Natthanai Prasannam. 2010. Rediscovery of National Glory and History: The Siam Renaissance as...

The Journal (Vol.6 No.2 2010): 47-67 47

Rediscovery of National Glory and History: The Siam Renaissance as Counter-Discursive Thai Films

Natthanai Prasannam

Abstract The Siam Renaissance (2004) is a film adapted from Thawiphop (1987, The Two Worlds), a popular Thai novel by Damayanti. The film was directed by Surapong Pinijkhar. The screenplay was written by Surapong Pinijkhar and Poraminthra Krouethong who are recognized as non-formal historians. Previously, Thawiphop had been adapted into films and television series; the new interpretation by Pinijkhar and Kroeuthong noticeably coheres with the Thai social context after the economic crisis in 1997. It is found that socio-political consciousness is established in both the novel and the film. Nevertheless, the film version broadens political and historical messages by altering the setting to that of the reign of King Mongkut, the period of great confrontation between Siam and the West. Counter-discourse is pursued in the course of rediscovering Thai royal-nationalist history, representing the West as uncivilized and glorifying Thai wisdom. The most significant counter-discursive practice is the remaking of “Anna myth.” In this context, Anna myth is the story of an English governess at the Siamese court by Anna Leonowens which has been reproduced among literary circles, Broadway performances, and the film industry in the West. The myth is transformed into the journey of Maneechan, the major character, and comprehended as an exotic fantasy of the West. Moreover, the film also writes back to colonial discourse in “White Woman’s Burden” of Anna.

This article was revised from a paper presented at Beyond the Politics of Identity Conference, University of Aberdeen, Scotland, UK, on 20 June 2009. The author would like to thank Ajarn Thongrob Ruenbanthoeng for his close reading and constructive comments. Assistant Professor, Department of Literature, Faculty of Humanities, Kasetsart University, Thailand.

Rediscovery of National Glory and History 48

บทคัดยอ ทวิภพ (2547) เปนภาพยนตรที่ดัดแปลงจากนวนิยายยอดนิยมของทมยันตีเรื่อง ทวิภพ (2530) ทวิภพฉบับภาพยนตรกํากับโดยสุรพงษ พินิจคา บทภาพยนตรโดยสุรพงษ พินิจคาและปรมินทร เครือทอง นักประวัติศาสตรอิสระ ที่ผานมามีการดัดแปลงนวนิยายเรื่อง ทวิภพเปนละครโทรทัศนและภาพยนตรมาแลวหลายครั้ง การตีความใหมในฉบับภาพยนตรนาจะเชื่อมโยงกับวิกฤตเศรษฐกิจใน พ.ศ.2540 อยางมีนัยสําคัญ ดังที่ปรากฏความพยายามในการกอบกู “ความเปนไทย” และ “อัตลักษณไทย” ในภาพยนตรไทยหลายเรื่องที่สรางหลังวิกฤตการณดังกลาว จากการศึกษาพบวาสํานึกทางการเมืองปรากฏทั้งในฉบับนวนิยายและฉบับภาพยนตร แตภาพยนตรไดขยาย “สาร” ทางการเมืองและประวัติศาสตรดวยการกําหนดฉากเปนสมัยรัชกาลที่ 4 ซึ่งเปนชวงเวลาที่ประเทศไทยเผชิญหนากับการคุกคามของอํานาจตะวันตก การโตกลับในภาพยนตรกระทําผานการนําเสนอภาพแทนชาวตะวันตกวาปาเถ่ือนในขณะที่เชิดชูภูมิปญญาและความเปนอารยะของไทย และการฟนคืนประวัติศาสตรแบบราชาชาตินิยม กลวิธีการโตกลับที่สําคัญที่สุดคือการเขียน “เรื่องเลาของนางแอนนา” ขึ้นใหม ซึ่งเรื่องเลาของนางแอนนา เลียวโนเวนสน้ีถูกผลิตซ้ําในวงวรรณกรรม การแสดงละครบรอดเวย และอุตสาหกรรมภาพยนตรในโลกตะวันตก ในฉบับภาพยนตรไทยเรื่องเลาของนางแอนนาถูกแทนที่ดวยการเดินทางของตัวละครเอกคือมณีจันทร และถูกลดสภาพใหกลายเปนเพียงจินตนาการเพอฝนของชาวตะวันตกมากกวาความจริงที่นาเชื่อถือ

Introduction Before colonialism and imperialism were introduced, there were wars among mankind to rule over the lands in most regions in the world. Europeans laid their interest on unknown lands after the Crusade Wars in the Middle East. Through the advanced knowledge of navigation, some Europeans departed to survey and claim new-found lands. The process continued on a competitive basis and was later shaped as colonialism and imperialism. These ideologies are still evident in European or Western mentality in the 21st century. Apart from armed forces, colonizers created colonial discourse by the use of social establishments to construct mental colonies. Many intellectuals in the Postcolonial world found that the colonialist discursive practices were still active after the independence of colonies. The weapons intellectuals have employed to fight against


the colonizers is “postcolonialism,” the discipline formed in a subversive spirit adjacent to the West as the major colonizers. (Edgar and Sedgwick, 2008: 51-52) The accepted strategies the intellectuals use to strike back at colonial discourse include the disclosure of the prejudice of the West on the indigene and the rewriting of national history which was previously “inaccurately narrated” with bigotry and intolerance by the West. Mainstream Thai historiography has pointed out the confrontation between Thais and the West since the Ayutthaya period. In that period, the interracial relationship was pursued in many facets: commerce, religion, culture, and the military. There were a great number of foreigners in the Ayutthaya community and in the royal court up to Rattanakosin period. Afterwards, the relationship between the Siamese and Westerners seemed to change; the attempts to dominate and colonize Siam were gradually revealed particularly in the reign of King Rama IV or King Mongkut in the 19th century. (see Pongsripian, 2002) As repeatedly retold in Thai history, Southeast Asia was totally colonized except for Siam. The glorious independence was claimed both in Thai mainstream and alternative historiography. However, the economic crisis in 1997 degraded Thai lives into misery. Certain business was affected; there were lots of unemployed. Bankruptcy pushed people to suicide. During the crisis, Thailand was filled with stress and depression. Inevitably, the Thai government had to borrow from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to heal the crisis. Thailand became a “debtor” of the West. The sense of national pride in its proposed status as the only Southeast Asian nation never to have fallen to colonial rule was threatened. (Chaiworaporn, 2002; Suvachittanont, 2002; Harrison, 2010: 111) The endeavor to redeem national glory came into view through nostalgic craze. There were plenty of cultural artifacts created in art cycle as well. Thai writers turned back to their local wisdom as well as Thai historical films or “returning to the past” films (Nang Yon Yuk) have been launched since that decade of economic crisis until the present. (Chaiworaporn, 2002; Choopen, 2007: 3-5) Though Siam or Thailand could avoid the formal colonization, Thai people were directly affected by elusive colonizing procedures and national glory was contaminated by the economic crisis. It is thought-provoking to analyze the progression of Thais in fighting back the colonizers to prove whether it shares some significance with the postcolonial intellectuals. Primarily, discursive practice is one of the weapons used to battle and to heal the wound of the colonizing situation. The case study proposed here is The Siam Renaissance (2004), a film directed by Suraphong Pinijkhar and screenplayed by Suraphong Pinijkhar and Poramintra Krouethong. The prominence of the film is its engagement in making linkage of Siamese and “farang” (The Westerner) past and present in the shaping and asserting of Thai identities, the others and the West. (Harrison, 2010: 96)


Socio-political consciousness in Thawiphop, the novel and the film The Siam Renaissance is a film adapted from Thawiphop (1987) or The Two Worlds, a Thai popular novel by Damayanti. Thawiphop, the novel, introduced a new generic classification, the Time Travel Romance, to Thai writing arena. Thawiphop is repeatedly reproduced in popular media. The first film version in 1990 was directed by Cherd Songsri. The television series version was on air in 1994 on channel 7. The film version by Pinijkhar was released in 2004 and the musical versions were reproduced by Thakolkiet Weerawan in 2005, 2006 and 2011. Pinijkar’s Thawiphop was interestingly reinterpreted. It was relatively different from other versions. Though the director declared that the film was inspired by the novel not an adaptation, there were huge complaints on the disloyalty to the original version. So far critics have praised Pinijkhar’s film: “This version of Thawiphop is the most admirable Thai historical films Thailand ever had” (Viroj, 2004: 118-119) and “This is a masterpiece worth buying as household media and as a collection to hand down to our children.” (Phon, 2004: 90) Damayanti’s Thawiphop is the story of Maneechan, a Thai ambassador’s daughter. Maneechan was raised and educated in a Western context. When she got back to Thailand, she bought an old mirror from a mysterious antique shop. She heard the voice of a man who later became known as Luang Akharadep Warakorn. One day Maneechan accidentally traveled to the period in the reign of King Rama V by walking through the mirror. She can exercise her foreign linguistic skills to rescue the nation from colonization during the crisis in 112th year of Chakri dynasty. Eventually, the mirror was broken; Maneechan married Luang Akharadhep Warakorn and lived her life in the past for good. In Pinijkhar’s Thawiphop or The Siam Renaissance, Maneechan was a daughter of a historian. She grew up and was educated in France and then worked as an officer in Thai consul bureau in Paris. Maneechan was asked to attend a press conference. French scholars were shocked by finding Le Voyageur, a memoir written by François Xavier who stayed in Siam during the reign of King Rama IV and V. Le Voyageur brought Maneechan back to her father, Luang Vilas, in Thailand. He asked her to forget the memoir. Surprisingly, Xavier located himself at Longitude 0 and he drew a picture of the Eiffel Tower over the Chaopraya River in Bangkok. Maneechan gradually found an enigmatic time warp between her time and the reign of King Rama IV or Siam in the 19th century. Maneechan was grounded in Chaophraya Srisuriyawongse’s house. She met Luang Akharadhep Warakorn and Phra Ratchamaitri who interviewed her about the period in which she actually belonged.


The socio-political consciousness in the novel was neatly inserted in the story of Phra Yod Maung Khwang who was punished for his insistence to guard the controversial borderline among Siamese, British, and French territories. In the novel, Maneechan tried to approach Phra Wisan Khadi who was in the jury team for that case. Though she could not change the past, she was patriotically inspired by Phra Yod Muang Khwang’s heroism. Maneechan worked very hard on reading history: she tried to save Siam in the reign of King Rama V from French gunship policy as the narrator stated that:

Siam had failed; Siam must not fail anymore. She needs to study, to remember, and to know then the destiny will show the way to her. Whatever will be…will be. If the two worlds lead her to disaster, who cares. Siam must live on…on its best condition. (Damayanti, 2004: 214-215) สยามพลาดมาแลว จะพลาดอีกไมได เธอตองเรียน ตองจํา ตองรู และ...ผูกําหนดชะตากรรมจะ ‘พา’เธอไปเอง อะไรจะเกิดข้ึนตอนี้ไป จงเกิด ทวิภพจะทําใหเธอพินาศหรือไม ชาง! สยามประเทศตองอยู อยูอยางดีที่สุดดวย!

The socio-political consciousness in the film Thawiphop or The Siam Renaissance is stronger than that in the novel. Pinijkhar changed the setting from the reign of King Rama V to the reign of King Rama IV or King Mongkut, the period of great confrontation between Siam and the West. However, the director still emphasized the crisis in the 112th year of the Chakri dynasty, Luang Akharadhep Warakorn, the major character, was heroically killed on the battlefield. Pinijkhar, the director, read Damayanti’s Thawiphop as political literature as he said that: “Those who seriously read Thawiphop should get the political messages. One may read it as a romance but I highlight the politics. I think Thawiphop is a political novel.” (Kriengsak, 2004: 98) The strong socio-political consciousness found in The Siam Renaissance focused on social criticism and its targets were Thais who live in present-day society. In the novel, Maneechan was depicted as half-Thai and half-foreign. She knew little of Thai history. Time travelling pushed her to give her interest on “Thainess.” It may be said that going back to the past is an intensive socialization for her. In the film, Maneechan had a nostalgic sense of classical Thainess as well. She was thrilled by the borderless greenest rice fields, groups of sugar palm trees, and the pagoda in Wat Arun before they were ever seen on postcards today. Maneechan represented Thai people who left their roots behind. In the age of globalization, there may be no gunship or arm forces. Yet the cultural imperialism worried the director who was concerned about Thai identity. The fear of losing Thai


identity was encoded in the conversations of Maneechan, Luang Akharadhep Warakorn and Phra Ratchamaitri. Maneechan mentioned about the time she had lived before she left.

Maneechan: Our country is very modern. There are many skyscrapers. Everything has changed. We have cars, electricity, movie theatres. We dress in a western style. We accept the westerners more than we accept one another. We have everything the Westerners have. We are everything the Westerners are. We eat everything the Westerners eat. We prefer anything the Westerners tell us to. We want to be them and we refuse to be ourselves. […] Phra Ratchamaitri: Which country do we accept? England or France? Maneechan: We accept all but ourselves. The US is the world’s greatest country. Our children accept Japan as well. มณีจันทร: บานเมืองเจริญมาก มีตึกสูงมากมาย ทุกอยางเปลี่ยนไปหมด มีรถยนต ไฟฟา มีโรงหนัง เราแตงตัวแบบตะวันตก นับถือฝร่ังมากกวาพวกเดียวกัน เรามีทุกอยางท่ีตะวันตกมี เราเปนทุกอยางท่ีชาวตะวันตกเปน เรากินทุกอยางท่ีชาวตะวันตกกิน เราชอบทุกอยางท่ีชาวตะวันตกบอกใหชอบ เราอยากเปนเขา แลวก็ปฏิเสธท่ีจะเปนเรา […] พระราชไมตรี: แลวเรานับถือใคร อังกฤษหรือฝร่ังเศส มณีจันทร: เรานับถือหมดนอกจากตัวเรา อเมริกาเปนชาติท่ียิ่งใหญท่ีสุด เด็กๆ ของเราก็นับถือญ่ีปุนดวย

The conversation quoted above implies that neo-colonialism may invade the Thai society in form of cultural commodities, cultural industry, and cultural globalization. When Thai people consume imported cultural stuffs, they are colonized. Certain cultural waves can be deduced as implicit hegemonic power. In The Siam Renaissance, the director tried to resist that power at a discursive level. Counter-Discourse in the Dimension of Power and Resistance Colonial discourse is greatly implicated in the ideas of the centrality of Europe, and thus in assumptions that have become characteristic of modernity: assumptions about history, language, literature, and technology. Colonial discourse is thus a system of statements that can be made about colonies and colonial people, about colonizing powers and about the relationship between these two. Colonial discourse constructed binary opposition between the West and the rest.


maturity ≠ immaturity progressive ≠ primitive civilization ≠ barbarism developed ≠ underdeveloped Western ≠ non-Western masculinity ≠ femininity self ≠ other

The discourse and the binarism grant the West a legitimacy to rule over the colonies and the indigenous people. The non-Western is primitive and barbaric; they deserve to be civilized. The West is masculine and therefore they are stronger than the colonies. The West has missions to protect the colony and to cultivate development in the colony. (Sapying, 2006: 16) This is later called the “White man’s burden.” The existence of power must closely correlate with resistance. Richard Terdiman coined the term “Counter-Discourse” to characterize the theory and practice of symbolic resistance. Terdiman examines the means of producing genuine change against the “capacity of established discourses to be ignored or absorb would-be subversion” by analyzing nineteenth-century French writing. (Ashcroft, Griffith, and Tiffin, 2007: 50) Helen Tiffin applied Terdiman’s conception in her article “Post-colonial Literatures and Counter-discourse.” It can be concluded from the content of the article that European discourses and discursive strategies are produced from a privileged position. Postcolonial reading is to investigate the means by which Europe imposed and maintained colonial domination. (Tiffin, 1995: 95-98) Thus rereading and rewriting of European historical and fictional records are vital and inescapable tasks. These subversive maneuvers, rather than the reconstruction of the essentially national or regional are what is characteristic of post-colonial texts, as the subversive is characteristic of postcolonial discourse in general. Postcolonial literature/cultures are thus constituted in counter-discursive rather than homologous practices, and they offer “fields” of counter-discursive strategies to the dominant discourse. Tiffin (1995) focuses on literary texts. She noted that in challenging the notion of literary universality, postcolonial writers and critics engage in counter-discourse. Postcolonial counter-discursive strategies involve a mapping of the dominant discourse, a reading


and exposure of its underlying assumptions, and the “dis/mantling” of these assumptions from a cross-cultural standpoint of the imperially subjectified “local”.1 I have applied the conceptions on counter-discourse by Terdiman and Tiffin to shape the framework of this study. I shall explain the counter-discursive strategies fashioned in The Siam Renaissance and how the director and the screenplay writers exploit them. Counter-Discourse through Representation of the West and the Siamese As in colonial discourse, binary opposition is used to empower the West on ruling the colonies. The director of The Siam Renaissance seized the opposing relationship and then distorted or reconstructed it. According to Stuart Hall’s proposal on a representational counter-strategy, encoding reversal of representation can fight back the mainstream or cliché representation. (Hall, 1997: 270-275) In the film, Gabriel Aubaret, French consul in Siam, was portrayed as a greedy Westerner. He wanted a part of the Mekong region which was, at that time, under the control of Siam. The director projected Aubaret’s greed through the cake-cutting scene. It was compared to dividing colonies into pieces. This conforms to the colonialist logic which is to objectify everything in the colony, such as people, as an object of anthropological studies, natural resources, culture and even local knowledge. The process is similar to the statement of Aimé Cézaire, the Postcolonial scholar, who proposed an equation: colonization = “thingification.” (Loomba, 2000: 47) The colonizer’s ideologies were criticized here: They do not civilize the savage land. They just greedily want to occupy the land.

Figure 1-2: Aubaret’s greed and cruelty in The Siam Renaissance. DVD still from Thawiphop, Film Bangkok.

1 Similarly, Jean Rhys’ Wild Sargasso Sea, which strikes back to Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre, directly contests British sovereignty—over person, place, culture, and language. It reinvests its own hybridized world with a provisionally normative perspective.


The second example is the bathing scene. The director compared Aubaret and Maneechan through the bathing scene. Aubaret showered outdoor, his hairy white naked body represented the savageness of the West beneath the velvet robe. Noticeably, Aubaret was othered according to Occidentalism–roughly defined as a mode of negative representation of the West constructed by the East. The director adopted Occidentalism that Thai political elites used to depict the West, precisely, in Khlong Phap Khon Tang Phasa inscribed at Wat Phrachetuphon (Wat Pho) since the reign of King Rama III into the film. (See Kitiarsa, 2010) Whereas Maneechan’s bathing was ritualized, she bathed with helping hands of two servants. The honey-like skin was neatly scrubbed. In the ritual bathing, Maneechan looked feminine and exotic. The counter-discourse here is to write back against an oriental exotic imagination created by the occidental. The director insisted that Siamese exoticism is a part of civilization in particular.

Figure 3-4: Bathing scenes in The Siam Renaissance. DVD still from Thawiphop, Film Bangkok.

From the opposing binary chart displayed before, colonial discourse associated wisdom to the West while granting the rest stupidity. The director presented the discourse through a conversation between Aubaret and Chaophraya Srisuriyawongse. Aubaret claimed French rights over Cambodia by referring to history, but later he was outwitted by the Siamese aristocrat previously seen as a savage.

Aubaret: When we came to rule over Annam in Cochin China, we have the authority over the whole Khmer since in history Khmer belonged to Annam. Chaophraya Srisuriyawongse: But using history to support that claim is a dangerous excuse. If England used history to make a similar claim, French might have to return Normandy, Gascony and what else?...oh..Guiene to England as well. Let’s be reasonable.


โอบาเรต: เม่ือเราครอบครองญวนในโคชินจีนเรายอมมีสิทธิเหนือเขมรท้ังหมด ในประวัติศาสตร เขมรเปนของญวนมากอน เจาพระยาศรีสุริยวงศ: การอางเอาประวัติศาสตรนี้เปนขอสมอางท่ีไมปลอดภัยนักนะทาน ถาอังกฤษยอมสมอางทางประวัติศาสตรในลักษณะนี้เชนกัน ฝร่ังเศสอาจตองสงคืนแควนนอรมังดี คาสโตนีย แลวอะไรอีกละ ออ แควนเกียนน คืนใหแกอังกฤษดวย นะทาน เรามาคุยกันอยางมีเหตุผลท่ีดีดีกวา

After the failure of negotiation over Cambodian land, Aubaret had Captain La Marche hand his letter to King Mongkut late at night. Captain La Marche was represented as a retard; he repeated all of Aubaret’s utterances. In accordance with colonial discourse, retardation is a property of the native whereas advancement belongs to the colonizer. (Ashcroft, Griffith, and Tiffin, 2007: 18-21) The film distorted the discourse by means of characterization. Aubaret is a key character in the counter-discursive process. Commanding Captain La Marche, Aubaret knew that Captain La Marche’s request would certainly be rejected. Aubaret announced that the reaction of the Siamese was to disgrace the friendship between the French and the Siamese; he would let the emperor know. After that the Siamese government sent Mom Rachothai to deliver a kind apology to Aubaret. The traditional procession and the apology gifts were ignored. Unexpectedly, Aubaret pulled Mom Rachothai’s hair and rudely kicked him out. The slow motion of disgracing Siam honor was intentionally emphasized. Later, Luang Akharadhep Warakorn, Maneechan, and their entourage were invited to a party of French officers and families. Some of the fellows do not know how to use spoons and forks. This represents the alienation of civilization and a subjective perspective on civilization. Using spoons and forks might be a simple savoir-vivre of Western culture, but it does not suit the Siamese context. In particular, the can-can dance which was extremely offensive from Siamese perspective was enjoyed by the Western party monsters. Counter-discursive strategies were also pursued via symbolic expression. In the party, Maneechan was threatened by Aubaret. She grasped Luang Akharadhep Warakorn’s dagger and accidentally stabbed Aubaret. When Maneechan went back to her time, she found that Siam was ruled by the French because of her mistake. The Eiffel Tower was build over Chaophraya River. The tower symbolically represented a Western phallus over the feminine body of the colony. (Louiyapong,


2008: 187; Chandrarojanakit, 2009) This symbol traditionally referred to colonial desire.2

Figure 5: Eiffel Tower over Chaophraya River in The Siam Renaissance. DVD still from Thawiphop, Film Bangkok.

Maneechan rushed back to the past, she grasped the dagger from Luang Akharadhep Warakorn before it was used to make a great mistake. Maneechan threw the dagger away then the Eiffel Tower and its imperious shadow faded. Here, Maneechan symbolized Siam. Her femininity was represented along the colonialist logic but she was a woman who could master masculinity. Throwing a dagger connoted rejecting masculinity. In this sense, masculinity belonged to the West. The fading Eiffel Tower was the fading Western phallus. It was castrated by Siamese woman. Counter-Discourse through Knowledge and Rediscovery of the History Generally, discourse is knowledge in relation to power. The director may be aware of the specific characteristic of the discourse. One day, Luang Akharadhep Warakorn took Maneechan to witness the secret weapons of the Siamese. Where the weapons were collected is Bhuvadon Thasanai, a mansion in the Grand Palace. There was a huge library in the clock tower. The dialogue between Luang Akharadhep Warakorn and Maneechan was as follow:

2 Masculinity and femininity in colonial discourse is constructed through the perspective of sexuality. The concept of colonization is based on sexual discourse: rape, penetration, reproduction. These can be named as “colonial desire”. See more in Young (1995).


Luang Akharadhep Warakorn: This is what His Majesty the King has prepared for us all. In a century, it is hard to find such a sage in Siam. That’s why I have devoted my life and my heart to His Majesty. This will be the pride of our descendants for generations to come. It is hoped that they too will know this valuable weapon and it is hoped that they will understand what we are trying to do.

Maneechan: In my time, your Siamese descendants can read and write.

Luang Akharadhep Warakorn: The Siamese can read and write!

You absurdly talked about the future again. Anyway, I will take that as a compliment. So it means we did it. Is everyone brilliant? Maneechan: Not quite, sir. There are many libraries. Anyone can read books there. Plenty of books are available at the corner of every street. Anyone can buy any book, but each of your descendants read only six lines a year, sir.

หลวงอัครเทพวรากร: นี่แหละคืออาวุธท่ีพระเจาอยูหัวทรงเตรียมไวใหพวกเราทุกๆคน รอยป สยามจะมีปราชญสักคนหนึ่งก็แสนเข็ญ สิ่งนี้ละทําใหขายอมถวายกายถวายใจท้ังหมดของขาได หวังเอาไวคุยอวดลูกอวดหลาน หวังใหคนรุนตอๆ ไปไดเขาใจและรูจักอาวุธท่ีมีคานี้ หวังใหคนรุนตอๆ ไปไดเขาใจวาเรากําลังทําอะไรกันอยูในยุคของพวกเรา มณีจันทร: ในเวลาของฉันนะ ลูกหลานเราชาวสยาม อานออกเขียนไดกันทุกคนเลยเจาคะ หลวงอัครเทพวรากร: ชาวสยามทุกคนอานออกเขียนได เจาเพอถึงอนาคต อีกแลว แตขาก็ถือเปนคําชม ง้ันเราก็ทําสําเร็จนะสิ ทุกคนฉลาดหมดใชไหม […] มณีจันทร: ก็ไมเชิงหรอกเจาคะ เรามีหอหนังสือมากมาย ใครๆ ก็เขาไปอานได มีหนังสือวางขายทุกมุมถนน ใครๆ ก็เขาไปซ้ือได แตลูกหลานเรา คนหนึ่งอานหนังสือกันปละแคหกบรรทัดเองเจาคะ

The importance of knowledge was highlighted. The film criticizes Thai people in contemporary society who ignored reading and learning. Reading is significantly related to literacy. Here it is the colonialist literacy. One who is “illiterate” in terms of consuming Westernness: they themselves are unconsciously colonized and victimized.3

3 This can be concluded by the idiom “tam kon farang” (kissing the asses of the farang). This idiom is used to criticize blind imitation of the West. (Kitiarsa, 2010: 57)


The knowledge was also expressed in contesting meantime from the West. As found in the memoir Le Voyageur, Siam was in zero degrees longitude instead of Greenwich in London. King Mongkut regulated personal time for use in the country before the creations of Greenwich Mean Time (GMT) and Big Ben. The film rediscovered the royal wisdom which deuniversalized the Western knowledge. Bangkok Mean Time was drawn at the Bhuvadon Thasanai mansion, clock tower in the Grand Palace. Knowledge and a rediscovered past in the reign of King Mongkut are closely interwoven. The film’s title The Siam Renaissance conveyed Siam in the reign of King Mongkut. During the reign, Siam was reformed in several facets: to set up groups of soldiers with Western discipline; to reform Buddhism by constituting “Dhammyuttika Nikai” with restricted obligations; to develop scientific knowledge and astronomic observation; to discover the first stone inscription inherited from the Sukhothai period; and to invent Ariyaka letters. The tremendous changes the king brought to the nation could be seen as a milestone of the Siam Renaissance in the nineteenth-century after the pursuit of the ancient legacy of the Ayutthaya period in the early Rattanakosin period. Compared to the Renaissance in the European context, the Siam Renaissance and the European Renaissance shared a lot in common—Knowledge, sciences, religious reformation, and printing, which ignited European Renaissance, were also found in the Siamese context. Although using time warp as the most significant motif, The Siam Renaissance valued linear history. In a western context, linear history is a mainstream convention of writing historiography. Essentially, linear history entails the progress of European or Western civilization passing from the Dark Age to the Renaissance. The director wrote Thai history in the film conforming to the so-called convention to illuminate Siamese national progress. Before the reign of King Mongkut, the Siamese perceived their time through Buddhist worldviews. Time passing denoted the degeneracy of mankind. All Buddhists should make merit to be born in the promising age of Matreiya Bodhisatava or Buddhist Utopia. (Sattayanurak, 1988) Thai historians identified the age of King Mongkut as a “New Siam” in accordance with the change of Siamese worldviews resulting from the new class in Siamese society, which is the middle class. (Keeratiworanan, 1998) From the time of degeneration to the time of progress, time perception was changed dramatically by Siamese socio-cultural factors but not by imported knowledge from the West. Progressive history was plotted along with the spirit of royal-nationalist history concentrating on fighting against Western colonialism. The heritage of historical writing in the reign of King Mongkut is a meta-narrative of Siamese independence gained by royal wisdom. The national memory sometimes concealed the complicated


relationship between Siam and colonialism. The history usually highlights the colonialist threats not deference. Furthermore, the historical narrative highlights independence not being implicitly dominated. Some historians call this phenomenon crypto-colonialism. (Winichakul, 2001: 57) Rediscovering national history in The Siam Renaissance echoes the conventional history we can find in textbooks, advertisements, television series, music videos, and Thai film after the 1997 economic crisis like The Legend of Suriyothai (2001) and the Legend of King Naresuan the Great (2006). Noticeably, counter-discursive strategies through the retold history have two prominent points. First, Siam in a historical context was facing the Westerners’ invasion as Thailand is currently facing neo-colonialism from the globalization. Second, the reproduced royal-nationalist history functions as eulogies for Thai kings. In the reign of King Rama IX, the royal institution still fights against the West along the counter-colonialist plot correlating to the present Thai king who leads the nation against cultural imperialism and globalization by his sayings and moral lessons. Counter-Discourse through the remaking of “Anna myth” Amongst the western narratives on Siam or Thailand, the Anna myth by Anna Leonowens is the most popular one which has been reproduced in several mass media. Anna’s story began when she came to Siam to work as a governess in the Siamese court between 1862 and 1868. After leaving Siam, she wrote two books: The English Governess at the Siamese Court published in 1870 and The Romance of the Harem published in 1872. These books inspired Margaret Landon to write her own version of Anna myth. She wrote the novel Anna and the King of Siam, published in 1940. This well-known novel originated the reproduction of Anna myth in the popular media.4 The adaptation of the Anna myth into a performance began in black and white film Anna and the King of Siam (1946) by Twentieth Century Fox. The film won two academy awards. After that the story of Anna was transformed into a Broadway musical titled The King and I (1951) by Richard Rodgers and Oscar Hammerstein II. The cinematic version The King and I (1956) was produced by Twentieth Century Fox and another version of the film by the same studio is Anna and the King in 1999 which was banned in Thailand.5

4 In literary cycle, Anna myth is widely controversial. Some scholars analyzed Anna Leonowen’s biography along with her works and Landon’s novel. The findings disclosed fictionalized elements particularly in The Romance of the Harem and in Landon’s version. Later some writers followed Leonowens’ path of “Critique on Siam” for example Fanny and the Regent of Siam (1962) by R.J. Minney. See Pinijkhar (2001); Imsamran (2008); Krouethong (2009). 5 Study transformation of Anna myth into performing art in Chantasingh (1999); Apasrawirote (2002).


The Anna myth was also remade in forms of a comic book and a cartoon animation. In 1946 before the adaptation of Landon’s novel into a film, Anna myth was written as a comic book titled Palace Teacher and was widespread in North America. The musical cartoon animation, adapted from the musical in 1956, was launched in 1999 by Warner Brothers. (Nana and Krouethong, 2004) Variations of the myth covey the popularity of Anna’s story in the West among adults and children. The reason why Anna myth was popularized among the Westerners is the plot proposes a clash between the West and the East. (Kasetsiri, 1999: 163) Some scholars remarked that the spirit of Anna myth was strong criticism of imperialism, polygamy and slavery. The spirit of the myth was pursued in all versions. It reproduced binary opposition between the colonizer and the colonized. (Apasrawirote, 2002: 295) In the film, The Siam Renaissance, Anna myth appeared only in the exposition as a play for charity held by Thai consul bureau in Paris. The unspoken association between Anna myth and the film was uncovered in 6 deleted scenes from 7 scenes.

Figure 6: Anna Myth in story’s exposition in The Siam Renaissance. DVD still from Thawiphop, Film Bangkok.

According to Tiffin’s theory on counter-discourse in literary arena through the processes of rereading and rewriting, Anna myth in The Siam Renaissance can a target of subversion. Although it is not instituted as a canon, Anna myth is popular enough to convince people to see Siam in the way represented through the Western lens. The director brings the audience back to the days when Anna spent her life in Siam then tries to understand her emotional condition as reinterpreted in the film. In deleted scene 3, we can find the subversive touch in dialogue between Anna and Maneechan.

Maneechan: Why did you have to lie? Anna: Just see Siam the way I do Manee. It’s such a happy land

faraway. I’m surrounded by people who love to flutter, drink habitually, a cruel full of nonsense, incredibly nosy, They prefer to believe in ghosts


and magic and followed by true religion, cowards, pretending to be well-manners, kind, serene. Maneechan: Why don’t you leave to find out your own happy land. […] Anna: The king, Manee. I stay because of the king. He makes me believe that everything can change. He makes me believe that the land of happiness would be here. Maneechan: What about inside the palace, you teach there, don’t you Mm? Anna: […] I yearn for love. The world inside the palace is a life people outside don’t know. […] I believe that I receive love and respect when I stay there.

มณีจันทร: ทําไมคุณตองโกหกดวย

นางแอนนา: ฉันก็แคมองสยามในแบบของฉันนะมณี มันเปนดินแดนแสนสุขอันไกลโพน ฉันถูกหอมลอมดวยผูคนท่ีประจบประแจง ดื่มสุราเปนนิจศีล ใจราย ไรสาระ สอดรูอยางเหลือเช่ือ พวกเขานับถือผีสางและมนตดํา มากกวาศาสนาจริงๆ ท้ังยังข้ีขลาด แสรงทํามรรยาทดี มีความกรุณา และเยือกเย็น […] มณีจันทร: ถาอยางนั้นคุณไมข้ึนเรือกลับไปประเทศของคุณเสียเลยละ นางแอนนา: ฉันอยูเพราะในหลวงนะมณี พระองคทําใหฉันเช่ือวาทุกอยางเปลี่ยนแปลงได พระองคทําใหฉันเช่ือวาดินแดนแหงความสุขจะเกิดข้ึนท่ีนี่

มณีจันทร: แลวในวังละ คุณสอนอยูในนั้นใชไหม นางแอนนา: […] ฉันเฝาปรารถนาในความรัก โลกในวังเปนชีวิตท่ีคนขางนอกไมรู […] ฉันเช่ือวาฉันไดรับความเคารพรักเวลาท่ีฉันอยูในท่ีนั้น

Anna here explicitly expressed her attitude on Siamese society. The entire dialogue was toned by the colonial discourse on the indigene. Siam was perceived as an exotic land of strangers. This country inherited insensible traditions and the natives have their characters which are completely different from Westerners. Even if Anna felt alienated by Siam, she still had faith in King Mongkut. The image of the king in this version of Anna myth was not extended in the same way as in the others. The subversion here is imposing eulogies for the Siamese king to the speech of the Westerner who had criticized King Mongkut as an individual and as an institution in other versions. Eulogies by Anna reflected the royal-nationalist history as well. Margaret Landon claimed that her writing about Anna’s life is well-researched and quite factual. Another counter-strategy can be seen in deleted scene 4. Anna was characterized as a murmuring fanciful widow who dreamed of living happily ever after, similar to fairy tales. One day Maneechan was invited to Anna’s place. Anna presented her beloved clothes to Maneechan. In her place, the director located a big


painting from the Cinderella story with her glass shoes. The books Anna had read were also exhibited. She had read contemporary literature of the 19th century like Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter and the fairy tales like Cinderella and Beauty and the Beast. Undoubtedly, Anna talked to Maneechan about her dreams which resembled bedtime stories.

Anna: I always dream of a happy land so far away in the distance. […] This is the dress I prefer to wear when I find the place. […] I just want to be part of that revolution. I dream of myself being an angel walking with monster barbarians, hoping that no one wakes me up because if that time comes I have to leave this place forever. นางแอนนา: ฉันมักฝนถึงดินแดนแสนสุขท่ีอยูหางไกลออกไป […] คนอาจไมรูวาแดนแหงความสุขอาจอยูใกลกวาท่ีคิด นี่คือเสื้อผาท่ีฉันตั้งใจจะใสเม่ือฉันพบสถานท่ีแหงนั้น […] ฉันเพียงปรารถนาจะเปนสวนหนึ่งของการเปลี่ยนแปลง ฉันฝนเห็นตัวเองเปนเทพธิดาท่ีเดินอยูกับคนเถื่อนท่ีดุราย หวังเพียงวาจะไมมีใครมาปลุกฉันใหตื่น เพราะเม่ือเวลานั้นมาถึง ฉันจะตองจากท่ีแหงนั้นไปตลอดกาล

In deleted scene 3, Anna once described Siam as a happy land faraway. She was impressed by the exotic surroundings. She identified herself as a major female character in fairy tales who eventually met a prince charming after their adventure in the unknown land. Anna dreamed of a prince who can give her a glass shoe. Her fancy about King Mongkut was painted along with the story of Beauty and the Beast. Anna might have thought that King Mongkut was the beast who was waiting for her to destroy the curse and then they could live happily ever after. For this reason, the story of Anna was devalued as a fairy tale but not factual matter.

Figure 7: Anna Myth in deleted scence in The Siam Renaissance. DVD still from Thawiphop, Film Bangkok.


In deleted scene 4, Maneechan accompanied Anna into the Siamese court where she wrote in her second book. Anna had told Maneechan that she was loved and respected while she was staying in the court. The film depicted Anna walking among women who looked at her like they were looking at a complete strager whereas Maneechan quite belonged to the court and was familiar with the activities they were doing. Anna, again, dreamed about the love and respect she had never had. Anna took Maneechan to see Son Klin. Son Klin told Maneechan that she was inspired by Anna. She read Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom Cabin. She liberated all slaves under her control. She told Maneechan that she was a willing being in the court. Nowhere was like home though home was full of emptiness. In deleted scene 6, Anna asked Son Klin not to knock the lute. It can bring bad luck, she supposed. Until deleted scene 7, Anna was about to leave Bangkok. Maneechan was there to send her off. Son Klin and her servants showed up as well; they played trio strings band. Son Klin knocked the lute. The reconstruction of Son Klin in The Siam Renaissance is to deconstruct liberalism by Anna in this version as well as the others. Particularly, in Landon’s version, Anna was depicted as an activist who fought for Human rights and Women’s rights. (Apornsuwan, 1999: 46-47) The critique on Anna’s ideologies shares some of the spirit of Postcolonial Feminism. As Mohanty (1995: 259-263) elaborated, the first world or white feminists put their liberal frame on women who live in every part of the world without the awareness of socio-cultural contexts. Western feminists always perceive Third World women as helpless, pathetic, and the victims of old-fashioned tradition. The Western Feminist discourse is not different from colonial discourse which regards the non-Western as the powerless that need protection. Western Feminist discourse parallels what Anna tried to accomplish. She raised a sisterhood among women in the Siamese court. (Apasrawirote, 2002: 64-72) Anna seemed to act like a colonizer. She pursued the White Woman’s Burden as Western man was responsible for the White’s Man Burden in imperialist and colonialist contexts. From the three scenes above, Son Klin was really inspired by Anna, but she did not suffer as Anna assumed. Preventing Son Klin from knocking the lute is similar to Western Feminist discourse that claimed women’s liberation from its own perspective. The significant subversion is Son Klin who knocked the lute and ignored Anna’s warning. It represents the decline of Western discursive power. The trio strings band by Siamese women underlined the potential of women who can access Western civilization and can localize it. The deleted story of Anna in The Siam Renaissance could be compared to the story of Maneechan. Anna traveled to Siam. She wrote a book on Siam from an imperialist


perspective. She desired to change improper things she felt. Maneechan traveled to the past. She desired to rescue Siam from the adverse condition. Anna and Maneechan believed in their capacity, but they stood on opposite sides of the same ideology. Royal-nationalist history also has an impact on rewriting the Anna myth. Maneechan kneeled when she was in the presence of the king while Anna herself had a strong faith in the king. Conclusion Thai socio-cultural context after economic crisis in 1997 inspired nationalist and nostalgic movement in modern Thai art and media cycles. The explosion of so-called creativity cohered with crises in Thai history particularly the loss of Thai identity as a result of the development of Thai society and industry in a more modern, global context. (Choopen, 2007: 28) The Siam Renaissance expands socio-political consciousness in the novel into the counter-discursive practices in the film. The director exercises the politics of representation to subvert stereotypes previously encoded by the West. Knowledge and the royal-nationalist history are recalled to maintain the national glory during the globalization and cultural imperialist era. Anna myth is a significant angle of the film. Here is the first Thai version of the Anna myth. The reinterpretation demythologizes the narrative by Anna Leonowens. The director also inserted criticism of the liberal ideology the West had imposed. The Siam Renaissance “articulates the dominant nationalist narratives surrounding the country’s avoidance of a fully-fledged colonial past.” (Harrison, 2010: 113) All counter-discursive elements were harnessed by royal-nationalist history, implanted through educational, media and family institutions, among Thai middle class. Focusing on creators and implied audiences, the interpretation of Thainess were projected via middle class perspectives. The backgrounds about Thai history in primary-to-higher educational curriculums which embedded cultural capitals were required for a proper comprehension. That is to say, The Siam Renaissance was produced to celebrate class-oriented values and socio-political standpoints. Ironically, the film othered “farang” to assert Thai identity but Maneechan was performed by Florence Vanida Faivre who is mixed-race. In this sense, Claiming Thainess is still controversial. (See Harrison, 2010) The casting implied hybridized Thainess in the age of globalization. The film proposed that Thainess should be evaluated by styles of thoughts instead of appearance. The dilemmas in claiming Thainess, here, might inspire further discussion if being “essentially Thai at heart” has close connection to other racial ideologies and discourses in Thai-ized cultural arena.


References Apasrawirote, Usa. (2002). The King and I: the transformations of the English governess and her receptions east and west. Doctoral Thesis, University of Newcastle upon Tyne. Apornsuwan, Thanet. (1999). Anna and Margaret: feminists in the Siamese court. Art &

Culture Magazine. 21.2: 36-47. [in Thai] Ashcroft, Bill, Gareth Griffith, and Helen Tiffin. (2007). Post-Colonial Studies: The Key

Concepts. 2nd ed. London and New York: Routledge. Chaiworaporn, Anchalee. (2002). Nostalgia in Post-Crisis Thai Cinema. FOCAS: Forum

On Contemporary Art & Society (Singapore) 4 (September): 298-310. Chandrarojanakit, Bandit. (2009). Siamese diorama and socio-cultural diversity. In

Socio-cultural diversity in Humanities, ed. by Kasem Penpinan, pp. 59-63. Bangkok: Vibhasa. [in Thai]

Chantasingh, Chalermsri Thuriyanonda. (1999). The Americanization of the King and I: the transformation of the English governess into an American legend. Doctoral Thesis in American Studies, University of Kansas. Choopen, Chajabhol. (2007). Nationalism in Contemporary Thai Society: A Case Study of Period Films from 1997 to 2005. Master of Arts thesis in Southeast Asian Studies, Chulalongkorn University. Damayanti. [pseu.] (2004). Thawiphop . 11th ed. Bangkok: Na Ban Wannakam. [in Thai] Edgar, Andrew and Peter Sedgwick. (2008). Key Concepts in Cultural Theory. Oxford:

Routledge. Hall, Stuart. (1997). The Spectacle of the Other. In Representation: Cultural Representation and Signifying Practices, ed. by Stuart Hall, pp. 223-290. London: Sage. Harrison, Rachel V. (2010). Mind the Gap: (En)countering the West and the Making of

Thai identities on Film. In The Ambiguous Allure of the West: Traces of the Colonial in Thailand, ed. by Rachel V. Harrison and Peter A. Jackson, pp. 92-118. Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong Press.

Imsamran, Bayan. (2008). Siam in Farang’s imagination: a perspective through Tua Chung Tai Proh Dai Mea Farang by R. J. Minney. Journal of European Studies. 16.2: 211-227. [in Thai]

Kasetsiri, Charnvit. (1999). Anna and King Mongkut. Sarakadee. 15.177: 158-164. [in Thai]

Keeratiworanan, Werasak. (1998). A study of the narrative on historical change from “Traditional Siam” to “Modern Siam”, 1824-1868. Master of Arts thesis in History, Chulalongkorn University. [in Thai]

Kitiarsa, Pattana. (2010). An Ambiguous Intimacy: Farang as Siamese Occidentalism. In The Ambiguous Allure of the West: Traces of the Colonial in Thailand, ed. by Rachel V. Harrison and Peter A. Jackson, pp. 57-74. Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong Press.

Kriengsak. [pseu.] (2004). Surapong Pinijkhar and a new journey of Maneechan. Starpics. 39.4: 97-99. [in Thai]

Krouethong, Poraminthra. (2009). Farang governess in the Grand Palace and the Anti- Anna club. Read Journal. 2.1: 85-94. [in Thai]

Loomba, Ania. (2000). Colonialism/Postcolonialism. London and New York: Routledge.


Louiyapong, Kamjohn.(2008). Women in Thai romantic films and cross-national relationships. Journal of Liberal Arts. 8.2: 157-199. [in Thai]

Mohanty, Chandra Talpade. (1995). Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses. In The Post-colonial Studies Reader, ed. by Bill Ashcroft, Gareth Griffith, and Helen Tiffin, pp. 259-263. London and New York: Routledge.

Nana, Kraireuk and Poraminthra Krouethong. (2004). Grand Palace’s secret agent and media world of Anna Leonowens. Bangkok: Matichon. [in Thai]

Phon. [pseu.] (2004). Thawiphop in 223rd year of Rattanakosin era: results from new imagination inspired by a former one. Matichon Weekly. 24. 1261: 90. [in Thai]

Pinijkhar, Suropong. (2001). Trilogy of the epic…angel and barbarians to liberal heroine: from Anna and the king of Siam to Fenny Fox’s monument. Art & Culture Magazine. 22.12: 114-117. [in Thai]

Pongsripian, Winai. (2002). Farang from Thai perspective. In Asian-European Studies: Philosophy and Methods, ed. by Theera Nuchpiam, pp. 149-161. Bangkok: The Thailand Research Fund. [in Thai]

Sattayanurak, Attachak. (1988). The transformation of historical consciousness and the changes in Thai society from the reign of King Mongkut to 1932 A.D. Master of Arts thesis in History, Chulalongkorn University. [in Thai]

Supying, Danaya. (2006). Counter-discursive plays: a critique of the European canon. Master of Arts thesis in Comparative Literature, Chulalongkorn University. [in Thai]

Suvachittanont, Wilailuck. (2002). The role of Thai identity in the 1997 crisis and beyond. Doctoral dissertation in Rhetoric and Technical Communication, Michigan Technological University.

Tiffin, Helen. (1995). Post-colonial Literatures and Counter-discourse. In The Post- colonial Studies Reader, ed. by Bill Ashcroft, Gareth Griffith, and Helen Tiffin, pp. 95-98. London and New York: Routledge.

Viroj. [pseu.]. (2004). The Siam Renaissance: a historical myth. Starpics. 39.6: 118-119. [in Thai]

Winichakul, Thongchai. (2001). Royal-nationalist Thai history: from crypto- colonialism to neo royal-nationalism or Sadej Phor cult of modern Thai bourgeoisie. Art & Culture Magazine. 21.2: 36-47. [in Thai]

Young, Robert. (1995). Colonial Desire: Hybridity in Theory, Culture and Race. London: Routledge.

Natthanai Prasannam. 2010. Rediscovery of National Glory and History: The Siam Renaissance as...

Documents

Transcript of Natthanai Prasannam. 2010. Rediscovery of National Glory and History: The Siam Renaissance as...