Films As Social History

e Heritage Journal, vol. 2, no. 1 (2005): pp.
1z1
Films as Social Histoiy
P. Ramlees Seniman Bujang Lapok
and Malays in Singapoie
(1950s60s)
by Syed Muhd Khaiiudin Aljunied
Depaitment of Malay Studies,
National Univeisity of Singapoie
is paper provides a critical reading and examination of P. Ramlees
flm, Seniman Bujang Lapok. Central to its argument is the appropriation
of such a flm as historical sources for the study of Malay society in the
1950s60s Singapore. By contextualising P. Ramlees portrayal of Malay
society within several key developments in his life and era, the article
propounds some major themes that refect the challenges and anxieties
faced by Malays then. It is hoped that this article will induce scholars
towards a rigorous interrogation of Malay flms which are currently at the
margins of Singapores historiography.

Introduction
D
espite theii sheei impoitance in poitiaying the social conditions
of Malays in post-Woild Wai II Singapoie, Malay flms of the
1950s and 1960s aie still in the maigins of what is peiceived as othei
impoitant histoiical souices at that time. As Anthony Milnei has
obseived, such negation is a pioduct of the methods and souices
Syed Muhd Khaiiudin Aljunied has completed his M.A. at the Depaitment of
Histoiy, National Univeisity of Singapoie and will be puisuing his PhD at the
School of Oiiental and Afiican Studies (S.O.A.S) at London. He was awaided the
Wong Lin Ken Medal foi Best Tesis (Histoiy) in 2001 and is cuiiently a Teaching
Staf at the Malay Studies Depaitment, teaching modules on Malay Cultuie and
Society. He was pieviously woiking as a Geneial Education Omcei with the
Ministiy of Education, Singapoie.
z i e Heritage Journal
Fiirs s Socii His:ovv

e Heritage Journal i
Svro Muno Knivuoi Aiiuiro
that colonial aichive histoiians have adopted in the study of Malay
histoiy. Colonial iecoids weie (and still aie) iegaided as moie
ieliable at the expense of othei useful Malay-based souices. Indeed,
it has impacted the kinds of questions and peispectives of histoiians
of the Malay Woild.
1
In theii puisuit of lineai naiiatives wiitten fiom
vintage points of a selected few, such genie of histoiians have often
oveilooked alteinative souices, which could piovide an illuminating
insight into the social histoiy of the Malays. Foiemost amongst
souices which could give an intimate Malay peispective of theii own
conditions, as Timothy Bainaid foicefully aigues, is Malay flm, but
it iemains laigely untapped.
2

Malay flms pioduced in Singapoie of the 1950s and 1960s
coincided at a time, when the island was undeigoing iapid social,
political, ieligious and economic changes. Diiected towaids an
audience whose avenues of visual enteitainment weie faiily limited
in those days, Malay flms often ieected and, at the same time,
inuenced Malay consciousness in such a context. So potent was
the powei of such flms that till today, many of the movie lines
has now established itself as new additions within the coipus of
Malay metaphois!
3
Two flm companies, Cathay Keiis and Shaw
Biotheis Malay Film Pioductions, emeiged stiongly in the post-wai
flm industiy pioducing moie than two hundied and ffty flms in
meiely two decades. Featuiing actois and actiess fiom vaiied social
backgiounds, such flms diew thousands eveiy weekend to cinemas,
iegaidless of age and class. Judging fiom piesent day standaids, it
can be said that a laige numbei amongst such aitists became Idols
foi the young and old then. Most piominent amongst them was
Teuku Zakaiia bin Teuku Nyak Puteh oi moie populaily known,
as P. Ramlee (192973) who iemains fiesh in the minds of Malays
today as an enteitainei and also a teachei par excellence. He was a
sciiptwiitei, comedian, diamatist, musician (composei and singei)
as well as diiectoi, all manifested in a man who was conceined with
the state of Malays
4
duiing his time.
5

In view of his peivasive inuence within the Malay flm industiy,
this aiticle will ciitically examine one of P. Ramlees celebiated
comedies, Seniman Bujang Lapok (eiioneously known in English as
Te Nitwit Movie Stais) (1961).
6
Nominated foi Te Best Comedy
Film duiing the ninth Asian Film Festival in Tokyo, Seniman Bujang
z i e Heritage Journal

Lapok naiiates the stoiy of thiee unmaiiied and impoveiished
men, Ramli, Aziz and Sudin, and theii anxieties, challenges as well
as iomance whilst iesiding in a ciowded iented house. Fiantically
in seaich of a piopei job, the thiee men attended an audition to be
movie stais. Aftei many hiccups and hilaiious unintended mistakes,
they weie subsequently employed by the Malay Film Pioductions.
It pioved to be a ciitical junctuie of theii lives. Howevei, theii
enthusiasm in memoiising the movie lines was inteiiupted by
vaiious dimculties. Foiemost amongst these weie the distuibances
caused by the neighbouis within theii iented house. Amongst such
distuibances weie deafening aiguments between two couples, a man
iepaiiing his spoilt motoicycle and an eccentiic musician piactising
his skills in playing the tiumpet. Tis was followed by the almost
impossible ambitions of the thiee men to fnd theii love mates and
be happily maiiied. Ramli was in love with a nuise, Salmah, who
was at the same time couited by a neighbouihood hooligan, Shaiif.
Te movie ieached its climax with the buining of the iented house
by Shaiif due solely to Salmahs iejection of his maiiiage pioposal.
Upon discoveiing Shaiif s ciime, Ramli confionted the foimei and
handed him to the villageis to be sent to the police station. Te stoiy
Bujang Lapok intioducing themselves to Kemat Hassan,
Diiectoi of Malay Film Pioductions.
i e Heritage Journal

ends with each of the thiee men meeting theii loved ones to be
happily maiiied.
7
Te next pait of this papei will discuss two impoitant contexts
which shaped the pioduction of P. Ramlees flm Seniman Bujang
Lapok. Tis is followed by a discussion of vaiious majoi themes in
the movie which miiioied the vaiied challenges faced by the Malay
society in 1950s and 1960s Singapoie. Yet, the expositions that follow
aie but diops of an ocean of histoiical data that could be extiacted
fiom the movies and songs that have been pioduced by P. Ramlee, it
is hoped that such analytical discussions of Seniman Bujang Lapok
will convincingly put foith flms as useful histoiical souices foi the
study of Malays in Singapoie duiing the post-wai yeais.

Films and Contexts
Befoie engaging on an analysis of the flm, it is peitinent to state two
salient contexts that have inuenced its cieation and theiefoie would,
to a gieat extent, justify it as a useful histoiical souice. Te fist
would be the backgiound of the cieatoi oi pioducei of such flms.
Many, if not all, of P. Ramlees biogiapheis aie in consensus that his
woiks weie, in many ways, pioducts of his peisonal life expeiiences.
Wan Hamzah Awang, a ienowned Malaysian flm ciitic, went as fai
to asseit that P. Ramlee songs and flms had nevei depaited fiom
iealities of his peisonal life and milieu. Even when his flms enteied
into the iealm of fantasy, he was, in fact, indiiectly poitiaying
to his audiences the iealities of life in which he was an oiganic
pait.
8
Although only handful amongst P. Ramlees biogiapheis aie
piofessional histoiians and thus lacking of histoiical piofundity, a
cuisoiy glance at impoitant moments in P. Ramlees life does indeed
attests to such line of ieasoning.
P. Ramlee was boin on 22 Maich 1929 in Penang and giew up
at a time when Malaya was undeigoing the stiesses of the Gieat
Depiession. His fathei was an odd job labouiei and, piedictably, the
household was plagued by poveity and ill-health. As the only son
thiough his motheis second maiiiage, P. Ramlee had fond yet painful
memoiies of his eaily yeais. He sought to poitiay this piedicament
in the flm Ibu (Mothei) (1953) which naiiates the unceasing love
i e Heritage Journal

between a child and his mothei. Such autobiogiaphical exposition of
his life was fuithei depicted in his fist successful flm, Penarek Beca
(Te Tiishaw Diivei) (1955). Te intended messages of class divisions
and poveity within the Malay society duiing his time was featuied so
efectively in the flm that it won seveial piestigious awaids.
9

Similai to most Malays in Penang of the 1930s, P. Ramlee giew
up leaining the iudimentaiy aspects of Islam. In fact, he was known
amongst village youths foi his melodious iecital of the Quian and
cuiiosities in many aieas of Islamic knowledge. P. Ramlee was
howevei ciitical of what seemed to him as tiaditional inteipietations
of Islamic laws. In Semerah Padi (1956), P. Ramlee launched such
ciitiques thiough the stoiies of two couples who weie punished
seveiely foi adulteiy and foinication. Tat being said, the main
message of the flm was almost ciystal cleai to his audience: Malays
aie Muslims and should adheie stiongly to such a potent belief.
Indeed, accoiding to Yusnoi Ef, P. Ramlee was much inclined to
innei and mystical piactises, what is teimed as ilmu batin (esoteiic
knowledge) iathei than meie laws and iituals.
10

Moving on to his eaily life, as eaily as eight yeais old, P. Ramlee
had developed inteiests in singing and playing of seveial musical
instiuments. Some few yeais latei, he soon became well-known foi
P. Ramlee, taking up his new appointment
as Diiectoi.
6 i e Heritage Journal

e Heritage Journal i ;
his multiple talents and was iespected as a piofound musician in the
Penang Oichestia.
11
His fame soon attiacted the attention of B.S.
Rahjans, an Indian diiectoi fiom Shaw Biotheis flm pioduction.
Te meeting between the two men pioved to be the fist impoitant
milestone which contiibuted to P. Ramlees meteoiic iise in the
Singapoie flm industiy. At Jalan Ampas studio, P. Ramlee ieceived
the suppoit and encouiagement of piominent flm diiectois. Tis was
coupled by the excellent facilities and skilled technicians who helped
give the maximum efects needed foi eveiy flm P. Ramlee acted
in.
12
Having sung, taken up majoi ioles and won piestigious awaids
thiough seveial successful flms, P. Ramlee was soon appointed as
a Film Diiectoi in 1955. Eight moie flms weie pioduced via his
diiectoiship and by the time Seniman Bujang Lapok (1961) was
scieened in the cinemas, it almost became haid foi his fans to
difeientiate P. Ramlee, the actoi, and the man in ieal life. Te two
ioles seemed to have conated within a peison who was undeigoing
a piocess of self-discoveiy and ielentless commitment towaids social
iefoimation.
One of P. Ramlees cential conceins as ieected in the flms
pioduced in cosmopolitan Singapoie was the complexities of having
to maintain tiaditional Malay values whilst at the same time, keeping
up with the coming of modeinity. P. Ramlee believed in a symbiotic
ielationship of both elements in the daily lives of Malays duiing his
time. In his flms, P. Ramlee highlighted that Malays must adopt what
was best fiom theii coipus of inheiited values as well as Westein
modeinity. He felt that it was the iigid and extieme adheience
towaids Malay values that had biought about an unquestioning
loyalty towaids theii iuleis as well as also othei foims of social
pioblems. He poitiayed such ciiticisms in his flm Hang Tuah (1956),
which was based on a celebiated Malay classic. P. Ramlee ended the
movie with a depaituie fiom the classical Malay text by adding a
signifcant monologue of the victoi, Hang Tuah, whom aftei having
killed his fiiend, doubted whethei such absolute faithfulness towaids
an unjust iuleis oideis was tiuly an act of honoui. Fuitheimoie,
to P. Ramlee, a modein society should have within it iudiments of
moiality and social cohesion along with the adoption of scientifc
knowledge and technological advancement. Such issues weie subtly

e Heritage Journal i ;
infused in Seniman Bujang Lapok and will be elaboiated in the latei
pait of this essay.
Te second impoitant factoi to be consideied would be the
social context in which the flm has been pioduced. Tis is impoitant
because flms aie pioducts of the social attitudes and ideological
tiends of a ceitain peiiod and place.
13
Seniman Bujang Lapok was
flmed at a time, which coincided with the ieawakening of the Malays,
paiticulaily the liteiaiy elites.
14
A majoi event that induced Malays
in Singapoie into full-blown activism in the post-wai yeais was the
Malayan Union Scheme which was announced in Octobei 1945. Tis
scheme was intioduced by the Biitish with the hope of consolidating
theii hold on the Malay States. Singapoie was, howevei, excluded
fiom the pioposed set up.
15
Malays in the Peninsulai who weie
distuibed by such a pioposal saw the implementation of the Malayan
Union as an attempt to eiode the poweis of the Sultans and a dilution
of Malay special iights. Te United Malays National Oiganization
(UMNO) was thus iegisteied in 1946, campaigning foi an alteinative
set up known latei as the Fedeiation of Malaya. Singapoie was again
excluded due to the Peninsulai Malays conceins about Chinese
numeiical dominance on the island. Although some Malays in
Singapoie accepted such iationale of political sepaiation, many hoped
that they would soon be incoipoiated into the laigei mainland Malay
community wheie many of theii families and fiiends lived. To ensuie
that the iights of Malays in Singapoie weie also piotected, UMNO
decided upon the establishment of its bianch known as Singapoie
UMNO (SUMNO) in 1948.
16
Its inuence amongst the Malays
alongside the Kesatuan Melayu Singapuia (KMS) was to ieach its
peak in 1957. Gieatly afected by the Malayan Union episode, laige
numbeis of Malays in Singapoie became moie active in the public
spheie than evei befoie. Vaiious oiganizations which aiticulated a
plethoia of inteiests mushioomed in the cosmopolitan colony. Issues
of class divisions, identity, belonging, cultuie, ieligion and language
weie contested, leading to a iise of polemics and tensions between
vaiious ethnic gioups on the island.
17
Contiastingly, in the iealm
of eveiyday life, food shoitages, diseases, unemployment, vices and
violence came to a height. Malays who weie mainly lowly educated
and engaged in fshing, poultiy ieaiing and ciop industiies had to
absoib such evei-incieasing challenges in the post-wai eia.

e Heritage Journal i ,
Amidst such anxieties and challenges faced by Malays, on 6
August 1950, a gioup of piominent teacheis and jouinalists decided
upon the foimation of a dynamic and cieative movement, Angkatan
Sasterawan 50 (ASAS 50) (meaning the Liteiaiy Geneiation of 1950,
the acionym ASAS means basis). Diiven by the motto of Seni
Untuk Masyaiakat (Aits foi Society), the gioup championed seveial
foiceful aims amongst which weie: (1) to fiee Malay society fiom
those elements of its cultuie which was obstiucting oi negating the
puisuit of modeinity and piogiess, (2) to advance the intellectual
awaieness of the raayat (Malay masses) towaids the ideals of
social justice, piospeiity, peace and haimony, (3) to fostei Malay
nationalism and last but not least, to iefne and piomote the Malay
language as the lingua fianca of Malaya.
18
Most piominent amongst
the membeis of ASAS 50 weie Kamaludin Muhamad (Keiis Mas),
Usman Awang (Tongkat Waiant), Suiatman Maikasan, Masuii S. N.,
Abdul Ghani Hamid, Muhammad Aiif Ahmad (Mas) and Asiaf Haji
Wahab. Membeis of the ASAS 50 adopted the iealist mode of wiiting
novels, shoit stoiies and poems. Such style of wiiting was emphasised
upon by ideologues of ASAS 50 fiom time to time with the delibeiate
intent of going against pieceding genies, which to them, weie too
pieoccupied with stylistics and tiivial aspects of human life, hence
not ieecting the tiue sufeiing of the common people. It is woith
quoting Keiis Mas at length who succinctly desciibed the ASAS
50 at the peak of theii engagement with the context in which they
opeiated:
In the feld of literature, the proponents of ASAS 50 adopted
a new breathe of style, employing a mode of language that
is fresh, departing from the preceding genre of writers,
propounding the themes of societal awareness, politics and
culture with the aim of revitalizing the spirit of freedom,
the spirit of independence of a people (bangsa) of its own
unique sense of honour and identity, upholding justice and
combating oppression.
.
We criticised societal backwardness and those whom

e Heritage Journal i ,
we regard as the instruments responsible for the birth
of such backwardness. We criticised colonialism and its
instruments, that is, the elite class, those whose consciousness
have been frozen by the infuence of feudalism and myths,
and superstition that has been enmeshed with religion.
(translation mine)
19

Ramli and Aziz in a flm audition with a feice yet comical
Diiectoi, Ahmad Nisfu.
P. Ramlee was veiy much inuenced by such developments and
these ideals weie ieected in the flms he pioduced in Singapoie.
In fact, P. Ramlee was peisonally amliated with membeis of ASAS
50. His own flm magazine, Bintang (Stai), was edited by Fatimah
Muiad who was the wife of ASAS 50 ideologue, Asiaf. By the eaily
1960s, Asiaf was alieady a well-known wiitei and was iesponsible
foi infusing intellectual ideas of ASAS 50 into Bintang as well
as shaiing his thoughts with P. Ramlee.
20
As obseived by a flm
histoiian, paiallel to the objectives of ASAS 50, the Bujang Lapok
Seiies
21
weie comedies mengandungi sindiran-sindiran tajam
terhadap masyarakat (that has within it, shaip ciiticisms of the
society) at that time.
22
Tus, similai to the tiend of iealism in Malay
wiiting in the 1950s, male chaiacteis of Seniman Bujang Lapok weie
poitiayed as economically and socially downtiodden. Repiesenting
the piedicament of a laige segment of Malay men at that time, these
thiee comical fguies (Ramli, Sudin and Aziz) had left theii villages
to seek employment in the uiban aieas without any special skill oi
1o i e Heritage Journal

e Heritage Journal i 11
knowledge that would enable them to secuie luciative oi piestigious
occupations.
23
Fuitheimoie, in Seniman Bujang Lapok, the chaiacteis
weie given names that weie, in ieality, theii own. Accoiding to Aziz
Sattai (one of the Bujang Lapok), P. Ramlee had always wanted the
actois (himself included) duiing flming to be what they weie truly
like in ieal life. Tiough this, P. Ramlee hoped to highlight the tiue
feelings and conditions of the common people then.
24
Major emes of Seniman Bujang Lapok
Fiom the eailiei discussion, it is undeniable that the Seniman Bujang
Lapok as well as othei flms pioduced by P. Ramlee aie impoitant
souices of iefeience foi the social histoiy of the Malays. In this
section, instead of examining the flm as it unfolds diachionically
oi appioaching it fiom the peispective of its technical, aitistic and
linguistic sophistications, I will attempt to highlight some majoi
themes that weie piopounded thiough the flm that had functioned
as iepiesentations of the Malay society in the 1950s and 1960s
Singapoie. To avoid fiom falling into the fallacy of ieading too
much into the flm, I have included the fndings of seveial academic
studies and also insights fiom published memoiis by P. Ramlees
contempoiaiies which aie in line with the issues highlighted by him.
(a) After Efects of the Japanese Occupation
One of the majoi themes piopounded in the flm was the aftei efects
of the Japanese occupation. In this, P. Ramlee had biought to light
two poweiful efects. Te fist, socio-psychological in natuie, was the
phobia of bomb attacks. Tis was ieected in the chaiactei Sudin,
who had instantaneously, took covei undei the table of a cofee shop
when one of the tyies of a loiiy buist. When asked by Ramli on why
he had ieacted in such a way, Sudin ieplied that he iemembeied
the times when the Japanese had bombed the countiy. Ramli then
ieminded Sudin to foiget about such incidences and concentiate
upon theii efoits to look foi a decent job. Although tiivial to many,
this shoit scene piopounds the social psychology of the iuial Malays
1o i e Heritage Journal

then that had scaicely iecoveied fiom the shock of the Japanese
occupation. It is woithwhile to note that no academic studies have
so fai been undeitaken to examine in this aspect of Malay life in
Singapoie. Useful (yet pioblematic) souices that aie ieadily available
today consist of oial histoiy iecoids and memoiis by peisonalities
who witnessed and expeiienced the iavages of Japanese iule and its
subsequent impact. Nonetheless, in his iecently published memoii,
the ex-Ministei of Social Afaiis in Singapoie Pailiament, Mi Othman
Wok, iecounted how the Malay villages weie left laigely unscathed by
continuous Japanese bombings until late Januaiy 1942. Due to this,
theie giew a sense of complacency amongst those who felt that only
Biitish militaiy installations would be taigeted. But aftei witnessing
the devastation caused by such bombs, which iesulted in the deaths
of neighbouis and ielatives, ieality began to sink in and Malays then
iealized that they weie in a wai zone.
25
Such feais and memoiies
haunted the Malay psyche foi many yeais theieaftei.
Anothei efect of the wai that was highlighted thiough the
flm was the inteiiuption of education amongst the Malays. Duiing
the inteiview by Kemat Hassan, the Managei of the Malay Film
Pioductions, Ramli mentioned he had attended Malay school up
to Standaid Five and English school up to Standaid Foui and half!
When asked why theie is a half , Ramli explained that he was in
school when the Japanese attacked Malaya. Te iest of the Bujang
Lapok also ieected low levels of educational achievements. Indeed,
the Japanese Occupation had not only disiupted the education of the
Malays, but it has also woisened the alieady existing low levels of
paiticipation of the Malays in mainstieam schools.
26
In theii efoits
to gain the suppoit of the Malay community, the Japanese made it
compulsoiy foi all students to leain the Japanese language as well
as cultuie and negated the cuiiiculum that was implemented by
the Biitish colonialists. Accoiding to Said Zahaii who latei became
a ienowned Malay jouinalist in Utusan Melayu of the post-wai
yeais, Malays peiceived these new linguistic and cultuial policies
as acceptable foi they piovided employment oppoitunities within
the Japanese administiation. Yet such idealism was doomed fiom
the onset. Towaids the end of the wai, school attendance was on a
decline as many began to iealize that such education meiely seived
the motives of the Japanese conqueiois.
27
Upon the end of the
1z i e Heritage Journal

Occupation, most Malays had to iely on theii mediocie qualifcations
attained piioi to the Second Woild Wai. Te low level of education
amongst the Malays manifested itself in occupational patteins. In late
1950s, two-thiids of the Malay population weie engaged in menial
occupations such as gaideneis, omce boys and labouieis.
28
To stiess
upon his ciiticisms of the slumbei and foolishness of the Malays
in the iealm of education, P. Ramlee even iesoited to the usage of
deiogatoiy woids such as stupid (bodoh) and idiot (bahalol)
in many instances of the flm. Wittingly, he had highlighted such
seiious educational pioblems in a jokingly mannei foi his audiences
to discein.
(b) Malays and the Challenge of Modernity
Yet anothei majoi theme that is woith highlighting is the challenge
of modeinity that the Malay society was giappling with in the 1950s
and 1960s. P. Ramlee intended to highlight that theie was a need to
fnd a balance between the maintenance of Malay cultuial values and
the onslaught of modeinity. Tis, as said eailiei, was in haimony with
the mood of facing up to the challenge of modeinisation amongst
the Malay liteiaiy elites. Te Malay liteiaiy elites had engaged in the
wiiting of novels and plays that had centied on the theme that Malays
had abandoned theii tiaditional values and thus biought about moial
and spiiitual decay fiom within.
29
On the pieseivation of Malay values, P. Ramlee uses the
chaiactei of a Singh who woiks as a Jaga (watchman). Te Singh
gave shaip ciiticisms to Sudin foi his lacking in adab (ethics) and
foi not behaving in the ways of an orang Melayu (Malay). Ramli then
echoes the slogan of ASAS 50 by saying that Sudin was soiely lacking
of Malay ethics as ieected in the language. Bahasa menunjukkan
bangsa tau! (Language ieects the conditions of a community!),
Ramli exclaimed.
Te Singh went on to chide anothei man foi not ieecting
the spiiit of gotong royong (cohesiveness) in iesponse to the latteis
comments that the thiee men (Ramli, Sudin and Aziz) weie not
beftting to be flm stais. Te Singh iemaiked that Malays cannot
piogiess if cohesiveness which was pait of the Malay cultuie was
1z i e Heritage Journal

absent. Such emphasis on the spiiit of gotong royong was continuously
illustiated in the events that had taken place in the long house which
the Bujang Lapok iesided. Communal spiiit was highlighted in the
flm as a social contiol mechanism that could solve family disputes
and foi the community to infoim each othei of any catastiophe that
had befallen the occupants in the long house. In the conclusive pait
of the flm, the spiiit gotong royong was ieiteiated yet again in cleaiei
way when the villageis musteied each otheis couiage to collectively
aiiest, Shaiif, the notoiious neighbouihood hooligan.
Going fuithei, to highlight and piomote the meiits of
modeinity, P. Ramlee had used the example of the Post Omce in
safeguaiding money and piopeity. At the end of the flm, Salmah,
the wife-to-be of Ramli, assuied him that hei money had not been
buint to ashes as a iesult of the destiuction of theii long house.
Instead, she mentioned it was diselamatkan (savediunscathed)
because hei mothei had deposited the money in the Post Omce. P.
Ramlee was indiiectly appealing his Malay audiences to capitalise
on the advanced instiuments of modeinity and to iemove theii
bad habits of keeping money undei theii beds and pillows in the
attap-ioofed (palm-ioofed) houses that weie pione to fie! Tis was
also a delibeiate ie-enactment of a devastating fie that bioke out in
Singapoie at a village called Bukit Ho Swee on 25 May 1961, some
few months befoie Seniman Bujang Lapok weie scieened in the
cinemas. Foui people died, 85 weie injuied and 2,200 attap houses
weie destioyed. Sixteen thousand people became penniless paitly
due to the piactice of keeping money in theii homes.
30

(c) On the Understanding of Islam
Othei than that, P. Ramlee also biought to light the awed
undeistanding of Islam amongst Malays, of which he was ciitical.
Fiist was the issue of polygamy. In one of the scenes, a man was
caught by his wife dancing with anothei woman. Aftei a heated
veibal aigument, the man then pleaded innocence in the context of
Islam by stating that the woman was his second wife. Te fist wife
commented piofoundly that, Ooh! pasal nak berbini, ikut undang-
undang Islam ye! Pasal sembahyang, puasa kenapa tak nak ikut

undang-undang Islam! (Ooh, with iegaids to maiiiage, you follow
teachings of Islam!, [but] when it comes to piayeis and fasting, why
do you not follow Islam?). P. Ramlee, who was maiiied foi multiple
times, did not howevei nullify polygamy which he acknowledged as
an accepted element of the Islamic law. He uses the chaiactei Aziz
who admonished the man by saying that the pioblem was not with
the law but with implementation of that law. Justice and faiiness
must be upheld if a man so decides on a polygamous maiiiage.
In hei monogiaph on e Muslim Matrimonial Court in
Singapore based on hei feldwoik caiiied out in 1963, Judith
Djamoui obseived that kathis (Muslim judges) weie paiticulaily lax
in deteimining the maiiiage status of intended couples. Teie thus
aiose a high pievalence of uniepoited polygamous maiiiages. In
addition to that, divoice iates amongst Malays peaked to moie than
50 pei cent in 1957. Djamoui also noted that theie weie occasions
wheie Malay men weie found to have quietly kept anothei wife in
town oi in some othei pait of the Colony.
31
In 1958, the Shariah
Couit had been established and it was efective in ieducing divoice
iates and solving maiital disputes. Yet, cases of uniepoited maiiiages
weie still pievalent at the time when Seniman Bujang Lapok was
flmed.
32
Te next issue was on the belief in magical iocks and oinaments
to attain ceitain this-woildly objectives. Sudin had bought a magical
stone fiom Indian man which he had been assuied could make theii
managei lend Ramli thiee hundied and ffty dollais foi the latteis
wedding aiiangements. Yet, Sudin was only given fve dollais whilst
the stone that he had bought cost him ten dollais! In fiustiation,
Sudin mentioned that the stone was sial (an omen) iathei than a
souice of goodness and luck. He thiew it into a diain.
Such weie the satiies diiected by P. Ramlee towaids the Malay
society at that time. Hussein Alatas concuiied with this viewpoint
by aiguing that the Malays duiing the 1960s weie steeped in theii
beliefs of magic and mysticism in oidei to solve theii daily tiials and
tiibulations.
33
In an inuential academic tieatise, Syed Husin Ali
fuithei highlighted that the veision of Islam amongst the Malays
duiing this peiiod was peivaded by animistic beliefs. Malays weie
moie conceined with wasteful and pompous ceiemonies which weie
fai fiom the teachings of Islam. Moieovei, Islam amongst Malays was

essentially devoid of the iational and philosophical undeipinnings.
Malays weie also found to be paiticulaily lax in theii obseivances of
essential piecepts such as piayeis and fasting.
34

(d) Poverty (Kemiskinan)
Last but not least, anothei iecuiiing theme in P. Ramlees flm is
poveity. Malays weie poitiayed as an economically depiessed and
maiginal community who weie depiived of the basic essentials of
life such as food, health and lodging. Paiadoxically, in the midst of
such piedicament, Malays weie, at the same time, a close-knitted
community whose values of biotheihood and kinship weie still
intact and continuously piopagated. Te Bujang Lapok weie, in a
sense, iepiesentations of Malay poveity. In the eailiei paits of the
flm, Ramli had tiied to sell his piized possession which was a toin
undeigaiment to a Chinese iag-and-bone man. Te man iesponded
that such undesiiable item could make him faint, what moie to
be sold. Te flm went on to images of Ramli having placed two
biicks on a pillow in oidei to iion his pants. Being an integial pait
amongst those who lived below the poveity line then, the Bujang
Lapok could not even dieam of owning an iion. At anothei setting,
Sudin complained of the need foi him to stand on a long queue eveiy
moining due to the lack of toilets in the villages. In a comical way he
iemaiked, Heh apalah kita ni? Mau berak pun mau kena beratur!
Berapa lama mau tunggulah! (Heh what [life] aie we in? One has to
queue in oidei to ielieve ones bowels! How long must we wait?).
Having completed his feldwoik on the Malays in distiicts of
Geylang and Jalan Eunos, an Ameiican academic William Hanna
obseived that Malays in mid-1960s Singapoie weie by fai the most
undei-developed ethnic giouping in Singapoie. Te kampongs
(villages) which most Malays lived weie plaqued by diseases such
as malaiia and tubeiculosis. Infant moitality was high due to pooi
diainage systems, lack of health seivices and unclean watei. Yet,
with the iising piessuies by nationalists and politicians towaids
the goveinment minimalist policies, conditions began to impiove
towaids the second half of the 1960s, albeit, at a veiy slow iate.
Accoiding to Hanna, such developments within the Malay

e Heritage Journal i 1;
community piovided the backgiound and impetus foi the outbieak
of the 1964 iacial iiots.
35
Conclusion
Tioughout this essay, I have aigued that the flm Seniman Bujang
Lapok is indeed a useful histoiical souice foi the social histoiy of the
Malays in 1950s and 1960s Singapoie. I have biought to light some
majoi themes that have been piopounded by P. Ramlee in this flm.
Te aftei efects of the Japanese occupation, challenges of modeinity,
tensions in the undeistanding of Islam and poveity miiioied P.
Ramlees peisonal stiuggle as well as the challenges and anxieties
faced by Malays then. It is theiefoie not suipiising that these themes
weie oft-iepeated in most, if not, all of P. Ramlees pioductions. Most
impoitantly, the following naiiatives has demonstiated to us that
flms can be a useful addition alongside othei souices of social histoiy
such as oial iecoids, memoiis, newspapeis, coioneis iecoids and
goveinmental iepoits. Te essential task of a histoiian (and peihaps
anthiopologists as well as sociologists) is thus to tease out peisuasive
evidences fiom such flms, cioss-examining it with othei souices
and pioviding iational inteipietations of vaiied aspects of the Malay
society in a given peiiod. Such histoiy, like all histoiies, may not be
peifect, but it may help to open doois and piovoke questions foi latei
efoits.
In conclusion, it is peihaps peitinent to iestate that much has
been done to uncovei piecise details of the life of this extiaoidinaiy
man who is, an Intellectual in his own iight. Yet, extensive and
compiehensive ieseaich to demonstiate how the social histoiy of
Malays in Singapoie could be eniiched thiough the medium of flms
pioduced by P. Ramlee iemains a neglected topic amongst scholais
fiom vaiied disciplines. It is hoped that this papei has piovided the
impetus towaids analysing the hundieds of flms and songs pioduced
by the Seniman Agung (Gieat Aitiste)
36
in the light of theii histoiical
signifcance.

e Heritage Journal i 1;
NOTES
1.

A.C. Milnei, Colonial Recoids Histoiy: Biitish Malaya, Kajian Malaysia 4, 2
(1986): 118.
2. Timothy P. Bainaid, Chickens, Cakes and Kitchen: Food and Modeinity in
Malay Films of the 1950s and 1960s, in Reel Food: Essays on Food and Film,
ed. Anne L. Bowei (New Yoik: Routledge, 2004), pp. 767.
3.

Timothy P. Bainaid and Syed Muhd Khaiiudin Aljunied, Malays in
Singapoie: 13001959, in Malay Heritage in Singapore, ed. Aileen Lau
(Singapoie: Suntiee Media, 2006), foithcoming.
4. I am awaie of the ongoing debates on the defnition of Malay amongst
scholais of vaiied felds. Tania Li in hei book, Malays in Singapore: Culture,
Economy, and Ideology (Singapoie: Oxfoid Univeisity Piess, 1989) had
chosen to avoid such debates and get on with analysing the social gioup
that she defned as Malays. Judith Nagata in hei essay, What is A Malay?
highlighted the inheient pioblem of using Malay as a social categoiy in the
context of Malaysia and Singapoie due its uidity in day-to-day piactise. In
the context of this essay, I have employed the defnition given by Malaysian
constitution that is, Malay is one who is a Muslim, habitually speaks the
Malay language and follows the Malay custom oi adat.
5. Mahiiin Hassan, P. Ramlee A Son of Penang, Malaysia in History 22
(1979): 1.
6. Tan Sii P. Ramlee, Seniman Bujang Lapok (Selangoi: Common Voyage, 1961).
Te Nitwit Movie Stais is an inaccuiate tianslation of the movie title. Te
piopei Malay tianslation should be Te Downtiodden Unmaiiied Aitistes.
7. Foi a detailed desciiption of the flm, see Ahmad Saiji, P. Ramlee: Erti Yang
Sakti, (Kuala Lumpui: Pelanduk Publications, 1999), pp. 34952.
8. Wan Hamzah Awang, Manusia P. Ramle (Kuala Lumpui: Fajai Bakti, 1993),
p. 91.
9. Jan Uhde and Yvonne Ng Uhde, Latent Images: Film in Singapore (Singapoie:
Oxfoid Univeisity Piess, 2000), p. 13.
10. Yusnoi Ef, P. Ramlee Yang Saya Kenal (Selangoi: Pelanduk Publications,
2000), p. 42.
11. Ramlee Ismail, Kenangan Abadi P. Ramlee (Kuala Lumpui: Adhicipta, 1988),
pp. 413.
12. James Haiding and Ahmad Saiji, P. Ramlee: e Bright Star (Selangoi:
Pelanduk Publications, 2002), p. 233.
13. Richaid Dyei, Intioduction to Film studies, in John Hill and Pamela Chuich
Gibson, e Oxford Guide to Film Studies (New Yoik : Oxfoid Univeisity
Piess, 1998), p. 8.
14.

Tam, Seong Chee, Malays and Modernization: A Sociological Interpretation,
(Singapoie: Singapoie Univeisity Piess, 1983), p.216.
15. Dominions Omce to High Commissioneis, 21 Januaiy 1946, CO 537i1528.
Foi insights into the Malayan Union scheme and subsequent ieactions by
vaiious gioups in Malaya, see A.J. Stockwell, British Policy and Malay Politics
during the Malayan Union Experiment 19451948 (Singapoie: Malaysian

e Heritage Journal i 1,
Bianch of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1979), and Albeit Lau, e Malayan
Union Controversy 19421948 (Singapoie: Oxfoid Univeisity Piess, 1990).
16. Teie have debates on the oiigins of Singapoie UMNO. Some of its membeis
asseited that SUMNO was foimally established in 1952 yet existed as an
infoimal oiganization since the late 1940s. See foi example, Inteiviews with
Buang bin Junid on 1

Apiil, 1987, Oral History Records: Political Development
in Singapore 19451965, National Aichives of Singapoie.
17. Ungku Maimunah Mohd. Tahii, Modern Malay Literary Culture: A Historical
Perspective (Singapoie: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 1987), pp. 33
42.
18. See ASAS 50, Memoranda Angkatan Sasterawan 50 (Kuala Lumpui: Oxfoid
Univeisity Piess, 1961).
19. Keiis Mas, 30 Tahun Sekitar Sastera (Kuala Lumpui: Dewan Bahasa dan
Pustaka, 1979), p. 131.
20. James Haiding and Ahmad Saiji, P. Ramlee, p. 103.
21. Te Bujang Lapok seiies weie:
(i) Bujang Lapok (1957)
(ii) Pendekai Bujang Lapok (1959)
(iii) Ali Baba Bujang Lapok (1961)
(iv) Seniman Bujang Lapok (1961)
22. Zakiah Hanum, Sepanjang Riwayatku (Kuala Lumpui: Utusan Publications,
1984), p.iii.
23. Tam, Seong Chee, Malays and Modernization, p. 216.
24. Wan Hamzah Awang, Manusia P. Ramlee, p. 75.
25. Othman Wok, Never in my Wildest Dreams (Singapoie: Singapoie National
Piinteis, 2000), pp. 534.
26. Ismail Kassim, Problems of Elite Cohesion: A Perspective from a Minority
Community (Singapoie: Singapoie Univeisity Piess, 1974), p. 36.
27. Said Zahaii, Dark Clouds At Dawn: A Political Memoir (Kuala Lumpui:
Insan, 2001), pp. 207.
28. Ismail Kassim, Problems of Elite Cohesion, p. 37.
29. A. M Tani, Pendahuluan, in A.M. Tani, Esei Sastera ASAS 50 (Kuala
Lumpui: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, 1981), pp. xxiixxiii.
30. <http:iiwww.moe.gov.sgineisgstoiyibthosweefie.htm>. See also, Aichives
& Oial Histoiy Depaitment et al., Emergence of Bukit Ho Swee Estate : From
Desolation to Progress (Singapoie: Singapoie News & Publications Limited,
1983).
31. Judith Djamoui, Malay Kinship and Marriage in Singapore (New Yoik: Te
Athlone Piess, 1965), p. 83.
32. Judith Djamoui, e Muslim Matrimonial Court in Singapore (New Yoik: Te
Athlone Piess, 1966), pp. 2632.
33. Syed Hussein Alatas, Modernization and Social Change: Studies in
Modernization, Religion, Social Change and Development in South-East Asia
(Sydney: Angus & Robeitson, Sydney, 1972), p. 58.
34. Syed Husin Ali, e Malays: eir Problems and Future (Kuala Lumpui:
Heinemann Asia, 1981), p. 42.

e Heritage Journal i 1,
35. Willaid A. Hanna, e Malays Singapore (New Yoik: Ameiican Univeisities
Field Staf, 1966), Pait II, p. 10.
36. Abdullah Hussain, P. Ramlee : Kisah Hidup Seniman Agung (Petaling Jaya:
Pena, 1984).
REFERENCES
1. Unpublished Sources
Dominions Omce to High Commissioneis, 21 Januaiy 1946, CO 537i1528.
Inteiviews with Buang bin Junid on 1

Apiil, 1987, Oral History Records:
Political Development in Singapore 1945-1965, National Aichives of
Singapoie.
National Education Website:
< http:iiwww.moe.gov.sgineisgstoiyibthosweefie.htm>
2. Published Sources
Aichives & Oial Histoiy Depaitment et al., Emergence of Bukit Ho
Swee Estate: From Desolation to Progress. Singapoie: Singapoie News &
Publications Limited, 1983.
Abdullah Hussain, P. Ramlee: Kisah Hidup Seniman Agung. Petaling Jaya:
Pena, 1984.
Ahmad Saiji, P. Ramlee: Erti Yang Sakti. Kuala Lumpui: Pelanduk
Publications, 1999.
Alatas, Syed Hussein, Modernization and Social Change: Studies in
Modernization, Religion, Social Change and Development in South-East Asia.
Sydney: Angus & Robeitson, Sydney, 1972.
A.M. Tani, Esei Sastera ASAS 50. Kuala Lumpui: Dewan Bahasa dan
Pustaka, 1981.
ASAS 50, Memoranda Angkatan Sasterawan 50. Kuala Lumpui: Oxfoid
Univeisity Piess, 1961.
Bainaid, Timothy P., Chickens, Cakes and Kitchen: Food and Modeinity in
Malay Films of the 1950s and 1960s, in Reel Food: Essays on Food and Film,
ed. Anne L. Bowei. New Yoik: Routledge, 2004, pp. 7585.
zo i e Heritage Journal

e Heritage Journal i z1
Bainaid Timothy P. and Aljunied, Malays in Singapoie: 13001959, in
Malay Heritage in Singapore, ed. Aileen Lau. Singapoie: Suntiee Media,
2006, foithcoming.
Djamoui, Judith, Malay Kinship and Marriage in Singapore. New Yoik: Te
Athlone Piess, 1965.
________, e Muslim Matrimonial Court in Singapore. New Yoik: Te
Athlone Piess, 1966.
Haiding, James and Ahmad Saiji, P. Ramlee: e Bright Star. Selangoi:
Pelanduk Publications, 2002.
Dyei, Richaid, Intioduction to Film studies, in Hill, John and Gibson, Pamela
Chuich, e Oxford Guide to Film Studies. New Yoik: Oxfoid Univeisity
Piess, 1998, pp. 310.
Hanna, Willaid A., e Malays Singapore. New Yoik: Ameiican Univeisities
Field Staf, 1966.
Ismail Kassim, Problems of Elite Cohesion: A Perspective from a Minority
Community. Singapoie: Singapoie Univeisity Piess, 1974.
Lau, Albeit, e Malayan Union Controversy 19421948. Singapoie: Oxfoid
Univeisity Piess, 1990.
Li, Tania, Malays in Singapore: Culture, Economy, and Ideology. Singapoie:
Oxfoid Univeisity Piess, 1989.
Mahiiin Hassan, P. Ramlee A Son of Penang, Malaysia in History 22
(1979).
Milnei, A.C., Colonial Recoids Histoiy: Biitish Malaya, Kajian Malaysia 4,
2 (1986): 118.
Othman Wok, Never in my Wildest Dreams. Singapoie: Singapoie National
Piinteis, 2000.
Piince, Stephen R., Movies and Meaning: An Introduction to Film. Boston:
Allyn and Bacon, 1997.
Ramlee Ismail, Kenangan Abadi P. Ramlee. Kuala Lumpui: Adhicipta, 1988.
Said Zahaii, Dark Clouds At Dawn: A Political Memoir. Kuala Lumpui:
Insan, 2001.
zo i e Heritage Journal

e Heritage Journal i z1
Stockwell, A.J., British Policy and Malay Politics during the Malayan Union
Experiment 19451948. Singapoie: Malaysian Bianch of the Royal Asiatic
Society, 1979.
Syed Husin Ali, e Malays: eir Problems and Future. Kuala Lumpui:
Heinemann Asia, 1981.
Tam, Seong Chee, Malays and Modernization: A Sociological Interpretation.
Singapoie: Singapoie Univeisity Piess, 1983.
Ungku Maimunah Mohd. Tahii, Modern Malay Literary Culture: A Historical
Perspective. Singapoie: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 1987.
Wan Hamzah Awang, Manusia P. Ramlee. Kuala Lumpui: Fajai Bakti, 1993.
Yusnoi Ef, P. Ramlee Yang Saya Kenal. Selangoi: Pelanduk Publications,
2000.
Zakiah Hanum, Sepanjang Riwayatku. Kuala Lumpui: Utusan Publications,
1984.

Films As Social History

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Films As Social History

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

e Heritage Journal, vol. 2, no. 1 (2005): pp.

You might also like