Ripples, Echoes, and Reverberations: 1965 and Now in Indonesia by Martha Stroud A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Joint Doctor of Philosophy with University of California, San Francisco in Medical Anthropology in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Nancy Scheper-Hughes, Chair Professor Laura Nader Professor Sharon Kaufman Professor Jeffrey A. Hadler Spring 2015 “Ripples, Echoes, and Reverberations: 1965 and Now in Indonesia” © 2015 Martha Stroud 1 Abstract Ripples, Echoes, and Reverberations: 1965 and Now in Indonesia by Martha Stroud Joint Doctor of Philosophy with University of California, San Francisco in Medical Anthropology University of California, Berkeley Professor Nancy Scheper-Hughes, Chair In Indonesia, during six months in 1965-1966, between half a million and a million people were killed during a purge of suspected Communist Party members after a purported failed coup d’état blamed on the Communist Party. Hundreds of thousands of Indonesians were imprisoned without trial, many for more than a decade. The regime that orchestrated the mass killings and detentions remained in power for over 30 years, suppressing public discussion of these events. It was not until 1998 that Indonesians were finally “free” to discuss this tragic chapter of Indonesian history. In this dissertation, I investigate how Indonesians perceive and describe the relationship between the past and the present when it comes to the events of 1965-1966 and their aftermath. Do the killings and detentions still emerge in and influence daily life today? If so, how? The experiences, interactions, and conversations I had and the interviews I conducted during two years of fieldwork, primarily in Yogyakarta on the island of Java, shape the form and focus of this dissertation. I examine how space and time are entangled when it comes to the events of 1965-1966 and the present day. I explore how the propaganda about these events continues to be circulated, internalized, and expressed in daily life, resulting in fear and paranoia that is managed through practices of surveillance and self-surveillance. I investigate stigmatization in the lives of my informants and the ways that stigma is assigned, transmitted, managed, and eluded. I explore the silences that weave themselves around this topic, and I focus on two case studies of ruptures in this silence that allow for new forms of voicing, authorship, and education. I explore the forms of satisfaction or justice my Indonesian informants want but do not expect to achieve. I offer a typology that reveals the complexities in the categories of “victim” and “perpetrator” when it comes to the events of 1965-1966 and their aftermath. Finally, I write about a few events that occurred after I left the field that illustrate the ongoing unfolding of this history today. Throughout the dissertation, I illuminate the ways in which the events of 1965-1966 continue to powerfully shape the subjectivities, social worlds, experiences, and identities of my informants nearly 50 years after the killings first began. i Table of Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................................1 Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................... ii Introduction ......................................................................................................................................1 Chapter One: Entangled Time and Space ......................................................................................15 Chapter Two: Propaganda, Paranoia, and Surveillance .................................................................28 Chapter Three: Stigmatization and Marginalization ......................................................................50 Chapter Four: The Space for Silence .............................................................................................67 Chapter Five: The Ruptures of Silence ..........................................................................................78 Chapter Six: Justice and Reconciliation ........................................................................................95 Epilogue: Since Leaving the Field ...............................................................................................112 Bibliography ................................................................................................................................115 ii Acknowledgments This dissertation would not exist without the people in Indonesia who shared their lives with me, who trusted me with their stories, experiences, thoughts, and feelings. I am indebted to them beyond measure. To my closest friends in Indonesia, my language teachers there, my neighbors in Yogyakarta, everyone who indulged my curiosity and my presence in their lives, who talked with me, who shared meals with me, who hung out with me, I appreciate your interest, patience, graciousness, generosity, hospitality, and help. I extend my heartfelt gratitude to you. Terima kasih. My greatest wish is that you recognize yourselves in these pages. It is also impossible to imagine that this dissertation would exist if I had not crossed paths with Professor Robert Lemelson during my undergraduate studies at UCLA. There is no other scholar who has had a greater impact on me than Professor Lemelson. A paragraph here seems inadequate to acknowledge the impact he and his work have had on my development as a scholar, as an anthropologist, and as an engaged citizen of the world. The courses I took from Professor Lemelson in psychological anthropology profoundly shaped the scholar and the person I have become since I have known him. His powerful and penetrating ethnographic films first introduced me to Indonesia. His work first introduced me to the topic of 1965. In so many ways, this project would never have existed without him. Professor Lemelson models for his students the kind of attentiveness, sensitivity, and rigor we should exercise as scholars. His enthusiasm and passion for anthropology are contagious. He cultivated and encouraged my intellectual curiosity, confidence, and independence. Ten years ago, when I was facing a difficult choice, he encouraged me to choose the option that scared me the most because in that fear lay the opportunity for me to grow. That piece of advice, and countless others, have stayed with me and shaped my scholarly trajectory and research in many ways. I am so grateful for Professor Lemelson’s support, encouragement, and friendship. To him, I extend my most heartfelt appreciation. My dissertation committee has been a source of support and strength. Thank you to Nancy Scheper-Hughes, Laura Nader, Sharon Kaufman, and Jeffrey Hadler. I am lucky to have a committee full of the kinds of scholars and writers I most want to emulate. I am grateful for the perspectives you brought to the process of my preparation for the field, my research, and writing. Thank you for your patience, encouragement, and rigorous engagement. I have benefited from being taught by some marvelous anthropologists throughout my academic life. My gratitude goes out to Joan Barker, who introduced me to anthropology at Santa Monica College. I am grateful to the anthropology professors I had at UCLA, especially Alan Fiske, Allen Johnson, Tom Weisner, Niko Besnier, and Christopher Donnan. I am so appreciative to have participated in the Mind, Medicine, and Culture (MMAC) discussion group at UCLA, where my intellectual curiosity was stoked by lively interdisciplinary discussions with more scholars than I can mention here by name. I am indebted to you all. At UC Berkeley and UCSF, in addition to my teachers who served on my committee -- Nancy Scheper-Hughes, Laura Nader, and Sharon Kaufman -- I am grateful to Vincanne Adams, Charles Briggs, and Lawrence Cohen. At UC Berkeley, I also benefited greatly from language instruction by Ninik Lunde and graduate seminars on Indonesia and Southeast Asia taught by Jeffrey Hadler. To the members of my both by Berkeley and UCSF cohorts with whom I navigated the early years of my graduate education, thank you for your friendship and camaraderie. While we have all spread out in many different directions since those early years, I still think of you iii fondly. Thank you especially to Theresa MacPhail for being such an empathetic and gutsy companion in this journey and for her enduring friendship. In the anthropology department at Berkeley, thank you to Ned Garrett for his welcome smiles, mellow attitude, and constant reassurance and support in helping me navigate the administrative requirements of the graduate program. Thank you to my patient peers who read and commented on chapters of this dissertation in two dissertation writing seminars led by Nancy Scheper-Hughes: Emily Ng, Sam Dubal, Rachel Ceasar, Jason Price, Jerry Zee, Alissa Bernstein, Ruth Goldstein, Michael D'Arcy, Samuele Collu, Noémie Merleau-Ponty, Rosalynn Vega, and Ugo Edu. To Alex Hinton, my debts to your work are immeasurable. Thank you. Thank you to Leslie Dwyer for a conversation at the Sarajevo Airport that she has probably forgotten that inspired me to finally commit to pursuing this research project. At times when the challenges of this project felt insurmountable, I often turned to the writings of John Roosa, Leslie Dwyer, Degung Santikarma,