Sugar Baby Love
Farish A NoorPublished: Mar 4, 2001 6:42 AM | Updated: Jan 29, 2008 6:21 PM
Years ago, some of my elder relatives were humming the tune Sugar Baby Love (The Rubettes) which was a hit in the 1970s. When I asked them why they were doing so, they replied that they were nostalgic about the days when they were studying at University Malaya where the tune was a top hit - believe it or not!
Years ago, some of my elder relatives were humming the tune Sugar Baby Love (The Rubettes) which was a hit in the 1970s. When I asked them why they were doing so, they replied that they were nostalgic about the days when they were studying at University Malaya where the tune was a top hit - believe it or not!
On second thought, one should not be too surprised if Sugar Baby Love was a top hit in the campus of UM then, for many other things were trendy as well. During my own short stint as a lecturer at UM, however, Sugar Baby Love was definitely not on the menu.
Apart from the fact that the song hails from the Jurassic Age, many of the students I came across (who would probably regard the Carpenters as "decadent yellow culture") would probably have consigned Sugar Baby Love to the same fate.
For someone who prefers to listen to Massive Attack or Rage Against The Machine early in the morning traffic jam, the staple diet of Raihan and other nasyid bands that were on offer in campus was decidedly off-putting. Still, this is what tolerance means in a real-life context and one cannot talk about accommodation of Otherness without practising it oneself.
Life on the campus of UM (and other universities in the country) has not always been like it is today. Those of you who have parents, aunts or uncles who are in their 50s today and who studied in the local universities in the 1970s should whip out the old albums and look at their photos.
I have always found it both amusing and interesting to see how my uncle and aunt (both of whom are now decked out in contemporary Malay-Muslim garb, complete with janggut and tudung) were dressed in the 1970s. That was a time when the students of UM, UKM and other institutions of higher learning were dressed in denim jeans, short skirts, T-shirts, hippie beads and all manner of psychedelic paraphernalia.
They were also a bit more active then - on weekends they tended to organise demonstrations against government corruption, US dominance in the Middle East, the conduct of the Americans in Vietnam, the Vietnam War itself and Japanese economic hegemony in East Asia. Flags were burnt, embassies were picketed and graffiti painted all over the place.
Those who do not have the luxury of having parents or relatives who studied in the local universities in the 1970s can either borrow some from their friends or look for the book Bersama Anwar Ke Penjara by Kamarazaman Yacob, one of the local student leaders who took part in the massive student demonstrations in the 1970s and who was sent to Kamunting detention centre along with Anwar Ibrahim, Dr Syed Husin Ali, Lim Mah Hui, CC Yong, Ibrahim Ali (yes, the Ibrahim Ali) and others.
In the book, one can have a glimpse of campus life in the 1970s and there are plenty of interesting photographs of Malaysian students showing that they were not the "lazy, indolent natives" that some of their own leaders claimed them to be. One also catches a glimpse of a rather groovy-looking Hishamuddin Rais (another malaysiakini columnist) leading a demo and a rather dull photograph of Ibrahim Ali when he was head of the students union of ITM.
Of course, all of that came to an untimely end when "Operasi Mayang" was launched in 1974 and dozens of student leaders were rounded up and arrested. The heated tenor of campus student life subsided somewhat when new laws were put into place by the Home Ministry and the Education Ministry (the education minister at the time being a certain politician by the name of Dr Mahathir Mohamad).
The NEP, awards and sponsorships to bumiputra students, and the politics of patronage gradually redirected the tide of student anger and frustration, forcing them back to their schoolbooks instead.
Under such domesticated circumstances, campus life evolved at its own slower pace and the changes that took place from the 1970s to the 1990s were less dramatic, though some would say more important in other respects. The baggy trousers, mini skirts and short pants gave way to tudungs and shalwar khameezes, as Malay and non-Malay students grew more conscious of their ethnic and religious differences.
Thanks to the encroachment of a new kind of national politics, oriented around the issues of race and religion, campus life became fragmented and polarised as well. Costume and dress came to serve as boundary markers that denoted differences of belief and values, and drew the dividing line between communities. By the time I was teaching at UM not so long ago, I could not help but notice that the level of inter-racial and inter-religious dialogue and interaction had dropped significantly.
Not once did I come across a mixed couple of different races among the students, though as one of the lesser academic Gurkhas forced to teach classes late into the night I did come across many couples in the dark who were close together in the literal sense. Worried parents can rest assured that their children were at least dressed modestly while engaged in heavy petting.
The other thing I noticed during my time at UM was just how much religion and religious discourse in general had come to penetrate and shape the discourse of the students in general. By this I do not just mean the tunes of Raihan played at full blast in the dormitories, but also the language used by the students themselves in their interaction with each other and fellow students.
There were those who refused to learn certain subjects or read certain books because they felt that the ideas contained in them were "unIslamic" or against their personal beliefs. Then there were those who kept referring to other students as "those outside our community" or "unbelievers", etc.
I could not help but wonder if the earlier generation of leftist-Islamist student leaders like Anwar Ibrahim and co. ever realised that their activism would one day lead to the creation of such students in the campuses of the country.
Today, the Malaysian government has grown increasingly worried about what it calls the growth of "fundamentalism" in our universities. True, the nominal signs of such a phenomenon are evident. Students are more concerned about apparent differences between their various cultures and belief systems and they are even protesting about having to live with students of different religious backgrounds. If they protest against the government or certain political leaders, their polemics are invariably peppered with themes such as "Satanic government", "kafir rule", etc.
But much of the blame for this must also go to the Malaysian government itself, which has systematically domesticated campus life with laws and regulations such as those introduced by the amendments to the Universities and University Colleges Act in 1975. It is precisely because the students have been cooped up and closeted, both physically and mentally, that there is little room for debate and exchanges to take place on campus.
In such a claustrophobic environment, only the most narrow minded can survive by sticking to what they know best. An atmosphere of intellectual repression and intimidation serves only to restrict the boundaries of knowledge and experimentation, thus opening the way for demagogues and pedagogues who exploit the situation even further. Furthermore, the intensification of the use of religion and race by student leaders and student organisations today merely reflects the form of communal politics that is being practised by the dominant parties in the country. What is happening in the campuses is therefore a mirror of Malaysian society itself, and a mirror which also magnifies its contradictions and uncertainties to an extent that is uncomfortable for many.
My own view of student bodies which use and exploit the religious and communal differences between the students is similar to what I have to say about the political parties that resort to the same shallow and self-serving tactics. Such a form of sectarian politics, be it on campus or the national political arena, does not serve us well and invariably stands in the way of creating broad based instrumental coalitions that are based more on ideological principles rather than exclusivist beliefs.
The politicians of the country are hampered in their efforts to get out of the trap that they have created for themselves. For instance, look at how difficult it has been for Umno to bring into its fold bumiputras who happen to be Christians.
But students need not fall into the same trap if they are able to establish a degree of critical distance between themselves and the political system of the country. They can still try to forge alliances and coalitions that revolve around non-exclusive themes such as the environment, development, economic and human rights, etc.
To do this, however, means that they will need to look beyond the narrow confines of their own communities and constituencies. And if they still cannot agree on every aspect of their collective aspiration and struggle, they can at least hum Sugar Baby Love together.
On second thought, one should not be too surprised if Sugar Baby Love was a top hit in the campus of UM then, for many other things were trendy as well. During my own short stint as a lecturer at UM, however, Sugar Baby Love was definitely not on the menu.
Apart from the fact that the song hails from the Jurassic Age, many of the students I came across (who would probably regard the Carpenters as "decadent yellow culture") would probably have consigned Sugar Baby Love to the same fate.
For someone who prefers to listen to Massive Attack or Rage Against The Machine early in the morning traffic jam, the staple diet of Raihan and other nasyid bands that were on offer in campus was decidedly off-putting. Still, this is what tolerance means in a real-life context and one cannot talk about accommodation of Otherness without practising it oneself.
Life on the campus of UM (and other universities in the country) has not always been like it is today. Those of you who have parents, aunts or uncles who are in their 50s today and who studied in the local universities in the 1970s should whip out the old albums and look at their photos.
I have always found it both amusing and interesting to see how my uncle and aunt (both of whom are now decked out in contemporary Malay-Muslim garb, complete with janggut and tudung) were dressed in the 1970s. That was a time when the students of UM, UKM and other institutions of higher learning were dressed in denim jeans, short skirts, T-shirts, hippie beads and all manner of psychedelic paraphernalia.
They were also a bit more active then - on weekends they tended to organise demonstrations against government corruption, US dominance in the Middle East, the conduct of the Americans in Vietnam, the Vietnam War itself and Japanese economic hegemony in East Asia. Flags were burnt, embassies were picketed and graffiti painted all over the place.
Those who do not have the luxury of having parents or relatives who studied in the local universities in the 1970s can either borrow some from their friends or look for the book Bersama Anwar Ke Penjara by Kamarazaman Yacob, one of the local student leaders who took part in the massive student demonstrations in the 1970s and who was sent to Kamunting detention centre along with Anwar Ibrahim, Dr Syed Husin Ali, Lim Mah Hui, CC Yong, Ibrahim Ali (yes, the Ibrahim Ali) and others.
In the book, one can have a glimpse of campus life in the 1970s and there are plenty of interesting photographs of Malaysian students showing that they were not the "lazy, indolent natives" that some of their own leaders claimed them to be. One also catches a glimpse of a rather groovy-looking Hishamuddin Rais (another malaysiakini columnist) leading a demo and a rather dull photograph of Ibrahim Ali when he was head of the students union of ITM.
Of course, all of that came to an untimely end when "Operasi Mayang" was launched in 1974 and dozens of student leaders were rounded up and arrested. The heated tenor of campus student life subsided somewhat when new laws were put into place by the Home Ministry and the Education Ministry (the education minister at the time being a certain politician by the name of Dr Mahathir Mohamad).
The NEP, awards and sponsorships to bumiputra students, and the politics of patronage gradually redirected the tide of student anger and frustration, forcing them back to their schoolbooks instead.
Under such domesticated circumstances, campus life evolved at its own slower pace and the changes that took place from the 1970s to the 1990s were less dramatic, though some would say more important in other respects. The baggy trousers, mini skirts and short pants gave way to tudungs and shalwar khameezes, as Malay and non-Malay students grew more conscious of their ethnic and religious differences.
Thanks to the encroachment of a new kind of national politics, oriented around the issues of race and religion, campus life became fragmented and polarised as well. Costume and dress came to serve as boundary markers that denoted differences of belief and values, and drew the dividing line between communities. By the time I was teaching at UM not so long ago, I could not help but notice that the level of inter-racial and inter-religious dialogue and interaction had dropped significantly.
Not once did I come across a mixed couple of different races among the students, though as one of the lesser academic Gurkhas forced to teach classes late into the night I did come across many couples in the dark who were close together in the literal sense. Worried parents can rest assured that their children were at least dressed modestly while engaged in heavy petting.
The other thing I noticed during my time at UM was just how much religion and religious discourse in general had come to penetrate and shape the discourse of the students in general. By this I do not just mean the tunes of Raihan played at full blast in the dormitories, but also the language used by the students themselves in their interaction with each other and fellow students.
There were those who refused to learn certain subjects or read certain books because they felt that the ideas contained in them were "unIslamic" or against their personal beliefs. Then there were those who kept referring to other students as "those outside our community" or "unbelievers", etc.
I could not help but wonder if the earlier generation of leftist-Islamist student leaders like Anwar Ibrahim and co. ever realised that their activism would one day lead to the creation of such students in the campuses of the country.
Today, the Malaysian government has grown increasingly worried about what it calls the growth of "fundamentalism" in our universities. True, the nominal signs of such a phenomenon are evident. Students are more concerned about apparent differences between their various cultures and belief systems and they are even protesting about having to live with students of different religious backgrounds. If they protest against the government or certain political leaders, their polemics are invariably peppered with themes such as "Satanic government", "kafir rule", etc.
But much of the blame for this must also go to the Malaysian government itself, which has systematically domesticated campus life with laws and regulations such as those introduced by the amendments to the Universities and University Colleges Act in 1975. It is precisely because the students have been cooped up and closeted, both physically and mentally, that there is little room for debate and exchanges to take place on campus.
In such a claustrophobic environment, only the most narrow minded can survive by sticking to what they know best. An atmosphere of intellectual repression and intimidation serves only to restrict the boundaries of knowledge and experimentation, thus opening the way for demagogues and pedagogues who exploit the situation even further. Furthermore, the intensification of the use of religion and race by student leaders and student organisations today merely reflects the form of communal politics that is being practised by the dominant parties in the country. What is happening in the campuses is therefore a mirror of Malaysian society itself, and a mirror which also magnifies its contradictions and uncertainties to an extent that is uncomfortable for many.
My own view of student bodies which use and exploit the religious and communal differences between the students is similar to what I have to say about the political parties that resort to the same shallow and self-serving tactics. Such a form of sectarian politics, be it on campus or the national political arena, does not serve us well and invariably stands in the way of creating broad based instrumental coalitions that are based more on ideological principles rather than exclusivist beliefs.
The politicians of the country are hampered in their efforts to get out of the trap that they have created for themselves. For instance, look at how difficult it has been for Umno to bring into its fold bumiputras who happen to be Christians.
But students need not fall into the same trap if they are able to establish a degree of critical distance between themselves and the political system of the country. They can still try to forge alliances and coalitions that revolve around non-exclusive themes such as the environment, development, economic and human rights, etc.
To do this, however, means that they will need to look beyond the narrow confines of their own communities and constituencies. And if they still cannot agree on every aspect of their collective aspiration and struggle, they can at least hum Sugar Baby Love together.
View Comments0