Pluralism and Hybridity in instant poems: Taxonomizing Indonesian students' degree of nationalism through their creative process
Poetry can be a device that is rich in meaning in responding to any issues, including pluralism issue. The aim of this research is to elaborate students’ attitudes expressed in their poem on pluralism issues in Indonesia. This research is also conducted to identify and group the responses into three attitudes: positive, negative, and neutral, and into five hybrid categories proposed by Steven G. Yao: Cross-fertilization, Mimicry, Grafting, Transplantation, and Mutation. The research is conducted in five private universities in Jakarta and Tangerang: Bina Nusantara University, Pamulang University, Nasional University, Indonesian Christian University, and Indonesian Al-Azhar University. The result of the research shows that out of 153 poems, most students (65%) have positive attitude toward pluralism. While 16 % of them have negative attitude and only 19% of the respondents have neutral or ambiguous attitude. Interestingly, 36 students (23.52%) use the word “tunngal/one” as a metaphoric medium to express their response, while 33 (21.56%) students use colors to represent their thoughts, 28 students (18.30%) use “bhinneka / diversity” to show their responses, and there are 10 students (6.53%) use “rainbow” to signify pluralism issues. There are strong metaphors found effective in reflecting the students’ ideas such as garden, music, jar, batik, Garuda, salad, and sandals. The strong metaphors, studied in Yao’s hybridization, show all the five degrees of hybrid interaction: two cross-fertilizations, one mimicry, three graftings, three transplantations, and three mutations. It is concluded that the students have positively owned a high degree sense of nationalism in responding to Indonesian plural realities.
Arp, T.R. (1998). Perrine’s Literature: Structure, Sound, and Sense. Orlando: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.
Bishop, R. S. (1995). Books from parallel cultures: Celebrating the Americas. New York: Horn Book.
Corbetta, P. (2003). Social Research; Theory, Methods and Techniques. London: Sage Publications.
Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (1998).The Landscape of Qualitative Research: Theories and Issues. London: Sage Publications.
Drury, J. (2006). The Poetry Dictionary .Ohio: Writer’s Digest Book.
Fainsilber, L. & Ortony, A. (1987). Metaphorical uses of language in the expression of emotions. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 2 (4), 239-250.
Galston, W. A. (2002). Liberal Pluralism: The Implications of Value Pluralism for Political Theory and Practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Gioia, D. (1992). Can Poetry Matter? Retrieved July 24, 2014, from http://www.danagioia.net/essays/ecpm.htm
Madden, F. ( 2002). Exploring Poetry: Writing and Thinking about Poetry. New York: Longman.
Modell, A.H. (2005). Emotional memory, metaphor, and meaning. Psychoanalytic Inquiry 25 (4), 555-568.
Yao, S. G. (2003). Taxonomizing Hybridity. Textual Practice, 17, 357-378.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.