Teater Koma

SALOMO TOBING

Ariel Heryanto

Since it was founded (1977), Teater Koma has been abundant in praise. The flood of praise was rife back in a number of obituaries for its founder and leader who had just died, Nano Riantiarno (1947-2023). What is the most special about Teater Koma? What is the relevance of its contribution to Indonesia's future?

Teater Koma is popular because of its humor, costumes and accessories. Criticism of the ruler is packed in a relaxed way. The highest praise for Teater Koma has been fixed on its long survival. In my opinion, there are far more special things than Teater Koma, but are neglected by the public. Teater Koma is one of the few examples of accurate answers for big questions that haunt Indonesia for more than a century about national identity.

Throughout the 20th century, the discussion about Indonesian identity is trapped by a series of dichotomies. For example, tradition versus modern, East versus West, or native versus foreign. Such dichotomy still continues until now with various other terms. Look at the debate about criminal law, serious violations of human rights, clothing for women, employment relations and sex ethics.

Also read:

> Nano Riantiarno Reached the Culmination

Since Indonesia’s independence, the dichotomy of traditional theater versus modern theater has dominated most of the historical discussions and the dynamics of performing arts. In the 1980s, artists and cultural observers felt they had found the right answers to solve the problem. Elements of traditional and modern theater were mated in a format that was popularly called "new tradition." The names of Rendra, Putu Wijaya and Nano Riantiarno were said to be their pioneering figures.

However, the concept of this new tradition remains problematic. Understandably, the concept was composed of a distorted framework of "tradition" and "modernity," as if both things are a kind of object, symptom or reality that is intact, independent and separate. The defect of the concept of the new tradition can be understood from two angles.

KOMPAS/RIZA FATHONI

Theater Koma plays "J.J City Trash" at Graha Bhakti Budaya, Taman Ismail Marzuki, Jakarta, Thursday (7/11/2019).

First, hybridity is not new. This is a common symptom, wherever and whenever local traditions or global modernity are hybrid. Second, even though mated in the new tradition, the dualism of tradition and modernity remains to leave one’s mark in that combination. Dualism is clearly seen in the various statements made by Rendra or Putu Wijaya, as well as their debaters.

The stance of Rendra (1935-2009) and Putu Wijaya (born 1944) to traditions are different from contemporaries. Tradition is no longer considered a dead heritage from the past, but a living social practice, dynamic and always changes. Both are modernists who are anti-modernity. However, in the presentation of these two figures or most of their observers, tradition and modernity are still two elements with their own identity. Dualism is still unmoved.

The Javanese culture that was lived by Rendra was different from the general understanding of Javanese culture. However, calling Rendra's creative concept as a new tradition becomes problematic. Rendra laughed at observers who considered his literary work and theatre as new. According to Rendra, he only reworked the songs and games of Javanese children he had been accommodating since childhood. The new tradition was an excessive title.

Also read:

> MARXISM

> 1 October

Putu Wijaya glorified the tradition that raised him, namely Bali. Like Rendra, Putu launched various criticisms of modernity. As in Rendra’s case, Putu's efforts, which consciously chose and glorified the strength of his ethnic tradition, prove the existence of the distance that separates the subjective position of the artist from the object he wanted to achieve. Dualism in the new tradition is blocked and the term is problematic.

Nano Riantiarno's work is different from everything discussed above. He was even different from Indonesian intellectuals who during the second half of the 20th century were busy trapped in the dichotomy of tradition versus modernity. Nano was free from the dichotomy trap. Cultural elements from anywhere and from any era would be embraced by Nano (Riantiarno’s nickname) and Teater Koma if they were considered valuable for the stage. He did not care whether it was a traditional element, modern, or a mixture of both or neither.

KOMPAS/IWAN SETIYAWAN

Nano Riantiarno

Rendra relied on Javanese tradition and refreshed the tradition's legacy. Putu Wijaya did something similar to the tradition of Bali. Nano's work in Teater Koma did not depart from and was not oriented to a particular cultural identity. Once the Javanese element was prominent. Occasionally Chinese opera elements were strong. At other times, the European element was strong.

Being open, tolerant and hybrid radically, Teater Koma is the most "Indonesian," accidentally. Maybe this is one of the reasons they live long, far beyond the lives of most theater groups in the country, including Bengkel Teater (Rendra) and Teater Mandiri (Putu Wijaya).

Being relaxed with differences and open in any culture leads to radical tolerance. All of that is done by Teater Koma without the ambition to fight for a new style or its own theory about hybridity, solidarity, tradition or modernization. The only thing that is prioritized by Teater Koma is to entertain the metropolitan middle-class spectators.

Also read: ‘Nyai’ Ontosoroh

The strength of Indonesian-ness in Teater Koma escapes the public’s understanding. Understandably, since Indonesia’s independence, the attention of the public, including its intellectuals, has focused on efforts to pursue a fantasy, namely the "original" cultural figure for the formation of a national identity. Those less native or less original were ignored.

Teater Koma has been ignored and underestimated, precisely because they are very Indonesian. Long before, Komedie Stamboel (1891-1930s) experienced the same thing. Srimulat (1950-1990) had a similar work style. It is not coincidental that the lives of all the theater groups were long. Everything that was hereditary was welcomed the warmest by the Indonesian public.

As an organization, Komedie Stamboel is not eternal. Srimulat also is not. However, their very Indonesian cultural vision was far beyond the age of the organization and its founders. Teater Koma after Nano Riantiarno might still exist for long. However, they are all a comma and gold milestones in a century of cultural work celebrating a pluralistic Indonesia.

ARIEL HERYANTO, Emeritus Professor of Monash University, Australia

This article was translated by Hyginus Hardoyo.