Hang Tuah Sucks: Whe We Need to Deconstruct Our Flawed Heroes

Hang Tuah Sucks: Why We Need to Deconstruct Our Flawed Heroes

Farish Nooor

 

Betuahnya negara yang tidak ber-Tuah.

 

There are times when our folk heroes need to be brought down a peg or two, particularly when they have overstepped the frontier of ideological correctness.  I have always nursed a vendetta against Hang Tuah, that beloved ‘budak Raja’ so adored by amok-prone keris-waving nationalists and humbug patriots who can never chant the slogan ‘Tak kan Melayu hilang di dunia’ too many times.  But of late the cult of Tuah and his keris antics have become too staid, too repetitive, too predictable for this academic; and so the time has come to take off the gloves and give the fella a good whuppin’.

Who hasn’t heard of Tuah and his gang?  The trials and tribulations of our national hero have become part and parcel of our nation-building process, and since childhood we have been reminded time and again of his blood-soaked exploits and his valiant efforts to keep the status quo intact.  Tuah was always an instrument of regime maintenance at best, and at worse comes under the category of Preman-mercenary types who, like the ever-so-loyal English yeoman, was cast as the salt of the earth.  In case any of us are still doubting, the opening lines of the Hikayat Hang Tuah (which, admittedly is a classic in its own right and a sample of authentic Malay literature) announces his entry thus:

Inilah Hikayat Hang Tuah yang amat setiawan pada tuan-nya dan terlalu sangat berbuat kebaktian kepada tuan-nya.

Terlalu sangat berbuat kebaktian kepada tuan-nya’ is an apt way of putting it.  Others might argue that it is an understatement.  The bottom line is that Tuah was and is blind loyalty and deference personified.  In the Hikayat he performs many deeds that are calculated to please his master, the Raja of Melaka, and more importantly, to uphold the presiding order of things.  Tuah’s fatal stabbing of Hang Jebat has been cited as the example par excellence of loyalty to the state superseding loyalty to his friend:  And by doing so anticipating the Hegelian dialectical conflict of state ethics versus the ethics of filial and familial relations.

For continued reading please go to:  http://www.othermalaysia.org/content/view/60/52/

Leave a Reply