put to work, or pursue what I am passionate about? In a rare case, someone can be so lucky so as to find a string connecting the two. If I pursue the practical skills, will I be happy once I get them to work? If I pursue my passion, will it provide for my life? Would I rather be idealistic or realistic? Can't I be both?

When I finally decided I want to pursue higher education first (because I haven't found the perfect workplace and I haven't had anyone with me to marry), I was faced with yet another set of options. Such was described in previous paragraphs. I made up my mind, or I thought I did, to study Creative Industries. The path is clear. I'm working in media industries as a translator (which can actually lead to two directions: media and/or translation) and I am interested in the relationship between media and culture. Creative Industries major has answers for them. However, it asks me: what will I focus on? I can't just study for the sake of studying. I don't have the answer yet.

I put misery to my life by overthinking it, as usual, and it confuses me too much. I'm not used to not having answers. I am a good student. I'm sure I can follow the classes diligently and successfully, but I'm not used to having to find my own question and answer. What will I do in life? What will I contribute to Indonesia, to the school, to my community? What will I give in return of the money the scholarship will invest on me? Giving answers would be easy; following up and be sincere wouldn't. I can't just say I want this to give me back my self-esteem and satisfy my thirst for knowledge (which will be an honest thing to say).

Anyway, in the midst of confusion, an offer came that almost immediately pull me and my life that way. There's this girl, who is a friend of a friend of mine, who used to test me for novel translation. I contacted her after I decided to quit my current job. Surprisingly, she offers me another novel translation project and even proposes that I become her proofreader next month. Being a proofreader/editor/translator has always been more interesting to me than I want to admit. It seems a simple task, but I truly enjoy it. It is practical, too, so I won't have to worry about not having a job. It is a concrete and sought after job. Without a second thought, I accepted her proposal. It could be a fulfilling freelance job while I complete my requirements for the scholarship. Killing two birds with one stone.

As if it is not enough a joy to hear, she read my CV and saw that I have published a fiction teen literature. She told me she's an editor at a well-known publishing company and encouraged me to send her my novel drafts, if any. She said she would love to edit and revise it if it's deemed worthy of publishing.

Oh, God, mercy!

It's a dream I have gradually forgotten. Buried in my deepest, silent heart. And my heart is never not noisy. I never thought it would come again like a new wounded flesh. So real and so close and so painful--it reminds me that it is still alive and burning.

Therefore, it is natural that I am drawn to the force of this dream. But while my heart is fluttering at the thought of picking up where I left it off, my conscience tugs at me and says, "What about all the plans you have in mind?" What about all the practical skills I have planned to learn? What about the issues and purposes you have prepared to be the key weapons in the scholarship essays and interviews? What about all the plans you have in mind?

I was never one to just abandon my heart, and all these times, things went great if I follow my heart. Moreover, the older I get, the rarer my heart tells me something. I cannot just refuse to hear what it is telling me now. It is fluttering when it hears the news, for God's sake! This is definitely not something I can just walk past by.

What scares me is that it almost immediately made me think I don't need this media and practical skills. I don't need to pretend I'm interested in cultural policy so much that I want to work in that field (because truly, I am interested in studying and learning all about it, but the prospect of working in that field does not appeal to me, like, at all). I am not ambitious to pursue a career in media.

But how much can I profit from writing fictions? If I'm J.K. Rowling, it would probably be enough for life.

I can always translate things. It is so tempting to just take a class and get certification for translation. I can edit books and papers. And then I'll get back to writing stories. I can probably get some published. I can always be an interpreter if I grow tired of seeing papers and documents. I can just take another class of interpretation. Or I can pursue a major in translation, although I still don't think it should happen anytime soon. Or probably I can take a major in literature. You know, studying world literature to see how other countries represent their culture in the books and all the pieces of writings. I can find some ways to represent Indonesia to the eyes of the world. I don't want to be a lecturer... but probably it's for the best? Or I can just be a researcher in Indonesian literature?

You see, I set my heart to writing and publishing and I want to try my best to make something out of it. I know I will, eventually. But it takes time to really break it down and find the concrete answers and then explain it to my parents, because I know they expect the best from me. And they think I'm not destined to be just another somebody. At least, my father does. He sees me as a minister of everything wonderful and foreign and influential. He sees me as a boss of a start-up, promising company. He sees me as a manager from a well-known corporate. He sees me as someone I think I can, but I'm not sure if I want to, become.

Oh, he'll accept my explanation, for sure, but it is scary to see the slight disappointment in his eyes if I seem to be unsure of my future, or if that future is something he does not understand. Still, in this quarter-life, I have to admit I don't know many things. I don't know if this is the right way or that is the correct path instead, or if my life will be prosperous in the future. I'm not good at planning. I don't know the answer to everything, and everything might not go according to plan. And sometimes I don't even know what I want.

It's a lie when they say teenage period is the period of confusion. 

Menanggapi LGBT

Boleh, ya, saya sekali-sekali sok-sok cerdas bicara tentang isu yang sedang marak di dunia ini. Tentu saja, ini sebenarnya masalah dunia pertama. Dunia yang isunya berupa isu kemanusiaan. Dunia yang tidak lagi dipermasalahkan lapar dan kemiskinan dan perang dengan negara tetangga... atau bahkan dengan sesama saudara. Ah, tetapi tidak apa. Toh isu ini sekarang sudah menjadi masalah pula bagi masyarakat Indonesia. Khususnya, dengan semakin vokalnya kaum-kaum terpelajar menyuarakan soal toleransi terhadap kaum LGBT. Apalagi, ada SGRC UI.

Saya pertama kali mendengar tentang SGRC UI dari teman saya di grup. "Di UI lagi rame bahas support buat LGBT, tuh," katanya. Lalu, teman-teman lain turut berpartisipasi dalam percakapan itu dengan memberikan gambar-gambar pamflet dan bukan pamflet yang kurang-lebih menggambarkan apa itu SGRC. Intinya, itu adalah kelompok yang mempelajari seksualitas dan membuka konsultasi/dukungan bagi yang membutuhkan. Beberapa orang di pamflet itu digambarkan sebagai bagian dari kelompok LGBT. Ada yang gay, panseksual... pokoknya segala kelompok LGBT. Oh, iya, bagi yang tidak tahu, LGBT bukan serta-merta gay saja. Banyak kelompok seksualitas lainnya.

SGRC UI kontroversial karena dua hal:

1. Mengangkat isu yang sensitif bagi masyarakat Indonesia.
2. Mencatut nama UI.

Untuk masalah kedua, UI segera mengeluarkan press release yang menyatakan bahwa SGRC tidak meminta izin aktivitas pada UI, dan karenanya tidak berhak mencatut nama UI. Dengan adanya press release itu, orang tahu bahwa SGRC bukan bagian dari UI.

Bagi saya dan teman teman, yang sudah belajar ilmu kemanusiaan dan cenderung terbuka/toleran terhadap LGBT, masalah sudah selesai. Kami tahu Indonesia belum siap, atau mungkin tidak akan siap, menerima LGBT sebagai hal lumrah. Tentu saja, penerimaan dan kesiapan toleransi terhadap LGBT bukan berarti lebih bagus atau lebih baik. Hanya memang karakter Indonesia yang erat dengan agama (apalagi sila pertamanya menganut Ketuhanan yang Maha Esa), tidak memungkinkannya menerima LGBT. Kami sebagai warga Indonesia yang beragama, tentu punya larangan tersendiri mengenai cinta sesama jenis (dan cinta sesama jenis adalah bentuk LGBT yang paling marak terdengar).

Namun, penerimaan dan kesiapan toleransi terhadap LGBT juga bukan berarti lebih buruk. Saya belajar tentang rasisme dan feminisme. Keduanya dimulai dari kecenderungan menuju homogenitas (saya pernah membahas ini dalam post tahun lalu). Kulit putih tidak menyukai kulit hitam karena mereka berbeda; dianggap lebih barbar, dianggap bukan manusia yang setara. Begitu pula dengan perempuan. Laki-laki beranggapan perempuan bukan manusia yang punya hak suara sebesar mereka. Karena alasan itulah, kulit hitam dan perempuan sempat dilarang memiliki hak yang sama dengan kaum satunya.

Bagi saya, kaum LGBT sekarang juga menerima perlakuan yang sama dengan perempuan dan kulit hitam. Mereka minoritas, maka diperlakukan berbeda. Kadang, saya melihat ini tidak ada bedanya dengan masalah kaum-kaum minoritas sebelumnya. Oleh karena itu, saya mengerti pentingnya toleransi dalam hal ini.

Toleransi saya, sejauh ini, berupa pengabaian. Jika saya tahu ada orang yang gay, atau ada orang transgender, saya tidak terlalu ambil pusing. Itu hidup mereka, bukan hidup saya. Siapa saya untuk menghakimi mereka? Bukan saya yang nanti akan menghisab amal mereka. Saya bukan Tuhan. Pemikiran saya ini akhirnya menunjukkan pola pikir saya yang beragama lebih ke sifat spiritualnya--hubungannya dengan Tuhan. Dalam sebagian dunia saya, orang-orang seumuran saya (20-an tahun) yang saya kenal, saya rasa kurang-lebih sama. Agama menjadi urusan pribadi yang tidak bisa dihakimi, tidak juga bisa menghakimi. Masing-masing saja.

Namun, ada juga sebagian dunia saya yang lain, dunia dengan orang tua saya dan sebagian orang-orang lain, yang tidak bisa saya abaikan. Pada bagian ini, aspek ritual agama-lah yang ditonjolkan. Katanya, jika saya biarkan LGBT, yang menurut agama merupakan penyimpangan sesat, artinya saya sama saja dengan kaum LGBT. Sama berdosanya, sama sesatnya, sama menyimpangnya. Semasa saya belajar ilmu kemanusiaan, saya sering berdebat soal ini pada ayah saya. Jadilah saya anak durhaka. Anak menyimpang. Dulu saya merasa ayah saya bodoh karena tidak mengerti. Melihat dunia terlalu hitam-putih. Apalagi jika bicara soal kebenaran.

Seiring pertambahan usia, saya mulai melihat dari kacamata ayah saya. Bahwa agama bukan sesuatu yang bisa dilepas begitu saja dari kehidupan. Saat kemarin teman saya cerita bahwa dia bertuhan, bukan beragama... saya membatin, saya pernah seperti itu. KTP saya bilang saya Islam, tapi sesungguhnya saya bertuhan. Bukan beragama. Hubungan saya dengan Tuhan adalah hubungan spiritual, bukan ritual. Tapi saya kemudian berkaca: jika saya Muslimah, saya tidak bisa hanya bertuhan. Saya harus beragama, dan beragama berarti mengadopsi juga aturan-aturannya.

Kembali ke soal LGBT. Jika begini jadinya, habislah saya dalam dilema saat menanggapi LGBT. Saya yang satu bisa menanggapinya dari sisi kemanusiaan (di mana saya melihat ketiadaan toleransi terhadap kaum LGBT adalah bentuk masalah kecenderungan homogenitas umat manusia), saya yang satu bisa pula menanggapinya dari sisi agama (paling tidak, sebaiknya mengingatkan bahwa itu dianggap menyimpang).

Belum ada solusi mengenai bagaimana menjembatani isu LGBT dengan eratnya agama di Indonesia. Mungkin akan ada, tapi saya tidak mau terlalu optimis. Saya yakin, bukan hanya saya yang menemukan masalah ini menimbulkan dilema. Kami warga Indonesia sedang belajar menemukan jalan--kami sedang bertanya-tanya tentang kemanusiaan dan tentang agama. Semoga tidak perlu ada pertentangan ekstrem jika kedua sisi itu tidak lagi bisa berkompromi.

Some thoughts on "IMPULSE FOR THE HOMOGENOUS"

Last week I googled collective sadism for my writing project and found this:

The Hatred of Nations

Basically it is about how the "impulse for the homogenous", or the tendency toward homogeneity, drives nations to hatred toward other nations (but do read the article and correct me if I got it wrong). 

I read the article and it was not about the hatred of nations that I understood; instead, it was about how the impulse for the homogenous is probably the core of almost all major problems we face today (and older days).

Name it. Racism, gender inequality, religions intolerance... these are only some of the problems I am sure we are all familiar with. Racism is strongly related to America, be it back in the days or today in its post-racial issues, but it also happened in Indonesia with the alienated Chinese people. Gender inequality, on the other hand, is an issue that is still hotly debated. People have long started to realize the importance of gender equality - proven with the ever-growing feminism - but then there's its counterstrike: meninism. I don't know if the phenomenon is a match for years of feminism growth, but it could be the beginning. Then there's religions intolerance, my favorite subject, which is the most visible major problem in Indonesia. It is tragic really, considering Indonesia was once regarded as a diverse and tolerant country. 

After reading the first article (The Hatred of Nations), I rethought my understanding about these problems and realize that it is likely that they were caused by the same impulse for the homogenous. For racism, it is clear that white people strongly disliked the different skin color. Actually, it wasn't dislike they started with. It started with the thought that the color difference meant different place on Earth, creating some sort of caste system, because there was the arrogance of white supremacy. In Indonesia, on the other hand, the racism against Chinese people wasn't originated from the color difference. It had something to do with political issues and communism, but in the end everything associated with Chinese characteristics (which means including their looks) decided the treatment they received.

Gender inequality was clearly caused by the tendency toward homogeneity because there are judgments toward women: that women are incapable, weak, the second sex. These judgments were made by the other sex, which is obviously male, and since then created an image of what women are. But before we discuss this issue deeper, let's not confuse gender and sex. Putting it simply, sex is male and female (the biological difference; between the one with penis and the one with vagina), and gender is man and woman (the stereotype of male and female's characteristics, that is the masculinity and the femininity). There are people who overgeneralized and associate gender with sex, saying a female must be feminine and a male must be masculine when it actually doesn't always have to be that way. Anyway, the decision that women are the second sex were made by men who thought that their sex was better. Come to think of it, did they really think that being physically stronger and thinking more logically make them the better sex? I don't think of myself as a feminist, but surely I oppose this idea. Back to the topic, I'm just saying that the very own thought that men can judge and put women in their 'place' was probably caused by the very impulse for the homogenous itself. It's basically drawing a bold line between men and women.

And finally we get to the last one: religions intolerance. This, I will based on my conversation with my friend earlier. This is an issue that has long been heard in the world, but only recently did I take notice of it. I think it started in 2012 or so for me. As far as I see, there is no firm ground for religions toleration in Indonesia. Religion has been a sensitive issue for years because it is related to our beliefs. For me, I don't see why people make it a problem because one's belief is related to one's inner self. There is no judge there, there is no standard there, there is no evaluation there. The proof that one has believed correctly is a matter in God's hand and no one but oneself would be there on the Judgment Day (or the Underworld, or the reincarnation circle, or whatever people believe in). Having faith in a religion is like taking an exam for a lifetime. The score comes out in our death. Religion is that simple for me.

Don't fuss and be a prick who preaches right and wrong because you just fucking don't know, but alas, not everyone shares my value. This is so related to that very impulse for the homogenous because some people think their religion is the correct one and thus, any difference is wrong. God, I don't know how many times I should highlight that truth is subjective. People just can't see, can they? This impulse is okay if they just keep it to themselves, yet they have to act on it. They have to exterminate those who are different. If something does not go along with their religious moral compass, they just have to fix it. They do not see that not everyone's moral compasses head the same way. Obviously, this creates a never-ending conflict in Indonesia, especially because some of the majority of Indonesian population are freak fanatics who think they're better than everyone else. Please, like they already have the guarantee of being sent to Heaven. 

Anyway, my point is that the impulse for the homogenous is a scary thing, but it is also a very humane characteristic. I mean, to create these major conflicts, it must be a viral thing. This impulse is not only felt by one or two people; it influences a group of people. No wonder it appears in my Google search for collective sadism. 

* * *

P.S. I just remembered that the Hitler case was also caused by a clear and strong impulse for the homogenous. Really, humans are scary. Even myself scares me.

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

Biggest Villain

Gerald berjalan menuju tempat pembuangan sampah. Sebuah cerita lagi yang dibuang…, batinnya mengeluh. Beberapa hari ini otak Gerald bagaikan knalpot yang tersumbat debu. Lama-lama Gerald bisa meledak.

Kantung hitam berisi bola-bola kertas (jangan bayangkan sesuatu yang indah, itu tidak indah dilihat, percayalah) dilempar ke dalam tempat pembuangan sampah. Gerald tahu beberapa menit lagi truk sampah akan lewat dan mengambil kantung-kantung yang ditumpuk selama satu minggu.

“Kenapa Gerald, kenapa?”

Gerald mendesis dan menggeram pada dirinya sendiri, lebih karena frustrasi daripada karena mulai gila.
Belakangan ini pikirannya tersita oleh Ayumi, cewek yang baru pindah bersama keluarganya di ujung jalan.

Saat Gerald pertama menyadari perasaan itu, dia membayangkan adegan-adegan romantis yang meliputi kencan di pinggir pantai (cheesy, yeah). Tapi apa yang benar-benar bisa dilakukan cowok berusia 10 tahun yang ambisius?

Gerald selalu terfokus pada mimpinya menjadi penulis. Cewek? Ha-ha. Tidak ada penggapai mimpi yang butuh cewek. Cewek hanya gangguan yang banyak bicara dan merusak konsentrasi… dan entah kenapa cewek selalu memaksa cowok untuk berperan jadi ayah yang bertanggung jawab dalam permainan rumah-rumahan mereka. Oke, kau tahu? Gerald punya teori untuk itu: biarkan cowok mencapai dulu mimpi-mimpinya baru dia bisa jadi ayah yang bertanggung jawab. Dalam hal ini, mimpi Gerald menjadi penulis (yang dalam bayangannya akan jadi sangat kaya dan terkenal).

Gerald kembali ke kamarnya.

Aneh, monster-monster di kepalanya tidak mau keluar. Biasanya itu yang menjadi petunjuk bagi Gerald untuk menulis. Gerald akan memegang kuasa atas monster-monster itu dan menempatkan mereka dimana saja dia suka. Tapi karena kali ini mereka tidak mau keluar, Gerald coba mengecek pesawat tempur dan tentara-tentaranya…

Ya, mereka juga tidak ada. Aneh. Hm, mungkin astronot-astronot berbekal spaghetti darah akan ada.

Biasanya mereka selalu ada.

…Ups, lagi-lagi hening.

Aneh. Kemana mereka semua?

Gerald mengecek dan mengecek ulang isi otaknya, berhati-hati jika mendadak salah satu dari mereka muncul. Tapi tidak ada yang muncul kecuali wajah Ayumi.

“Sial!” keluhnya.

Gerald menggerakkan jemarinya di keyboard, berharap apapun bisa muncul saat dia secara sembarang mengetikkan kata-kata.

Lalu itulah saat Gerald mulai menuliskan tentang Ayumi. Senyum Ayumi. Wajah Ayumi. Wangi Ayumi. Semuanya tentang Ayumi. Dan untuk pertama kalinya Gerald merasa menulis seperti sedang menyanyi.
Saat akhirnya tulisan itu jadi, Gerald merasa berpuas diri. Dia ingin menunjukkan pada Ayumi sebuah mahakaryanya.

“Ya?” Ayumi menyambutnya.

“Baca ini,” ujar Gerald dengan bangga.

Hanya membutuhkan waktu beberapa menit sebelum Ayumi selesai membaca.

“Kau membuatku mati di akhir cerita? Oh, Gerald, dasar cowok! Ini menjijikan!”

Gerald sekarang yakin cewek adalah penjahat terbesar abad ini.

[fin]

Catatan: Ini adalah cerita yang saya tulis di tahun pertama saya kuliah.  

Haiku

I've known the existence of haiku for long, but it's not until recently that I understand its rules. Now that I am familiar with it, I'm experimenting on my own haiku.

The thing with haiku is that instead of rhymes, it has 5-7-5 rule. The numbers stand for the number of syllables in each line, three lines for each haiku. The theme is (usually, I guess) the Mother Nature, though I'm not sure how strict this last rule is.

I've tried writing five haiku. They're open for interpretation, but each holds a special meaning for me. Now, since showing them all at once would not be interesting, I will publish one each day starting from the next one.

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)