Article Komunitas: International Journal of Geger Sikep: Environmental Indonesian Society and Culture 9(1) (2017): 13-28 DOI:10.15294/komunitas.v9i1.8673 (Re)Interpretation among the © 2017 Semarang State University, Indonesia p-ISSN 2086 - 5465 | e-ISSN 2460-7320 Contemporary Anti-Cement http://journal.unnes.ac.id/nju/index.php/komunitas UNNES JOURNALS Movement in Kendeng, Central Java Setiadi1, Aprilia Rejeki Saraswati2, Nur Rosyid3 1,2,3Department of Anthropology, Faculty of Cultural Sciences, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia 2,3Anthropology Laboratory for Research and Action (LAURA) Received: 31 January 2016; Accepted: 2 February 2017; Published: 30 March 2017 Abstract Over the past decade, a shift has occurred in the Sedulur Sikep community’s attitude since the increase in its popularity and coverage in the mass media following its involvement in the anti-cement movement in Central Java. However, not all members of Sedulur Sikep participate in or even approve of this movement. This anthropological study attempts to illustrate how this situation has pushed the Sikep community mem- bers to (re)recognize their values, the influence of these values on environmental discourse, and how the relations between them are understood and practiced by Sedulur Sikep and the movement fighting in its name. By examining the adaptability of ecological knowledge and the ordering of visible space as a result of complex interactions between nature and nurture, it is possible to examine the shifts in their understand- ing of environmental dynamics and their cultural identity. The ‘fragmentation’ that has occurred is rooted in different understandings of the reciprocal bonds between the Sedulur Sikep’s tani mligi identity and natural resources. The dynamics and stagnation seen in how Sedulur Sikep positions itself in relation to cement production is also apparent in various methods of (re)interpretation, particularly regarding the relevance of Sedulur Sikep’s beliefs to its ecological contestation and struggle for living space. Keywords environmental movements; recognition; contradiction; gegeran; reinterpretation INTRODUCTION backlash. A follow-up project was initiated by PT. Indocement, Tbk, through its subsi- At the beginning of 2007, the Sedulur Sikep diary, PT. Sahabat Mulia Sakti (PT. SMS), in community showed an increased popularity Kayen and Tambakromo Districts in 2010; in the Indonesian mass media, promoted by this project remains ongoing, as of writing. its involvement/being involved in a move- In the past ten years, the media has ment against the largest cement companies frequently positioned the Sedulur Sikep in Indonesia, namely PT. Semen Gresik and community as the main actor in the social PT. Indocement, Tbk. Both of these compa- movement against the company. Many acti- nies intended to open factories and mining Corresponding author efforts to the north of the Kendeng Moun- Jalan Sosio-Humaniora, Bulaksumur, Yogyakarta tain Range. The first project, initiated by PT. 55281 Email Semen Gresik in Sukolilo District in 2006, [email protected]; [email protected]; stopped in 2009 in the face of community [email protected] 14 Setiadi et al, Geger Sikep: Environmental (Re)Interpretation among the Contemporary Anti-Cement... vists have also been involved in and contri- that the use of Sedulur Sikep’s name in cove- buted to the construction of a narrative that ring the movement was a media misunder- positions the Sedulur Sikep community as standing. environmental agents that maintain “local This trip was planned following a 14 wisdom” (Mojo, Hadi & Purnaweni 2015) April 2015 meeting between twenty Sedulur and as promoting social justice (Crosby Sikep community members from Bombong, 2009; 2013). Several researchers, meanwhile, Sukolilo, and the Governor of Central Java have viewed them as culturally maintaining at his residence. One person who rejected an environmentally conscious lifestyle, for the anti-cement activities was called as wit- example using subsistence farming to ma- ness during a court case in Semarang on 8 nage water in the face of drought (Wibowo September 2015. Strangely, however, it was 2011; Mardikantoro 2013; Subarkah & Wicak- Sumadi—a resident of Bombong who was sono 2014). In March 2015, a short film titlednot a member of Sedulur Sikep—who repre- Samin vs Semen was released, further cont- sented the community. During his testimo- ributed to the construction of the narrative ny, he dressed entirely in black, as expected of an environmental movement1. Neverthe- of Sedulur Sikep members. In his testimo- less, not all members of the Sedulur Sikep ny, he highlighted the different values held community approve of the struggle. Some by Sedulur Sikep and argued that, far from remain silent, while others explicitly voice the media’s depiction, the community’s va- their disapproval of Sedulur Sikep’s anti-ce- lues were unrelated to the anti-cement mo- ment activities. Those who voice their disap- vement. Sumadi’s involvement in the trial proval attempt to clarify the need for obei- was claimed as an attempt to clear Sedulur sance and rejection of demonstrations and Sikep’s good name and extricate the com- protests, all of which they consider to erode munity from the anti-cement movement their Sedulur Sikep identity. Another film, and the problematic discourse over cement. Sikep Samin Semen, was made in response The attempt to “clear” Sedulur Sikep’s to and as clarification of Sedulur Sikep’s -po name of members’ involvement in the anti- sition on the environment and on the filmcement movement was supported by the Samin vs Semen2. government of Central Java when Governor On 20 April 2016, the regional govern- Ganjar Pranowo invited members from Pati, ment of Pati and the Governor of Central Kudus, Blora, and Bojonegoro, to attend an audience at the Governor’s Office Complex Java sent twenty-five members of the Sedu- in Semarang on 15 December 2016. In this lur Sikep community to Parliament, the of- meeting, the governor wanted to confirm fices of the daily newspaperKompas , and Sedulur Sikep’s involvement in local anti-ce- the offices of the Faction of National- Awa ment movements. The Sedulur Sikep com- kening Parties (Fraksi Partai Kebangkitan munity members in attendance, some twen- Bangsa, FPKB) in Jakarta. This was intended ty in total, stated that the majority of their to “bring back” the good name of Sedulur Si- community was not involved, and that only kep, to show that the “real” community has the family of Gunretno—approximately ten not involved itself in the anti-cement mo- people—was active in voicing its rejection of vement because such involvement is forbid- the cement industries. At the conclusion of den by their values. These delegates argued the meeting, the governor promised to ease 1 The full video can be accessed at https://www. administration for the Sedulur Sikep com- youtube.com/watch?v=jWaRhg2i9AU. This film was produced and released by Dandhy D Laksono munity and address questions of discrimi- and Ucok Suparta Film as part of the film and pho- nation in education. This meeting was held tojournalistic project titled Ekspedisi Biru (‘Blue following protests from JM-PPK (Jaringan Exhibition’). Masyarakat Peduli Pegunungan Kendeng, 2 Sikep Samin Semen was produced by Mkz Pic- Network of Persons with a Concern for the tures in response to Samin vs Semen. It can be accessed at https://www.youtube.com/ Kendeng Mountain Range) demanding that watch?v=jWaRhg2i9AU. the governor follow through on the Supreme UNNES JOURNALS Komunitas: International Journal of Indonesian Society and Culture 9 (1) (2017): 13-28 15 Court’s decision to rescind permission for focuses solely on the Sedulur Sikep in Pati the Semen Indonesia factory in Rembang. Regency, more specifically in Bombong and This situation led to suspicion and Bowong villages, Sukolilo District, where prejudices within the Sedulur Sikep com- the pro-, neutral-, and anti-cement debate munity. On the one hand, members of the is centered. These locations have been se- community who rejected any involvement in lected because many of the Sedulur Sikep the anti-cement movement have been bran- figures involved, both in the anti-cement ded as siding with and being manipulated movement (i.e. in the struggle against the by the government and the cement industry establishment of the cement factory) and in to dismiss members of the anti-cement mo- the movement against anti-cement activi- vement as not being “real” members of the ties, live in this area. Meetings and planning Sedulur Sikep. Conversely, members of the sessions are often held at these people’s ho- Sedulur Sikep who are against the cement mes. As such, by focusing on these two villa- industry have been considered the “tools” of ges the researchers are able to better under- groups with vested interests against the es- stand the situation. tablishment of cement factories, with their This focus upon traditional commu- Sedulur Sikep identity being used to port- nity, I hope, can gives a new addition to the ray them as fragile and easily influenced. Inexisting literatures on environmental mo- discourse, this has led an argument that ce- vements which are largely non-traditional, ment factories do not only “pollute” the en- non-organic and transnational(Císař 2010; vironment, but also local society and cultu- Chen 2010). re. These mutual suspicions are exacerbated For this research, in-depth interviews by both sides’ conviction that the other side and participatory observation has been has