MINANGKABAU AESTHETICS IN INDONESIAN CINEMA

Abstract

This article attempts to construct the Minangkabau aesthetic in Indonesian cinema. The emergence of conflict based on Minangkabau ethnicity in a movie is why the Minangkabau aesthetic construction is built. From the perspective of identity theory, the film is seen as a social process, including ethnic content. Considering Indonesia s diversity, this Minangkabau aesthetic construction cannot leave the Nusantara s aesthetic concept. Mise en scene analysis is the first step to determine the Minangkabau element. The categorization of landscapes and traditions associated with Minangkabau in films conclusively becomes the Minangkabau aesthetic construction found in Indonesian cinema. This construction is expected to consider Minangkabau ethnicity or fictional content in art, especially movies. Article Received: 18 October 2020, Revised: 3 November 2020, Accepted: 24 December 2020 Introduction In its history, the Minangkabau-contented in Indonesian cinema seemed to be dominated by the adaptation of literary works from the Balai Pustaka and Pujangga Baru era. Sitti Noerbaja (1941) is based on the romance Marah Rusli. Salah Asuhan by Abdul Muis was appointed to the big screen by Asrul Sani with the same title in 1972. Di Bawah Lindungan Ka bah, Hamka s work was brought to the big screen twice in 1977 and 2011. Tenggelamnya Kapal van Der Wijck (2013) was also appointed from Hamka s romance. Besides, there are three film raise Minangkabau folklore, namely Malin Kundang Anak Durhaka (1971), 7 Manusia Harimau (1986), and Palasik (2015). Then, Tabula Rasa’s (2014) release seems to give a new color to Indonesian films, especially those with Minangkabau locality. Presenting the life of the Minangkabau diaspora in overseas lands, this film also presents traditional Minangkabau culinary content. Films containing Minangkabau locality also did not escape discussions and polemics. Cinta Tapi Beda, by Hanung Bramantyo, became the topic of conversation because it was considered to have insulted Minangkabau, Java, and even Islam. This film tells Diana s story, from Padang and is a Catholic, with Cahyo, from Yogyakarta, a Moslem. It intricacies of their relationship with different beliefs. However, as if knowing the author s intent and purpose, the audience tends not to accept the film s story s contents. The audience accused this film of discrediting Minangkabau with the statement, Minangkabau is Islam. Hanung, as the director, finally decided to stop the screening of the film (Noviandi, 2013). In fact, in 2018, this film was sued in the realm of law (Priyambodo, 2018). The release of Merantau (2009) is considered a milestone in the revival of local content (Minangkabau) in Indonesian cinema. More related to film titles and action featuring silek (silat), Merantau raises a fairly thick element of Minangkabau (ica, 2009). On the other hand, the Governor of West Sumatra, Irwan Prayitno, said that the film Merantau lacked the philosophy of silat and the tradition of migrating for the Minangkabau people (Indah, 2009). It seems the audience s sensitivity towards film content is still a challenge in the Indonesian cinema development. Besides dealing with Lembaga Sensor Film (Film Censorship Institutions), film creators in Indonesia still have to deal with audience censorship. The film audience (and other arts) in Indonesia have not been able to sort out the realities in the works from the real facts. The audience s closeness to the PSYCHOLOGY AND EDUCATION (2021) 58(2): 4672-4692 ISSN: 00333077 4673 www.psychologyandeducation.net film s content could be one of the possibilities that cause this behavior. Thorough knowledge of something can be the beginning of rejection because it does not match expectations. It can be said that film audiences in Indonesia still tend to accept the repetition pattern, which is a common assumption for certain ethnic people (stereotypes). When compared, the public is more accepting of the Minangkabau s image being stingy, the Javanese who succumbs, the stubborn Batak people as depicted in one of the soap operas, Suami-Suami Takut Istri. Indonesian audiences are more receptive to the film by Djajakusuma Malin Kundang Anak Durhaka (1971) than the short story of Malin Kundang Ibunya Durhaka by A.A. Navis. The audience tends to accept the use of the Minangkabau language in dialogue, the appearance of gonjong roofs, or even merely selecting a setting in the West Sumatra region as Minangkabau content. The display s inconsistency with the audience s knowledge, in the end, has great potential to give rise to massive rejection. The knowledge that is commonly known and accepted by the public can build sentiments that tend to be chauvinist. That is in line with the statement of Aumont et al. (1992) that cinema provokes an increase in chauvinism through its contents. Apart from the assumption as an exploitation, the content of Minangkabau locality in films is widely considered to help develop knowledge and understanding of sustainability and preserve traditional Minangkabau culture and tradition. The strength of the matrilineal system in the matchmaking and marriage process shown in Tenggelamnya Kapal van Der Wijck is seen as a representation of the Minangkabau s rigidity matrilineal culture (Trisnawati & Yesicha, 2018). Besides, this film shows primordial ties and ethnocentrism, which are an obstacle to multiculturalism in the Indonesian context (Thalib, 2017). Meanwhile, surau as a traditional Minangkabau education system (Azra, 2003), which appears in the film Surau dan Silek, actually presents the reality of different views of the surau and silek of the two Minangkabau generations (Arief, 2018). The traditional values and folklore in Harimau Tjampa are considered similar to the romanticism in the style of films during the colonial period (Anggraini, 2016). Harimau Tjampa is one of the movies at the beginning of the development of Indonesian films that raised nationalism while still carrying traditional values (Minangkabau). Several responses to films containing Minangkabau indicate the process of acceptance of this form of artistic expression. Regardless of positive or negative, audience responses are a form of the same background knowledge about Minangkabau. Minangkabau is one of the ethnic groups in Indonesia, which has a dynamic culture. Minangkabau people are known to adapt to new environments when they migrate quickly. Their hometown tradition brought overseas as a form of identity besides a condition of longing for their ancestral land. It can be said that talking about Indonesian cinema s history cannot be separated from the Minangkabau. In a sense, the Minangkabau traditional culture has influenced film development as an industry in Indonesia. The emergence of the Minangkabau element in the film as a representation of ethnic identity requires an adequate understanding of the Minangkabau aspects. How can an element of locality be called a part of Minangkabau? Is philosophy, tradition, art, landscape, and language sufficient to measure the Minangkabau aspects in a film? This article attempts to present search results and efforts to compile Minangkabau s aesthetics concept and construction in cinema. Of course, the discussion does not break away from the film s context as an industrial product. Film and Identity Film is often said to be a form of representation and even a reflection of life. Viewers often feel that they have experienced the same events as those shown in the film (Kurniasih, 2019). This assumption is acceptable because, in fact, films present reality. Through PSYCHOLOGY AND EDUCATION (2021) 58(2): 4672-4692 ISSN: 00333077 4674 www.psychologyandeducation.net audio-visual imagery and technology, films present the impression of reality and build that impression into reality. Because of its convincing nature, Metz (1991) said that films could move audiences, has the power to draw crowds. Visual imagery is the most prominent element in building this impression. Through this visual image, the audience blends with the film. Montage in the film is an advantage over photography. If photography presents a visual image of the past, a film with montage techniques brings events as their present form. The past in film is a narrative building through flashbacks. That is where the power of film narrative builds instantaneous visual images (Metz, 1991). On the other hand, Buckland (2000) offers a different perspective on reaching film meaning. The impression of unity and continuity experienced by every viewer in the cinema is based on standard codes that unconsciously form a specific, structured, and sometimes provide the same understanding. This hierarchical arrangement between the unconscious and the coding system behind it shows that film continuity is a surface illusion and so-called impression of reality. Film semiotics encourage intersections between films and their references, break relationships that are thought to be essential, and show that filmic meaning results from a coded system, not just a relationship between an image and its reference (referent). However, we cannot deny that one aspect of the semiotic meaning of a work (film) comes from the concept of audience acceptance. Ehrat (2005) states that understanding a film will involve the audience s knowledge as part of the meaning process. However, he added that if the film is perceived generally as a real-world object, like a picture in a particular time, or a similar pattern, its vision has failed. Like literature, the film is a means of communication in the form of symbols. Symbols are conveyed elaborately through sound and visual dimensions. Like paintings and photographs, the film presents light and shadow. Like a sculpture, a film offers three-dimensional spaces. Like a pantomime, films show moving images. Like dance, films have complex rhythms involving music and poetry. Films communicate through images, metaphors, and symbols. Like dra