English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 1-8 ISSN 1823 6820

The lowering of the Union Jack for the last time at twelve midnight on 31 August, 1957 in Kuala Lumpur, the capital of the Federation of Malaya marked a new era in the newly independent nation. The British colonialist policy of bringing in workforces from the Indian sub-continent and China to the Malay dominant states left a legacy of a plural society. The plural society used to rule itself according to the agreed constitution based on the English Westminster parliamentary system. Apart from the issues of socio-economic development, the new nation had to tackle the problem of multiethnicity which meant they also had to avoid racial discord and disunity. The problem of disunity can be viewed from both the economic and educational aspects. According to Ryan (1972:246). These problems were important:
Firstly there was the economic imbalance between the two largest communities, the Malays and the Chinese, in that the Malays had a disproportionally small share (as farmers and agriculturists) of the national wealth. One community with such an economic grievance would hinder the growth of national unity. Secondly, there was the need to hasten the assimilation of the Malayan Chinese and Indians by setting out a national policy of education which would emphasize Malayan unity.

Based on the problems of national unity and nation building during post-independent Malaya from the 1960s onwards, this study focuses on the themes of ethnicity and ethnic relations as presented in literary works by the representatives of the predominant ethnic groups in Malaysia. Achieving this purpose involves a comparison of two novels, Menteri (1967) by Shahnon Ahmad and In a Far Country (1993) by K.S. Maniam. Both texts were chosen because they have posed common problems, that is of ethnic relations between the three major races in Malaysia regarding their dilemmas, fears and apprehensions of one another and what the future has in store for them. All these problems are presented in both novels in the respective writers peculiar and unique style. The texts are deemed comparable due to their main themes, namely the problems of ethnic relations after the period of British colonialism in the Federation of Malaya, and after 1963 with the inclusion of Sabah and Sarawak in the Federation of Malaysia. However, it would not be a viable comparison if the texts shared similar views and allowed only a one-sided convergent analysis. Therefore the viability of this thematic study is seen from other

English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 1-8 ISSN 1823 6820

aspects within the main theme of ethnicity. The question of racial identity, for instance, was dealt with in great depth in one novel but not in the other, due to the respective writers ideological agenda. In addition, both writers are from different ethnic groups, thus they could present the feelings and sentiments of their respective communities better, and which allows an analysis of the aspects of divergence in both texts. Another rationale for the selection of these texts is the writers backgrounds. Both of them are well-known, prolific writers in their own way. Shahnon Ahmad, the author of Menteri is a popular figure in Malay literature. He was awarded the Anugerah Sastera Negara (The National Literary Award) in 1982 by the Malaysian government with the title of Sasterawan Negara (The National Literary Laureate). He was born in 1933 in the district of Sik, Kedah in the village of Kampung Banggol Derdap which became the setting for his famous novel Ranjau Sepanjang Jalan (No Harvest but a Thorn) in 1966. This novel highlights the suffering of the poverty stricken Malay farming community. He was also a controversial writer when he touched on political matters. He created a polemic among Malay literary critics and also among politicians with his satirical and surrealistic novel, Shit in 1999 (Sohaimi, 2001:101). This novel satires certain government leaders. His other novels also commented on the Malay political leadership and the poverty of the Malays. He is a writer who likes to experiment with various styles and approaches and also pays careful attention to the problems within and outside the Malay community (Solehah 1998:75). Formely an academician in USM in Penang and a Member of Parliament for Sik, his birthplace, it can be seen that his concern for his ethnic group is reflected in his novels and political activities. K.S. Maniam is also a prolific writer of almost all the genres.He was the recipient of the Raja Rao Award for outstanding literary works by South Asian diasporic writers from the Samvad India Foundation (Fadillah, 2004:170). He was born in 1942 in Bedong, Kedah. He was the descendant of Indian migrants during the colonial days. His father was a laundryman in the local hospital and also a rubber tapper. The writers experiences growing up in an estate became the basis for his first novel, The Return. (Fadillah, 2004: 168) Formerly a teacher and then a professor for the University of Malaya, he is now retired and is involved in full-time writing. Like Shahnon, Maniam too, is concerned with the problems and the dilemma of ethnicity among his own people- the Indian community. The Return (1981), for instance portrays the struggles of the
3

English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 1-8 ISSN 1823 6820

migrant community and in this case, the protagonist of the novel has found success through his perseverance and English education. In conclusion, the backgrounds of both writers have not only led to the theme of diversity in ethnicity but also to a sense of unity in terms of nationhood. The analysis of the chosen texts follow the American school of Comparative Literature as defined by Henry Remark (Bassnett, 1993:31):
Comparative literature is the study of literature beyond the confines of one particular country, and the study of the relationships between literature on the one hand, and the other areas of knowledge and belief , such as the arts, philosophy, history, the social sciences, the sciences, religion etc on the other. In brief, it is the comparison of one literature with another or others, and the comparison of literature with other spheres of human expression.

The American school is more flexible, meaning it transgresses boundaries and according to Remark, could also compare things other than literature (Bassnett, 1993:32). In this comparative analysis, the two novels have transgressed the language border between the Malay and English language, even though it is done within the political boundaries of one nation, namely Malaysia. The novels go beyond the confines of ethnicity with their comparison of the Malay and Indian cultures. In looking at the ideological and also the historical and cultural factors in comparing the texts, this study adheres to the post-colonial literary theory and in certain aspects to Marxist literary thought. The foremost issue in the comparison would be the question of ethnicity in post-colonial criticism. According to Aschroft (et al. 2002:800):
Ethnicity is a term that has been used increasingly since the 1960s to account for human variation in terms of culture, tradition, language, social patterns and ancestry refers to the fusion of many traits that belong to the nature of any ethnic group: a composite of shared values, beliefs, norms, tastes, behaviours, experiences, consciousness of kind, memories and loyalties.

The next concept to be touched in this analysis would be hegemony, which as a post colonial term means the power of the ruling class to convince other classes that their interests are the interests of all.(Ashcroft et al. 2002:116). Similar to the Marxist definition, it connotes power and domination, and added to the aspect of domination is the relation between social classes. (Williams,
4

English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 1-8 ISSN 1823 6820

1985:108). The other inseparable half of hegemony is definitely ideology. Addressing both postcolonial and Marxist definition, Ashcroft (2002:221) states that ideology means:
a system of idea that explains, or makes sense of society, and according to Marx is the mechanism by which unequal social relations are reproduced. The ruling classes not only rule, they rule as thinkers and producers of ideas so that they determine how society sees itself (hegemony)

The theme of ethnicity and ethnic relations in the two novels are discussed within the framework of the mentioned literary theories. The sense of ethnic identity is strong in both texts: the Malayness in Menteri and the Indianness in In a Far Country. The Malay characters with the protagonist Bahadur, a cabinet minister, his wife, Nurimah and daughter, Hawa and his secretary, Sidek are the prominent characters. Bahadur represents the dominant Malay political party in control of the government. The concern of Bahadur and his government is the welfare of the Malays and their survival; socially, economically, and politically in the future alongside the other ethnic groups. Bahadur worries so much about the future of the Malays that he puts the blame for their problems on the other races. At the end of the novel, after being unconscious because of stress, and through the advice of his opportunist secretary, he proposes to the central committee of the ruling party a resolution blaming the Malay civil servants for the failure of the Malays. The crux of this novel rests on the problems of a single ethnic group due to the anxiety of the Malays regarding the presence of migrant groups as a result of British policy. Similarly, in In a Far Country, the theme focuses on the anxiety of a single ethnic group, the Indians as represented by Rajan, about the uncertainty of the migrant race in the future and whether the spirit of nationalism and love for the country could still exist in an independent nation. History has shown that there were divisions among ethnic lines even before independence, especially with the British divide and rule policy: According to Kennedy (1970:253):
The divisions of Malaya before the Second World War were racial as well as political. Although Malaya provided a fine example of racial harmony, the small balance in numbers which existed between Malays and Chinese, and the existence of a very considerable Indian minority put further difficulties in the way of potential national unity. 5

English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 1-8 ISSN 1823 6820

Nevertheless, both novels show some differences in terms of ethnicity. Menteri has portrayed only Malay characters, although the other ethnic groups are described through the dialogue of the main characters only. They are not given a voice and do not have a say in determining the future of the country. This situation is due to the writers racial sentiments probably because of the conditions of the time the novel was written that is in 1967, two years before the May 13th tragedy. This tragedy refers to the ethnic riots in Malaysia on 13th May 1969 after the general election. The ruling party, the Alliance, failed to get a two-third majority in Parliament. The opposition parties managed to encroach into the Alliances strongholds. The riots notably in the federal capital of Kuala Lumpur, started as a result of inflammatory political speeches and victory processions by opposition parties. (Zaharom, 2002:124). It was also felt that the ethnic distrust and enmity due to the economic imbalance, led to the tragedy. (Zaharom, 2002:127). The only nonMalay described in the novel is Pugusami, an opposition Member of Parliament. Bahadur is not happy with Pugusami because he is an active opposition member who is critical of the governments policy:
Tell him to go back to his homeland if he does not like to be here. Tell him to go back with his people. People like Pugusamy cannot be entertained much. (Shahnon, 1967:44)

However, K.S Maniam wrote his novel in 1993, many years after the tragedy ended and when there was much mingling and understanding between the races in Malaysia. The voices of each ethnic group can be heard such as in the character of Rajan, Zulkifli, Lee Shin, and a few others each with their respective views and ideas on nationality and ethnic relations. There are differences in both texts in relation to hegemony and ideology. Menteri focuses on the hegemony of the Malay administrative elite. The elite were wielding their power and influence and enforcing their ideology of economic development of the Malays in order to survive against the other races. Bahadur, representing the Malays, still believes in democracy and also feudalism to maintain the status quo. On the other hand, In a Far Country, does not portray the presence of hegemony or ideology directly. It shows the different ethnic groups trying to adapt to one another. It does not portray the role of the administrators or policy makers as in Menteri. Nevertheless, there is a bit criticism of the prevailing political condition when Jimmy Kok comments on Rajan:
6

English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 1-8 ISSN 1823 6820

You say things too openly, he says. You must hide your real self. Otherwise youll be in danger. If Im not myself Ill be in danger. I say. See what I mean? he says There are eyes and ears everywhere (Maniam, 1993:156)

The dialogue above shows some kind of surveillance or a big brother kind of rule in the country. The writer has been discrete himself in conveying his message about ethnic relations, a message which could be sensitive to the powers that be but could be deemed subversive and thus inciting racial tension. Both novels have a similarity in the changes to the younger generation as a result of the modern way of life, especially to the Malays. In Menteri, the characters of Sidek and Hawa show the new post-independence generation that has developed a lackadaisical attitude. Sidek makes use of Bahadurs position for his own benefit and wants to marry Hawa only for political influence. Hawa only enjoys her career and is not at all concerned with her fathers struggle to help the Malays. In In a Far Country, Zulkiflis son, Mat also shows the beginning of decadence in youths:
Mat resembles some of the young men, really boys who leave the kampungs and small towns for the city in search of the glamorous and successful life. (Maniam, 1993:134)

A final aspect of the convergence of these texts is in the presentation of the themes in a subtle way. Issues related to racial sentiments can be considered seditious by the authorities and as such, both writers have avoided the realistic presentation of the problems but instead opt for surrealism, which according to Abrams (1999:310) a revolutionary movement in arts as well as literature and often joined forces with another revolutionary movement in the political and social realm. Surrealist presentation in literature include aspects of hallucinative writing, flights of fantasy, dreamlike and nightmarish sequences (Abrams, 1999:311). Bahadurs dream in which the Malays were angry with him in 1987, twenty years later, made him realize his mistakes and the present government failure to help the Malays. The dream is actually a critique of the governments policy in certain aspects. In In a Far Country, the quest for the mystical tiger by Zulkifli and Rajan is symbolic of the quest for the spirit of the land, Malaya or Malaysia for the benefit of all. Rajan, a businessman from the
7

English Language Journal Vol 3, (2009) 1-8 ISSN 1823 6820

Indian immigrant community, tries to find a sense of belonging in the new land, symbolized by his quest for the tiger. Zulkifli is the Malay character who takes Rajan into the interior to face the tiger. The plot is symbolical of the struggles of the earlier immigrant communities, namely the Chinese and Indians, to be accepted in their adopted land. Zulkifli represents the Malays who are willing to accept them into society and forge national unity In conclusion, the texts discussed in this study have a similar theme of ethnic relations and its repercussions for the future. The novels differ in the way in which the problems of ethnicity are explored according to the writers intention and racial bias. Thus Shahnon Ahmad focuses on the problems of the Malays in anticipation of the inevitable future with the presence of other races. K.S Maniam looks at the problem of ethnicity with other groups in mind, even though he leans more on his ethnic Indian background. He tries to synthesize them to build a single united nation, with each ethnic group contributing to the development but not totally exploiting it. It is hoped that the approach to the problem discussed in the texts can be further explored since it involves ideology. The writers ideology and the ideology of the masses together with the authorities normally shape the theme of literary works.

REFERENCES
Abrams, M.H, (1999). A Glossary of Literary Terms. (7th Ed.) Orlando: Harcourt Brace College Publishers Ashcroft, B., Griffiths, G., Tiffin, H., (2002). Post-Colonial Studies: The Key Concepts. London: Routledge Bassnett., Susan, (1993). Comparative Literature: A Critical Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Fadillah M., Ruzy S,H., Ganakumaran, S., Raihanah M. (2004). Voices of Many Worlds. Subang: Times Edition Kennedy, J. (1970). A History of Malaya (2nd Ed.). London: Macmillan Maniam, K.S. (1993). In a Far Country. London: Skoob Books Publishing Co. Ryan, N. J. (1972). The Making of Modern Malaysia and Singapore. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press. Shahnon Ahmad, (1967). Menteri. Alor Setar: Dinas Penerbitan Pustaka Sekolah. Sohaimi Abdul Aziz, (2001). Kesusasteraan Bandingan. Kuala Lumpur: Utusan Publications & Distributors Sdn Bhd. Solehah Ishak et al. (trans), (1998). Malaysian Literary Laureates .Kuala