Fetish, Recognition, Revolution by James T. Siegel Review by: Rosalind Morris Indonesia, No. 67 (Apr., 1999), pp.

163-176 Published by: Southeast Asia Program Publications at Cornell University Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3351381 . Accessed: 15/07/2012 13:54
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Southeast Asia Program Publications at Cornell University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Indonesia.

http://www.jstor.org

Revolution. Princeton: Princeton JamesT. Siegel. Fetish,Recognition, Press,1997.275pages. University

Rosalind Morris In his "Foreword"to the Englishtranslation Friedrich of Kittler's monumental David Wellbery chastises certain a in Networks,1 book,Discourse tendency American to as merely He criticism dismisspost-structuralist out-dated fashion. notes, thought thattheeffort render to rather as something fashion of acerbically, post-structuralism "in" to it and an (whether or "out")is partoftheattempt contain nullify by suggesting Thatwhichcan go outoffashion no historical has To ephemeral quality. significance. is is claims to say thatpost-structuralismno longerfashionable to say thatits first wereexcessive. Suchdismissals onlyrepeata falseSimmelian not radicalism premise, to but they "wish-fulfillment he are,according Wellbery, In merely fantasy."2 contrast, of post-structuralism yetto be actualized assertsthatthe profound has radicality within institutions American the of criticism. literary Such a foreword well introduce T. James Siegel'sbook,Fetish, might Recognition, Revolution. This astonishing texthas the promiseforanthropology that Kittler's DiscourseNetworks forliterary has criticism media studies.And it is similarly and in rooted thephilosophical of announces to project post-structuralism. Siegel'spreface readersthatthe book is indebtedto JacquesDerrida,JacquesLacan, and Martin Thesearenotaltogether common intellectual in Heidegger. companions anthropology, in manycircles, is de rigeur dismissworkwritten it to undertheir influence as and, too as and, at thesame time, beingno longerin fashion. beingprecisely fashionable Whatis so marvelous aboutFetish, Revolution-a book almostas difficult Recognition, to graspas OfGrammatology3-is it demonstrates, uncommon that with and precision the extentto which post-structuralism demands and facilitatesa consistency, It politicallyengaged and empiricallygrounded anthropology. is, in short,a to rebuff thespuriousaxiologythatanthropology chosento inherit has magnificent from the that would opposenotonlyhistory fashion, and but GeorgSimmel: axiology also experience representation, and and philosophy. anthropology Revolution a book aboutthehistory force languagein is and of Fetish, Recognition, the Indonesianrevolution. concerns relationships It the betweenthe emergence of the of and Melayuas a "linguafranca," formation a new kindofauthorial subject, the of and colonizedindividuals.It is workings desirein the space betweencolonizers abouttheplace ofmoney and commerce, and of rumor, thecirculation signs.And itis in abouttheworkings fetishism theconstitution modernity,modernity which of of in a theforce nationalism of would survive and indeedthwart moreradicalpossibility the ofrevolution. Givenitsobjects, withthe immediate Siegel'sbookdemands comparison other"classics" of the field,most notablyGeorge McT. Kahin's Nationalism and
Press,1990). University 2 David Wellbery, in "Foreword," Discourse Networks,vii. p. 3 Jacques trans. Derrida, Grammatology, Gayatri John Of Chakravorty Spivak(Baltimore: Hopkins Press,1976). University 1 Friedrich Discourse trans. Metteer withChrisCullens(Stanford: Stanford Kittler, Networks, Michael

Indonesia 67 (April 1999)

164 RosalindMorris

in and R. in Revolution Indonesia4 Benedict O'G. Anderson's Java a Time Revolution.5 of a It maybe thecase thattwo decades mustpass before new classiccan be added to the canon of so-named texts,and that seems to be the case in the writingof In Indonesia'srevolutionary a Revolution,book history. any case, Fetish, Recognition, theseearliermonuments, whichboth leans upon, and departsfrom, will quickly become mandatory readingforall scholarsof both Indonesianand other(failed) movements. revolutionary in The materials whichSiegelreadsthecauses,traces, effects revolutionary and of in Indonesiaare unusualones foranthropologists: essays,novels,letters, possibility Thisis notbecause he has abandonedthe"real,"nor and otherliterary productions. "cultural in becausehe wantstofind because but, meaning" literary production, rather, of wereproducedin and through he believesthatthesubjects Indonesian modernity in the and, moreparticularly, and through kind of communication-at-alanguage form bothitsliterary itseconomicdimensions) and distancethatthecommodity (in permitted. that about Thoughhe does notciteit,one can surmise thegenesisofthisargument the relationships betweenmoney,language,and historical transformation in lies of of The fetishism. "specter of Siegel'sre-reading Marx'searlytreatment commodity Marx"thathauntsthisbook is,ofcourse, doubled.Its first sourcecan be foundin The and Marxdescribes Economic Philosophic Manuscripts 1844,wherein of money'sability one's actualcapacities one's appearance: "transform insert gap between a and to to all and intotheircontrary," to turn"each [ofone's own] powers into my incapacities Thismagic, magicofdissemination-turned-dissimulation whichitis not."6 a something the whichSiegelreminds nonetheless us to requires lookofanother becomefelt the by who possessesit is themagicofthefetish. is concerned one withtheform that Siegel milieuofIndonesia, wherea process generalization of suchmagictakesin thecolonial inbotheconomic linguistic and forms producing possibility a certain was the kindof of for It a freedom colonialsubjects. is, ironically, freedom bornin themoment thatthe who suffer effects thatdislocation coloniallaw comes to bear on individuals the of between substanceand appearance which is the resultof commodification. The of and risks itat the thefetish appearances, Siegel, recognition produces says annulling sametime. as Siegel is perhapsless cynicalthanMarx about thenatureof such freedom it in thecontext commodity of relations. he holds fastto Marx'ssingular But emerges thatit is notin a parallel between the insight moneyand languagethatone discovers but in the analogy that would link money with "the magic of the commodity oflanguage." Marxian For,theother foreignness specter haunting Siegelseemsto come from Marx'sobservation "Ideas ... first that have tobe translated oftheir out mother and therefore the analogy that tongueinto a foreign tonguein orderto circulate" betweenmoneyand languageexistsonlyinsofar thelatter understood mean as is to
Nationalism Revolution Indonesia and in (Ithaca: Cornell Press,1952). Unviersity 4 GeorgeMcT.Kahin, 5 Benedict O'G. Anderson, ina Time Revolution R. Cornell (Ithaca: 1972). Press, Java of University 6 KarlMarx,TheEconomic Philosophical and ed. (New York: Manuscripts 1844, DirkJ.Struik of 1964), 167-8. Publishers, International pp.

Revolution 165 Fetish, Recognition,

Both and thestructuralist to translation.7 thebourgeois has, response thisobservation of course, been one that fantasizesthe possibilityof total commensurability or movesin theoppositedirection, whileacknowledging any that Siegel translatability. is and bornoftheaspiration universal to linguafranca, Melayuin particular, precisely thatthismisunderstanding in translation. accounts, largepart,forthe Siegelsuggests in failureof revolution Indonesia.In an effort recoverthe radicality to thatwas, in and by the lingua franca,Siegel extends Marx's own nonetheless, generated conclusion to make the "foreignness language" the source of a complex but of It unrealizedfreedom. is a freedom characterized thenon-identity of ultimately by that and therealization difference that (boththe"difference" Marxpositedas subjects of theinternal betweenuse-valueand exchangevalue, contradiction thecommodity and thetemporally deferred dimension identified Derrida'sterm diffrrance) of is the by condition possibility revolution. of for necessary The first of of argument the textconcernsthe emergence a modernauthorial For in themoment thatthewriter subjectivity. Siegel,thiskindofsubjectivity appears ofa giventext to thereaderto produceforthema sharedtemporal location. gestures Sucha "sharedlinguistic milieu"(p. 25) takeson a particular he says,in thecase form, of the "lingua franca," whichis imaginedto be "language itself," language that a traverses differences is therefore all and of totaltranslation. supposedlycapable (p. of about thehistory Melayu is, however, not merelythatit 26) Whatis significant the ideal of a universal but thatit achievesits statusas figures impossible language, themedium communication thedistant of with worldthrough workings money. the of Authorsare not merelythe producersof texts, but theyare the ones who claim for to givereaders theworld. payment theaccessthey thisinaugural via Siegel movesfrom argument, a readingofMohammedBakir's todiscussthecorollary sucha universal of the prosody, language, namely development ofa first an "I," whichis defined substitutability a lackofidentity and on pronoun, by the part of the speaker:"The 'I' of the lingua francais not fullyinhabitedby its of speaker."(p. 31) The consequences such an unstablepronominal positionis first of he claims,in thetranslation SoewardiSoerjaningrat's famousarticle, recognized, "Als ik eens Nederlander was" intoMelayu,as "Djika Saya Nederlander." According to Siegel,thisarticleterrified Dutchbecause it suggestedthattheywere being the "over-heard" and thattheirwords were producingunintended consequences.The of secret however, imagined thoughts theDutchwere, beingoverheard peoplewho, by as usersofthelinguafranca, werenotfully identified withthesubject positionofthe listener. that thisstructure "hearing of outsideofsocialidentity" Indeed,Siegelargues constitutes definitive the attribute themass mediated of that audience,an attribute is in from political the moment which inseparable globalliteratures begantobe translated into Melayu. And it is the factof thisstructure constitutes that both the historical and for to ground thelegitimating argument Siegel'sattention literature: In suchan age oftranslation, within text when'I' speakfrom the and embody the communicative there political are effects. 'I' ofthelingua The poweroflanguage, It therefore, mentally replacecolonialmasters. is ... in its power to compel a
7 KarlMarx, trans. Nicolaus(Harmondsworth: Grundrisse, Martin 1973), 163. Penguin, p.

francais important because throughit one imagines otheridentitiesand can, not

166 RosalindMorris

its to thatits political subjects overhearing, capacity displaceor fissure strange resides.(pp. 36-7) force he remarks "Thisis nota successstory." that Withacidicforeboding, then to of Thisis nota successstory because,according Siegel,theradicalpotential the and of the corollary dissolution hierarchically of organizedand displaced subject, termthatis variously of a unifiedpower, is annulledby the "fetish modernity," The central of with"fetish appearances." of concept thebook,thenotionof replaced of is to "the fetish modernity" perhapsthemostdifficult graspand it comes to the The onlyapproximation an historical of readerin a processof gradualdisclosure. fetishism occursin a footnote overviewof otherconceptsof (note 33) to actually Three. Like the improbableassignationof definitions "language" to of Chapter 2 status intellectual of footnote in Chapter One, thepost-scriptus history surrounding will as a so dense and conflicted discourse thaton fetishism perhapsbe a bitirksome trained theAnglo-American in traditions citational of Even forthosereaders practice. whomSiegelis arguing. wanttoknowwith themostgenerous reader mayoccasionally of from thesesof bothFreud and Marx is the Indeed,theprofundity his departure In obscuredby thishabitof relegating to argumentation a footnote. the occasionally toengagetheliteratures histories of one forgives becauseitpermits this and end, Siegel Indonesia muchmoredirectly. thebenefits everywhere And are palpable. in The idea of the fetishis addressed first a series of discussions about the tale of Njai Dasima, a character who is, fromthe start, endlessly recirculating in therelationship and a certain betweensurface associatedwithexchange instability The ofa who is,nonetheless, and appearance. infamous substitute/simulacrum "wife" not one, Njai Dasima is theone "who embodieswhatpasses between."(p. 63) She movesalongthevector theDutchman's of desirefor satisfaction the"Indonesian" and as in woman's desireformoney. Just value realizesitself thecommodity onlyin the of withdesire-in moment itsexchange(and is annihilated so thefigure Njai of use), Dasima is associatedforSiegelwitha logicof"supplementarity." figures crisis She a and of representation, becomestheobjectaroundwhomthere swirlsdistrust an and therelationships between surface and theauthenticity concerning anxiety appearance oftheoriginal. ifhe readsthecategory theauthor terms bothtextual But of in of and so thesupplement forSiegelboth withinthe extra/inter-textual relations, operates to book and in itsrelationships thesocialcontext itsinscription. of In a stunning abouttheuse ofthephotograph an earlypublication in of argument The Storyof Njai Dasima, Siegel tells us that the photographwas intended to the in a it "ornament" book.Thisornamentation for is, him, completion, thesensethat makes visible a quality of the originalwhich was not visible until it had been bothdrawson, or, supplemented, one might say,translated. 73) Thisobservation (p. and overturns, ChristianMetz's understanding photography an inherently of as fetishistic device whichincites viewersto imaginea space beyondthe frame the of and serveas an inadequatesubstitution for photograph, to thenmakethephotograph For that"beyond."8 Siegel,thephotograph attached thebook as an indexofthat is to which lies "outside." (p. 71) He does not,like Metz, believe thatphotography is
8 Christian and in ed. Metz,"Photography Fetish," TheCritical Image, CarolSquiers(San Francisco: Bay Press,1990), 155-64. pp.

Revolution 167 Fetish, Recognition,

more fetishistic than film,but sees in both technologies capacity to a relatively to And he attributes that capacity a politicallyand manufacture appearances. force.That forceemergesin the momentthat transformative epistemologically to when forexample,the identity, appearancescannotbe trusted revealan original that is merely it cotton thatone sees in a film, ofsilkcan hide thefact and appearance In can more,thatcotton appear to be moresilkthansilkitself. Siegel's analysis,the whenit is accompanied thedemandforan agencythat becomesrepressive force by can claimknowledge whatis hidden. of of We can observe herethedegreetowhich servesas Siegel'sinvocation technology A oriented a foilfora moreontologically has, of project. considerable body oftheory the between film photography. beendevotedto understanding differences and course, him to For Siegel,thesetwo collapse intotheunityof "thecamera,"whichpermits the false idealizationof a "photographic" which is blind precisely seeing engage of because it is incapableof seeingbeyondthesurfaces things. Thus,in discussing articles aboutphotography, a parallelbetweenthe Tirtho's Siegel posits journalistic camera and the lingua franca.(p. 85) Tirtho,it seems, was worried about the of because theypermitted imagesin newspapersettings juxtaposition photographic noblesand soup cans to sitnextto each other. Becausethephotograph was Javanese to containthetruth its original, juxtaposition of the could be deemed an presumed offense. as Siegel discernsherea use of thephotograph image,thatis to say, as a of it condensation essences.In thiscontext, maybe helpful recallthat, thesame to in ran his storiesabout photography (1927),on the otherside of the year thatTirtho Kracauerwas positing muchmorefamousopposition his between world,Siegfried and imagistichistory, between the aspiration to a total photographichistory mimesis-what he called the "general of inventory a naturethatcannotbe further of assessment truth. of reduced"9-and thepossibility a critical Siegel's claim that Tirtho's writingsrest on an understanding the photographas being both a of of and a "condensation whatis knownand said" (p. 86) of reproduction appearances schoolanalysesthanon theBarthesian to restless on Frankfurt belief seems,therefore, is not thata successful of but a photograph precisely a resemblance itsreferent rather essence."10 despitethefactthat sense This "disincarnation whichrevealsa genetic his that ofthestrange shares proximity themassmediamakespossibleevenat a distance School writers, and especiallyWalterBenjamin.It is, much with otherFrankfurt that the between Tirtho's anxiousefforts to however, felicitous convergence Siegelfinds desireto exploit magicthatcomesto the its contain powerand Barthes photography's forehere. Thus does Siegel conclude,"Tirtho'sphotographic image is condensed 86) language."(p. But The claimis thrilling. thereader discomfited here.Indeed, maybe legitimately it one feelscompelled ask whether is precisely camera, to the even ifonlyas a figure, that permitsthe mobilityfromwhich the photographderives its magic or the as the newspaper. Thoughhe suggests much, book does not,to mymind,adequately
9 Siegfried in MassOrnament: Weimar ThomasY. Levin Kracauer, ed., "Photography" The Essays, trans., and with introduction Thomas Levin(Cambridge, Y. Mass:Harvard 1995[1927]), Press, by University pp. 47-61,61. 10RolandBarthes, Lucida: on Camera trans. Howard(New York: ReflectionsPhotography, Richard Noonday,1991[1990]), 102-3. pp.

168 Rosalind Morris

betweenphotography and statewhat it reveals,namelythatit is the relationships and thataccountforthe mass publication, betweenthephotograph thenewspaper, and image.It is not,in theend,thecamera between language convergence particular to the that"has thecapacity recontextualize." 85) It is, rather, newspaper.Siegel (p. thatthe newspapermerelycomes as a supplementto mobilize a mightrespond thatwas bornwiththe camerabut not actualizedthere.However,this possibility and in would need fuller articulation be convincing, itis stillwanting the to argument text. To focus too narrowlyon the camera and the problemof juxtapositionis, to aboutthedemandfor that nonetheless, defer argument Siegel'sbroader recognition In like and aboutswindlers thieves, Soenda the comeswithphotography. stories Berita, is in of increasing powerand function thecolonialpoliceforce tobe understood terms and identity in to between ofthedemandforthem securetherelationship appearance wherea linguafranca made itpossiblefor has to crosstheotherwise a context people identification. Individuals who dressedlikeDutchpeople linesofnational sacrosanct stories and in actuality, But, were,in Tirtho's suspectedofdissimulation. as Adorno once said,thedemandofthemassculture was, and is,to "Becomewhatyou industry that to are." Siegelis able to demonstrate theattempt actualizethiscommandmentof forms thatappearedin magazinesforexample,theimitation commoditized in, effort thepartofthepolice,led to a new understanding on and theresponse that to of he a fetishization appearances. this, meansthatpeople discovered of By appearances, could signify than that moreand differently they thepossibility they intended and to oftheir achievethetransformation selvesin theeyesofothers. Thisconstitutes thereby forSiegel,the "weldingof appearanceto language.""I," who could move between can attention myself to bothappearance through languagesand positions, call others' "I" He becausethelaw responds and utterance. thenexplainsthat, negatively, learns a thatthistransformative is actually power.It needs therecognition others, of play of and the of constitutes secondsection Siegel'sbook. however, thesubject recognition and of in The arguments substantiation arguments Section are Two,"Recognition," relativelymore easily apprehendedthan those of the "Fetish" section.Here, in centered inter-ethnic on the relations (thosebetweenIndonesian discussing literature studentsand Dutch people in Holland and those betweendifferently ethnicized in Java),Siegelextends premise his thata third is thesourceofone's subjects person In own fetishistic significance. Student Hidjau, powerand givesto ititsfullpolitical by findsthestory a youngman who overcomes of the Mas MarcoKartodikromo, Siegel and of "fetish modernity" learnsthepleasureand possibility believing of thathe can in at thatemerges therelationships become anything all. It is a possibility between culturalbackgrounds, possibility a thatsomehowescapes the subjectsof different
prohibitionsof the colonial law which would have forbiddenone to become what one of appeared to be if thatappearance was scandalously transgressive one's putatively proper place. (p. 102) Much has been writtenabout the extrememeasures taken in Indonesia to preventthe crossingof culturaland nationalboundaries,especially when that crossing entailed sexual relations.Siegel pays respectto these analyses, but he is interested less in the prohibitions of the colonial order than in the imaginary possibilities that were actually facilitatedby colonial encounter,possibilities that, nonetheless,"closed down" the revolutionary potentialof literature linking"desire by and imaginationto identity"and particularly, nationalidentity. 104) (p.

Revolution 169 Fetish, Recognition,

in Muchoftherest thebookmaps thehistory whichStudent of Hidjau's encounter into the repressive with an imaginary freedom converted is pursuitof a national that would merelysubstitutefor Dutch hegemonyby containingand identity and muchpathosin this the logicofhierarchy unity. Siegelfinds reproducing latter's that a processwhichhe suggestsis born in the existential homesickness process, within therealization one has a foreign that element oneself. thetime By accompanies he ofH. M. Zainuddin'snovel,Flower is 1928), says,there no ofAtjeh (DjeumpaAtjeh, save thatthequalitiesof theoriginalare difference betweenimageand appearance, in of of made manifest theimage.This "victory thefetish appearance"is, forSiegel, of the death-knell revolution. 143) It is associated with an understanding of (p. of thedomestication theforeign 158),rather thanthe as, modernity quitesimply, (p. of This manifests itself understanding eruption thenew and thedifferent. reactionary in in the erroneous thatcharacters the eminently assumption popular Sino-Malay thattotaltranslation possible.Onlybad translation, novelsmake,namely is especially of oftheconcept "love"and "cinta," seento cause deathor other is catastrophe. Siegel intothenovels about brokendesireand eros at the providesus withgreatinsight boundariesof ethnic readersto understand how it was that community, permitting romance becametheidiomin whichnationalist sentiment founditsmostdeeply petty felt narratives. will Feminist criticics wantSiegelto be morecategorical narratological in identifying womenas themereinstruments masculine of national formation subject and in stating thatit is female like characters, Sitti Saniah,who mustdie to makethe Revolution. point.But thesefactsare not disguisedin Fetish, Recognition, They are of nottheobject a thematized itis in his resistance Indeed, simply ideological critique. the to to suchthematizations Siegelcan permit stories workforus as they that might havefor their readers. Whateverelse one may have wanted of the discussionof romancenovels, it becomes possible to anticipate, thispointin the book, the path thatSiegel will at thathe willhave to follow. After we knowthattheIndonesian revolution follow, all, becamea mere WarofIndependence, that and and communists weretobecome youths thevictims an authoritarian whoseviolences of state have knownfewlimits. Yet,it is to that a testimony thesuccessofSiegel'sargument therestofthebook is notsimply narration that of but it to and toilluminate how the denouement that continues explore in course of history Indonesiawas determined the forms representation of that by of moments: theworkings languageand itsrelationships to dominated by subsequent other of This technologies transmission. is whatmakesthebook so valuableforother who are notIndonesianists. is also whyother like like This scholars, myself, scholars, are probablygoing to read the book as literature, and to scrutinizeits myself, on operations thelevel of textual although practice. Theywill notbe disappointed, there manyoccasions, are whenreadingFetish, that Revolution, one feels Recognition, in likea diviner searchof theghostly interlocuters It whomSiegel is engaging. is as wishes forhis reader to experience of his own writing thoughSiegel something of of theorists-in orderthat practice-anexperience beinghaunted thetraces other by the from fetishism wouldidentify that imageand origin.
she comprehendhow radical a notion the "trace" mightbe, how different would be it

Whatof theseinterlocuters? hearsDerrida'sdiscourse "supplementarity" One on the and Lacan's understanding of throughout book. Freud'snotionof theuncanny formation be felt can between and behindthelines.Butin his prosestyle, is it subject

170 RosalindMorris

and Kafkawho seem to be themostnaughtily and obtusely Kierkegaard persistent notionof repetition, a jest to be enjoyedbut not as Indeed, Kierkegaard's specters. seemsto inform takentoo earnestly Siegel'sapproachto the exceptin itsobservation, The of readingitself.11 accountsof the storiesand novels from which he practice in of "fetish appearance" of unfold thetext a strange as derives notion modernity's his a as witheach itself kindofre-writing,"copying" it were,in whicha space inscribes the of This and effort specify content thereferent. is bothappropriate performative to of that of ofthenotion authorship Siegeldevelopsat thebeginning thebook,wherehe in into in the himself thetext theveryactof that moment whicha copyist states copies of A as he alienation, well as a certain copying, achievesthestatus authorship. certain to of of is hereunderstood be thecondition possibility literature. Independent spacing, ambition achievement, citational and the ofhis own authorial logicand therepetitive an of this labor, marking bookas theenactment perform important specifications texts of thanthereflection deconstructionist rather reading. in of Revolution. Thereare manysuchgestures specification Fetish, The Recognition, mosttranslated Siegel,are generally numerous followed summary by by quotations, whichreiterate without thecontent thecitation. citation The of is statements, reducing butnotsuperficially. does Siegelperform classic a on Thus treated itssurface, literally, the He gestureof Freudian(dream)interpretation. resists hermeneutic gesturethat would seek a correspondingly and meaningforany utterance singleand originary willmanifest in thatunconscious themselves thetransformed assumes,instead, logics surfaces of speech throughassociative linkages that will have to be pursued and retrospectively without guarantee. A briefexample of this tacticcomes fromChapterEight,"Collaborationand in CautiousRebellion," whichSiegelinterrogates writings variousindividuals the that to submitted a contestmarkingthe thirtieth of of anniversary the proclamation One submission comesfrom womanwho,inwriting, a describes role the independence. herhusband, physician, a the for playedin "educating" masses(rakyat) independence. the of She describes miraculousness thefact he was tricking Dutch the that, although whileappearing be their to he in of collaborator, was notturned by theinhabitants his in thefactthatnotone of the of their district, Kadungora.She finds proof solidarity this her as 31,000co-residents betrayed man,herhusband. Siegeldescribes writing an of thefearthatpeople experience when theybelieve their names to be explanation and this as control, he understands explanatory circulating beyondtheir gesture the of Soewardiinaugurated. 190)And he focuses on veryapotheosis theprocessthat (p. thewoman'sremarks therelationship between thepeople,and the regarding money, of the the question purity, citing following enigmatic passage,inwhich womanmarvels at herhusband'sdoubledexistence thetrust elicits and he from boththerakyat the and Dutch: is The Humanity stillpure.Thinkof thewages whichtherakyat paid directly! on appreciationof the Dutch towardFather's[the husband's] influence the had fullconfidence father. 191) in people ofKadungora; they (p.
11SerenKierkegaard, in and ed.,trans., "Repetition" Fear Trembling/Repetition, HowardV. and Edna H. Princeton 1983[1843]). (Princeton: Press, Hong University

Revolution 171 Fetish, Recognition,

It their that "'The people' pay wages and itindicates purity. indicates, Siegelfollows: moredeeply: do nottalk."He thenprobestheremark their is, respect. Theypay; they in would have had difficulty continuing their their "Without wages,thefunctionaries of It the work.Theywould have ceased tobe functionaries.is,finally, payment wages the'people,'and 'functionary."' Siegel's between thatensuresa difference Yet, rakyat, the seems to overturn previousone and it announcesits own subsequentstatement "But." role differentiating withtheword, one But'thepeople' pay as a signoftheir Precisely, is led to be believe, respect. the to do forthesamereasonthey notreport camat theDutch.Thosewho do not But had did who wishtobe hisenemy, an opportunity. they not him, appreciate of take it. Here, one sees the solidarity the rakyat. They appreciate,theypay wages to mark that appreciationor theydo not appreciate,and they talk, is. the spreading wordofwho one really (p. 191,myemphasis) the of from strange thanthisin extracting juxtaposition Siegel will go even further in thiscontext, a and moneyin thewoman'swriting, conclusion that, money purity "a It a as "does not function payment." is, rather, gift, tokenof theiresteem.Her is circulating onlyin definedcircumstances, opposed to talk,which moneyas gift, circulateswithoutlimit."(p. 191). One mightsay, then,that moneyhas lost its for can dimension, no longerstandas a substitute thelinguafranca. Siegel linguistic of for that, people ofthisclass,thethreat therevolution remarking goes stillfurther, at that of residedin thefeeling proximity one experienced communicating a through of the and again,itis thisforce, force languageand ofcommunication, distance. Again at that itself across the space of mass-mediation, Siegel identifies the transmitting such mediated And again and again,he findspeople resisting heartof revolution. This as a sourceofcontamination. is, as he says,"nota successstory." relationships in of The progression Siegel'sreading thepassagejustcitedis rather breath-taking, of content" "semantic He bothin itsreachand itsrapidity. goes beyondtheseeming the statement (and its broader context)to find evidence of a complex logic of of all in and socialrelations precedethesubjects language, signification whichmoney, an isomorphic is The therevolution. point, however, notthathe discerns relationship of (Levibetweenthesign and money.He does not repeatthetruisms structuralist nor Straussianor Foucaultian)analysis and findabsolute contingency, read the fact. substance be an irreversible Thiswould be thereflex to of dislocation value from to oneswho imagine economies be themere ofless accomplished readers, gift gesture that understands of antecedents thoseorganized monetary Instead, Siegel exchange. by It communication. is as can by moneycan be contained fetishism, be used to prohibit as as withgifting exchange, as cancellation deferral, to be associated vengeance likely in in thatit mustbe understood He communication. understands, short, continued of and ways. In the context the Indonesian particular historically ethnographically even as it held open the communication he could prevent revolution, says,currency of It of distance. could becometheinstrument therevolution's possibility traversing It and into conversion something repressive, hierarchical. could and itdid. As unitary, of far as the theorization money goes, then,the point is history.One cannot will nor will knowin advanceifrevolutions succeed, ofmoney one understand, cannot oriented Siegel's of Thisis themosthistorically of cancellation. be thecurrency their A the [Duke worksto date (excluding evenmorerecent NewCriminal inIndonesia Type

172 RosalindMorris

is morevisible Press,1998])and itsinsistence uponhistoricizationnowhere University of thanin thistreatment money. witha repetition thetext. repetition of leads to a So, Siegel achievesthisanalysis achieves purpose-in Kierkegaard's its sense.A summary a of and difference, thereby someelements givesthemup formorecareful, moreexciting, and and text estranges But and Indeed, differences scrutiny. thereare otherrepetitions, otherdifferences. forexample, movement the often becomevisiblebecause ofa failedrepetition. Take, moves between betweenparagraphstoward the book's end where Siegel finally and "modernism." This time, is describing another a contestant, Siegel "modernity" his to of man who recounts submission slogansand his killing Dutch soldiers.The willbecomeclear," "for remarks nameofthismanis withheld, reasonsthat Siegelin a The The reasonconcerns contents the footnote.12 reasonsare at leasttwo-fold. first of to But the he reflect thestory: confesses killing. beyondthis, writings theuse of upon of the "passwords."Siegeluses thisnotion passwordin a complexkindofjest,citing own self-representation a singleletter with while invoking idea of the the writer's as and whathe describes thefailure literature of cryptogram usingit to slidebetween The nameofthewriter in Indonesiaand thehighmodernist literature FranzKafka. of to at who confesses hurling grenades theDutchis "K." One might by-pass-as mere resonance between narrator theconfession, carries his the of coincidence-the who out for rolein theIndonesian without understanding larger ever the struggle independence whichhe works, and "K" or "Joseph of TheTrialand TheCastle. K" scenariowithin These "K"s remainsimilarly blind to the logic of thatsystemto which theyare on nonetheless call. Butone surmises thatSiegelis too knowing writer have bya to and so one wants to pursue it further. Indeed, the passed thisresonancehimself, makesclearhis affection theplay of initials a means of engagingthe for as preface of and of itself. problem alphabetization, thence, writing It is in thediscussionofK (on page 216) thatSiegelslips betweenthe "fetish of and the "fetishof modernism."One wonders, initially,if it is a modernity" errorand, as thereare so manyin thelatter sectionof thebook (for typographical Princeton whichfact Pressoughtto apologize),thedoubtis notwithout University merit. themovement But finds reasonlaterin thetextand turns (it seems) to its out have beenmorethanaccidental. passagebegins, The "With thefetish modernity of K, has been set aside. He is nottheoutcome thepathofnationalism have traced." of we Insteadhe is alignedwithSoewardi, writer the who imagined himself a Dutchman as as only to disavow identification a Dutchmanand, thus,to achieve the power of whata Dutchman be The "K imagining might thinking. passagecontinues, showsthat thefetish modernism nottheonlyway to independence." of was Modernism would
have defeated modernityif it could have recognized the power of language as the inherent the lingua francaas itbecame a nationallanguage." (p. 216) in

K anotherpossibility power of non-identity. "won no prize" but he "represents In Siegel'stext, "fetish modernity..,. the of formed whena certain linguistic power became evidentwhen it seemed to summonauthority it." (p. 216) And he against
remarksthatthe "full appropriationof the forceof language perhaps could only take awakened awareness of linguisticpower." (p. 216) K does place aftersuch recognition
12Footnote 274. 1,p.

Revolution 173 Fetish, Recognition,

such awarenesswould have made hima properly nothave such awareness, though He and notjust a modern, modernist, subject. might perhapshave becomea writer. in notoffer comparison for thator a madman.Siegeldoes Either anyonelikeArtaud, and of whom thetwinpossibilities literature madnesswould be united.Instead,he us thetwo possibilities separatelives.On theone hand,we have K, a man as gives a to to beholden slogansand thepoweroftheforeign: revolutionary subject the utterly of a time the hand,we have a man mourning end power of language.On theother in it a satisfaction killing. whenhe couldfind enough is thislatter figure, man Ironically called MNT, ratherthan K, who exhibitsthe mark of Kafka's epistolaryand in a pronoun thethird person. writing, namely use ofthefirst-person autobiographical that violenceis thenpairedwiththefreedom The lunacyof thisman's inexhaustible and in excess of,a dissociatedfrom, was suggestedby the birthof an "I" forever speaker. He In theend,though, Siegelgivesus morethanviolence. also givesus theworkof the ofbothrevolution literature, and a one manin whomhe finds thwarted possibility in madnessthat kepthima prisoner his own home, has manwho,despitetheinsistent AnantaToer. lucid:Pramoedya has remained In the last sectionof thebook,Siegel providesa fulltranslation analysisof and + Maid," whichwas written 1948 in "Flunky PramoedyaAnantaToer's shortstory, It is was in prisonas a counter-revolutionary. a tale ofgenealogical whilePramoedya in and for and abjection thecolonialcontext, it exemplifies, Siegel,all degeneration in Revolution.is also here, to It that has beenattempting theorize Fetish, he Recognition, thatK's in the "Epilogue,"thatSiegel concludeshis discussionof K and remarks in violenceinstead.A violence to fetishism, attempting avertrecognition, produced in And and sublimated transposed reading, produceartor literature. might, a Freudian thisis what Siegel findsin Pramoedya'swork.Because he did not succumbto the with Dutchhierarchy Indonesian which nationalist merely replaced hierarchy, program, and is Pramoedya botha revolutionary a writer. saysSiegel, and sisternamed Sobi and Inah, Pramoedyatellsof In writing about a brother this and people who investforeignness-in case bothJapaneseness Dutchness-with in tonational "a signification excessofwhat fetishistic categories powerby attributing "theforeign foreign as therefore would mean to Dutchor Japanese." They posit they and yet with the promiseof possessionof it." (p. 244-5)In thisstory, foreignness submit to to itself themen,to thecolonialmasters whomtheslavishservants attaches in It themselves. is also thematized theobjectsof desireand thesignsof power that + Sobi's the typified "flunky maid" seek: namely"two radios and a phonograph." in theoriginal) one ofher who is re-Christened mother, Rodinah, "Dolly" (Poppi by be whenshe becomespregnant and tuans, might fathers persuadessix menthatthey extractsfromthem supportfor the child who is "50 percent"hers. The profits in houseinsideofwhichwere: obtained thismanner permit Dollyto "builda masonry The storycontinues, two radios and a gramophone." "Nightand day these three one the And Dolly,believing soundedoff after other!" thatshe has becomethe objects "Who can compete?"(p. 235). Dolly gives birthto of her name,asks herself, dolly anotherchild, this one named Inah, and acts out the same strategy. Gradually, she and however, becomesdisenchanted, whenshedies,"Noteventhetworadiosand thegramophone understood" cause ofherillness(p. 235). the

174 RosalindMorris

in own philosophy theforeign an authorial in of jest, Siegeldiscovers Pramoedya's The characters withwhichhe narrates story. the confuse names forthings. theirony et insteadof"divide Dollybecomeslikea "realdoll."She hears"divideand surrender" to becomesa narrative corruption of and And theeffort writea genealogy impera." rather thanreproduction. dissimulation of are beingonlya rank("native Althoughtheorigins thegenealogy lost,there of at the beginning the accountof originsand not a person's identity, sergeant") of makeshim And itis histelling thestory, tellsthestory. saysSiegel,that Pramoedya which exceeds the individual and the spokespersonof a positionforsomething voice of speakers."What has been effacedcomes back. And it unitary putatively in It comesbackat bestonlyambiguously thevoiceofthenarrator. comesback,rather, be of that as something added, something cannot held back." (p. 251) The real irony thatin thetitle, of lies in its unsettling thetitle. the story, however, Siegel remarks if does nothing notdemonstrate the between languages.The story commensurability a betweenlanguages. In writing storyof inevitable absolute incommensurability which would have overcomesthe fetish, degeneration, says Siegel, Pramoedya it.Pramoedya "hearstheforeign" as to contain foreignness recognizing by attempted to domesticate and thereby theverypossibility without it, such, "upset[s] attempting words of Sobi, words in which the His of recognition." textrepeatsthe recurring content a foreign of languagebecomemeresounds: "yua apprehended imperfectly alwees in mai haat." And in so doing, says Siegel, Pramoedya insinuatesthat is and the something foreign to be foundat home.Thus does he escape nationalism for of substitution Indonesian inequality Dutchinequity. witha certain aboutSiegel'smovement, slip his One can therefore curiosity persist And one can wish thathe from to betweenrepetitions, "modernity" "modernism." the of ironizedfetish Pramoedya's text: would have pursuedmorecompletely other In tooquickly theinstruments itself. myopinion, Siegelpasses by through technology "hear the foreign." One wants him to pause and which Pramoedya's characters in "soundedoff after one the consider moment whichtheradiosand thegramophones in withthem.Just the other!"And the moment whichDolly's heart"reverberated" the of the no she before dies,Dollyexperiences dislocation herbodyand mind, former commands." 235) The "worldkeeps turning," "mental thelatter's (p. longerobeying but likeany automaton (and anylong-playing record), she does not.She dies and the standsas cause and are Here a technology radios and gramophone dumbfounded. the survivorof a human death.Pramoedyagrantstechnology statusof the lingua whichone hearsold sounds from far as it; franca, Siegel describes it is thatthrough are that away, again and again. The radiosand thegramophone like thetelephone,
which makes K of TheCastlea man who is always "on call," even beforehe instrument the of knows what summons him. It is foreign (dare technology, technology the foreign one say the mass media) which seduces Dolly, and which renders her ethicallyand politicallyimpotent.13
131am indebted heretoAvital Ronell's "TheWorst of essay, Neighborhoods theReal:PhilosophyDiacritics 1989. 1.1, Telephone-Contamination,"

"Flunky + Maid," the use of the "+" sign both evokes and ridiculesthe fantasyof total

Revolution 175 Fetish, Recognition,

of de Modernist writers theEuropeanfin siecle have attempted inscribe to the might and sound ofthattransmission themselves writing into machines, thereby achieving what Pramoedya only describes, namely the autonomization and even the Friedrich Kittler (in sense)ofthebodyvis-a-vis technologization Heidegger's language. has indeedidentified suchan impulsein Kafka, well as Artaudand thesurrealists. as the And, as Siegel suggests, loss ofpropernamesin "Flunky+ Maid" sharesmuch K. of withKafka'sstories K and Joseph Thoughthequotecomesfrom it Kittler, might "Bare and dismembered well have been Siegel writing, names cannot supporta of Bildung."14 Difference hereas surely a scratch the continuous as on history erupts of the surface vinylenters sound ofthemusicbeingplayed.Pramoedya's characters whichforeign are overtaken theinstruments voices speak and offer their by through seductions. And one can surmise, though Siegeldoes not,thatthisis how one repays his debt and takeshis revengeon Conrad's "Karain,"15 exile's colonialstory the in which a gramophone also stands as figureof modernity's of fetish, the desire to possess and containthatwhich comes fromoutside. Had he pursued this secret have wantedto draw out the lineage(whichis also one of corruption), Siegelmight differences between and modernism more than movement his between terms modernity What began with the camera should perhaps have ended with the permits. gramophone.For in the end, the gramophoneis a far bettermetaphorfor the transmission whichconveysthe factof transmission thanthe camera,which,in its exaltstheillusionofflawless assimilation naturalism, to The transparency. sound of thegramophone itself never is and certainly as repressible not as absolutely repressible is thelens.Thisresidue as Siegelhimself central Pramoedya's to is, notes, story. it When Pramoedyaends "Flunky+ Maid" by describing as a simple story, and to eatingand defecation, whenhe remarks thatthosewho reducing everything the of kill he for perceive tediousness thisprocessmustsurely themselves, articulates leaves a remainder and thatthe Siegel the primary principlethatall assimilation of is of The acknowledgment thatremainder theprerequisite literature. suicidesare those people who still operate according to the dualism of meaning and The at meaninglessness. modernists, least in Kittler's analysis,are thosewho have abandoned such oppositionsfor another,that between communication and, as do it,"din." But thesetwo categories not exhaustall possibilities. Pramoedyaputs and madnessstandas the other, Bothrevolution recurrent Under the possibilities. latter also describes thosewho,likeMNT, have fusedwiththeir rubric, rifles, Siegel instruments. is difficult want this,to want it to have It to becomingone withtheir happened morethanit did (and it happeneda lot). But when Siegel concludeshis book by suggesting thedesireforunity that whichunderlines fetish modernity the of thefailure theIndonesian of it is difficult disagree.For,as so to revolution, explains many other fine Indonesianists (many of them influenced by Siegel) have the of with which demonstrated, fantasy a unifiedIndonesianculture(a fantasy cultural has been all too complicit) a muchgreater violence. anthropology performed The deaths (intellectual, and social) thatresultedfromthatviolence,a material, violenceutterly in repressed thetheme parkwithwhichSiegelopens his book,have
14Kittler, Discourse Networks, 341. p. 15Joseph A "Karain: Memory," Eastern in Western (New York:Carroll Skies and Graf, Conrad, Skies, 1990),pp. 129-60.

176 RosalindMorris

In also been effaced.16 Fetish, Revolution, are allowed to hauntonce Recognition, they but again. For this,not only Indonesianists, otherSoutheastAsianistsand social of and of be anthropologists-to nothing historians theorists modernism-must say And in the wake of this book, it will be impossible to dismiss postgrateful. as structuralist Those who fearits radicality will, anthropology apoliticalfashion. wantto dustoff someolderfetishes. however, probably
16Siegelcites of Pemberton's account thetheme See from John Indonesia,' park. "Recollections 'Beautiful Public Culture (1994): thePostmodern)," 241-262. (Somewhere 6,2 Beyond