Suriyothai: hybridizing Thai national identity through film

Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, Volume 4, Number 2, 2003

Suriyothai: hybridizing Thai national identity through film

Amporn JIRATTIKORN

Introduction

The film Suriyothai has been a focus of publicattention in Thailand since it was released inAugust 2001. The story revolves around aqueen of the early Thai kingdom of Ayutthayawho sacrifices her life to protect her husband,King Maha Chakkraphat (1548–1569), thussaving the country from falling to Burmeseinvaders. When her husband left for battle,Suriyothai secretly followed him disguised inthe uniform of a Siamese soldier. In the battle,however, King Maha Chakkraphat was over-come and pursued by the Burmese prince,and was in danger of losing his life. Seatedatop her elephant, Queen Suriyothai immedi-ately charged into the conflict, fightingfiercely until she met her death (DamrongRajanubhab 2001: 19). However, althoughschool textbooks have familiarized decades ofThai schoolchildren with the Suriyothai leg-end, this is the first time that it has beenprojected on the silver screen.

Suriyothai is the most ambitious Thai-lan-guage film ever made. It cost Bt400 million(US$9 million), involved five years of researchand took two-and-a-half years to shoot. Cou-pled with the publicity it has received, thisenormous time and expense, has encouragedThais to hope that Suriyothai will be nomi-nated for the Best Foreign Film Oscar in 2002(Atiya 1999). The stakes are particularly highbecause the production was sponsored by HerMajesty Queen Sirikit, apparently with thehope of helping Thais to learn more abouttheir own history and of enhancing the coun-try’s reputation overseas. In the words of oneof the Queen’s ladies-in-waiting, ‘Her Majestyis very impressed with Queen Suriyothai’ssacrifice and would love to introduceSuriyothai’s name and story to the world’(Atiya 2001).

In general, popular knowledge of ‘history’comes through well-known legends andthrough the episodes included in school text-books. Habsbawn and Ranger (1983) havereminded us that in building the ‘nation-state’, the past has to be invented, or rein-vented. In this process of reinvention, newsymbols and devices come into existence tobecome emblematic of the modern state –national anthems, national flags, the per-sonification of the nation through symbols orimages. Since the history that anchors nationalideology is rarely identical with what hasbeen preserved in popular memory, the lattertoo must be selectively reshaped and rewrit-ten, and at the same time popularized andinstitutionalized.

Of necessity, our sense of the past isshaped and limited by the possibilities andpractices of the medium in which that past isconveyed (Rosenstone 1995). In contrast to thewritten word, the visual and aural medium offilm has a particular capacity to reimage thepast and project those images to a large and‘captured’ audience. In this sense Suriyothai isplaying an active role in narrativizing thepast. Given that the present Queen is thedriving force behind the film’s production, itis important to understand what she expectsto accomplish in presenting it both to Thaisand to the world. What message is beingconveyed through the film? What does itmean to speak of ‘official’ history or of ahegemonic national narrative? What issuesemerge when we think about the construc-tions of Thai national identity at this specifichistorical moment?

In trying to understand Suriyothai as arepresentation of national identity, my studyseeks;

ISSN 1464-9373 Print/ISSN 1469-8447 Online/03/020296–13 2003 Taylor & Francis Ltd

DOI: 10.1080/1464937032000113015

Hybridizing Thai national identity through film 297

1) To explore the ‘problems’ in constructingThai national identity at the present time.In other words, why does the nation neednarratives now?

2) To investigate the historical and socio-economic context that may have influencedthe representation of Suriyothai as a na-tional heroine.

3) To explore the relations of cultural power,both locally and globally, that shape theposition of Suriyothai in the global context.

In exploring Suriyothai, my theoretical per-spective is based on the notion of culturalidentity and the argument that the construc-tion of national identity can never be isolatedfrom global, transnational relations (Ang1998). There are no ‘pure products’: all nation-alisms are hybrids, not just because they areconstructed relationally with ‘others’ but be-cause they are continually staged and pro-duced for multiple audiences, both inside andoutside the national community. Thus, thisstudy attempts not only to examine the text ofthe film, but to also take into account thedynamics of socio-economic conditions andpolitical forces, both local and international,which have informed the film-making pro-cess.

The Thai film industry in the 1990s

In exploring the problems in constructingThai national identity in the present, it isimportant to put Suriyothai in the broadercontext of the Thai film industry. For most ofthe 1990s, as the country enjoyed an economicboom, MTV, Japanese pop singers, and West-ern life-style paraded across the Thai stage.Because of the dominance of Hollywoodblockbusters at the box office, Thai moviessuffered. In the early years of the decade, only8–10 films were made per year. In contrast, inthe 1970s more than 200 Thai movies could beseen in local theaters (Bangkok Post 1999). Yetdespite the fact that for around ten years theThai public had obviously preferred Holly-wood productions, Thai films began to make acomeback after the economic crisis of 1997.Since that time, a new wave of filmmakers hasrevitalized the industry, generating both in-

come and positive reviews. During the 1970sand 1980s, although well-known actors andactresses did help draw in audiences, localfilms were routinely decried by educatedThais, who often used the term ‘nam nao,’ or‘polluted water film’ because story linestended to follow the soap-opera style of plot –a conflict between mother and daughter in-law, a love affair between a rich girl and apoor boy. In contrast, in the new era of Thaifilms, the formatted soap-opera story-line hasdisappeared. The production quality of Thaifilms has improved and they are now attract-ing audiences from among more educatedThais as well as traditional audiences.

The revival of Thai films after 1997 iscredited to the movie Nang Nak (The Nation2001a). Nang Nak is a romance about a leg-endary Thai ghost, set in Siam a century ago.Nak is a young, newly-wed woman, whosemuch-loved husband is called away to war.While he is absent she dies giving birth to herfirst child. However, her love for her husbandis so profound that her spirit refuses to leave.As a ghost, she manages to stay close to herhusband, and when his friends and relativesplot to get rid of her, Nak strikes back. Thefilm was a huge success and broke all boxoffice records. It was enthusiastically receivedat the 1999 Asia-Pacific Film Festival, winningawards for the best director, best art director,and best sound (The Nation 2001b).

After Nang Nak came Fun Bar Karaoke,made by a former advertising agency de-signer, Pen-ek Ratanaruang. The film is ablend of modern and mystical life, depictingthe life of a man who spends most of his timein a karaoke lounge and mixing the Thaibelief in fortune-tellers with gangster life inBangkok. Even though Fun Bar Karaoke took inlittle money from local box office sales, it hasbeen included in many international film festi-vals and has been warmly received at most ofthem (Bangkok Post 1999). After Fun BarKaraoke, Pen-ek Ratanaruang directed RuangTalok 69. This film is about a young ladydrawn into an unlikely situation after beinglaid off during the economic crisis. It has beennominated in several regional festivals andwon awards at the Berlin and Brooklyn filmfestivals.

298 Amporn Jirattikorn

Meanwhile, in 2000 Bangkok Dangerous, di-rected by Oxide Pang, won several awards atthe Canadian and at Asian film festivals andwas also successful in the local market. IronLadies, under the direction of YongyoothThongkongthun proved popular with bothThai and international audiences. Iron Ladies,which tells the true story of the 1996 Thainational volleyball champions (a team whichconsisted of gay men, drag queens, transsexu-als, and one straight man), was the first Thaifilm to be shown in art house theaters inEngland and America. In Hong Kong, IronLadies sold more tickets than Hollywood’s ThePatriot. In the same year, the Thai film indus-try also saw the success of Fa Talai Jone, Ban-grajan, and Aung Yi, to name a few. Filmed inpastel colors and featuring surreal sets, FaTalai Jone relates the melodramatic story of aThai cowboy. It parodies old Thai action films,making use of exaggerated acting styles. FaTalai Jone became the first Thai film to bescreened at the Cannes Film Festival. It alsobrought home a Vancouver International FilmFestival award.

Bangrajan, a historical film earning 100 mil-lion baht in ticket sales, was the most success-ful movie of the year 2000. Directed by ThanitJitnukul, it tells the story of villagers whofought against Burmese invaders during thewar that caused the fall of Ayuthaya in 1767.Three times this small group of villagers frus-trated Burmese troops in their attempts toreach the capital. Enraged, the Burmesevowed to keep attacking, and the people ofthe village fought to the death. Perhapssignificantly, this film tapped an underlyingpool of traditional hostility towards theBurmese, and for many Thais invoked thesaying ‘better a dead free man than a liveBurmese slave.’

Against this background, Suriyothai (Au-gust 2001) should be seen as the next bigmove for the Thai film industry, especiallysince it is far more ambitious in terms ofresearch and production costs than any of itspredecessors. Suriyothai also broke most Thaifilm industry records with the longest shoot-ing and post-production period (three years),the longest screening time (190 minutes), themost spectacular sets and costumes, and the

biggest casts (70 main characters, 2,000 extras,80 elephants and 70 horses) (Matichon Sud-sapda 2001). Publicity accouncments promisedthat viewers would be entertained by intrigueand drama in a visually brilliant showcasethat would last from beginning to end. Inthree hours and five minutes, they wouldwitness the growth and near-fall of a kingdomwhere the prosperity resulting from foreigntrade was undermined by internal rivalryamong Ayutthaya’s three royal dynasties. In-terlaced with these developments would bethe personal story of one woman’s life and herfinal destiny.

It is intriguing to note that the revival ofThai films coincided with the economic crisiswhich hit Thailand in mid-1997. This, I wouldargue, was due in part to a reaction againstglobal forces and transnational cultural flows.The economic crash, followed by the Thaicurrency devaluation, and Thailand’s forcedacceptance of a bailout from the IMF (Inter-national Monetary Fund) led to a general feel-ing that the country was being colonized bythe West, and more specifically by the IMF.The lives of Thai people had been completelychanged, with many losing their jobs andmany businesses facing bankruptcy becauseof currency devaluation. The collapse of thebaht made people feel that the money in theirpocket was worth nothing. The vocabulary ofimperialism began to surface in popular dis-course and in remarks such as ‘The IMF thingis just like being colonized’ and ‘We were ableto avoid an early 20th century colonialism,why can’t we avoid this?’ (Pasuk and Baker2000: 165). Interestingly, the public responseto the crisis tended to be focused inwardrather than outward; Thais were inclined tosee the crisis as the nation’s over reliance onthe West in terms of capital, consumer, goods,ideas, and technology.

The economic crisis thus provoked a re-vival of interest in local culture as a reactionagainst everything modern and global. TheKing’s birthday speech in December 1997 em-phasized the idea of self-sufficiency, self-re-liance and the idea of going back to a simplereconomy. The government also launched the‘Thais-Help-Thais’ and ‘Buy Thai’ campaigns.At the level of popular culture, Thailand saw


the revival of ‘authentic’, ‘local’ culture suchas lukthung, a Thai country music. This revivalof local Thai film industry, I would argue, waspart of a larger trend reacting to the globaliz-ing trends that were perceived as hostile andunsympathetic to the Thai identity. As thedirector of Suriyothai states,

‘I hope Suriyothai, as a defender of ourculture, will pave the way for others tofollow. We are being colonized byHollywood movies, Chinese movies.We are losing our cultural identity’

(Niwat 1999: 87).

Interestingly, in reacting against globalforces and in trying to compete with the Hol-lywood counterparts, Thai films seem to havetaken on new characteristics. Firstly, period orhistorical films seem to be very popular withboth audiences and the filmmakers. Why? Ac-cording to one producer, Duangkamol Lim-charoen, Thai production houses are adoptingthe ‘go-inter’ trend. Buoyed by the inter-national success of Nang Nak, a romance abouta legendary Thai ghost set in Siam a centuryago, Thai film investors have turned theirinterests to period dramas, resulting in filmssuch as Bang Rajan, Fa Talai Jone, Kang LangPhap (Behind the Painting), The Moonhunter(14 October Uprising), Jan Dara, andSuriyothai. Indeed, more are in the pipeline,including Krai Thong, Koh Lang Wang, and TaoSuranaree. However, I would argue that thepopularity of period films is not only becauseof the ‘go-inter’ trend; the economic crisis hasalso played an important role in popularizingperiod movies. In other words, the economiccrisis evokes a sense of nostalgia. The feelingof ‘paradise lost’ engendered by the economiccrisis has tended to draw audiences to periodstories even though this is perhaps ‘imaginednostalgia’ as Appadurai puts it, ‘nostalgia forthings that never were’ (Appadurai 1996: 77).

Secondly, Thai films in the new era nolonger aim at local markets. With bigger bud-gets and more creativity, Thai films are mov-ing up in the international ranking. Over thepast three years, Thai films have receivedinternational acclaim and brought home nu-merous awards from film festivals all over theworld. At the same time, Thai films are still

struggling to find an identifiable place in theglobal world. Suriyothai is simply one playeramong others in an arena where Thai-ness isbeing re-constructed and defended. The dif-ference is that Suriyothai is not only a royalversion of nationalist ideology; it has enteredthe marketplace as an active competitor forThai allegiance.

Suriyothai, Suphankalaya, Anna and theKing: three women in Thai history

As I have argued, Suriyothai is, in fact, part ofa new nationalism directed against globalforces. Nonetheless, given that the Queen isthe driving force behind the film, the questionstill remains as to why the story of Suriyothaiwas chosen as a statement of nationalist ideol-ogy, and the nature of the ideology that itprojects.

In exploring these questions, it is import-ant to look at the historical events on whichthe ‘legend’ of Suriyothai is based. Suriyothai’sheroic deed allegedly took place at MakhamYong Battle field in 1548, four centuries ago.The name ‘Suriyothai’ was first mentioned ina chronicle written by Pan Jantanumas(Cherm), 247 years after the battle. The chron-icle says that Suriyothai, dressed in a soldieruniform, accompanied her husband into thebattle, and died seated on an elephant. Anearlier version, composed by Laung Prasert114 years after the event, has been recognizedby many historians as the most chronologi-cally accurate of all the Ayutthaya chronicles.However, although it mentions a heroic deedby a consort of King Chakkraphat it does notgive her name (The Nation 2001c). FernaoMendes Pinto, a Portuguese merchant wholived in Ayutthaya during that period, pub-lished ‘the Travels of Mendes Pinto’ in 1614.He refers to a battle that took place on June19,1548, but makes no mention of the heroicqueen of Ayutthaya (Wiwat 2001).

Although the events surrounding theMakham Yong battle and the Suriyothai storyare sparingly chronicled, the name ofSuriyothai has become synonymous with‘heroine’. I have not been able to determinethe date when her story was first inserted intoThai textbooks, where she became a national


heroine. However, according to Thai scholars,a number of Thai historical chronicles, includ-ing the stories of great leaders and heroicwars, were written or rewritten during thereign of King Rama IV (1851–1868) as part ofa strategy of nation building. At a time whenforeign colonial powers were threatening thecountry, the names of several heroes from theAyutthaya period as well as that of Suriyothai(the only heroine) were invoked to attest Thai-land’s long and glorious history (Sunait 1994).

As noted earlier, the idea of making thefilm was initiated by HM Queen Sirikit, whosponsored the entire film production andplayed an active role in many aspects of thefilm-making process. MC Chatri Chalerm Yu-gala, a veteran filmmaker (also known asThan Mui, himself a descendent of the Thairoyal family), was asked by HM the Queen tobe the director. The Queen also chose theleading actress, a minor member of the royalfamily and one of the queen’s ladies-in-wait-ing. Although there is no evidence that theQueen was involved in writing the screen-play, she maintained close contact with ThanMui throughout the production and presidedover the first day of shooting in April 1999, aswell as at the closing day of shooting (Gam-pell 2001).

One of the Queen’s ladies-in-waiting,Khunying Busaya, who has been in royal ser-vice for the past twenty years, stated quiteemphatically that the queen’s purpose was tocultivate national pride. ‘Her Majesty thequeen,’ she said, “wants the Thais to feelproud of themselves. She wants people tohonor each other and respect themselves. Shewants them to appreciate the historical eventsof the past that have seen the creation of theThai State and the avoidance of colonialism’(Gearing 2001).

The prevalent mode of nationalist thoughtdeems a nation genuine when it has ancestral‘history’ and culture. A sense of having acommon and distinctive ancestral history andculture not only provides a feeling of commu-nal uniqueness, but unites past and presentgenerations. For this reason, the exploration,articulation or invention of a nation’s ances-tral myth and ‘historical’ culture has been apreoccupation of nationalist elites (Yoshino

1999: 10). As in the case of Suriyothai, theideology conveyed through the film is part ofthe nation’s master narratives, which have allbeen about Thai struggles against invasionsby foreign entities and the preservation ofnational sovereignty by the heroic leadershipof successive kings and queens. The story ofSuriyothai was sufficiently dramatic to emergeas a powerful narrative in the modern me-dium of film. The plot revolves around aheroine, the action builds up to a dramaticending, and the interpretation of its morallessons can concern either the female role asprotector or the nation’s honor, or the de-votion of a woman to a man, or both. Asevents following the economic crisis seemedto affirm the sense that the country was en-dangered or even invaded by the neo-colo-nialist IMF, Suriyothai has re-enforced thelong-held belief that Thailand has maintainedits sovereignty against foreign forces for agood five hundred years and will continue todo so in the future.

Like other cases of ‘invented traditions’,Suriyothai has attempted to develop a newhistorical legend during a period of rapidsocial, cultural and political change, and at atime when old traditions no longer seem tooffer a valid answer to society’s problems. Theroots of this national revival lead back to anolder and more glorified past, to the ‘goldenage’ of antiquity (Zerubavel 1994: 108). In theThai case, the 1997 crisis intensified the feelingthat modern political, social, and cultural in-stitutions were corrupt, and that untaintedforms of governance could be located in olderinstitutional forms. The collapse of financialinstitutions and the urban-based economyalso fostered the view that Thailand shouldreturn to a locally-based economy like thatwhich existed, it was thought, in the past. In aspeech made directly after the economic crisisto promote the idea of greater self-sufficiency,HM King Bhumibol invoked the Thai idiom‘it’s like walking backward into a khlong (acanal),’ meaning to regress or to become moreconservative. As the King stated, ‘We have togo back to do things which are not compli-cated and which do not use elaborate, expens-ive equipment. We need to move backwardsin order to move forwards. If we don’t act like


this, the solution to this crisis will be difficult’(quoted from Pasuk and Baker 2000: 193).Moreover, the widespread scandal and rumorthat involved both Buddhist monks and pol-itical figures led a Thai need for spiritualsupport, which could be located in a glorifiedpast. Indeed, attendants at the Bangkok lakmuang (city pillar) found that the numberscoming to pray for help or guidance increasedten times after the baht was floated (Pasukand Baker 2000). In short, I would argue,Suriyothai can be seen as part of a nationalsearch for the golden age of antiquity; thegolden age when everything was good.

It seems to me, however, that the economiccrash is not the only explanation for the mak-ing of Suriyothai. Another reason, I wouldsuggest, is the emergence of the PrincessSuphankalaya cult in 1997–1998. In 1997, Prin-cess Suphankalaya’s face could be foundeverywhere, on paintings, posters and medal-lions, hanging in supermarkets and go-gobars, and dangling from taxi-drivers’ rear-view mirrors. Thai historical chronicles andschool textbooks have long extolled the brav-ery and achievements of her younger brother,King Narasuan the Great, who liberatedAyutthaya fifteen years after it was subju-gated by the Burmese King Bayinnaung in1569. Her name had never come to the fore inofficial Thai histories. In 1997, however, a newstory of Princess Suphankalaya began to cir-culate, based on reports from Lunag PooNgone Soraya, a respected Thai monk whoclaimed that her spirit had visited him whilemeditating (Songpol 1999).

According to this new narrative, after theBurmese subjugated Ayutthaya, the BurmeseKing appointed King Thammaracha to be thenew Thai regent for Burma. PrincessSuphankalaya and her two brothers, Nara-suan and Ekatosros, were taken to Burma toensure their father’s loyalty. As a hostage,Princess Suphankalaya became the consort ofthe Burmese king Bayingnaung. She then per-suaded him to let her brothers return to Ayut-thaya. The elder of the two princes laterregained Ayutthaya’s independence and be-came King Naresuan the Great. The princesswas finally killed in Burma to avenge thedeath of the Burmese crown prince who was

slain by King Naresuan in a decisive battle bywhich Ayutthaya’s freedom was regained.When she was killed, it is said, she was al-ready eight months pregnant. Her selfless actgave King Naresuan the time to slowly andquietly rebuild the country, leading to theliberation of Thais from the Burmese (Karn-jariya 1999).

During the crisis, Princess Suphankalayabecame a popular goddess, and statues andportraits bearing her likeness appeared allover Thailand. Many people alleged that theyhad prospered and had become more success-ful when they became her devotees. However,if anybody is to be credited for the ‘discovery’of Suphankalaya, it is a businesswoman, Dr.Nalinee Paiboon. Four years ago, she lost hercosmetics business to bankruptcy and herhusband to divorce. But she said that afterworshipping the Princess, she was rescuedfrom bankruptcy and became very successfulin business. In gratitude, she annually dis-tributes free calendars bearing the Princess’sportrait to the public. In addition, she com-missioned a historian to research the chroni-cles looking for information about the life ofthe Princess, and a popular novelist to narratethe story. This was part of Dr. Nalinee’s at-tempts to make the story of the Princess morewidely known. She is convinced that the lifeof the Princess holds a lesson for modernThais:

‘At these times we have to be brave,patient and strong to pass these politi-cal and economic hurdles. Most im-portantly, we should do something forour nation as the Princess did for us’.

(Karnjariya 1999)

Most scholars and commentators attributethe popularity of this cult to the public’ssearch for a ‘spiritual oasis’ during the coun-try’s political and economic crisis. Thais, it issaid, were desperate for emotional support,and they needed comfort, guidance and achange of luck – all of which could be foundin Princess Suphankalaya. Every day storiesappeared relating how some people becamesuccessful and prosperous after they startedvenerating her. Sales of her portraits skyrock-


During 1997–1998, portraits and icons ofPrincess Suphankalaya were selling very wellat Tha Phra Chan market.(Courtesy of Bangkok Post)

2000. Thailand’s problem with Anna and Kingand its Broadway predecessor is that the taleis based on the memoirs of an English govern-ess at the court of the nineteenth-century KingMongkut. Thais believed that the books andmovies about Anna Leonowens and KingMongkut had consistently distorted the imageof Siam and the King himself. The producersof Anna and the King were refused permissionto film in Thailand, and like the earlier ver-sion, The King and I, it has been banned fromThailand due to its historical inaccuracy andwhat the Thai censors perceive as disrespectfor the monarchy.

During an interview, the director ofSuriyothai, Than Mui, affirmed that he in-tended to draw a comparison with Holly-wood’s new version of Anna and the King(Atiya 1999) because he had expected that thetwo movies would be released at the sametime and that audiences would make the con-nection between them. His aim was to presentSuriyothai as a genuine Thai historical movie,and thus challenge the distortion and inaccu-racy of Anna and the King. He stressed that hehad invested five years of research in the film,studying old documents and wall paintings sothat he could faithfully recreate life at theroyal court of Siam. ‘Unlike Anna and the KingI have evidence to prove the historical accu-racy of my film, everybody knows that themovie Anna and the King is just a joke’ (CNN1999).

Interestingly, Suriyothai’s director has cho-sen to tell the story of the Ayutthaya queenthrough the eyes of a Portuguese mercenary,Domingos De Seixas. De Seixas lived in Ayut-thaya for 25 years before returning to Portu-gal. Than Mui explained that Domingos DeSeixas was chosen to narrate the story becausemost Thais already know one version ofQueen Suriyothai’s heroic deeds. By re-tellingher story from the perspective of an outsider,a foreigner, he hoped not merely to generate anew curiosity but to heighten the comparisonwith Anna and the King.

‘I can see some differences, though.Anna and The King has been writtenand is being directed by foreigners.The film, therefore, will project a to-

eted, and books about her life started to ap-pear. A TV drama was planned to tell thestory of this forgotten/rediscovered heroine.However, as the cult grew, some governmentofficials became concerned about the apparentmanipulation of historical facts. A nationalcommittee responsible for verifying Thai his-torical records warned people that theyshould not believe everything they haveheard or read about Princess Suphankalaya.Former Prime Minister Chuan was so dis-turbed by the Suphankalaya phenomenonthat he ordered the government’s Fine ArtsDepartment to look into the matter. ‘It is goodto show gratitude, but that should not bebased on superstition’ (Gearing 1999: 36–37).Surprisingly, within a short time the PrincessSuphankalaya cult faded away.

In this context, I would argue, the rein-venting of Suriyothai is partly a royal reactionto the Princess cult which was so pervasiveThailand during the time of economic crisis.The movie Suriyothai invokes a ‘real’ heroine,whose story, based on Thai chronicles, waswell-established in school text books andpopular mythology, whereas the PrincessSuphankalaya cult had emerged from a prov-incial monk and was spread via the assistanceof the cosmetic business. In effect, we have aroyal versus a local cult.

The third factor that contributed to thereinvention of Suriyothai, I would argue, is thenew version of the Hollywood movie Annaand the King, which was released in February


tally western viewpoint. Suriyothai,however, is built on an interpretationof Thai history by Thai people butbeing filmed with foreigners. There isa mixture of perspectives here’.

(Atiya 1999)

Than Mui had other ambitions. He hadhoped that the film Suriyothai would not onlybe favorably compared with Anna and theKing, but in so doing would also qualify as anominee for Best Foreign Picture. He aimed,in fact for a symbolic challenge to Anna andthe King in the Oscar awards, even thoughthey would not be competing in the samecatagories (CNN 1999). However, this did nothappen because of delays in Suriyothai’s pro-duction; Anna and the King was released inFebruary 2000 while Suriyothai was releasedin August 2001.

On the base of these three factors,Suriyothai can be interpreted as both a royalconceptualization of nationalist ideology, anda defender of Thai-ness. Suriyothai is equally areaction against the local cult of PrincessSuphankalaya and against the transnationalHollywood movie, Anna and the King. It showsus how anti-neocolonial nationalist embarkson recovering an ancient traditional past inorder to suit its present needs.

Suriyothai: a woman of the nation

As I have argued, Suriyothai attempts to con-struct a sense of pride in the nation. However,the question still remains as to why the storywas constructed around a heroine rather thana hero. Why, in short, choose Suriyothai? It ispossible that this choice can be explained sim-ply by pointing to the fact that Suriyothai isthe only royal heroine among several royalheroes in the Thai official national history.The Queen is the driving force behind themovie, and it may well be that she sees certainparallels between herself and QueenSuriyothai, who sacrificed herself for her na-tion and her husband.

Nonetheless, there may be a less obvious

explanation whereby gender has come to playa crucial role in the process of national ident-ity-making and in this regard stands in con-trast to the typical masculine constructions ofnationalism. Suriyothai ostensibly represents a‘female’ nationalist depiction of a Thai womansacrificing her life for the country. In examin-ing whether the underlying ideology is that offemale nationalism or a patriarchy, I wish todevelop Thongchai’s argument that Suriyothaiis, in fact, telling a story of an ideal wife, notthat of a heroine.

Thongchai Winichakul, a leading Thai his-torian, has contended that although the storyof Suriyothai was only written a century ago, itwas in fact composed according to traditionalconventions that governed the writing ofchronicles and Buddhist literature, includingthe Jataka tales. (Thongchai 2001). As far backas the Sukothai period (1250–1350), Thaichronicles and Thai classical literature persis-tently stress the ideal wife as one of the sevenassets that the ‘Great King’ needs to possess(the others are the noblest elephant, the pre-cious horse, the marvelous gem, the preciouschamberlain, and the excellent general.) TriPhum Phra Ruang, a classical Buddhist cosmo-logical literature written during Sukothai pe-riod, contains a description of the ‘goodwoman’ and the ‘ideal wife.’ This type ofwoman is born into a royal and or noblefamily, itself a sign that her previous liveshave been meritorious. Her status and glorywill enhance to the Great King’s prosperity,contribute to her husband’s life in other ways.Termed ‘Nang Kaeaw’ (literally, Miss Jewel),she will gain people’s respect and will thus bevalued by the Great King as a reward for hergoodness (Kornvipa 1989). The image of NangKaeaw is also found in the Jataka tales, nota-bly in the Vessantara Jataka, the tale portray-ing the Buddha’s penultimate life. Thongchaiargues that the story of Suriyothai was writtenin order to present the ideal woman possessedby the Great King of Ayuthaya, and it istherefore not the story of a heroine, but of anideal wife (Thongchai 2001). The difference isthat because of her act of devotion to herhusband, she saves the country from falling tothe foreign invasion.


Given that Thai historical chronicles – in-cluding the story of Suriyothai – were writtenduring the reign of King Rama IV, when thecountry was under the colonial threat, the 19th

century version of Suriyothai shows us howroyal chroniclers blended the old concept of agood woman who is subordinate to her hus-band with a nascent nationalist ideology thatstresses loyalty to the nation. However, in thecontemporary re-invented version, we need toconsider Suriyothai, the 16th century Queen, interms of the process of invention/interpret-ation in the 21st century. In fact, the story ofQueen Suriyothai is accorded only three linesin a chronicle that simply reports that therewas a battle in which the King’s wife waskilled. In the reinvented version, however, thedirector has envisaged Suriyothai as a strong‘modern’ Thai woman. ML Piyaphat Bhi-romphakdi, a lady-in-waiting who takes themain role, was told to play Suriyothai not asyoung girl modestly confined to the palace,but as an active young woman who loves theoutdoors and after marriage becomes im-mersed in the politics of the Ayutthaya court.She should be depicted as being as intelligent,brave, and tenacious as a man, a woman whofaithfully stands beside her husband in themost serious power struggle of the period.She is a leader in her husband’s campaign,and even offers him advice. Than Mui is thuscredited for giving the 16th century QueenSuriyothai bravery and strength not only onthe battlefield but beyond, despite the factthat five hundred years ago the life of an elitewoman was relatively confined. In transform-ing Suriyothai into a ‘male-like’ woman of the21st century, Than Mui has in effect renderedher sacrifice to the nation complete. Suriyothaihas become the ‘imagined woman’ for whomthe nation longs at a critical time. ‘Good’ Thaiwomen are today encouraged to be ‘modern’and attain an education, but at the same timetheir moral standards should remain tra-ditional. Nonetheless, being an ideal woman/wife/queen today is very different from thenineteenth century, when Thailand first beganto pit its sense of being a nation against that ofthe West. Yet despite such differences, it canbe argued that women are still subjected to apatriarchal ideology.

Suriyothai in the global context

In responding to the economic crisis and theeffects of globalization, Suriyothai not onlyaims at the local market, but also strives tofind its place internationally. We need only torecall the statement that HM Queen Sirikit‘would love to introduce Suriyothai’s nameand story to the world’ (Atiya 2001). ThanMui also stated that it was never his intentionto make Suriyothai so that it was meaningfulonly to Thais. He also wanted to export it tointernational audiences, hoping that it wouldbe nominated for the Best Foreign Film Oscar(Atiya 1999). In attempting to give Suriyothaian international flavor, Than Mui brought inIgor Luther, a professional technician fromEurope, as director of photography. Lutherhad worked with the acclaimed Germanfilmmaker Volker Schlondorff on the ‘TinDrum’, which won the Best Foreign Film Aca-demic Award in 1980 (The Nation 1999). Formusic, he engaged Richard Harvey, a Britishcomposer who has been involved in Holly-wood films such as ‘The Lion King’ and ‘Ara-bian Nights’. In attempting to make Suriyothaimore international, Richard Harvey composeda score more oriented towards Western thanto Thai music. In his words, ‘I was hired toproduce a Western score because Westernscore is the lingua franca of movie-goersaround the world. I would like to have addedmore Thai colouration to the score, but thatwas not what the producer or the directorwanted’ (Hiransomboon 2001). Ironically, thelyrics of Suriyothai’s theme song were writtenfirst in English and only later translated intoThai.

The fire which burned deep in youreyes,

The truth you never compromised,You made the perfect sacrifice,To give us freedom, to give us life,Out of a perfect love.Now and Forever,Help us stand for what is right,Now and forever,Make us strong enough to fight,When the mountain is high, when the

river is dry,We are one, you and I,


Now and Forever, Suriyothai.In a dream, where the darkest force is

broken,In a prayer, where the softest words

are spoken,In all these, you lead us through.In this world, Mother of our Nation,You are the sun, the moon, the sky, the

heaven,In all these, we will find you.(quoted from Compact Disc “The

Making of Suriyothai”, Mangpong:2001)

As noted above, Suriyothai’s director choseto tell the story of the Ayutthaya queenthrough the eyes of a Portuguese mercenary,Domingos De Seixas, who lived in Ayutthayafor 25 years before returning to Portugal. Hisaim, Than Mui said, was ‘to present Thaihistory in a macro context: What were we likein relation to other countries? That is why Ihave foreigners doing the cinematography,lighting and music’ (Atiya 1999).

Paradoxically, while internationalizing theSuriyothai production by having foreignersmanage the cinematography and music, byemulating the grandeur of the Hollywoodstyle and by recreating Suriyothai as a modernwoman, Than Mui has also attempted to makeSuriyothai a global defender of ‘Thai-ness’.Thus, in my view, Suriyothai operates in aspace where the global and local meets andwhere the struggle for national identity jostleswith the desire to affirm Thailand’s place in aglobal context. On the one hand, Suriyothaican be seen as a reaction against ‘Anna andthe King,’ and against the intrusion of global-ization, which is often depicted as a threat tothe autonomy and integrity of ‘Thai-ness.’ Onthe other hand, the ‘Hollywoodizing’ ofSuriyothai has undermined the very Thaiidentity that it sought to assert. The veryparallels between Suriyothai and its Holly-wood counterparts demonstrate that the con-struction of national identity can never beisolated from the global and transnationalcrosscurrents (Ang 1998).

Nor do the nationalist aspirations ofSuriyothai’s producers hide the fact that it isalso a commercial enterprise, and that it has

opened up a space for merchandizing Thai-ness, royalty and tradition. Since the film wasreleased, more than thirty premium goodshave gone on sale at cinemas around thecountry, including Suriyothai T-shirts, umbrel-las, magnets and key rings. One of the mostinteresting of these items are dolls about afoot high, representing the main chracters inthe film – the Siamese Kings, the BurmeseKing, the Queens, and the consorts (The Na-tion 2001d). Suriyothai co-sponsors have alsocapitalized on the movie’s popularity. TheSiam Commercial Bank distributed aSuriyothai theme saving-account book, checkbook and ATM card; Boon Rawd Brewery, theproducer of Singha beer, used a scene fromthe film on its beer cans; the Petroleum Auth-ority of Thailand (PTT), set up a promotioncampaign for every 400 baht spent at one ofits service stations by giving the customers abox of tissues with Suriyothai’s image on thepackaging; the Telephone Organization ofThailand released 25,000 phone cards promot-ing the film and expected to launch another75,000 cards once the movie begins showingat public cinemas (Bangkok Post 2001).

The commercial promotion of the filmmeans that ‘Thai-ness’ can in a sense bebought and sold both locally and globally; ineffect, Suriyothai has made Thai identity into aconsumer item. However, with the likelihoodof foreign distribution,1 the film’s sponsorshave seen the opportunity to promote theirbrands overseas. Boon Rawd plans to promoteSingha beer by selling cans that display ascene from the film accompanied by an En-glish language explanation in every countrywhere the movie is shown.

‘The films is the biggest movie in thehistory of Thailand and we want to bepart of it. It also has a big chance to benominated for the Academy Awardsso we want to use the opportunity topromote our product worldwide. Thisis not mainly to make money but alsoto make our name to the world mar-ket,’ said Chutchai Wiratyosin, BoonRawn’s public relation manager.

(Bangkok Post 2001)


Conclusion

This examination of the film Suriyothai revealshow it has constructed nationalist ideology.The work of contemporary cultural studieshas argued that commonplace analyses of his-torical representations and all such represen-tations are more about the moments of theirproduction than about the period they pur-portedly represent (Kodat 2000). I have sug-gested here that the construction of‘Thai-ness’ through the film Suriyothai is inti-mately linked to the post 1997 economic andcultural crisis in Thailand. As in other cases of‘invented tradition’ when a society undergoesrapid development which shatters its socialand political order, Thailand needs to recon-struct a ‘great’ past in order to lay down itsfuture agenda (Hobsbawn 1983). Suriyothaiseeks to construct the past to re-stabilize thecountry’s long-held belief that it has been ableto maintain its sovereignty and will do so inthe future. To understand this, one must real-ize that myth-making and personalglorification are a normal occurrence in anysociety. Heroes and heroines are created tounify the country, very frequently for politicalpurposes.

What makes Suriyothai interesting is thefact that in responding to the economic crisisand global forces, it has blended the local andglobal within itself, becoming in this sense

For a 400-baht-fill up at PTT, a customer gets abox of tissue with Suiryothai images on thePackaging.(Courtesy of Bangkok Post)

From its beginnings in the late nineteenthcentury, the constructions of Thai nationalismhave moved forward. On the coat-tails ofglobalization, local and international under-standings of ‘Thai-ness’ are both blended andthen commodified.

Characters from the movie Suriyothai are displayed on Singha beer cans.(Courtesy of Bangkok Post)


both hybridized and commodified. Every-thing about Suriyothai can be bought, sold andunderstood as ‘Thai-ness’. As Ang (1998) ar-gues, in the increasingly integrated world sys-tem there is no such thing as an independentcultural identity. Every identity must defineand position itself in relation to the culturalframes affirmed by the world system.Suriyothai has exemplified how the politics ofnational identity always implies a rearrange-ment of relations of cultural power, both lo-cally and globally. It also illustrates the factthat all nationalisms are hybrids, not just be-cause they are constructed relationally with‘others’ but because they are continuallystaged and produced for multiple audiences,both inside and outside national community.Suriyothai is but a reflexive of the narrativevoice: ‘us looking at them looking at us.’

Author’s note: I am indebted to ProfessorBarbara Andaya, Geoffrey White and Ming-Bao Yue at University of Hawaii for theirguidance, advice and encouragementthroughout my paper.

Notes

1. Since both Than Mui and the Queen hope toshow Suriyothai to an international audience,Than Mui had his old friend, Francis Ford Cop-pola, reedit the film for the international version.The original version of 185-minutes will beshortened to a 150-minute version, which will belaunched in October 2002 by Coppola’s distri-bution company. He also will receive executiveproducer credit.

References

Ang, Ien (1998) ‘Culture and Communication: to-wards an ethnographic critique of media con-sumption in the transnational media system’. InJohn Storey (ed.) What is Cultural Studies?: AReader, London: Arnold Publications, 237–54.

Appadurai, Arjun (1996) Modernity at Large: CulturalDimension of Globalization, Minneapolis: Univer-sity of Minnesota Press.

Atiya Achakulwisut (1999) ‘Making History’,Bangkok Post, 27 May, http://search. bangkok-post.co.th/bkkpost/1999/may1999/bp19990527/270599 outlook01.html.

Atiya Achakulwisut (2001) ‘The Word onSuriyothai’, Bangkok Post, 11 August, http://search.bangkokpost.co.th/bkkpost/2001/au-gust2001/bp20010811/110801 outlook04.html.

Bangkok Post (1999) ‘Coming Attractions’, 27 June,http://search.bangkokpost.co.th/bkkpost/1999/june1999/bp19990627/270699 Outlook01.html.

Bangkok Post (2001) ‘Sponsors Set to Ride SuriyothaiFervour’, 7 August, http://search.bangkokpost.co.th/bkkpost/2001/august2001/bp20010807/070801 business13.html.

CNN (1999) ‘Biggest Film in Thai History Chal-lenges ‘Anna and the King” www.cnn.com/ASIANOW/entertainment/9909/28/thai.film/.

Damrong Rajanubhab, Prince (2001) The Chronicle ofOur War with the Burmese, Phra PhrasionSalarak, Thein Subindu and U Aung Thien(trans.), Bangkok: White Lotus.

Gampell, Jennifer (2001) ‘The Gospel According toSuriyothai’, Asian Wall Street Journal, 24–26 Au-gust 2001, http://gampell.com/suriyothai.htm.

Gearing, Julain (1999) ‘A Royal to the Rescue’,Asiaweek, 16 April, 36–37.

Gearing, Julian (2001) ‘A Movie to the Rescue’,Asiaweek, 20 August, http://www.asiaweek.ecom/asiaweek/daily/foc/0,8773,171432,00.html.

Hiransomboon, Andrew (2001) ‘The Sound Track’,Bangkok Post, 9 September, http://search.bangkokpost.co.th/bkkpost/2001/sep-tember2001/bp20010909/en/outlook/09sep2001

out55.html.Hobsbawn, Eric (1983) ‘Inventing Traditions’. In

Eric Hobsbawn and Terence Ranger (eds.) Theinvention of Tradition, Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1–14.

Karnjariya Sukrung (1999) ‘Mystery of a Princess’,Bangkok Post, 25 February, http://search.bangkokpost.co.th/bkkpost/1999/febru-ary1999/bp19990225/250299 outlook01.html.

Kodat, Catherine Gunther (2000) ‘Saving PrivateProperty: Steven Spielberg’s American DreamWorks’, Representation (71) Summer: 77–105.

Kornvipa Boosue (1989) Buddhist and Gender Bias:An Analysis of a Jataka Tale, Working PaperNo.3, Thai Studies Project. Toronto: York Uni-versity.

Matichon Sudsapda (2001) ‘Suriyothai Fever’,22(1095) 13–19 August: 87–88.

Niwat Kongpien (1999) ‘Fact and Fantasy of MC.Chatrichalerm Yuko’ (‘Khwam Jing Kab Jin-tanakan Khong MC. Chatrichalerm Yukol’),Silapa Wattanatham 20(10) August: 81–87.

Pasuk Phongpaichit and Christ Baker (2000) Thai-land’s Crisis, Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books.

Rosenstone, Robert A. (1995) Vision of the Past: theChallenge of Film to Our Idea of History, Cam-bridge, Massachusetts: Harvard UniversityPress.

Songpol Kaopatumtip (1999) ‘Demystification of a‘forgotten heroin”, Bangkok Post, 19 September,http://search.bangkokpost.co.th/bkkpost/1999/september1999/190999/190999 perspective03.html.


Sunait Chitintaranond (1994) The Wars between Thai-land and Burma (Phama Rob Thai). Bangkok:Matichon Publishing.

The Nation (1999) ‘A Queen’s Sacrifice’, 18 May.The Nation (2001a) ‘Expat Tales: Fickle about Flicks’,

25 October 2001, http://www.nationmultimedia.com/page.arcview.php3?clid � 12&id� 50397&usrsess � 1.

The Nation (2001b) ‘Bangkok Film Festival: A ThaiFilm Renaissance’, 15 November 2001, http://www.nationmultimedia.com/page.arcview.php3?clid � 18&id� 51535&usrsess � 1.

The Nation (2001c) ‘Giving Life to a Legend’ 23August, http://www.nationmultimedia.com/page.arcview.php3?clid � 18&id� 47262&usrsess � 1.

The Nation (2001d) ‘Clashing Over History’, 2 Au-gust, http://www.nationmultimedia.com/page.arcview.php3?clid � 12&id� 46190&usrsess � 1.

Thongchai Winichakul (2001) ‘Suriyothai: A Na-tional History of An Ideal Woman’ (‘Suriyothai;Prawatsart Kang Chart Chabap Nang Kaeaw’),Silapa Wathanatham 22(12) October: 55–57.

Wiwat Panwut-thiyanon (2001) ‘History ofSuriyothai: A Never Ending Dialogue of thePast and the Present’ (‘Prawatsat Suriyothai:

Bhodsontana An Mairujob Rawang Adet KabPatjuban’), Sarakadee 16(198): 54–79.

Yoshino, Kosaku (1999) Consuming Ethnicity andNationalism: Asian Experiences, Honolulu: Uni-versity of Hawaii Press.

Zerubavel, Yael (1994) ‘The Historic, the Legendary,and the Incredible: Invented Tradition and Col-lective Memory in Israel’. In J.Gills (ed.) Com-memoration: The Politics of National Identity,Princeton: Princeton University Press, 105–123.

Author’s biography

Amporn JIRATTIKORN is currently finishing hersecond MA. in anthropology at University ofHawaii (Manoa). She had her master degree inSoutheast Asian Studies from National Universityof Singapore in 2000. Her work experience is indirecting and documenting documentaries forPacific Intercommunication, Thailand. She had alsoworked as a columnist/writer for Thai journals. Herpublications appear in Sarakadee, Silapa Wat-tanatham, Matichon Sudsapda, etc. She has publishedseveral books on history, cultural and social issues(in Thai). Her recent book is “Perd Man MayaUsakaney” (Voices from Southeast Asia) dealingwith contemporary, in particularly, popular culturein Southeast Asia.

Suriyothai: hybridizing Thai national identity through film

Documents

Transcript of Suriyothai: hybridizing Thai national identity through film