Tuesday, June 19, 2018

FORTS (1)

Forts catch my attention everywhere I go. Despite their physical ruined condition, spirits and history are so vivid in every fort that exists until today. Second, I have concern about forts in Indonesia. Hundred of forts are waiting for exploitation for adaptive reuse or they have been transformed for new functions but need better programs and management. Compared to adaptive reuse of forts in other countries, Indonesia still neglects its forts. They don´t contribute maximum yet to local social economic and cultural development. 


I will share forts that I visited in the last half year. In all these forts, public education programs are prioritized and well managed. They attract foreign and local tourists and become lively places. 


Fort Zeelandia, Tainan, Taiwan (Nov 2017)



Replica of Dejima Fort, Nagasaki, Japan (Dec 2017)


Galle Fort, Sri Lanka (March 2018)



Cartagena de Indias, Colombia (May 2018)


Naarden Vesting , Netherlands (June 2018)













Sunday, June 17, 2018

WE MAKE THE CITY!




I am volunteering at the Festival We Make The City in Amsterdam, 20-24 June 2018. It is the largest festival addressing issues in urban areas with a lot and a lot of programs and many thousands participants. The whole Amsterdam Metropolitan area will be the festival's arena. 
Image may contain: text

Why did I decide to be a volunteer while I have plenty to do? Because I care about the place where I live and all of other places in the world. 

It is fascinating to see how people keep developing ideas and innovations to make cities as better places to live. And if I could say something, I will say that we shouldn't limit the ideas of festival to urban areas only but also to suburbs and villages. Those peripheral areas have huge and unlimited potentials to develop and offer high quality of life. 


Thursday, June 07, 2018

PENDISTRIBUSIAN DAN REPATRIASI KOLEKSI MUSEUM NUSANTARA

Kamis, 7 Juni 2018, ada diskusi di Museum Etnologi Leiden berjudul "De Ontzameling van Museum Nusantara, Een Uitzonderlijk Proces" (Pembagian Koleksi Museum Nusantara, Sebuah Proses yang Luar Biasa). Sebuah diskusi setengah hari yang merefleksikan secara jujur dan obyektif hubungan antara Belanda dengan Indonesia khususnya, serta posisi etnologi di dunia internasional. 

Ceritanya bermula dari penutupan Museum Nusantara di Delft pada bulan Januari 2013 karena dianggap kurang peminat. Koleksi museum sejumlah 18 ribu buah harus menemukan tempat yang baru sesuai kaidah hukum dan peraturan yang berlaku di Belanda dan standar internasional yang mengatur hal itu. Setelah melalui proses yang berliku selama 5 tahun akhirnya ada 17 museums baik lokal, nasional maupun internasional yang menampung koleksi Museum Nusantara. 

Dari 18 ribu koleksi, sekitar 16 ribu diantaranya berasal dari Indonesia, oleh sebab itu disebut juga repatriasi yaitu pengembalian koleksi ke negara asalnya. 

Untuk mempersingkat cerita sebuah proses yang luar biasa, panjang dan berliku itu, akhirnya "hanya" 1500 koleksi yang kembali ke Indonesia. Menurut Prof. Dr. Bambang Hari Wibisono, mantan Atase Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Kedubes Indonesia di Den Haag, koleksi tersebut selain akan disalurkan ke Museum Nasional juga akan disalurkan ke berbagai museum propinsi.

Mendengarkan berbagai pengalaman dalam proses penutupan Museum Nusantara, pendistribusian koleksi dan repatriasi realitanya ternyata sangat kompleks dan terdengar melelahkan. Begitu banyak pihak yang terlibat, semua mencurahkan jam kerja yang tidak terhitung banyaknya, mencoba menempuh prosedur resmi sesempurna mungkin, mendokumentasikan seluruh proses itu dan setelah 5 tahun sumberdaya habis sudah, keputusan harus diambil, betapapun jauhnya dari angan-angan ideal di awal proses. Pada awalnya diperkirakan 12 ribu dari 18 ribu koleksi akan kembali ke Indonesia, realitanya hanya 1500 buah. Menurut Indonesia, banyak koleksi yang tidak perlu dikembalikan karena merupakan barang-barang yang umum. 

Yang menarik adalah analisa ahli repatriasi koleksi museum, Dr. Jos van Beurden. Pada tahun 1970-an Indonesia pernah mengajukan permintaan pengembalian ribuan koleksi museum dan hanya ratusan yang dikembalikan oleh Belanda. Sekarang, menurut beliau, Belanda yang ingin mengembalikan ribuan koleksi namun hanya sebagian kecil yang diterima oleh Indonesia. Fenomena yang menggambarkan perubahan konstelasi kesejarahan kedua negara dengan segala dinamikanya. 

Selain itu repatriasi koleksi museum secara massal juga hal yang baru bagi Belanda. Tahun 2005 ketika ada sebuah museum di Belanda yang ditutup dan memiliki banyak koleksi asal Indonesia, tidak ada diskusi tentang repatriasi ke Indonesia karena keterbatasan sumberdaya dan jejaring. Baru kali inilah dengan kasus penutupan Museum Nusantara ada gagasan dan implementasi repatriasi koleksi museum ke negara asalnya. 

Kesimpulan lain yang penting adalah kesalahpahaman bahwa koleksi di Museum Nusantara adalah bagian dari sejarah hitam penjajahan ketika banyak orang Belanda membawa koleksi ke negara mereka secara tidak sah, tidak patut dan tidak semestinya. Ada beberapa koleksi yang memang demikian namun sebagian besar adalah koleksi yang diperoleh secara sah, patut dan semestinya (melalui jual beli, tukar menukar, hadiah dan sebagainya). 

Oleh sebab itu diselenggarakan diskusi di Leiden ini, sebagai pembelajaran bagi dunia museum khususnya di Belanda tentang pendistribusian dan repatriasi koleksi. Semua pelajaran berharga itu akan dibukukan bersama dengan hasil diskusi hari ini dan disebarluaskan kepada publik, juga di Indonesia. 

Jika berminat membaca informasi lebih detail tentang penutupan dan proses pendistribusian koleksi Museum Nusantara silakan buka website ini walaupun dalam Bahasa Belanda namun bisa memberi gambaran secara garis besar. 





Tuesday, June 05, 2018

AIRPORTS AND HERITAGE AWARENESS: TAIPEI (2)

...and this is cultural heritage promotions in the Taipei Airport (June 2018) about everyday life in the Penghu Island,  Taiwan. 

















AIRPORTS AND HERITAGE AWARENESS: HONGKONG

I enjoyed myself in the airports of Taipei and Hongkong lately with their efforts to promote cultural heritage in the middle of passenger flows. It is a smart way to use  spaces and to atrract attentions from passengers who are usually have to wait for their flights. 

In Hongkong, they have exhibitions about traditional dress Cheongsam, teapots and traditional foodstall that is almost dissapearing from the streets in Hongkong. They offer also a workshop about Cultural Caleidoscope on weekends. What a great example for otehr airports.




















Monday, June 04, 2018

ASIAN NETWORK OF INDUSTRIAL HERITAGE

The Asian Network of Industrial Heritage (ANIH) was officially established in March 2018. The ANIH aims to work in collaboration with industrial heritage societies to develop common vision of Asian industrial heritage. It is a follow up of the 15th TICCIH (the International Committee for the Conservation of the Industrial Heritage) Meeting in 2012 in Taiwan with the result the Taipei Declaration for Industrial Heritage. 
The network will play a role to empower Asian narratives on its industrial heritage which mostly was built during colonial era by colonial powers. In Asia, industrial heritage has not only experienced modernization, but is closely associated with daily life, memory and social change. 

Secretary office of ANIH is located in the Cultural and Creative Industries Park, Taichung City, a former Taisho Brewery Company in 1916. 

The First Forum of ANIH took place in the Taichung Cultural and Creative Industries Park, 30-31 May 2018. This meeting was also parallel with Exhibition of "The Footprint of Asian Sugar Industrial Heritage."

Heritage hands-on joined both programs and inspired tremendously by other participants. Hopefully ANIH will play an active role in the near future to encourage more dialogues and publications about and amongst Asian players in industrial heritage.








RISE AND FALL OF SUGAR INDUSTRY IN INDONESIA (2)

This is the summary of Heritage hands-on's presentation titled "Rise and Fall of Sugar Industry in Indonesia" during the First Forum of Asian Network of Industrial Heritage, Taichung, Taiwan, 31 May 2018.

More information on the event is on the posting of 24 April 2018.

INDONESIA: FROM THE SECOND LARGEST SUGAR EXPORTER TO THE SECOND LARGEST IMPORTER IN THE WORLD?[i] 

  1. During the colonial era, the peak triumph was achieved through farmers’ sacrifice.  Sugarcane was produced in the fertile land of the farmers with a forced very low lease, forced labors and prioritized irrigation system.[ii
  2. High financial support for research institutions to produce super varieties. 
  3. In the beginning of Independence, Indonesia institutions and manpower were not exclusively ready to optimally develop sugarcane industry and trade. 
  4. There were no comprehensive policies and several of the existing ones were conflicting. 
  5. High input costs, poor management practices, inefficient government policies and a steady stream of cheaper imports.[iii]

POLICIES OF SUGAR INDUSTRY AND TRADE DURING THE COLONIAL ERA
1830-1870      The Cultivation System (cultuurstelsel) (forced sugar plantations and forced labors to increase production)
1870-1900      Market Liberalization (the Cultivation System was gradually eliminated and replaced by the Agrarian Law and the Sugar Law that provided opportunities for private sector to invest in sugar industry and trade)
1900-1930      Development of Syndicate System (implementation of ethical politics through migration, education and irrigation. The irrigation policy was applied in sugar industry by eliminating forced labors in sugarcane plantation, reducing government monopoly, regulating minimum wages and land lease).  
1931-1942      Cartel (sugar production and trade were regulated by government institutions)

POLICIES OF SUGAR INDUSTRY AND TRADE DURING THE INDEPENDENCE
1945-1965       Nationalization of sugar industry (1945-1959) (Taking over all foreign institutions and companies by the Indonesian Government).
Guided Economic System (1959-1965) (Regulated sugar industry and trade by the Indonesian Government).
1966-2010      Marketing liberalization (1966-1971) (Ministry of Agriculture was responsible for sugar production and Ministry of Trade was responsible for sugar trading).
Stabilization (1972-1997) (Regulations to increase sugar production and income of sugar farmers. Import of sugar was monopolized by a government institution).
Adaptation of free trade system (1993-2001) (Implementation of international trade agreement and import of sugar was open for private sector).
Import control (2002-2010). (Imported sugar was only to fulfill needs of industry sector, not for household consumption).




[i] Sri Wahyuni, Supriyati and J.F. Sinuraya, Sugarcane Industry and Trade: Lessons Learned from the Applied Policies during the Colonial Era up until This Period, Pusat Analisis Sosial Ekonomi dan Kebijakan Pertanian, Bogor.
[ii] Soentoro et.al., Usaha Tani dan Tebu Rakyat Intensifikasi di Jawa, Dalam Ekonomi Gula di Indonesia, IPB, 1999.
[iii] Guerin, Bill, How the mighty Indonesian sugar industry fell, Asia Times, September 26, 2002.