1. the First Thai Novels and the Thai Literary Canon
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
1 The first Thai novels and the Thai literary canon Modernity in Thailand is commonly associated with the reign of King Chulalongkorn (r. 1868–1910), who modernised Thailand by appropriating many advancements made in the West. The general discourse on ‘modernity’, khwam than samai or samai mai in Thai, which mean ‘being in step with the present era, or the new age’, is closely related to the Thai obsession with khwam jaroen or ‘prosperity and progress’.1 This prosperity can be manifested by material wellbeing or intellectual prowess. For the state, prosperity is reflected in the material things—buildings, transportation, public works, etc.—that were more highly developed in 1 Siwilai resounds of the English ‘civilised’, which the Thai appropriated to represent high international culture mostly based on English aristocratic culture. Khwam jaroen has connotations of industrial artefacts of modernity—good roads and transportation, running water, electricity, brick buildings, radio and television, etc. Khwam than samai includes both cultural, behavioural and material artefacts of modernity based on a model of a secular and industrialised society. To the Thai, there is a khwam than samai sakon, or universal modernity that is not necessarily tied to the West. Japan by the turn of the 20th century, for example, is an example of a modern society for Thailand to emulate. And so is colonial India—the official dress code for males appearing in state ceremonies in Thailand today can either be thechut ratcha pataen uniform based on the ‘Raj Pattern of British colonial India’ or sut sakon, which is the ‘universal Western suit’. Thai identity is not compromised when it is clothed in a universal form of modernity. Also see Thongchai Winichakul, ‘The quest for siwilai: A geographical discourse of civilizational thinking in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century Siam’, The journal of Asian studies, 59(3) (August 2000): 528–54. 11 READ TILL IT SHattERS the West after its industrial revolution. Modern Thai literature is also dated to this period, and, as the National Identity Board has recognised, Thai literature also partakes of this modernisation process.2 In the West, following Cervantes’ Don Quixote (1615), the novel came to reflect socio-historical reality that represented a clear departure from the symbolism and allegory found in literature of the Middle Ages. As a new way of writing/thinking, the plot of the novel became grounded in a specific historical context, with a real geographical location. In fact, the historical rise of the novel is a history derived from, and directed to, the rise of the middle class. And in contrast to the long tradition of the novel in the West, the novel in Thailand was altogether new. The first novel introduced to an emerging literate middle class was a translation of Marie Corelli’s Vendetta (1886), which was published in 1902. It is clear that, by the reign of King Mongkut, the Thai court had concluded that the centre of the civilised world had shifted from China and India to Europe. But, unlike the influence or allure of India and China, the two major hegemonic powers that flanked Thailand, the allure of the West was more dangerous, ambiguous and problematic. India and China never exercised direct political or military control of states in Southeast Asia, except perhaps in the case of Vietnam.3 But European imperialism threatened to impose political, economic, intellectual and military domination of Thailand as indeed had happened elsewhere. 2 The National Identity Board, Treasury of Thai literature: The modern period (Bangkok: Prime Minister’s Office, 1988), 5. Literary scholars also endorse this idea, see Suphanni Warathorn, Prawat kan praphan nawaniyai thai [History of the Thai novel] (Bangkok: Thai Textbook Project Foundation, 1976), 24–39. 3 The Thai court participated in the Tribute Economic Regime from the Sukhothai period up to the early Bangkok period (13th–19th centuries). The Thai courts sent tribute missions to China, symbolically accepting the superiority of the Chinese court. Thai tribute gifts of local raw material, such as aromatic woods, deer hide, antlers and spices, were exchanged for silk, jewellery and precious ceramics. In this unequal exchange, the Thai court came out richer. Parenthetically, it should also be noted that the Thai also replicated this system locally and demanded ‘tribute’ from its vassal states such as Pattani. One should view the new European economic regime of laissez faire and free trade as replacing the Tribute Economic Regime. But, in the case of the new regime, it came hand in hand with military and political threats. What was mostly cultural hegemony on the part of China was replaced by Western imperialism that had already imposed direct economic, political and military control over Thailand’s neighbours. The Thai court had to find ways to participate in this new trade regime without falling prey to direct colonialism. David Wyatt, Thailand: A short history (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982), 56. For a detailed account of Thai trade with China, see Sarasin Viraphol, Tribute and profit: Sino-Siamese trade, 1652–1853(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1977), doi.org/ 10.2307/j.ctt1tfjb0r. 12 1 . THE FIRST THAI NOVELS AND THE THAI LITERARY CANON To understand fully the adoption and adaptation of the novel in Thailand as part of a larger survival strategy, it is also necessary to understand the political forces faced by Thailand and the defensive strategies that its leaders took. The Bowring Treaty of 1855 with Britain, which opened Thailand to the new free trade economy, is quite problematic. On the one hand, one can view the treaty regime as a humiliating imposition on Thailand’s sovereignty. But from the Thai perspective, the acceptance of extraterritoriality that was part of this treaty can be seen as a price to be paid for participation in the new trade regime, as well as the cost for maintaining control over its own citizens.4 The court’s strategy also included social engineering and intellectual improvement. The court believed Thai society should look modern/civilised to the West, so there would be no excuse for the West to colonise it. At the same time, it should 4 In fact, the opening up of the Thai market and the trade in rice in large quantities to feed the British colonies enriched the coffers of the Thai court. In addition, adopting the new political paradigm provided by the West allowed the Central Thai court in Bangkok under Rama V to consolidate its power over its provincial rivals. As a pragmatic strategy for maximising local power and survival, acceptance/submission to Western demands was logical and unavoidable. The Thai court was also careful in portraying itself as an ‘equal’ of European royalty. In dealing with outsiders, the court made sure that, for domestic consumption, the royals were to appear as ‘royals’ in their interaction with the West. After the turn of the 20th century, Thai kings did their best to make themselves appear as members of the international family of royalty. For example, Queen Saowapha, Rama V’s consort, made it a point to show foreign visitors her intimate knowledge of her distant ‘relatives’ in Europe. See Maurizio Peleggi, Lords of things: The fashioning of the Siamese monarchy’s modern image (Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 2002), 32. Kannikar Sartraproong’s excellent study of Chulalongkorn’s visit (pai thiaw) to Singapore and Java tells us that the Thai officials wanted to make sure that the British and Dutch authorities treated the Thai king (and therefore Thailand) as a monarch and not as one of the ‘local princes’. The colonial authorities did their best to put the Thai monarch in his place, but the local Malay papers used his visit to criticise the colonial authorities (especially in Batavia) for not inviting local leaders to some of the activities, and for not whitewashing government buildings to prepare for the king’s visit. To assert his position as equal to Queen Victoria, Chulalongkorn, who was still a teenager, sent her the following telegram: We have left Bangkok on the 9th or 10th to see Our Provinces, and we have arrived at our most gracious Majesty’s colony at Singapore, the first time that aKing of Siam has landed on an English Country. His Excellency the Administrator has received us with the highest honors, and made us most comfortable at Government House. We are delighted to see the Country and people prospering so well under Your Most Gracious Majesty’s rule. We repeat Our grateful thanks to Your Majesty for your friendly reception of Us, and we wish you long life, health, and prosperity in every respect. Telegram from the King of Siam to Her Majesty, Dispatches from the Secretary of the Straits Settlements, COD/12, 01-06-1871 (emphasis added), quoted in Kannikar Sartraproong, A true hero: King Chulalongkorn of Siam’s visit to Singapore and Java in 1871 (Bangkok: Tana Press and Graphic Co. Ltd, 2004), 218. Kannikar’s meticulous study uses English, Dutch, Malay and Thai sources to compare and contrast the various accounts of the visit. This excellent study shows the intent of the Thai court, and the stakes involved. For another account, see Imtip Pttajoti Suharto, Journeys to Java by a Siamese king (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Thailand, 2001). Also see Lysa Hong, ‘Extraterritoriality in Bangkok in the reign of King Chulalongkorn, 1868–1910: The cacophonies of semi-colonial cosmopolitanism’, Intinerario: European journal of overseas history, 27(2) (2003): 25–46. 13 READ TILL IT SHattERS learn about Western culture and language in order to understand better the people they had to deal with. This policy can either be seen as a pragmatic strategy of the weak, or as what others have called auto-colonialism, self-colonisation or crypto-colonialism.5 Coming to terms with Western culture by appropriating what is seen as helpful to national survival, Thailand did its best to maintain some control over its own affairs, and to find ways to maximise profit from trade.