Dialita: Collective Memories of Former Women Political Prisoners during the New Order Era in Java (Lestariningsih and Sunarti, 2022)

=== [PDF page 1] === 1114075 research-article2022 MSS0010.1177/17506980221114075Memory StudiesLestariningsih and Sunarti Article Memory Studies Dialita: Collective memories of 2023, Vol. 16(5) 1189–1207 © The Author(s) 2022 Article reuse guidelines: former women political prisoners sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI: 10.1177/17506980221114075 https://doi.org/10.1177/17506980221114075 during the New Order era in journals.sagepub.com/home/mss Java, 2000–2011 Amurwani Dwi Lestariningsih Universitas Indonesia, Indonesia Linda Sunarti Universitas Indonesia, Indonesia Abstract This article studies how the experiences of former women political prisoners in the New Order era of Indonesia have been recollected to reproduce identity. In 1979, these women were returned to their community after a rehabilitation period of nearly 10 years. The public, which could not accept their past, attached a lingering stigma to them and continually rejected them. This article attempts to uncover the process of memory articulation and the context in which these women sought to reproduce their identity through Dialita (Di Atas Lima Puluh Tahun, Above 50 Years Old), a choir group consisting of former women political prisoners and their relatives. Dialita positioned itself as a medium for cultural reconciliation that aimed to alter public perception of the women’s identity and reposition them in the country’s collective memory. This is how the politics of memory work in Indonesian society, where the government has the power to decide which memories should be remembered and which should be forgotten. Dialita brought almost forgotten songs back to life because its members were not allowed to write songs while being imprisoned at correctional facilities in Bukit Duri, Plantungan, Salemba and Ambarawa. Interviews and textual interpretation have allowed us to delve deeper into the lives of these former women political prisoners, who were positioned as the main actors of a past historical event and encouraged to articulate their memories by reproducing songs as a part of their identity reproduction. The articulation process and the re-interpretation of the past helped the women shape their sense of self and, more importantly, to alter the way the public remembers the events of 1965. Keywords articulation, collective memory, Dialita, former political prisoners, women Introduction In late June 2018, the Indonesian Academy of Sciences (Akademi Ilmu Pengetahuan Indonesia/ AIPI) held an international seminar on public health at the National Library of Indonesia, in collaboration with History of Medicine in Southeast Asia (HOMSEA) and the Asian Society for Corresponding author: Linda Sunarti, History Department, Faculty of Humanities, Universitas Indonesia, Depok 16424, Indonesia. Email: linda.sunarti@ui.ac.id === [PDF page 2] === 1190 Memory Studies 16(5) the History of Medicine (ASHM). The seminar discussed various themes, ranging from health services in the postcolonial era to mental health issues. One particularly interesting discussion panel in the context of this article was titled, ‘Indonesia’s 1965 Tragedy: Towards a Redefinition of History?’ However, the main attraction was a choir called Dialita (an abbreviation of Di Atas Lima Puluh Tahun, Above 50 Years Old), consisting of 17 singers aged 50 years and older, who performed as an opening act of the seminar. They were former women political prisoners from the 30 September Movement who, along with their family members and relatives, sang songs about their prison years in Bukit Duri, Plantungan, Salemba and Ambarawa. The songs expressed collective memories and positioned Dialita as a medium for the reproduction of identity. The songs became a mnemonic device to help the singers shape their sense of self and alter the way the public remembered the events of 1965. During the Indonesian National Revolution, these women participated in the struggle for independence against the Dutch Empire and the occupation administration. The 30 September Movement marked the beginning of the internal split between nationalists and communists. After those unfortunate events, the government of President Sukarno dissolved every communist-affiliated political organization and arrested all members. Among those directly affiliated with the Communist Party of Indonesia (Partai Komunis Indonesia, PKI) were Lembaga Kebudayaan Rakyat (Lekra), Gerakan Wanita Indonesia (Gerwani, the Indonesian Women’s Movement), Consentrasi Gerakan Mahasiswa Indonesia (CGMI), Pemuda Rakyat and Himpunan Sarjana Indonesia. The character of the relationship between Lekra and the PKI is still undefined. Lekra was a part of the political and cultural agenda of the party because D.N. Aidit and Nyoto, two prominent figures of the party, established the organization. Lekra supported the party’s growing agenda from time to time, amplifying the idea that the organization was indeed integrated into the party. Furthermore, both the organization and the party shared a similar vision in political and cultural domains (Foulcher, 1969: 4). Hence, it is difficult not to define Lekra as being part of the PKI, although many members of Lekra were not members of the party because the organization started as an independent organization with its own statute and budgeting. Various forums were held to decide on the organization’s future development and to administer the organization’s policies. The higher forum, Kongres Nasional, discussed the direction, principle, ideology, resolution and general outline of the organization’s movement (Muhidin and Yuliantri, 2008: 39). Gerwani, on the contrary, was always under the great influence of the party. The members of the PKI treated Gerwani as the party’s women’s organization, while the members of Gerwani saw the party as a means to obtain emancipation and equal rights in politics. In the 1960s, Gerwani was ideologically and structurally connected to the party; in 1964, the government urged the existing organizations to enter the various parties, and Gerwani’s decision to enter the Communist Party was about to be declared in the upcoming congress, Kongres Gerwani ke-V, in December 1965 (Archive of Sekretariat Kopkamtib, 1974a: 658– 659; Wieringa, 1999: 342). The New Order government divided political prisoners into three classes. They categorized those directly involved in the movement as A-class and sentenced them to death. The government categorized those who knew about the movement but failed to report it to the authorities as B-class prisoners and later subjected them to mental and ideological rehabilitation. The government released C-class prisoners because they supported the Communist Party but knew nothing about the movement, while F-class prisoners were people who had not yet been arrested but whom the New Order government considered to be dangerous individuals. The 17 women of Dialita were part of the organizations mentioned above and came from West Sumatra, Java and Kalimantan. Their occupations included doctors, singers, dancers, senators, artists, teachers, college students and even athletes. === [PDF page 3] === Lestariningsih and Sunarti 1191 The eradication of the communist-affiliated organization and its members began in 1968. The government initially held them in ordinary jails alongside petty criminals. In 1971, the New Order government implemented an assimilation policy for the 1965 political prisoners, who were transferred to Plantungan, a temporary detention centre called Tempat Pemanfaatan Sementara Tahanan (Tefaatra), before being admitted to Inrehab, a so-called rehabilitation facility. The government decided to release C-class women prisoners in 1971 and the B-class women prisoners in 1979. The government offered the prisoners a chance to get parole. They were acquitted but subjected to monthly reporting and strict supervision, a situation that was further aggravated by social oppression, as mentioned in Petunjuk Pelaksanaan No: Juklak-04/Kopkam/ II/1974 (Archive of Sekretariat Kopkamtib, 1974b). They were treated as ex-communicados with whom other people were not supposed to communicate. Their families rejected them, while the public viewed them from a very stigmatized perspective. To reduce this social tension, some decided to make a fresh start by settling in new communities where no one knew or cared about their past identities. The former women political prisoners finally gained an opportunity to re-enter the wider community after the 1998 Reform. In 2000, Indonesian President Abdurrahman Wahid publicly apologized to all of the victims of the 1965 killings, followed by initiatives for national reconciliation. Under such favourable circumstances, these women started to develop their reconciliation plan by using their network and opening up to others regardless of their past identity. They constructed a brand-new ‘positioning’ to alter the lingering negative perception of their past. This article delves deeper into the issue of identity reconstruction and positioning through oral history. The research included doing interviews with many eyewitnesses who were involved in the 30 September Movement. These interviews are the primary source of this study, along with materials held in various archives and official documents. We have interpreted each interview session using Gadamer’s hermeneutical approach to analyse the transcript via a dialectical process. The dialectical process requires an intermediary, namely, language, owing to the spatial and sociocultural differences between the subject and the researcher. Likewise, Ricœur supported Gadamer’s ideas when he stated that the dialectical process was necessary to obtain an understanding of the text (Gibson, 2017; Magetsari, 2018: 22; Mendelson, 2012; Ricœur, 1981). We then further interpreted these texts to reconstruct the historical events. We conducted in-depth interviews with eight interviewees: the leader of Dialita and five of its members, including the songwriter; a humanitarian worker who assisted the political prisoners by caring for both the families left behind and the political prisoners themselves, while they were in prison or upon acquittal; and President Wahid’s personal assistant during his presidency (1999– 2001). We conducted the interviews via online and offline meetings in light of the national implementation of adequate health protocols due to the Covid-19 situation in Indonesia after March 2020 The primary aim of this article is to explain how the articulation process is crucial to constructing the identities of the former women political prisoners. In addition, we will elaborate on the method they used to reproduce their identities through the collective memory embedded in the public’s consciousness and subconsciousness. The 30 September Movement of 1965 The gruesome events on the night of 30 September 1965 marked the beginning of the communist rebellion in Indonesia. It was an attempted coup against the government, then led by President Sukarno. The event later became known as the 30 September Movement (Gerakan 30 September/G30S) and was explicitly associated with the PKI, as well as with its branch organizations. Gerwani was one of these; it consisted of female members of the party and was === [PDF page 4] === 1192 Memory Studies 16(5) therefore associated with the movement as well. This organization grew significantly, from 80,000 members in 1954 to 662,460 members in 1957. The members of the women’s organization were ordered to prepare meals in Lubang Buaya – a suburban area in Cipayung, East Jakarta – for the volunteers who were joining the PKI to enter the Dwikora (Dwi Komando Rakyat) Movement, which had to confront the establishment of the Federation of Malaya. One of the members was Sulami, who knew nothing about the planned coup, at least until 1 October when the news first reached the public (Wieringa, 1999: 448–499). That night fundamentally shook Indonesia and the international community and provoked distrust towards the PKI. The government quickly arrested PKI members and associates, but the rage of the public was so intense that they started to burn buildings and offices once used by the PKI. This chaotic situation lasted for the rest of 1965, until the government arrested and interrogated more and more PKI members and associates, including Gerwani members (Lestariningsih, 2011: XVI). In his study on this topic, Sulistyo (2000: 223–225) considered the period of chaos an uncontrollable conflict among the children of the nation. Muslims were hunting PKI members and their associates in Java with the blessing of their respective religious leaders, spreading the conflict further to Jombang and Kediri (Leksana, 2019: 70). Anti-communist sentiment grew, encouraging every individual to join the movement to eradicate the PKI and communism. Nahdlatul Ulama (NU), the largest Islamic organization in Indonesia founded by K.H. Hasyim Asy’ari and K.H. Wahab Hasbullah on 31 January 1926, led the counter-movement for both political and religious reasons. In 1930, the NU established the Gerakan Pemuda Ansor, a division of NU that engaged in youth and social affairs but without obtaining any military orders or government instructions. Those in the anti-communist movement believed that the PKI must be held responsible for the events of 30 September. Gerwani’s poison attack on Banser in the Muncar district of Banyuwangi, in the East Java province, exacerbated tensions. At that time, it was believed that Gerwani members were disguising themselves as fatayat, a female division of NU similar to the Gerakan Pemuda Ansor, established on 24 April 1950, thus began the manhunt of PKI members by Islamic communities (Kasdi, 2019: 86–87). The situation was very unstable, to the point that individuals suspected each other and got involved in a series of ‘kill or be killed’ incidents. Cribb (1990), on the contrary, viewed the events of late 1965 and early 1966 as a genocide or mass killing, in which he found typical examples of manslaughter. Cribb (1990: 35–39) therefore objected to the idea that the act of mass killing was simply a horizontal conflict. Other researchers insist that the military and the government must have been a part of any actions taken to eradicate the PKI and communism from Indonesia, emphasizing that violence could be structurally and systematically coordinated by the State (Leksana, 2019: 70). Robinson (2018) supported Cribb’s argument and also detected patterns in the way PKI members and associates were captured, interrogated and executed. He argued that particular perpetrators of this genocide identified their targets not by ethnicity, nationality or religious beliefs, but by political affiliations (Robinson, 2018: 6). He also traced significant patterns in the military’s support to the anti-communist locals and various prominent figures or community leaders. The manhunt, concentrated in Central Java, East Java, Bali, Aceh, North Sumatra and East Nusa Tengara, began in October 1965 and ended in March 1966 The Order of March the Eleventh (Surat Perintah Sebelas Maret or Supersemar) marked the beginning of Suharto’s reign as the president of the republic, and the dissolution of the PKI and its substructures. The dissolution was made official by the enactment of TAP MPRS/XXV/1966, which also banned the Communist Party throughout Indonesia and made it illegal to spread or develop the teachings of communism, Marxism and Leninism. The arrangement made the manhunt of PKI members and associates even more legitimate (Kasemin, 2004: vi). === [PDF page 5] === Lestariningsih and Sunarti 1193 Authorities took PKI members and their associates, including the members of Gerwani, to various prisons throughout Java, such as Bukit Duri Prison in Jakarta, Wirogunan Prison in Yogyakarta and Ambarawa and the Bulu Prisons in Central Java. They were sorted into three different classes, as mentioned above. The number of women political prisoners rose as high as 63,894 in 1968 and reached up to 30% of the total prison population (Lestariningsih, 2011: XVII). This mass incarceration caused problems for the government because of the costs of maintaining the prisoners; the government was eventually forced to transfer women prisoners to Plantungan, and the other prisoners to Buru Island. Five hundred women prisoners were transferred to the Plantungan Rehabilitation Centre in April 1971, followed by more in the next few months (Lestariningsih, 2011: XVII). At that time, Plantungan was known as a type II military hospital, a relic of the Dutch East Indies administration. After the 1945 Revolution, the ownership of the leprosarium was transferred to the Indonesian government and the hospital was transformed into a women’s ‘rehabilitation centre’. Life there was not easy for women political prisoners. They had to participate in a reeducation programme about ideology and various life skills. Most importantly, they were forced to confess their involvement in political organizations with communist ideologies, such as the PKI. The government released them in 1979 (Lestariningsih, 2011). The patriarchal culture of the New Order Government Almost every newspaper in Indonesia, both local and national (e.g. Berita Yudha, Angkatan Bersendjata, Kompas), made the 30 September Movement a headline throughout October and November 1965. They also covered the involvement of Gerwani in the murder of the six generals and one officer of TNI-AD that took place in Lubang Buaya, East Jakarta. These newspapers described how Gerwani members were dancing to a song titled, ‘Harum Bunga’ while torturing the military officers before they were killed and thrown into a well. These newspapers continuously portrayed Gerwani members as a ruthless group of women who tortured for pleasure (Lestariningsih & Soekarba, 2019: 429; Wieringa, 2019: 21). Moreover, Wieringa (1999: 503–507) further explained the newspaper coverage as a purposeful stigmatization of Gerwani, which the New Order Government used to impose a specific political identity on Gerwani through mass media propaganda to eventually cast Gerwani members as the epitome of immoral women who tortured for pleasure. Therefore, Wieringa concluded that Gerwani barely had a narrative space of their own because of the existing historical narratives based on the masculine point of view. Nevertheless, the press constructed this kind of political identity relentlessly during the New Order era, especially through the production of a national movie titled Pengkhianatan G30S/PKI, which the national television station aired every 30 September. The movie was later considered as a part of the government’s campaign against communism as well as a sociocultural justification of the violence that had happened between 1965 and 1966 (Herlambang, 2013: 19–22). In a cultural system dominated by a patriarchal viewpoint, the Gerwani’s success in Indonesian politics was seen as an anomaly. The New Order government considered the women’s organization as a violation of women’s ‘nature’, for women should be subordinate to men. In the 9 November 1965 issue of Berita Yudha, Suharto described women as well-mannered yet delicate and motherly creatures who obeyed their husbands or men in general (Yuliawati and Kusumadewi, 2016). Gerwani’s bold entry into the Indonesian political arena through the PKI, which won the 1955 general election, was later considered to be an act of opposition to the patriarchal culture of Indonesian society at that time. Other political parties in the male-dominated parliament also regarded Gerwani as a threat (Lestariningsih and Soekarba, 2019). === [PDF page 6] === 1194 Memory Studies 16(5) The New Order government imposed a patriarchal governmental system by highlighting the importance of men as the sole rulers of the country, with women acting as their subordinates, treated and regarded as being of lesser importance than men (Lestariningsih and Soekarba, 2019: 430; Sakina and Siti, 2017: 72). Such perceptions of Gerwani developed and became embedded in society, stigmatizing Gerwani members as immoral women who tortured for pleasure. To become a woman meant to become a mother and a wife who obeyed her husband, and the Gerwani women fit neither of these descriptions (Adam, 2017: 14). The government introduced Dharma Wanita and Pembinaan Kesejahteraan Keluarga (PKK) as alternative women’s organizations (Fatimah, 2004; Suryakusuma, 2011: 13–42; Wieringa, 1992). Both operated as government programmes and were more domesticated organizations with no urgency for reform (Wieringa, 1999: 104–106, 2019: 24–25). Cribb elaborated his point of view further by arguing that the New Order government had domesticated Indonesian women down to the smallest unit of social organization, namely, the family unit, where the role of these women was nothing more than that of establishing a harmonious family while having a strong faith in the philosophy of Pancasila. It was a systematic move that gave the government a solid grip on society (Suryakusuma, 2011: xi). The patriarchal culture affected the imprisonment and rehabilitation of the women political prisoners as well. The use of male guards in an all-women prison was not viewed as irregular and the guards were furthermore allowed to treat women prisoners as ‘the subordinates’, according to the New Order government’s sociocultural beliefs at that time (Lestariningsih, 2011). The stigma lingered even after these women political prisoners were released in 1979. The media portrayed them as immoral and ruthless women raised by the Communist Party to become anomalies who distorted the sociocultural structure of Indonesian society. Therefore, these negative sentiments turned into harsh propaganda against communism and the Gerwani, and further understated women’s agency. Even more disturbing was the rumour that these women had marks on their bodies that identified them as Gerwani members, allowing the male guards to perform body or strip searches of their bodies. Hence, it was not surprising that many forms of sexual harassment occurred in the rehabilitation centres (Budianta, 2003; Pohlman, 2018). In a study on communism and women, Pohlman (2015: 1–15) stated that these former women political prisoners, including those who became widows at a later stage, still suffered a stigma and negative definition that made them ‘eligible’ to be harassed or raped. Such abuse served as proof of how the political identity that the New Order government attributed to these women had successfully shaped the Gerwani’s public image. The result of this kind of disruption affected the postprison assimilation process, which would supposedly allow these women to return and live as free women again within the community. They found it hard to do so because they were still considered a part of the Communist Party and the cold-blooded murderers of the seven military officers in 1965. Consequently, they had to conceal their identities to be able to live in peace (Pohlman, 2004: 8–9). The downfall of the New Order Government and the rise of democracy after Reformasi After the 1998 reformation, former political prisoners expressed their desire for reconciliation, especially in relation to the events of 1965. Most of these former political prisoners had demanded reconciliation through the National Human Rights Commission and international courts. The government facilitated their wishes through a forum called the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. President Abdurrahman Wahid, who succeeded Habibie, proposed the revocation of TAP MPRS/XXV/1966 and continued with a national apology to PKI members and their families. Various parties – even within parliament – and, especially, Muslim politicians, but also === [PDF page 7] === Lestariningsih and Sunarti 1195 Muslim communities, rejected the proposal. Only non-governmental organizations supported the idea. Wahid did not insist that parliament revoke the 1966 resolution because of the continued public rejection of the PKI and anything associated with it (Shobirin and Anwar, 2014: 188). Pramoedya Ananta Toer, an activist for Lekra, a branch organization of the PKI, openly rejected Wahid’s idea for national reconciliation and apology. Toer considered Wahid’s offer as superficial, concealing the political implications that could intensely divide society into two opposing sides. Therefore, reconciliation efforts failed when both the general public and ex-PKI members rejected the idea (Shobirin and Anwar, 2014: 188–189). Nevertheless, a series of interviews that we conducted with former women political prisoners have allowed us to unveil the other side of the story. Sudarminah (82 years old) was a former woman political prisoner. She was once the secretary for the Cilacap branch of Gerwani and was elected as a member of the Regional Representative Council for West Irian before the events of 30 September happened, which resulted in her being imprisoned in the Bukit Duri prison. In 1971, she was transferred to Plantungan along with many other women political prisoners; she was released approximately 8 years later, in December 1979. Upon her acquittal, she joined the Association for the Victims of New Order Government (Paguyuban Korban Orde Baru (Pakorba)), along with other former prisoners, to urge Wahid and the reformed government to apologize for their actions and save their reputation. However, since the association achieved very little, Sudarminah decided that she no longer wished to pursue such interests as she was getting old. We interviewed Sudarminah a few times in 2004 and 2005, at her house in Menteng Dalam, Manggarai, South Jakarta. We met her again for additional interviews in 2019 and 2021, after she moved to her daughter’s house in Ciracas, East Jakarta. Sudarminah passed away on 14 August 2021. Aminuddin Kasdi (73 years old) was one of the members of NU and he was also part of Gerakan Pemuda Ansor. He expressed his disapproval of Wahid’s decision to give a national apology and retract the TAP MPRS/XXV/1966 during two phone interviews on 8 June 2021 and 10 August 2021. Kasdi explained that, as an organization, NU had at least two opinions on this matter. While some people in NU approved of Wahid’s decision, others condemned it because the government would start not only forgiving the members of the PKI, but also occasionally compensating for their basic needs so that the former prisoners could once again live a normal life with their families. However, an apology was considered too much, given that public acceptance of the PKI before the events of 30 September had led the nation to develop a certain fear towards communism for some few years. Those who rejected Wahid’s decision took the massacre of NU’s kyais (Islamic religious leaders) and santris (the students of kyais) into account. The 1948 Madiun Rebellion and the 30 September Movement were more than enough for them to reconsider, or even reject, Wahid’s decision. A few who agreed with Wahid’s decision considered it a real action taken by the head of the republic at that time because Wahid had also built a halfway house for these women in Kramat Raya, Senen and Central Jakarta, as we learnt from Wahid’s personal assistant, Ngatawi Al Zastrouw (55 years old), during an interview at his house. The public was also suspicious of the decision because the reconciliation process initiated by both the government and the non-governmental organization had not yet reached a profound breakthrough to help the former prisoners. In this context, the former women political prisoners formed a choir group that they named Dialita. The story of Dialita was written in 2020; it explained the struggle of the group through a descriptive narrative history (Triningsih et al., 2020). They established this group to help fellow former women political prisoners to ease their economic burden or simply to give them and their families a space where to share stories as a trauma healing process. Dialita also offered an alternative way to heal the wounds and resentment towards the government === [PDF page 8] === 1196 Memory Studies 16(5) after years of oppression. It was a gathering forum as well as a place where to relieve themselves from the stigma that was still lingering in collective memory, socially, culturally and politically speaking. Through Dialita, they gave each other support. They developed their own version of cultural reconciliation through the songs they sang. They also established Dialita to preserve works of art by former 1965 political prisoners. It was a way to preserve their memories and rebuild their From Wanoja Binangkit to Dialita: An effort of reconciliation Dwyer (2015: 6) explained how the legal language of perpetrators, victims and witnesses of an occurrence is unable to touch the memory, articulation and contemporary politics in which it was embedded. Therefore, the effort for reaching reconciliation was in a deadlock. Some organizations pulled other efforts to urge the government to acknowledge the violation of former prisoners’ human rights. Sekber 65, for example, tried to reconcile by establishing an interfaith network as a discussion platform with the former prisoners of 1965. Forum Silaturahmi Anak Bangsa (FSAB), consisting of the sons and daughters of the generals murdered during the events of 30 September, made a similar effort. Both failed to meet the intended objective as the former prisoners were still waiting for the government to express an apology, begin reputational rehabilitation and compensate for their indefinite detention. We discovered this during an interview with Uchikowati (64 years old), conducted in her house in Pamulang, South Tangerang. She was the daughter of a former woman political prisoner. Both of her parents were associated with the PKI, as her mother was the Head of Gerwani in Cilacap and her father was the Regent as well as the Head of PKI in Cilacap. These women had also tried to put forward a class action lawsuit with the help of non-profit legal support. Their objectives remained the same: reconciliation, reputational rehabilitation and compensation for losses. Nani Nurani Affandi (80 years old) was a singer in the presidential palace, who was arrested because she was considered to be a member of Lekra. During our interview at her house in North Jakarta, in 2020, she explained her discontent regarding her years in prison; she had never joined any leftist movement or organization. She remembered that she attended PKI’s anniversary in Gelora Bung Karno Stadium, but that was it. Later, Affandi willingly joined the class action lawsuit as one of the eyewitnesses examined before the court. The hearing sessions at the court became a moment where the former women political prisoners met with each other, along with their families. They began to reveal their true identities, those they had kept hidden for a very long time, and they also began to share stories and memories about the songs they sang. The songs became a medium for memory identification and thus ignited the idea of creating a choir group. They even sang some of the songs during the hearing sessions. Affandi narrated that the group was once called Wanoja Binangkit and that they met and practised once every week. Affandi believed that the group’s performance could one day prove their innocence. In 2005, Wanoja Binangkit held its first show, singing the songs on stage for the first time. The group expanded afterwards. In 2006, it performed more often at various shows, book launches and art exhibitions at Taman Ismail Marzuki (TIM), Jakarta. They did a routine practice every Saturday, facilitated by the non-profit legal support that helped them during the hearing sessions. They also carried out social activities to help fellow former women prisoners who were still struggling with their economic situations. They started rewriting the songs under the name Wanoja Binangkit but then proposed a new name to better identify their background. Thus, in 2011 Dialita was formed through a rather natural and ordinary thought process, without ruminating on the kind of profit or fame that they might gain from the activity. === [PDF page 9] === Lestariningsih and Sunarti 1197 The initial purpose of the group was to help fellow women political prisoners because some of them were too old to get a job and they faced real discrimination against their former status (Triningsih et al., 2020: 16). Dialita practised once a month, not only to enhance the quality of the choir group but also to heal the trauma that burdened them. As Wanoja Binangkit, they sang more patriotic and folk songs; as Dialita, they focused on the songs they sang while in prison. Affandi also stated that Utati rewrote the songs. Along with Mudjiati, Utati carefully remembered the songs, verse by verse, although there were still many forgotten songs according to Affandi. Hence, Dialita was transformed into a medium for the reconciliation with the past of the former women political prisoners who were still searching for a vessel to contain the dissatisfaction they had felt for so long (Dayasih, 2019: 13). They did larger gigs, for example, before the National Human Rights Commission. In 2016, they had a chance to perform at the 13th Yogyakarta Biennale. Uchikowati added that it was then that they realized they were becoming better known among the public, especially when the younger generation that attended the Biennale encouraged them to release an album. The recording process of their first album finished and the album was released on 1 October 2016; it was titled Dunia Milik Kita (The World Is Ours). Dialita also established a management team, a day after the first album’s release, to help with the women’s schedules and practices. They involved Sahabat Dialita, a group of people who supported Dialita’s comeback but did not belong to the choir group. Uchikowati was chosen to lead the management team, while upcoming leaders would be selected once every 3 years, as is explained in the Piagam Kesepakatan Dialita (Dialita’s Agreement Charter), signed at Omahe Kartika, Yogyakarta (Triningsih et al., The recording process took 6 months. Forty percent of the songs were written during the Old Order era, the rest during the women’s imprisonment. They launched the album on 1 October 2016 at Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta. Another album was released on 31 January 2019 at the Goethe-Institut in Jakarta and was titled Salam Harapan (Greetings of Hope). Uchikowati recounted her memory, saying that there were at least 800 people at the launch of Dialita’s second album. She added that the second album was about the surviving women’s new hope for the upcoming era because Dialita was the effort of reconciliation that the government had failed to bring about. So many flaws in the law applied to them. They brought the past back to reconcile it with the present and then face the future with open arms, as Uchikowati explained, I think it would be easier [for us] to come near the feelings of the people in our surroundings. It would be hard for them to understand all of the [legal] matters, no matter how much we tried to explain all these processes we had been through. [For] example, a lot of people suggested [that we] keep on trying to find justice and trust the process of the law, attending every hearing session to gain legal decisions. We did those [suggestions], to retrieve the loss, to get rehabilitated, et cetera. But some other people, who found it hard to really know the story and sympathize, insulted us by saying: how dare we, for once we tried betraying the country and now we want the exact same country to provide us with compensation. That was the logic applied [by] the majority of our society. However, Uchikowati also acknowledged that some former women political prisoners did not want to be associated with Dialita or did not have the same thoughts as Uchikowati and her friends in Dialita. Mudjiati confirmed Uchikowati’s statement: Every time we sing [the lyrics of a song titled Relakan] ‘we will meet again, freely’, I cannot hold my tears back. I feel sad, and therefore my tears started running down, because I keep on thinking that it was too much to ask. I cannot imagine myself, and the other women, being free. === [PDF page 10] === 1198 Memory Studies 16(5) Ngatawi Al Zastrouw analysed the establishment of Dialita, calling it a bold act by the former women prisoners who showed their resistance to the constraining structure in society. Zastrouw advised that Dialita might want to apply a more subtle approach to tone down the stigma that still affected them. The more they corroborated their true identity, the more reactions would follow. Perhaps the songs were the manifestation of their emotions, a part of their collectively shared memories. Zastrouw argued that it might be difficult for them to keep imposing themselves on the public in order to gain more sympathy. While some might understand and willingly support their movement, others might see them as they were before. As he continued with his statement, we realized that Dialita was facing a new challenge: the women would never develop if their songs circulated only among their peer groups and supporters. The public space remained a distant corner for them. Silenced melody: Collective memory in symbols of resistance According to Halbwachs (1992: 22), collective memory is not a commonly generated idea but rather a socially constructed one. Collective memory survives and draws strength from the thought processes of its members. Each social class has its own collective memory that its members have created over a long period of time. Therefore, each individual in the group has an interest in remembering and recreating the past. Although various scholars have studied collective memory, this article delves deeper into collective memory as a medium for the reproduction of social identity. In addition to what Pohlman (2015) and Setiawan (2018 in McGregor et al., 2018) have observed, we argue that the role of Dialita in reproducing an identity is both social and cultural. Jacques Le Goff (1992: 3–4) argued that collective memory as a process plays an important role in determining a person’s life, based on what happened in the past or is happening in the present. Furthermore, collective memory can produce stronger impressions than the memory of individuals. According to Le Goff, collective memory in a society is usually formed through tradition and the learning process. Thus, the former women political prisoners in this article engage in the rebuilding of collective memory through Dialita. Rigney (2018: 269) described this condition as a form of suffering that can connect people more than joy. Kar Yen Leong highlighted the former prisoners’ attempt to straighten out history. The group they created was a space that gave them support and a place where they could prepare and make claims to the government as well as narrate their experiences. Often they felt that if nobody told or talked about their stories, their reputation would be forever sullied and the opportunity to clarify history would be lost (Leong, 2021: 35). Furthermore, Leong (2021: 41) explained that the group provided much psychological support to their members, assisting them in breaking barriers and encouraging them to engage and be present in the world once again. Nevertheless, Wahyuningroem pointed to the failure of transitional justice and the role of civil society in Indonesia. After the failure of transitional justice to bring about justice and accountability, the post-transitional period offered a new approach. The post-transitional justice period was dominated by the strong presence of civil society, which went beyond the State’s accommodation to reckon with past abuses. In Indonesia, the main characteristic of post-transitional justice was society’s persistence in working for truth and justice to tackle cases of human rights abuse (Wahyuningroem, 2019: 149–150). Dialita filled the blank space to revive their collective memories, which were all related to their roles as warriors, days before the events of 30 September occurred and shifted the public’s perception of them. Dialita helped these women to give a particular meaning to their social identity, which was reflected by the songs they sang. The former women political prisoners composed the songs while === [PDF page 11] === Lestariningsih and Sunarti 1199 in prison, which makes these songs the record of an era. The lyrics incorporate thoughts on the daily struggles of prison life, where the women could not engage in much activities, certainly not writing, reading or listening to the radio. The women therefore chanted melodies, remembering the tunes because they were not allowed to write them down. The songs sung by Dialita embodied these memories and the women collectively used them as a symbol of resistance amid their growing helplessness, as Utati explained, [To us] art is a part of trauma healing. Together in Dialita, we share stories and sing together [to remember and to forgive]. One of their songs, Ujian, was composed by Siti Jus Djubariah (Jus), a teacher and a member of PKI’s onderbouw (substructure/sub-organization). She taught the song to teenage prisoners in Bukit Duri Prison until it was subconsciously planted in their memories. She did so to encourage the young women not to lose faith and hope. The song directly helped other political prisoners to cope with their receding freedom, liberty or independence during their mental and ideological imprisonment. These are the lyrics of Ujian according to Jus’ arrangement: Dari balik jeruji besi  Behind these iron bars Hatiku diuji   My heart was put to the test Apa aku emas sejati  Am I pure gold Atau imitasi   Or a mere imitation Tiap kita menempa diri  Every time we push ourselves Jadi kadar teladan  Becoming examples Yang tahan angin, tahan hujan Of those who are wind yet rainproof Tahan musim dan badai  No matter what seasons and storms Meskipun kini   Even though now Hujan deras menimpa bumi Rain on earth is pouring down Penuh derita   In anguish Topan badai memecah ombak Storm, hurricane, breaking waves Gugur patria   Fallen patriots Tembok tinggi memisahkan kita The wall is separating us Namun yakin dan pasti  But be certain Masa depan kan datang  The future will soon arrive Kita pasti kembali  We will be back The lyrics reveal the die-hard spirit of the former women political prisoners, in search of solemn yet serene consolation. The belief that they would have the chance to return to their previous state of freedom one day encouraged their struggle to find solace. The lyrics also reflected the women’s strong mindset, not giving in to anything that came their way. On 7 December 2020, we did an interview with Utati (72 years old), a member of Dialita who had been imprisoned in Bukit Duri for 11 years, starting in 1967 (see Figure 1. in p. 12). She was released on 20 December 1977 but immediately rushed to the hospital because of her condition, staying there until she recovered in January 1978. She revealed to us how difficult it was for her to recall the song composed by her friend Jus while she was in the Bukit Duri Prison. The lyrics were created towards the end of Ramadan, when all the inmates were feeling lonely because no one would visit them during the festive season. Juvenile inmates, those between 14 and 15 years of age, were affected most. They cried every time they heard the pounding of the bedug, a type of drum used by Muslims in Java for religious purposes. The adults were also sad because they === [PDF page 12] === 1200 Memory Studies 16(5) Figure 1. Interview with Mrs. Utati on 12 July 2020. Lestariningsih’s Private collection. Lestariningsih interviewed Mrs. Utati, who was sitting with her back turned to the camera, and Mrs. Mudjiati, who wore a yellow shirt. This photo was taken during the coronavirus pandemic. were concerned that the teenagers might not know what was happening at that moment. The adults therefore began to create diversions by inviting the teenagers to sit under the cherry tree and sing Ujian. As they were not allowed to make notes, the lyrics were remembered rather than recorded. Mudjiati (69 years old), another member of Dialita who had been imprisoned for 14 years starting in 1965, sang the song and then encouraged the teenagers to sing along. It took them many days to memorize the lyrics and they sang them quietly to avoid being heard by the prison officials. Mudjiati was also in Bukit Duri prison, with Utati, but was then transferred to Plantungan. She was released in 1979. In the lines, ‘Am I pure gold or a mere imitation’, the word imitation is a metaphor meant to encourage the women political prisoners: they are supposed to be pure gold because they stand together in hard times, just like forged precious metals do. They did not and will not bend, no matter how difficult the situation is. The uncertainty was the hardest part of their life. They often felt like giving up because they had no hope for the future, but this verse gave them the strength to endure. In the next verse, the lines, ‘Every time we push ourselves’ and ‘Becoming examples’ imply that they believed they had to be strong for further regeneration, which might require additional strength until it was time to go home, even though they could not be certain about their freedom. Dialita’s songs were composed by male and female political prisoners. Another song, titled Kupandang Langit, is one of 20 songs composed by Kosalah Toer, Utati’s husband. He graduated from a university in Russia in the 1960s. He got caught and imprisoned soon after he returned to Indonesia in 1968. In 1979, Toer was released and then began actively translating Russian literature into Bahasa Indonesia. He later joined the Research Foundation for Victims of Human Rights Violations (Yayasan Penelitian Korban Pelanggaran Hak Asasi Manusia, YPKP HAM). Toer composed the song while he was held at the prison of Salemba. He rewrote it many times until he === [PDF page 13] === Lestariningsih and Sunarti 1201 could no longer recall the original version. Utati frequently asked him to write down the song before he forgot the lyrics. Here is at least one verse from the song as Toer remembered it: Langitku teladan  My sky, my example Bumiku Dermawan  My earth, she is generous Engkaulah pegangan  You are (my) guide Di waktu berjalan  During this journey Tetaplah engkau bertarung Keep on fighting Utati told us how difficult it was for her husband to recall the songs he composed. These verses were meant to encourage fellow political prisoners to stay alive and well because having faith was the only way to survive. However, Utati stated that it would be impossible to interpret the song further because they only had a few verses. She believed that every verse in the song reflected the women’s deepest feelings. It preserves their memories of the atmosphere of the prison, the despair of having a limited universe and the blissful thoughts of a calm and composed mind. Dialita’s songs are, then, the primary means for these women to articulate their collective memories of their time at Bukit Duri, Plantungan, Salemba and Ambarawa. These songs helped preserve the zeitgeist of their lives in 1965 and of their unfortunate yet challenging lives decades after the 30 September Movement. They even used some other songs to demand the rights they had been denied all this time. Thus, Dialita enabled them to reproduce a sociocultural identity by reactivating and reorganizing the existing collective memories within the past context to be transmitted to their descendants and perhaps also to the next generation. In other words, the members of Dialita constructed a new narrative through songs to counter the dominant narrative. Dialita: Mere discourse or growing narrative? During the New Order government, the narrative of former women political prisoners was built within a structured discourse of power. The government discouraged their roles and society perceived them as immoral communist women. This is how the politics of memory work in Indonesian society, in which the State has the power to dominate the memories of its people. Therefore, the State has the ability to decide whether an occurrence is worth remembering or should be forgotten. This way, the New Order government established a certain identity that was attached to the former women political prisoners. In accordance with Foucault, power and knowledge are inseparable, forming an episteme (Foucault, 1980: 130). The episteme formed authoritative and legitimate knowledge that influenced the way people reacted to and thought about former women political prisoners from the New Order era. In this discourse, Dialita created a new narrative. In various performances, Dialita tried to reject the narrative of the New Order government. Foucault saw knowledge as giving meaning to normality as well as resisting madness (Foucault, 1988: 21–26). Therefore, Dialita resisted to the existing discourses generated by the State. In this episteme, Dialita tried to establish a new narrative by elaborating truthful knowledge and the choir’s performance served to mitigate existing narratives against the former women political prisoners. Thus, these women were aware of the fact that their cultural identity had been constructed in such a way by a previous political domination. In other words, the government had constructed their cultural identities to perpetuate its power. The New Order government enacted a different kind of politics of identity promotion with regard to the former women political prisoners of 1965. The government reconstructed their identity socially by attaching a negative stigma to it, for example, by claiming that they were immoral, vicious, heartless, murderous and even salacious women (Wieringa, 2019: 21). Propaganda was === [PDF page 14] === 1202 Memory Studies 16(5) everywhere: films, literature, monuments and many other means of propaganda constructed a somewhat generalized and simplistic definition of the members and onderbouw organizations of the PKI. Identity is inevitably a fluid element of social repercussion. Identity flexes through time and space, being reproduced and reconstructed, to meet an exact political interest in every ideological contrast. Viewed through Foucault’s (1980) power relation approach, we could say that identity has a strong influence. Therefore, identity is a construction of social, cultural, historical and political aspects that cannot be thoroughly dissociated from past occurrences. Memories of past traumatic events escalate the sense of the ‘in-group’ or ‘out-group’, for identity generally constructs a binary segmentation whereby someone differentiates oneself from others (the public). The components of identity may vary by ethnicity, religion/personal belief, political inclination, occupational sector and many more elements. Calhoun (1994: 20) added that collective identity should be considered an important factor in constructing the individual identity of those who belong to the group. Collective identity marked a peculiar individual interpretation and social, cultural, political and historical construction as the basis of self-acknowledgement. The New Order government reconstructed the identity of these former women political prisoners, making them accomplices of the dangerous Communist Party. The New Order government dominated public knowledge, thoughts and collective memory by publishing various leading narratives, delivered in films, mass media and monuments. The leading narratives were spreading like propaganda, giving the former women political prisoners stigmas for life, making them ‘eternal prisoners’. Such stigmas also influenced their family members, relatives, supporters and various parties that tried to facilitate their effort to change their condition. Rejection and repudiation sent them into a limbo, for they did not have access to jobs – either governmental or in the private sector – or normal lives (Lestariningsih, 2011: 271). The government applied various regulations to limit their movement, dominating their lives for years through heavily publicized narratives and regulations. The State attached a negative and corrupt discourse to these women, who were deemed members of the Communist Party and, specifically, the Indonesian Women’s Movement, the Gerwani. It disseminated this discourse through the mass media and generated an anomalous identity for them. The women of Dialita have tried to create a new narrative symbolically through their performances against the hegemony and structural domination of their identity as former political prisoners. By the end of the New Order era, they slowly reappeared in various meetings and discussion forums. Their reappearance was part of their resistance effort. They started by introducing a discourse of resistance through symbols in the songs they performed, debunking prior beliefs that they were some of the culprits of the 30 September Movement. Through such a re-establishment process, Dialita attempted to change the narrative of their past and demonstrate that they were the victims of the fabrication of history by the authoritarian government. They also wanted to reintroduce themselves to the next generation to provide an alternative historical narrative. Dialita: Rearticulating and repositioning After the change of regime in Indonesia, former women political prisoners made various efforts to deconstruct their identity and the stigma attached to it. They began to organize informal meetings to share their experiences and help their friends with financial or other difficulties. They instituted the meeting in the form of a monthly arisan, a social gathering that takes place at a fixed interval, === [PDF page 15] === Lestariningsih and Sunarti 1203 rotating savings and credit, commonly practised by Indonesians as a social interaction. From these meetings, Dialita emerged as a communication forum. How much did their anomalous identity affect them? Having lived similar experiences allowed them to support each other better, especially when they had to embrace negative stereotypes attached to them for life. Pohlman explained the stigma attached to widows of PKI activists and the former women political prisoners of 1965 based on the collective memories of the larger Indonesian population. One popular belief was that these women were homewreckers and murderers (Pohlman, 2015: 2) and they therefore had to be shunned from communities and remain unforgiven. On this matter, Le Goff (1992: 3–4) highlighted the salience of past roles in exacerbating collective memories beyond the individual one. Hall (1990: 226) elaborated on cultural identity further: It is always constructed through memory, fantasy, narrative and myth. Cultural identities are the points of identification, the unstable points of identification or suture, which are made, within the discourses of history and culture. Not an essence, but a positioning. Hence, there is always a politics of identity, a politics of position, which has no absolute guarantee in an unproblematic, transcendental ‘law of origin’. Drawing on Hall’s elaboration, we could say that Indonesian society remembered such stereotypes and recognized them as the current state of the identity of these former women political prisoners. Hence, we may also need to examine the effect of such stereotyping. The former women political prisoners suffer constant cultural trauma, a kind of trauma that affected a group of people who experienced tumultuous occurrences in the past to the point where they could not stop feeling guilty or disturbed by the discourse rooted deep in their subconsciousness. It then became a longterm memory that could psychologically intensify the propensity to forget (Alexander, 2004: 1). In deconstructing identity and the attached stigma, the former women political prisoners started to organize informal meetings. They shared their stories and daily struggles and assisted friends in need. They realized that their lives had been and would never be easy, neither financially nor habitually. They even set up social service activities in groups to keep a regular schedule for their meetings, during which they developed the initiative to form Dialita as a channel to seek solace and peace. Through Dialita, these women tried to reconstruct their cultural identities in response to the one constructed by the New Order government, which spurred the public to change its social, cultural, political and historical memories of Dialita. They articulated themselves through the songs as the symbol of repositioning. Budianta (2015: 3) explained that to establish their own living space, these women had to establish a domain as their ‘personal space’ to develop their identity. Dialita served as their personal space, an exclusive domain in which to express themselves through songs, social networking and self-rebranding to various governmental institutions, such as the National Commission for Women (Komnas Perempuan) and the National Commission for Human Rights (Komnas HAM). Dialita brought them to many places in Indonesia, Jakarta, Yogyakarta and Purwakarta. They even won the Special Jury Prize at the 2011 International Film Festival in Dubai (UAE), with a documentary on the background story of Dialita and its members. The documentary was meant to reconstruct the past using a different set of perceptions in order to change the public opinion on their current status as free Indonesians, who no longer had any affiliations with communism, and to continue the reconciliation process. On 9 May 2019, Dialita received the Gwangju Prize for Human Rights Award from the Memory Foundation in South Korea, for their contribution to the recognition of human rights (Dipa, 2019). Some additional songs worth mentioning here include Viva Ganefo (Long Live Ganefo, Games of the New Emerging Forces), Dunia Milik Kita (The World Is Ours) and Kupandang Langit === [PDF page 16] === 1204 Memory Studies 16(5) (Looking at the Sky). If we look at the lyrics, we could conclude that these songs were meant to articulate the former prisoners’ nationalism as developed on the revolutionary road prior to independence; this meant that they continually reproduced the sense of being or becoming Indonesian (Sadam, 2013). Murray-Li (2000: 157) highlighted the cultural elements in this reproduction process, especially how each element is correlated. Two albums have been released, each presenting Dialita’s songs as the symbol of the women’s existence in the contemporary world. They have also given concerts, talk shows and public dialogues to develop a more persuasive yet friendly relationship with the next generation. Selfbranding is the most important means for them to construct a new collective identity and to be embedded further in Indonesian collective memory. As the main agency of structural changes, these women would perhaps never have been able to alter the past completely. Yet, they would always have a chance to articulate and position themselves in a way that the public can realize the urgency of the reconciliation process. Conclusion John Locke asserted that the main source of memory comes from the inside of one’s awareness of self-similarity over time and that it implies a contemporary identity discourse (Olick et al., 2011: 9–10). Modern states emphasize their power by manipulating people’s assumptions of time and space, including history and memory (Olick et al., 2011: 14). In such a context, the New Order government built a modern state based on Locke’s assertion, in which the government took structural control over the memory of the people and then established a government which manipulated history and alternated memory. The historian Taufik Abdullah characterized the New Order government as a rather ‘greedy’ state. Abdullah described the character of the government as an authoritarian entity, controlling every aspect of Indonesian political and economic life and even the people’s memories, to the point that they could no longer express their life aspirations (Azra, 2020: 77–78). According to the theory elaborated by Roediger and Abel (2015), collective memory is the memory of a group of people that happens to have a particular meaning for them. For the former women political prisoners, Dialita manifests this collective memory. Dialita helped these women reconstruct their sociocultural identity through their songs by interpreting past occurrences for the present and future. They articulated their current purpose, which is to alter the stigma and develop a brand-new identity. Hall (1990) explained that identity is a sociopolitical, cultural, historical and authoritative construction: a combination of power and knowledge. Identity is also a way to identify various individuals, groups or communities as a positioning tool. This article has explored the identity reconstruction process of the former women political prisoners, whom the New Order government described as immoral, vicious, heartless, murderous and even salacious women. In reality, most of them rejected the idea of attributing their organization to communism as a whole. They believed that their ‘narrative of origin’ had been altered to meet a particular political purpose. Castells (2015: 251) stated that the only way to resist authoritative power is to associate multiple repressed elements with an alternative solution of repositioning the self outside authority. This article has therefore argued that the articulation of identity by the former women political prisoners is likely to indicate a trajectory that is able to constitute a new grand narrative for the 1965 movement and propose an alternative voice in opposition to the New Order government’s historical narrative. Foucault referred to this process as a discourse, which is created to impose a political hegemony and dominant narrative – forever in conflict with one another – on people. The women analysed in this article created Dialita as a symbolic domain to rehabilitate, or redeem, their rights as members of Indonesian society. === [PDF page 17] === Lestariningsih and Sunarti 1205 Funding The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by Universitas Indonesia’s Research Grant (Hibah PUTI Q3 Doktor 2020) managed by DRPM UI and led by Dr Linda Sunarti, M. Hum. Contract Number: NKB-718/ UN2.RST/HKP/05.00/2020 of 29 April 2020. ORCID iDs Amurwani Dwi Lestariningsih https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9864-9358 Linda Sunarti https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6828-1169 References Adam AW (2017) Perempuan dalam Sejarah Lelaki. Jurnal Perempuan 52. Available at: https://kalyanamitra.or.id/perpustakaan/perpustakaan/jurnal-perempuan-52-kami-punya-sejarah/?lang=EN Alexander JC (2004) Cultural Trauma and Collective Identity. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Archive of Sekretariat Kopkamtib (1974a) Himpunan Surat Keputusan Pemerintah, Instruksi-instruksi dan Ketentuan-ketentuan Lain yang Berhubungan dengan Masalah Kamtibmas; Juli 1969 s/d Februari 1974. Archive, Sekretariat Negara Republik Indonesia (Republic of Indonesia’s Ministry of State Secretariat), Jakarta, Indonesia. Archive of Sekretariat Kopkamtib (1974b) Petunjuk Pelaksanaan Nomor Juklak-04/Kopkam/II/1974 tentang Pengawasan Atas Para Bekas Tahanan dan Para Bekas Nara Pidana G30S/PKI yang Dikembalikan ke Masyarakat dan Peningkatan Kewaspadaan Masyarakat dalam Kumpulan Produk-Produk Kompamtib Yang Menyangkut masalah ex-Tahanan G30S/PKI. Gol. Subversi dan Gol. Ekstrim Lainnya. Archive, Sekretariat Negara Republik Indonesia (Republic of Indonesia’s Ministry of State Secretariat), Jakarta, Indonesia. Budianta M (2015) Precarious cosmopolitanism: work migration and cultural belonging in a Globalized Asia. International Journal of Culture Studies 19(3): 271–286. Budianta M (ed.) (2003) Menembus Kabut Asap: Kesaksian Tahanan Politik 1965. Jakarta, Indonesia: Amanah Lontar. Calhoun C (1994) Social Theory and the Politics of Identity. Oxford: Blackwell. Castells M (2015) Networks of Outrage and Hope: Social Movements in the Internet Age. Cambridge: Polity Press. Cribb R (1990) The Indonesia Killings of 1965-1966: Studies from Java-Bali. Melbourne, VIC, Australia: Monash University and Centre of Southeast Asian Studies. Dipa A (2019) Dialita, 1965 survivors choir, to accept Gwangju human rights award. The Jakarta Post, 17 May. Available at: https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2019/05/17/dialita-1965-survivors-choir-toaccept-gwangju-human-rights-award.html Dwyer L (2015) Reimagining transitional justice in Bali. Völkerrechtsblog. Available at: https://voelkerrechtsblog.org/reimagining-transitional-justice-in-bali/ Fatimah S (2004) Negara dan Perempuan Fujinkai (1943-1945) dan Dharma Wanita (1974-1999). PhD thesis, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia. Foucault M (1980) Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972–1977. New York: Pantheon Books. Foucault M (1988) Madness and Civilization. New York: Random House. Foulcher KR (1969) A survey of events surrounding Manikebu: The struggle for cultural and intellectual freedom in Indonesia literature. Bijdragen tot de taal-, land- en volkenkunde (Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences of Southeast Asia) 125(4): 429–465. Gibson C (2017) Gadamer and the universality of hermeneutical reflection. Ithaque 20: 23–49. Halbwachs M (1992) On Collective Memory. London: University of Chicago Press. Hall S (1990) Cultural identity and diaspora. In: Ruthergand J (ed.) Identity, Community, Culture, Difference. London: Lawrence & Wishart, pp. 222–237. === [PDF page 18] === 1206 Memory Studies 16(5) Herlambang W (2013) Kekerasan Budaya Pasca 1965: Bagaimana Orde Baru Melegitimasi Anti-Komunis Melalui Sastra dan Film. Tangerang, Indonesia: Marjin Kiri. Kasdi A (2019) PKI Dalang dan Pelaku Kudeta G-30S/1965. Jombang, Indonesia: Yayasan Masyarakat Peduli Sejarah. Kasemin K (2004) Mendamaikan Sejarah: Analisis Wacana Pencabutan Tap MPRS 1966. Yogyakarta, Indonesia: Ilmu Sejarah FIS UNY. Le Goff J (1992) History and Memory (trans. S Rendall and E Claman). New York: Columbia University Press. Leksana G (2019) Remembering the Indonesian Genocide 53 Years Later. Bijdragen tot de taal-, land- en volkenkunde (Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences of Southeast Asia) 175(1): 67–79. Leong KY (2021) Straightening history: political prisoners and human rights in Indonesia. Journal of Southeast Asian Human Rights 5(1): 25–43. Lestariningsih AD (2011) Gerwani: Kisah Tapol Wanita di Kamp Plantungan. Jakarta, Indonesia: Penerbit Buku Kompas. Lestariningsih AD (2020) Kebudayaan Jalan Rekonsiliasi. Kompas, 30 September, p. 4. Lestariningsih AD and Soekarba SR (2019) Absence of Women’s Party in the New Order Era: case study of Indonesia Women Movement. International Review of Humanities Studies 4(1): 420–434. Magetsari N (2018) Mengkaji Ulang Ilmu Pengetahuan Budaya. In: Hidayat RS (ed.) Hikayat Ilmu Pengetahuan Budaya. Jakarta, Indonesia: Yayasan Pustaka Obor Indonesia, pp. 9–45. Mendelson J (2012) The Habermas-Gadamer Debate. New German Critique 18: 44–73. Muhidin DM and Yuliantri RDA (2008) Lekra Tidak Membakar Buku: Suara Senyap Lembar Kebudayaan Harian Rakyat (1950–1965). Yogyakarta, Indonesia: Merakesumba. Murray-Li T (2000) Articulating indigenous identity in Indonesia: resource politic and the tribal slot. Comparative Studies in Society and History 42(1): 149–179. Olick JK, Vinitzky-Seroussi V and Levy D (2011) The Collective Memory Reader. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pohlman A (2004) A fragment of a story: Gerwani and Tapol experiences. Intersections: Gender, History and Culture in Asia and the Pacific 10. Available at: http://intersections.anu.edu.au/issue10/pohlman.html Pohlman A (2015) Janda PKI: stigma and sexual violence against communist widows following the 1965– 1966 Massacres in Indonesia. Indonesia and the Malay World 44(128): 68–83. Pohlman A (2018) Two women’s testimonies of sexual violence during the 1965-1966 Indonesian massacres. In: McGregor K, Melvin J and Pohlman A (eds) The Indonesian Genocide of 1965: Causes, Dynamics and Legacies. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 115–132. Ricœur P (1981) Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences: Essays on Language, Action and Interpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rigney A (2018) Remembering hope: transnational activism beyond the traumatic. Memory Studies 11(3): 368–380. Robinson G (2018) The Killing Season: A History of the Indonesia Massacre, 1965-1966. Princeton, NJ; Oxford: Princeton University Press. Roediger HL III and Abel M (2015) Collective memory: a new arena of cognitive study. Trends in Cognitive Sadam M (2013) Being and Becoming Kachin: Histories beyond the State in the Borderworlds of Burma. Oxford: The British Academy, Oxford University Press. Sakina AI and Siti DH (2017) Menyoroti Budaya Patriarki di Indonesia. Social Work Journal 7(1): 71–80. Setiawan K (2018) Remembering suffering and survival: sites of memory on Buru. In: McGregor K, Melvin J and Pohlman A (eds) The Indonesian Genocide of 1965: Causes, Dynamics and Legacies. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 215–234. Shobirin E and Anwar A (2014) Benturan NU-PKI 1948-1965. Jakarta, Indonesia: Pengurus Besar Nahdlatul Ulama. Sulistyo H (2000) Palu Arit di Ladang Tebu: Sejarah Pembantaian Massal yang Terlupakan (1965-1966). Jakarta, Indonesia: KPG Gramedia. === [PDF page 19] === Lestariningsih and Sunarti 1207 Suryakusuma J (2011) State Ibuism: The Social Construction of Womanhood in New Order Indonesia. Thesis, Institute of Social Studies, The Hague. Triningsih W, Martini S and Abrar (2020) Senandung Pilu Eks Tahanan Politik 1965: Sejarah Paduan Suara Dialita (2011-2016). PERIODE: Jurnal Sejarah Dan Pendidikan Sejarah 2(1): 13–26. Wahyuningroem SL (2019) Towards post-transitional justice: the failures of transitional justice and the roles of civil society in Indonesia. Journal of Southeast Asian Human Rights 3(124): 124–154. Wieringa SE (1992) Ibu or the beast: gender interest in two Indonesian women’s organizations. Feminist Review 41: 98–113. Wieringa SE (1999) Penghancuran Gerakan Perempuan di Indonesia. Jakarta, Indonesia: Kalyanamitra and Garba Budaya. Wieringa SE (2019) Two Indonesian women’s organizations: Gerwani and the PKK. Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars 25(2): 17–30. Yuliawati FG and Kusumadewi A (2016) Lapisan Dusta di Balik Legenda Kekejaman Gerwani. CNN Indonesia, 30 September. Available at: https://www.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/20160930103757-20-162339/ lapisan-dusta-di-balik-legenda-kekejaman-gerwani List of interviews Interviews with Sudarminah (82) several times during 2004–2005 at Sudarminah’s house in Menteng Dalam, Manggarai, South Jakarta, and 2019–2021 at Sudarminah’s daughter house in Ciracas, East Jakarta, after her husband passed away in 2010. Darminah passed away on August 14, 2021. Interviews with Aminuddin Kasdi (73) on June 8, 2021, at Kasdi’s house in Surabaya, Jawa Timur, and on August 10, 2021, by phone and online meeting. Interview with Ngatawi Al Zastrouw (55), the personal assistant to Abdurrahman Wahid at Zastrouw’s house in Serua, Bojongsari, Depok, West Java. Interview with Uchikowati (64) on July 6, 2020, at Uchikowati’s house in Pamulang Indah, South Tangerang. Interview with Nani Nurani Affandi (82) on August 20, 2020, at Affandi’s house in Rawabadak Utara, North Jakarta. Interview with Utati Koesalah (72) at Utati’s house in Kemiri Muka, Depok, West Java. Interviews with Mudjiati (69) at Utati’s house in Kemiri Muka, Depok, West Java, and at Sudarminah’s daughter house at Ciracas, East Jakarta. Author biographies Amurwani Dwi Lestariningsih is a PhD candidate in the History Department, Faculty of Humanities, Universitas Indonesia. She has a keen interest in the issues relating to the former women political prisoners in Indonesia, especially those involved in the 30 September Movement. Linda Sunarti is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of History, Faculty of Humanities, Universitas Indonesia. Her research focuses on multiple areas of history, particularly in relation to Southeast Asian studies, international relations, diplomacy and politics.