GeoJournal (2006) 66:161–163 DOI 10.1007/s10708-006-9033-0

Heritage, politics and identity in Southeast Asia: an introduction Rahil Ismail Æ Ooi Giok Ling Æ Brian J. Shaw

Published online: 26 October 2006 Ó Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

‘Heritage’ and ‘identity’ are terms and issues that are inherently challenging but add the inevitable components of politics and space, and an intriguing landscape emerges. In themselves, both terms can be construed as amorphous and rarefied concepts that might be addressed by higher echelons of authority, but, as outlined in the following collection of papers, heritage and identity play an integral and fundamental role in the development of not only ‘manufactured’ national identity but also as the personal manifestation of self on space and politics. Both heritage and identity can be the people’s sources of meaning and experience (Castells, 2004 p. 6). In this collection of papers, the authors consider the process of identity construction as one upon which the contradictions and dispositions of the surrounding socio-cultural environment have

R. Ismail Æ O. G. Ling National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 637616, Singapore B. J. Shaw (&) School of Earth and Geographical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, 6009 Crawley, WA, Australia e-mail: [email protected]

a profound impact (Frosh, 1999). If, as the postmodernists have argued, there has been a decentring of identities and fragmentation because of globalisation (Hall, Held, & McGrew, 1992; Bauman, 1992), so too there has been resistance, particularly in terms of ‘place’ which is seen as the open-ended site of social contestation (Johnston, Gregory, Pratt, & Watts, 2004). In the way that non-representational theory (Thrift, 1996) would have it, places became ‘the effect of the folding of spaces, times and materials together into complex topological arrangements that perform a multitude of differences’ (Hetherington, 1997 p. 197). The inspiration for this theme issue can be traced back to a workshop session on ‘Heritage, Politics and Identity in Southeast Asia’, organised by the theme editors at the VIIth Southeast Asian Geography Association (SEAGA) Conference in Khon Kaen, Thailand, 29 November to 2 December, 2004. Other contributors have been working on similar themes and their papers have found a natural place in this collection. The various studies cover Southeast Asian nations of Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam, and present an eclectic range of issues and case studies. Fundamentally, the case studies highlight the particularities and uniqueness of the Southeast Asian experience that includes not just the obvious geographical interaction of space, but also that of time, and with that consolidation of

123

162

memory and identity. Undoubtedly, any discussion of heritage and identity that excludes the legacy of the region’s rich and unique historical tapestry does so at its own peril. Southeast Asia is a political-geographical term that embraces a fascinating diversity of people, culture and aspirations. It was the confluence of great trading routes, the home of ancient Empires, the product of endogenous and exogenous influences, the prize of ruthless colonial powers, and only recently, a group of newly empowered sovereign states going through various degrees of post-colonial angst of defining identity in the post-war ‘winds of change’ era. The challenges continue as identity formation is never static, constantly evolving, perennially challenged and jealously contested by various ‘guardians’ of history, memory, heritage and with that ‘identity’—whatever that might mean. In these various contestations, the ‘power’ to draw physical and dialectic boundaries, though dominated by elite political decision-makers, is still affected by both ‘politics from below’ and by the sometimes unpredictable trajectories of a seemingly relentless globalised world with a corresponding, varied reaction to this development. Indubitably in any contestation of space, time and memory, the forces of this brave new globalised world as described by Greider (1998) as ‘One World, Ready or Not’ will factor in both the impulses for, and the responses to, ‘managing’ heritage and identity. In this collection, the two Malaysian case studies explore the very essence of dealing with historical legacy and the incorporatisation of the globalised world. Emile Yeoh’s discourse on ‘‘Ethnic coexistence in a pluralistic campus environment: the case of University of Malaya’’ provides a timely reminder of the challenges of a plural society with the statistical assessment of Malaysia’s progress in inter-ethnic relations since the traumatic events of 1969. Assessing the ethnic dynamics of the University of Malaya’s campus, Yeoh outlines the extent to which longstanding affirmative action had impacted on a unique Southeast Asian society. Ooi Giok Ling’s case study on ‘‘Mahsuri’s Curse: Globalisation and Tourist Development in Pulau Langkawi’’ examines the management and reimagination of a

123

GeoJournal (2006) 66:161–163

popular past crafted to suit the needs and ambition of the local economy while being intertwined with cold imperative demands of a global tourist industry. The assertive word of ‘‘curse’’ in the title underlines the later assertion on who actually ‘wins’ in this contestation and manipulation of heritage with her analysis questioning the gains for the few and questionable benefits for the rest. In the sole paper on Thailand, Catherine Hesse-Swain raises the highly pertinent issue of reprogramming identity in a globalised world where perceptions and values are conflated to not necessarily admirable ends. In ‘‘Progamming beauty and the absence of Na Lao (Lao Face): How Lao Isan youth living in northeast Thailand navigate concepts of beauty represented in popular Thai TV, and how their interpretations may contribute to self-perception of Lao-Isan ethnic identity’’, Hesse-Swain examines a case study of perception and self-worth that can find resonance in other Southeast Asian societies currently bombarded by a singular definition of beauty and with it personal identity and communal selfworth. In the Vietnam case study, the ‘casualty’ is more visible in the tangible form of the magnificent canal-side highway in Ho Chi Minh City. Hanh Thi Hong Vu in ‘‘Canal-side highway in Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam: issues of urban cultural conservation and tourism development’’ argues for a more nuanced approach to the utilisation of the historic canals. She calls for an approach that is less damaging to the system, more cognisant of local community needs and gives urgent recognition of value to the city’s dynamic development within the region. Her contention is that cultural conservation and tourist development projects can include the canals as integral to future plans, rather than as an embarrassing supplementary consideration. Traces of similar concerns can be found in the three case studies from the small city state of Singapore. In Hamzah Muzaini’s ‘‘Producing/ Consuming MemoryScapes: the Genesis/Politics of Second World War’’, various strands of heritage and identity are interwoven into an intriguing interplay of commodification of history, collision of perspectives and ‘consumption’ of

GeoJournal (2006) 66:161–163

officially sanctioned memoryscapes. This paper asserts clearly that there is a memorial and commemorative gap between official and populist understanding and acceptance of how the Second World War ought to be manifested within the context of present day Singapore. Similarly, Rahil Ismail’s personal discourse on ‘‘Seasonal Spaces: Ramadan and Bussorah Street, the Spirit of Place’’ examines the critical engagement of Singapore’s only Islamic heritage space with the official ‘vision’ of commodifying the district to an increasingly perceived critical point. By examining the changes inflicted on the district and the not all together wholesome impact, the paper contends that while ‘politics from below’ can make representation for preservation of significant identity markers, the ultimate authority lies with elite decision-makers who are not always fully attuned to the sensibilities of the community of this minority enclave. However, a more heartening alternative is the final case study from Singapore by Brian J. Shaw and Rahil Ismail in ‘‘Ethnoscapes, Entertainment and ‘Eritage in the Global City: Segmented Spaces in Singapore’s Joo Chiat Road’’. A more optimistic story unfolds in the successful effort of pioneer grassroots participation in coping with the multiplicity of interactions that had brought less desirable elements of globalisation into a much loved historical district, highly valued by three distinct Singapore ethnic groups. As a conservation area, the Joo Chiat story continues to be both a cautionary tale and a trailblazing example in the interaction and collision of the local and the global worlds. In conclusion, the papers in this theme edition trace the intersection of myriad concerns, multilevel perspectives and political-economic imperatives that have the power to transform seemingly nebulous concepts into hot-button emotive issues of whose identity?; which form of identity?; and what possible future identity? These concerns are especially significant within the pluralist societies that dominate the Southeast Asian region, societies

163

which possess the capacity to engage in both confrontational tension and enriching mutual accommodation. Identity as invested in space and time is not a linear causal progression, but possesses a depth and complexity that can (re)surface issues which demand a high degree of political imagination and dexterity from governing authorities and participating stakeholders. Significantly, though, despite what some decision-makers might claim, resolutions do not always provide a ‘win–win’ situation for all parties. Although all may be ‘winners’ in part, some may be ‘winning’ more constantly than others. Fundamentally through this selection of papers readers may be brought to a position which all interested parties in these contestations understand as the basic premise; that in the politics of heritage, identity and space, the battle does not end with an official pronouncement or a leveling of physical entities. The history of the region has shown that heritage and identity have a timeless lifeline of consolidation and manifestation. To put it colloquially, it is indeed a case of ‘watch this space’.

References Baumann, Z. (1992). Intimations of Postmodernity. London: Routledge. Castells, M. (2004). The Power of Identity. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Frosh, S. (1999). Identity. In A. Bullock, & S. Trombley (Eds.), The New Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought. London: HarperCollins. Greider, W. (1998). One World, Ready or Not: The manic logic of global capitalism. London: Penguin. Hall S., Held D., & McGrew T. (Eds.) (1992). Modernity and its Futures. Cambridge: Polity Press. Hetherington, K. (1997). In place of geometry: the materiality of place. In K. Hetherington, & R. Munro (Eds.), Ideas of difference. Social Spaces and the labour of division (pp. 183–199). Oxford: Blackwell. Johnston R. J., Gregory D., Pratt G., & Watts M., (Eds.) (2004). The Dictionary of Human Geography. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Thrift, N. J. (1996). Spatial formations. London: Sage.

123