Amalinda
Savirani
I always want to
write something in my facebook blog, believe me I do. Anything will do. But I
am just to lazy. A friend of mine gave me a tips that I should discipline
myself everyday just for one hour to write anything. Evi Mariani, my best
friend, has encouraged me (over and over again) to write an article in a media
where she works. During my desperate time working on my dissertation, I read
notes written by many friend. I admire and envy them of being so productive.
When I heard colleagues in my department in UGM published articles in both
national and local newspaper, my heart is burn into jealousy of not capable
doing what the same. So far, I am already happy to write something funny in my
facebook status, and get comments from friends.
I have ideas and I think
those are cool ideas that can be shared with friends.
Sometimes those
ideas lingering in my mind. Yet I never managed to make any single article so
far.
I interrogate myself why it is the case. I guess I am just tired of words
and sentences after drowning with them daily: from the time I woke up until I
close my eyes. I can't stand words and sentences anymore, let alone makes those
words and sentences to dance in an article. Nooooo. What I rather do then is
downloading oldies Indonesian songs that I listen when I was in high schools,
and posted them in my wall facebook. Until a friend of mine noticed my
activities and asked me directly: is that all you do as PhD student? I feel
shame.
Although I can answer that friend's question with my own
justifications, but I don't want to. I agree with his idea, that as a person
who want to dedicate his or her life in an academic career, one (I mean me
myself) needs to write in a frequent basis as a mean to share thoughts, and to
read what the readers have a say about the idea. My cool ideas will have no
meanings without writing them. You simply doing a monolog; a reader of your own
thought, and I think that kind of sad. My cool ideas do not interact with the
world, they (are being) lock (ed) inside.
That's another
type of tyranny, at least to my own self.
In one night sometimes in 2009 or
early 2010, I was in messenger with Merlyna Lim, an assistant professor in
Arizona State University, or ASU (I can't believe the abbreviation is so scary,
as at least in Javanese). We have a different background of disciplines, she is
a technology-scientist while I myself by education is a political scientist. I
don't know how but we then starting talking about cities. We started discussing
issue of city. I share her my idea on the importance (for political science) to
discuss the life of people living in the city in a different way. I suggest
that city's inhabitants should also be approached in a slightly different ways.
A lot of things going on in the city (forgive my city-centric attitude), which
I call as 'daily politics': issues surrounding our daily and simple life. This,
I argue, is also very 'political'. Political scientists have absorbed so much into
political issue with P capital letter: election, political parties, government,
decentralization, etc. Not that they are not important. They do. Yet, at the
same time we seem to ignore others things surround us: how your ditch in front
of your house has been stucked forever without any one even bother to take care
of it, but simply just cement them so you can not see them. Second example is
rubbish management in city. If one day your garbage man is sick and absent for
a week, you started to have the flies inside of your house with strong smell,
you, or at least I, will be uncomfortable. If once your water tab has color,
you are not sure whom you should contact. It is not my intention to say that
similar thing does not happen in the rural areas. They do too, but in a
different scales of urgency.
Issue of daily politics frames political life as
not something that far away and unreachable, but it is so close to our life. I
suggest, therefore, political sciences should start to incorporate a micro
perspective, a daily politics in the study. In Europe, incorporating this
approach has been conducted for the last ten years showing from many PhD
researches.
A study on the
impact of area extension of Netherlands Schiphol airport is not focusing on
policy-making process, but rather on rejection by inhabitants living in the
area, and the expressions of their disappointment (due to sounds pollution from
the planes traffics) by many symbolics activities, such as blocking the
entrance for the construction activities (this reminds me of some citizens
living in the surrounding areas of TPA Bantargebang Bekasi a couple of year
ago). Political science is then about social movement,s, their background and
their political strategies imply. Surely, the construction of ideas on daily
politics is insufficient to be approached from "classical" approach
political science, usually with questions such as: to what extent these all
daily activities impact to political life in general?; or will they influence
stability in general? I know this alternative approach place political science
as so romantic, idealist, and taking side. It delves into the life of ordinary
people and their strategies in coping with their problem they face daily. This
is also the reason my I like US President Barrack Obama. His long involvement
in organizing communities in the US is very close to the ideal of daily
politics. I want to be like him, not as a president, but as someone who are
close to their community.
This is also the
reason why I want to be ketua RT sometimes in my life. I want to understand
people.
Why do I mentioned Merlyna Lim before, oh ya, she suggests me to
write this thought. At that time, I felt full of energy to share this, but then
I am absorbed in other things in my life. Yet, our chat and this daily issue
things kept lingering on in my mind. I hope by putting this idea, I let it go
and see how it will interact with comments
I am glad I write this piece and I
hope to do the same soon.
Amsterdam 13
June 2010
No comments:
Post a Comment