Clash of the Dhalangs:

A Dilemmatic Course of Artistic Creativity and Function of

Sundanese Wayang Golek Purwa

Andrew N. Weintraub’s conversation with a traditional music scholar in

Power Plays: Wayang Golek Puppet Theater of West Java grounds the topic of

this paper “He had told me that contemporary dhalang like Asep Sunandar

had degraded the art form by turning it into a cheap form of entertainment.

The academic lamented that wayang golek had changed from a traditional

medium of instruction to a modern form of communication. Older dhalang

had chastised Asep for changing the artistic standard of performance.” (6)

On the other side of this argument, Asep Sunandar in Mimi Herbert’s Voices

of the Puppet Masters:The Wayang Golek Theater of Indonesia claimed that

“puppeteers must keep up with these changes if the wayang is to be

accepted. The dhalang must constantly re-educate himself so that he will

not be left behind in this era of advanced technology.” (201) “These

changes” refers to the way society is becoming more secular, more worldly.

It is interesting to see how the traditionalists accuse the modernists of

degrading the art form. The hierarchical pattern is obvious when looking at

traditional art in this context. The traditionalists see wayang as a form of

‘high art’ and any attempt to make it popular will degrade its status. High

art, according to Marchenkov in his paper “Notes on Art’s History” “must be

artificially sustained by non-commercial support.” (229) The quotation

1

corresponds perfectly to the case of traditional wayang, as the performance

is traditionally held as part of noncommercial ceremonies or ritual

celebrations. The purpose is neither commercial nor propagandistic in

nature. It is meant more to achieve such desired effects as happiness,

wealth, or the safety of the patron who initiates the performance. In

addition, the performance through its repertoire, symbolic events and

characters, implicitly provides the audience instruction and models on how

to lead a good life. In contrast, the modernists’ wayang performances tend

to depend on sponsors who have their own agendas to deliver, so the

dhalangs focus more on adapting the repertoire or creating new stories to

accommodate the sponsor’s desire.

This paper focuses on how arguments between the two groups of

dhalangs, the traditionalists and the modernists (contemporary dhalangs),

continues today in regard to struggles over the artistic creativity and

function of the wayang golek. Traditionalist dhalangs are represented by

Saini Kosim, Otong Rosta, Barnas Sumantri and Endang Subrata.

Contemporary dhalangs are represented by the Sunarya Family. This issue

is current and is still an ongoing debate as proven by recent articles in local

Bandung daily newspapers, Pikiran Rakyat, Monday edition, 22 November

2010 which covered the discussion of wayang golek dilemmatic course.

They argued that modernity did not leave enough space for the richness of

original traditional art of Indonesia. People tend to love foreign culture more

which has no root in the local society (30).

2

To ground the theoretical usage of the terms praxis and poiesis for the

topic discussion, I decided to use Marchenkov’s synthesis of praxis and

poiesis relation. Agamben in The Man Without Content brought up the

problematic relation between the two terms. In the end of his discussion, the

artist as “the man” is still left without “content”, without a satisfactory

answer to the problematic relation of the two terms. Marchenkov in his

paper “Poiesis, Praxis, and the Romantic Fallacy of Modern Aesthetics”

offered a synthesis over the argument on the distinction between praxis and

poiesis. He mentioned that they “need each other and mutually condition

each other.” (41) Rather than contrasting the terms as two conflicting

activities, he argued that “poiesis includes praxis within the scope of its

activity.” (43) More explicitly, he stated that “Praxis is thus a phase in the

work of poiesis but neither of them can be complete without the other.” (43)

The ultimate goal is “to light the divine flame in the heart of man.” (42) He

saw them as two different transformational levels of being—praxis as the

transformation of the external being and poiesis as the transformation of the

internal being. The external being refers to the concrete or abstract

materials that are transformed into some art forms. The internal being

refers to the artists themselves and the audience/spectators. At the poiesis

level, the artists must first transform themselves in order to transform the

audience through their artworks. Artistic creativity is the medium of the

internal transformation. The following discussion on the dilemmatic course

of wayang golek will be based on this concept of praxis-poiesis synthesis.

3

I. A Brief Introduction of Wayang Golek Purwa

Wayang Golek is probably the youngest form of wayang that derived from

its original two dimensional shapes. There are different types of wayang, but

the most popular and widespread is the wayang purwa which is based

primarily on two Indian epics, the Mahabharata and the Ramayana. The

three-dimensional Sundanese wayang golek which bases its performance on

the two epics is called wayang golek purwa.

There is no solid agreement among wayang scholars or dhalangs about

the origin of the Sundanese wayang golek purwa just as there were not

many scholarly sources on the development of wayang golek in West Java.

Weintraub indicated that the first account of wayang golek went back to the

late sixteenth century to the first wayang golek created by Sunan Kudus, one

of the pious leaders who brought Islam to the island of Java (28). Another

theory is that Karang Anyar, a Bandung regent who reigned from 1892-46,

had a craftman create different kinds of wayang which were distinct from the

Javanese ones. Saini Kosim, a famous traditionalist dalang, argued that

wayang golek’s existence dated back to early Chinese influence, which

predated the Indian influence. He also admitted that no one knew from

where the form of the wayang golek originated. Wayang golek performances

and shapes experienced gradual transformation into a national art form.

Throughout its development, the form integrated local traditions, symbols,

and spirits while maintaining the universal values.

4

Atik Soepandi argued that wayang golek performance is traditionally held

as ritual ceremonies such as weddings, birthdays, circumcisions, and

ruwatan. (4) Ruwatan is a sacred ritual to clean oneself of an evil spirit,

improve one’s quality of life, or clean a place/house from an evil spirit. In the

traditional function, wayang golek performances are more symbolic in

meaning and suggest spiritual effects. Other functions of the performance

are to educate and to inform. These secondary functions have grown more

significant in the modern era, as Kathy Foley stated in “Puppet Theater of the

Sundanese.” “Today Sundanese wayang continues to change under the

influence of modern artists.” (23) It has become the source of the conflict

about the artistic creativity and function of wayang golek. Modern

performances of wayang golek integrate modern technology in the creation

of wayangs and the style of performance. This fact corresponds to Hans

Belting in Art History and Modernism who discussed how “the non-Western

artists express themselves in Western media and technologies in which they

continue their narrative traditions, while at the same time carrying on a

critical dialogue with Western culture.” (68) The dialogue between modern

wayang golek performance and Western culture happens in the realm of

popular culture, the greatest Western culture influence in Indonesia. The

young generation in particular is drawn into a world culture that offers more

spectacles and entertainment compared to traditional art. Only by

transforming itself into popular culture can wayang golek reconnect to the

modern audience which is now the majority. The traditionalists’ fear, as

5

reflected in Gerbert J. Gans’ Popular Culture and High Culture, is that the

performance will become part of mass culture that transforms the artist “into

a worker on a mass production assembly line, requiring him or her to give up

the individual expression of his own skill and values.” (20) If that happens

not only are traditional values at risk but the prestige of the artist as a

dalang will diminish.

I.1. Philosophy and Aesthetics of Wayang Golek

According to Saini Kosim, who is a dhalang, philosopher, playwright,

and professor, in his interview with Mimi Herbert in Voices of the Puppet

Masters: The Wayang Golek Theater of Indonesia, there are five worlds in

Sundanese cosmology, and wayang golek performance reflects this

cosmology.

(Figure 1) Kayonan (Figure 2)

6

The five worlds are called Buana Panca (figure 1). Buana Panca Tengah (I),

or The Middle World is the domain of man. The highest point is called Buana

Nyungcung (A), ”the throne of the godhead, the source of light.” (46) It is

the source of creation. At the bottom is the world of pure matter without life,

the realm of darkness and the devil called Buana Mongkleng (B). Both Buana

Nyungcung and Buana Mongkleng are beyond human comprehension. In

between the Middle World and either A and B lie the other two worlds. The

one below Buana Nyungcung is called Buana Padang (II): the abode of gods,

the world of light, which in the wayang cosmos is called Sunya Ruri, meaning

serenity, peace, the absence of sound. The other world, above Buana

Mongkleng, is Buana Larang (III): hell, the realm of demons and lowly spirits.

God created the devil to show His power, a way of thinking close to Sufism.

The Buana Panca Tengah is always full of strife because humankind always

has a choice between good and evil. This is the dynamic of human life, and

it is also the world in which wayang golek performance exists. The dhalang

through his or her performance is supposed to guide the audience to the

right decision in life. The shape of the Tree of Life or kayonan (figure 2)

clearly reflects the five worlds. It is the first and last puppet to appear in

every performance. Its appearance at the beginning and the end suggests

the balance between the five worlds during the performance.

Saini Kosim further explained how the perception of history in wayang

reflects the Hindu yugas way of seeing history; as circular. He called it Cakra

Manggilingan. Cakra means a turning wheel. “The structure of wayang

7

performance reflects the idea of this particular pattern of history. It can be

described as cosmos, chaos, cosmos—a circle without beginning, middle, or

end.” (48) It reflects “the cyclical mode of history”, of never-ending

struggles between good and evil, where world events will repeat themselves

in other times and forms. The ultimate traditional telos of wayang

performances, then, is to keep the balance of the cycle. This non-stop

search for balance begins at the microcosm level. For example, a member of

a certain family might suffer from a seemingly never-ending illness. Based

on traditional belief, the family has to perform ruwatan ritual to restore its

balance, and one of the means to do this is by wayang golek performance.

Wayang performance also contains much symbolism. It agrees with the

non-Western aesthetics value which regard abstract and symbolic things as

reality, as stated by Soetarno in Estetika Pedhalangan. Another significant

value is to be one with nature in a harmonious way. These values are

reflected through the performance, the purpose of which is to reach this

balance and harmony within individuals, families, and communities. The

stories have layer upon layer of meaning. It is called archaic patterns, it is

ancient and universal. One of the most important archaic patterns is the

Vishnu Avatar pattern. “These archaic patterns are graphically expressed in

the ancient symbol of the unity of man and God, the star of David.” (50)

(figure 3)

8

(Figure 3)

Wayang performance depicts events and characters trying to regain

this balance. Since the wayang perception of history and time is circular, the

evil force which is defeated in the performance does not permanently

disappear, but will keep returning to disrupt the balance. Ideally, the

audience will receive implied instruction from the performance on how to

lead a balanced life.

Returning to aesthetics, Soetarno argued that traditional wayang golek

does not have clear and established aesthetical criteria. The aesthetical

judgment is often subjective in nature and depends on one’s own perception

based on personal spiritual and cognitive maturity. However, most dhalangs

and wayang scholars agree that the wayang aesthetics is very much related

to the dhalang skills. This means poiesis is the most significant activity in

wayang golek. A dhalang has to evoke the audience’s aesthetical

9

The triangle with its apex pointing

upward symbolizes the Mintaraga

pattern, the striving of man toward

God. Then God descends in the form

of an avatar since the human is too

weak to fight the evil in the world.

This is symbolized by the triangle with

its apex pointing downward. The circle

inside the two triangles is the balance

created, Manunggaling Kawula Lan

experience through two basic skills: cerita (skills related to narrative

construction, voice creation, musical sense), and sabet (physical skills to

manipulate the puppets). In addition, a dhalang has, to a certain extent, to

know and master the local people’s view of life so that he or she can

construct or choose suitable narratives for performances in a certain place.

Mastering these skills will raise the dhalang’s prestige and status, and the

audience will expect to reach the spiritual and aesthetical experience when a

master dhalang performs.

This aesthetical experience changes with modern times. A more

secular audience not too familiar with the repertoire expects more to be

entertained than to undergo such spiritual experiences. Weintraub stated

how entertainment is generally seen as a reflection of contemporary

Indonesian society. He argued that this view tends to blame modern society

for contaminating pure wayang golek aesthetics. He claimed that the

traditionalists are only concerned about the pure aesthetics and do not

consider how wayang golek can play an active role in shaping the changing

social conditions and people’s conception of their place within these

conditions. (17) The aesthetical judgment in the modern performance is

different. The aesthetics is judged on the dhalang’s creativity to evoke

audience emotion. If the dhalang can keep the audience on their seats,

make them laugh, and play with their emotion, then the performance is a

good one. The end effect is more emotional than spiritual.

10

I.2. Puppet Shapes

Buurman in Wayang Golek: The Entrancing World of Classical Javanese

Puppet Theatre argued that Sundanese wayang golek shapes have

experienced a transformation from the time they were first crafted. The

most obvious change is in the use of colors and raw materials. The early

wayang golek did not have many colors, but the modern ones are quite

colorful. The raw materials were mostly woods, but the modern ones use

rubber and synthetics. The demand for more spectacular and beautiful

puppets for tourism has commodified wayangs. Instead of being crafted

single-handedly by master craftsmen, modern puppets are mass produced

by workers and machines. One can see that a dilemma also occurs in the

level of puppet production.

In “Puppet Theater of the Sundanese” Foley mentioned four major

character types in wayang golek: refined, strong, ogre, and special. (26)

Each has its own unique shape, facial expression, and attire. Wayang golek

has at least six important components—the face, the head-dress, the build of

the body, the arm ornaments, the hands, and the dress, each of which

contributes to the building of the characteristics of wayangs. These

components also reflect the wayang philosophy and aesthetics. For

example, a good and refined character has small eyes, thin lips, a slim body

and a downward-pointing nose. The bad character or ogre possesses

contrasting components. The shapes and forms of the puppets determine

how the dhalangs manipulate them. The dhalangs should not make the

11

mistake of interpreting the manner, behavior, or voice of the puppets

because each has its own specific characteristics that symbolize certain

values.

Almost all characters in wayang golek have their own special traits and

the audience can recognize them instantly from the way they look or dress.

Through some variations may appear, the craftsmen usually keep the special

traits of each character. For example, the character Bima, is known for its

long protruding thumbnail and a snake around his neck. These components

must be there to represent Bima.

The modern dhalangs created new puppet characters to provide more

spectacles and entertainment. These characters are detached from the

repertoire and the traditionalist critics argue they have no spiritual

connection to either the epic or the audience. This is one of the issues about

which the traditionalist dhalangs are concerned. The modernist dhalangs are

accused of moving away from the original puppets that convey within

themselves traditional and spiritual values. The modernists invent new

puppets that exist only for entertainment and spectacle.

Related to praxis as the transformation of external beings, puppet

production is the first level of practical activity. The dhalangs or craftsmen

transform raw materials into puppets. The traditionalists and modernists do

not share the same view on how the puppets should be produced. The

former cherish the conventional way with traditional materials, and the latter

begin to innovate with new materials and the final shape of the puppets.

12

Each defends its own argument that indicates how to deal with the dilemma

in preserving the performance. For the sake of maintaining the purity of the

puppets, the traditionalists embrace the old puppet-production means with

the risk of losing its attractiveness. The modernists risk of losing high moral

values of the puppets but at the same time gain people’s interest with their

innovative puppets.

II. Clash of the Dhalangs

II.1. Role of the Dhalangs

Dhalang is the key element of the wayang golek performance. The

dhalang is also the producer, narrator, actor, singer, and director of the

performance. Dhalang is regarded as a spiritual leader, ritual specialist and

community advisor. This entitles the dhalangs to a powerful and influential

position in society. Weintraub stated that wayang golek performances

become an important site for the dissemination of rulers’ propaganda,

programs, and policy because the dhalangs are able to reach and influence

large numbers of people much more effectively than the rulers can. (15)

This explains why throughout their history in Indonesia, wayang golek

performances have been politically, socially, culturally and economically

exploited by the rulers. This is also the reason why the two groups of

dhalang clash. The dispute is not only about preserving the performance,

but also about struggling for power.

13

To discern the clash, it is necessary to know the plot or lakon in wayang

golek as it is closely related to the praxis and poiesis. On the importance of

wayang stories, Sears argued they as a “form of power constitute narrative

traditions, as sites of contestation and accommodation in the search to hear

new voices of authority in specific story cycles.” (35) The importance of

which stories achieve their purpose is one cause of conflict between the two

groups.

One must realize that the two groups of dhalang see praxis and poiesis

differently which further complicates the relation of the two terms. There are

two major types of plot or lakon in wayang golek; Lakon galur is the major

repertoire with which all dhalangs should be familiar. It is the more symbolic

and philosophical plot, and in Sundanese is also referred to as the tuntunan

plot or plot that provides guidance for the audience. The other plot is called

lakon carangan in which the dhalangs can create their own plot which is still

related to the major repertoire. It is called the tontonan plot, providing

entertainment and information on recent issues for the audience. In this

secondary plot the dhalang delivers the message of the patron or the

sponsor through comical characters that always live in the present, in

contrast to the characters in the repertoire who always live in the past or an

unspecified time.

Both the traditionalists and the modernists agree on the second level of

praxis that refers to the transformation of the “dead” puppets into live ones.

It relates to the skill in manipulating the puppets. In this context, the

14

dhalang transforms the “dead” puppets into a “living” ones through his or

her skills. The audience can literally see the puppets’ chest moving, as if the

puppets were really breathing; the dhalang breathes life into the puppets.

The poiesis, however, is another matter. For the traditionalists, artistic

creativity means performing the repertoire well to achieve the desired

spiritual effects. In the traditional view, lakon galur, a plot familiar to the

audience, should be the center of the performance. The plot contains no

new stories taken from either Mahabharata or Ramayana. The dhalangs

perform this lakon because of the values it carries. The audience does not

expect to hear new stories but are contemplating and reflecting on their lives

through the already familiar plot. They hope to regain balance in their lives

or to improve their spiritual lives and wisdom through watching the

repertoire. Audience identification with the characters is important as the

transformation happens in the process of identifying oneself with the

characters.

The modernist dhalangs see poiesis as an exploration of their creativity

outside the repertoire. Through lakon carangan they can innovate and

experiment with different styles of performance and shapes of wayang

without contaminating the original puppet shapes and repertoire. Ajip

Rosidi, a well-known Indonesian literary figure, stated in Weintraub’s book

that “with the change in character and beliefs of the people, performances

have separated themselves from religious ceremony and tended toward

performance as entertainment.” (17-18) This separation distinguishes the

15

traditionalists and the modernists. The modernists are fully aware of this

shift in society’s view. With a more secular audience, a different approach

needs to be taken to ensure the survival of the performance. The

modernists have integrated technology advancement into the performance

in order to keep up with the demand of the modern audience and they have

left behind the religious aspect of a performance.

Consequently, their telos is also different. On the one hand, the

traditionalists, as mentioned before, aim at a desired spiritual effect that can

restore the microcosmic balance. On the other hand, the modernists aim at

making sure that the messages are delivered and the audience is

entertained by the performance. To put it in another way, the traditionalists’

goal is spiritual and instructive, while the modernists’ goal is communicative

and entertaining. I notice that there are implied telos behind the broad ones

mentioned above. These implied purposes are the same for both groups.

The first is that they both aim to preserve the performance, and the clash

occurs because they chose different paths to reach that aim. The second is

that they both compete for power and status. Being a powerful and famous

dhalang means respect and high status in the society. Later in the

discussion we will see how the two groups express the concern that implicitly

underlines their rivalry.

16

II.2. Traditionalist Dhalangs

Weintraub in Power Plays argued that:

“Indonesian studies of wayang golek have been highly specific about

prescribing the formal qualities essential to the form, and the plot

summaries of the basic story repertoire, they have generally excluded

discussion of the more nebulous and improvisatory arena of

entertainment. Instead, entertainment has become a negative category

to signify a lack of adherence to the high standards of performance.” (16-

17)

Weintraub’s position regarding the clash is apparent. Kathy Foley, another

American wayang scholar, also stated the importance of entertainment in

wayang golek performance:

“Entertainment creates a space from which the voices, preferences, and

interests of the audience emerge and become represented. In their

desire to entertain and to please their audience, dhalang becomes

vehicles for public representations of the people’s desires and interests in

the realm of culture, even when popular enfranchisement is otherwise

repressed in the realms of politics and economics.” (18)

This obvious stand for the modernist is more difficult to pinpoint among the

wayang golek dhalangs except for the Sunarya family. Most dhalangs place

themselves in the grey area, while some are strongly against the ways of the

modernist dhalangs.

17

Saini Kosim, a senior puppeteer and also the director of the Bandung

Academy of Performing Arts (ASTI), is one of the vocal dhalangs against the

modernist. In his interview with Mimi Herbert, he expressed his concern on

this matter:

“Today…symbolism is less apparent in wayang golek performances. In

the past there was a balance between serious literature or philosophy

and the clown scenes. Now there is far too much emphasis on slapstick

comedy and on the fighting scenes. Most of the performances are just

entertainment. Furthermore, the aesthetic value of the wayang is being

destroyed by unsuitable innovations such as ogres made of rubber or

synthetic materials.” (53)

More interesting is his statement that “old puppets are an expression of the

imaginative and creative mind, while many of the new puppets are simply

fantasy.” (53) What he said indicates what is important for him as a

dhalang: Praxis outweighs poiesis, performing the repertoire well in order to

invoke the spiritual and aesthetical experiences rather than focusing more

on the exploration of artistic creativity to merely please the audience and the

patron. He also raised the difference between “creative mind/imagination”

and “fantasy”. The traditional ogre puppets convey the image of some dark

power in our consciousness. Kosim argued that the new innovative ogres

have no connection to human nature because they are new and are

detached from the established world of pewayangan. For him, practical

18

activity lies in the exploration of the traditional puppets, not in the creation

of new puppets which is only a ‘fantasy’.

Otong Rosta, another senior puppeteer also expressed his concern about

the modernist performance. In his interview with Mimi Herbert, he stated:

“Today’s audiences are different, very different. In the past if the dhalang

was old and if the tale he was telling was even older, the audience would

show more interest. Now they just turn up their noses…The people in

West Java, especially in Bandung—why, they’re all blind. They want the

dhalang to be young and handsome and the female singer to be beautiful

and lively. Her mastery of the song and the quality of her voice are

unimportant. She doesn’t sing to complement the performance anymore;

she just provides cheap entertainment.” (74)

Otong Rosta saw wayang aesthetics as a form of seniority and a major

repertoire being performed. He added that the beauty of the voice of the

sinden (woman singer) is much more important than the beauty of the

sinden herself. Otong Rosta preferred the inner quality and values to the

outer ones as the source of wayang aesthetics. He explicitly mentioned that

Asep Sunarya’s execution is lacking and that Asep’s way of talking about the

religious message is more direct, though he actually does not have to talk

about it directly because the implicit meaning of the performance was

apparent. His direct criticism further shows that Asep’s artistic creativity in

delivering the religious message directly is unnecessary. For Otong, to do it

right and to do it the old ways are the most important aspects of a

19

performance. To have a young, handsome dhalang and a beautiful singer as

a form of artistic creativity is not that important. One cannot help but hear

the jealousy in his interview, which is logical because behind their clash lies

the competition for fame and power.

Endang Subrata’s concern is also on the praxis. He complained that many

puppeteers are not aware of the significance of each puppet’s design and

dress, and that many of the Bandung puppeteers, clearly implying the

Sunarya family who live near Bandung, are ignorant of the correct version of

the repertoire. His criticism again emphasizes the lack of execution of the

practical activity, the “doing”.

Another famous West Java dhalang, Barnas Sumantri, in his interview with

Kanti Walujo, was asked what is the worst thing a dhalang can do. He stated

that sacrificing the virtues and dismissing the ethics of wayang performance

to gain popularity, along with treating wayang as a commercialized

commodity, surely fall into this category. His concern reflects Saini Kosim’s

concern which is more philosophical. One can notice Barnas’ emphasis on

“doing it right” rather than doing it for the sake of popularity. Implicitly,

Barnas disagreed with the so-called innovative performance that sells

wayang as a commodity.

From the concerns expressed by four dhalangs on the growing

deviation of wayang golek performance in modern times, we can see that

they all believe that harmony and unity with nature, which can be achieved

through performing in a right way, is the major function of the performance.

20

According to Soetarno, the dhalang’s orientation during a performance is to

transmit knowledge and wisdom which corresponds to Eastern aesthetics. (8)

In the context of wayang golek, the balance between the tuntunan and

tontonan has to be maintained, with tuntutan as the main part of the

performance. The traditionalist aesthetics see the success of the

performance from the spiritual point of view. There is no means of assessing

a performance except from the completion of each ritual stage which is done

in the right manner. The telos of the tuntunan part is the praxis that results

in values transmission. It is more about doing it right that results in the

sought effect. In this part the audience enjoys the performance spiritually,

not emotionally; they reflect on and contemplate the values and symbols

embedded within the wayang characters with which they identify. Thus,

poiesis does not matter much in the tuntunan part. The traditionalists do not

distinctly separate the two terms, in fact, they see them as a unity. The

spiritual transformation of the audience and themselves at the poiesis level

will be achieved when the praxis is done in the proper manner.

Hegel would probably call the traditionalist dhalangs pre-modern

artists. They have immediate contact with their material, in this case their

beliefs, and ideas of the proper way of performing wayang. What the

traditionalists try to preserve corresponds to Agamben’s suggestion for the

artists: to return to a mythical view of art, and that art should regain its

mythic power. It also corresponds to Coomaraswamy’s offer of the pre-

modern world of art as an alternative to Western aesthetics. The

21

traditionalists want to preserve the “aura” of the performance and to limit

the Western influence on aesthetics. On the importance of myth, Partha

Chatterjee, cited from The Nation and Its Fragments: colonial and

Postcolonial Histories, stated “If myth is the form in which truth is

miraculously revealed in the domain of Eastern spirituality, then it is myth

that must be affirmed and the quibbles of a skeptical rationalism declared

out of bounds.” (49)

II.3. Modernist dhalangs

The modernist dhalangs focus more on the tontonan rather than the

tuntunan. Lakon carangan becomes more significant than lakon galur. Thus,

the aesthetical jusgment shifts; the success of the performance is based on

the audience’s response. The telos is more to the pleasure of the audience

and the satisfaction of the patron. Just as the traditionalists, they depend on

the skill of manipulating the puppets and performing the lakon galur, but

with less stress on the spiritual and religious aspects. The more the

audience watches and cheers, the more successful the performance is. The

cheering and clapping indicate the audience’s satisfaction. A more secular

audience is interested in new stories with suspense, surprise, romance, and

more fighting than the established repertoire that tells the same plot over

and over.

The Sunarya family optimally utilizes wayang golek capacity as a

means of mass communication. Modern media becomes the tools of

22

communication. Ade Kosasih Sunarya argued that their innovative artistic

creativity in the performance is only applied to the comical characters. He

explicitly mentioned in an interview that after he managed to draw the

audience’s attention back to wayang golek, he would begin instilling the

traditional values of the performance. However, there is no guarantee that

he would go that far now that he is already famous because of his innovative

performance.

His brother, Asep, is even blunter about his status of dhalang. In a

conversation with Dr. Condee, Asep explicitly mentioned that he was not a

spiritual leader; he was purely an artist and an entertainer. He was not

concerned at all with the spiritual aspect of the performance. Mimi Herbert

in her chapter on Asep Sunandar affirmed his claim by naming the chapter

“Superstar”, which what he is now to the modern audience of wayang golek.

Herbert opened this chapter by stating that “Amost single-handedly, the

puppet master Asep Sunandar has brought about such a dramatic change in

public perception of wayang golek that he is widely considered a ‘hero’ of

the art form in West Java. With his virtuoso performances, featuring

innovative puppets and sophisticated sound system, he has been able to

attract much larger audiences.” (190) Asep is also the one who began the

commodification of wayang. He employs fine craftsmen who carve puppets

for his use, for sale to collectors, and for the lucrative tourist market. He

revolutionized wayang golek status into a form of popular/mass culture. On

the shapes of the puppets, he claimed that “with the exception of the ogres,

23

on which the carvers are free to use their imagination, his puppets adhere

strictly to the iconography of their predecessors.” (193) He explicitly

mentioned that the changes of wayang golek form are done to fit the needs

of today’s audiences. On telos, Asep stated that “the function of the dhalang

has always been to educate and entertain,” (201) and, like his brother, he

argued that they first had to get the audience’s attention by using

entertainment as bait before presenting the inner meaning of wayang

stories.

From their view on performing wayang, poiesis really what matters to

reach their purpose. They focus on the tontonan part in the poiesis level.

This usually contains comical/humor stories with clowns as the main

puppets. At this level of poiesis they focus on their artistic creativity to

achieve the mental and intellectual transformation of the audience through

the messages and information they deliver. They innovate and improvise

the stories in accordance with his sponsor’s or his own agenda. As for the

praxis, they have the same view as the traditionalists who see it as the skill

of manipulating puppets.

III. Conclusion

The discussion on the dilemmatic course and function of wayang golek

performance shows us that there have been ongoing struggles over the

meaning of wayang golek between two groups of dhalang. Kathy Foley, as

cited by Weintraub, argued that these struggles “among performers,

24

sponsors, audiences, critics, media producers, and public officials take place

in various discursive spheres, including spoken and written discourse, as well

as within music, visual imagery, and other elements of performance.”

(Weintraub 9)

The arrival of modernity created this separation and consequently

opposition of wayang golek. In a sense, the two groups of dhalang are not

that different from each other; they both want to preserve the performance

as their ultimate goal, and they both also compete for fame and power. In

the level of praxis that I separated into two different levels, both groups have

the same view on the second level of praxis: the skills to bring the puppets

to life. They also integrate each others’ values in their performance but with

different emphases. That is where the similarities stop.

On the first level of praxis, how to transform the raw materials into

puppets, they have different views. The traditionalists think that a dhalang

must stick to the old way of making a puppet and avoid the commodification

and commercialization of puppet production that may pull the puppets into a

form of kitsch. The modernists believe that to preserve wayang golek, the

form and shape have to be adapted to the needs of the modern audience.

To promote wayang golek, the puppets have to be mass produced so that

more people will be aware of their existence. On the level of poiesis, the

traditionalists do not distinctly separate it from praxis. Once a dhalang

performs the repertoire in a proper manner, inner being transformation will

follow. The entertainment part that explores the artistic creativity of the

25

dhalang is secondary and has no significance in the spiritual transformation

of the audience. The modernists see artistic creativity as the most

significant aspect of the performance to reach the more secular audience

and to transform them. With that kind of audience, spiritual transformation

is not important, the mental and intellectual transformation is more

significant, especially to transform the audience’s perception on wayang

golek.

From the elaboration above, it is clear that the clash between the two

groups is rooted in the way they see the relation between praxis and poiesis.

Beyond that, their clash is not just about preserving the performance, it is

about power. There is no right or wrong in this clash, both sides have made

their points on their arguments. In the end, the audience will determine.

After all, both groups of dhalang struggle to transform the audience. For

now, we can only observe the ongoing debate and hope there will be a

middle ground between them somewhere.

26

Work Cited

Agamben, Giorgio. The Man without Content. Transl. by Georgia Albert.

Stanford UP: Stanford,

1999. Print.

Buurman, Peter. Wayang Golek: The Entrancing World of Classical Javanese

Puppet Theatre.

Oxford UP: Oxford, 1988. Print.

Chatterjee, Partha. The Nation and Its Fragments: colonial and Postcolonial

Histories, Princeton: Princeton UP, 1993. Print.

Coomaraswamy, Ananda K. Christian and Oriental Philosophy of Art. Dover

Publications Inc.:

New York, 1956. Print.

Gans, Herbert J. Popular Culture and High Culture: An Analysis and

Evaluation of Taste. Basic

Books, Inc.: New York, 1974. Print.

Greenberg, Clement. Art and Culture: Critical Essays. Beacon Press: Boston,

1989. Print.

Herbert, Mimi. Voices of the Puppet Masters: The Wayang Golek Theater of

Indonesia. The

27

Lontar Foundation: Jakarta, 2002. Print.

Keeler, Ward and Kathy Foley. Puppetry. The Festival of Indonesia

Foundation: New York,

1991. Print.

Marchenkov, Vladimir. “Poiesis, Praxis, and the Romantic Fallacy of Modern

Aesthetics”. The Phenomenological Inquiry. Vol. 28. Univ. of Georgia

Interlibrary Loan, 2004. (36-51). Print.

--. “Notes on Art’s History” (220-239). Print.

Mrazek, Jan. Puppet Theater in Contemporary Indonesia: New Approaches to

Performance

Events. Univ. of Michigan Press: Michigan, 2002. Print.

Mulyono, Sri. Simbolisme dan Mistikisme dalam Wayang: Sebuah Tinjauan

Filosofis. Gunung

Agung: Jakarta, 1979. Print.

Soepandi, Atik. Pagelaran Wayang Golek Purwa Gaya Priangan. Pustaka

Buana: Bandung,

1984. Print.

--. Dasar-dasar Pangaweruh Wayang Golek Purwa Jawa Barat. Nirmana:

Bandung, 1992. Print.

Soetarno, Sunardi and Sudarsono. Estetika Pedhalangan. Institut Seni

Indonesia: Surakarta,

2007. Print.

28

Suryana, Jajang. Wayang Golek Sunda: Kajian Estetika Rupa Tokoh Golek. PT

Kiblat Buku

Utama: Bandung, 2002. Print.

Wakhudin. ”Pakem Melawan Modernitas.” Pikiran Rakyat. 22 November

2010: 30. 22 November 2010. <http://www.epaper.pikiran-

rakyat.com>. Website.

Walujo, Kanti. Dunia Wayang: Nilai Estetis, Sakralitas & Ajaran Hidup.

Pustaka Pelajar:

Yogyakarta, 2000. Print.

Weintraub, Andrew N. Power Plays: Wayang Golek Puppet Theater of West

Java. Center for

International Studies OU: Ohio, 2004. Print.

29