Living Silence in Burma (43 page)

As his art developed, so did his political awareness. He wrote an article entitled ‘In the dark, every cat is black’, which attacked the regime for killing people’s creativity and forcing them into the same mould. He said: ‘They hate educated people, so they oppress all people who can rule or create or invent.’ What saddened him and his teachers was that the regime made it so difficult for talented older artists to pass on their knowledge to the next generation. Instead, artists felt that they had to hide their skills and their work.

Sitt Nyein Aye is an exception, and after a few years even he began to think about his responsibilities to his parents and siblings. He decided that he had to take up commercial work to earn a decent living. But his political leanings got the better of him. Asked to design a small calendar for junior college students, he included a sketch of the Rangoon University student union building, which had been blown up by the Ne Win regime in 1962. For that, he spent two months in custody.

After his release, he threw himself into apolitical work. Soon, his studio was inundated with orders. Previously, he said, all signboards were done with coloured letters on a white background. But Sitt Nyein Aye revolutionized commercial art in Upper Burma by incorporating a wide variety of colours, textures and designs developed from his study of modern art. Even the authorities were drawn to his work. He designed a new badge for the military and did small projects for military intelligence personnel. Although he achieved success, Sitt Nyein Aye said he still wasn’t happy. He claimed: ‘I had the exact opposite problem [to before]. I had a lot of money, and a lot of materials, but no time to paint my own things. So I thought, “Success is like a prison”.’

Nevertheless, he used the money he made to bring a measure of prosperity to his village. Besides donating cash and clothing, he purchased goats and cows for villagers to raise. He also opened a small art course every summer, bringing children to Mandalay to study with him. By 1988, he was beginning to move away from his commercial business in order to focus again on more creative work. But then the demonstrations broke out, and he set up an independent newspaper under the auspices of an activist monks’ association. The day after the coup, he fled with a group of students to India, where he has invested his talents in producing artwork for the resistance groups’ offices and publications.

Since Sitt Nyein Aye left the country, Burmese artists’ interest in contemporary forms of art has grown. But the fact that modern art by its nature takes a defiant attitude towards tradition and control makes it an obvious area of concern for the regime. And artists, because of their
powerful ability to convey emotions and immortalize historical events in unforgettable images, have been subject to constant surveillance.

Nevertheless, some Burmese artists have managed to achieve international fame, and a small but growing number of galleries outside the country show their work. One artist who has painted and performed haunting pieces is Htein Lin. A former political prisoner who spent from 1998 to 2004 behind bars, he secretly made over three hundred works of art on white prison uniforms, many of which were given to him by prisoners on death row.
¹²
A number of the paintings reflect the gruesome nature of prison life, including hunger, sickness and criminal prisoners who voluntarily cut off their fingers in order to avoid being sent to a labour camp. A few years after he was released, he moved abroad. Galleries in London and Thailand have held showings of his prison artwork, which he had arranged to be smuggled first out of prison and then out of Burma, as well as his more recent work. He has also created silent but emotionally intense performance pieces which reflect his anguished feelings about his country.

Like writers and poets, artists who have remained in Burma sometimes organize their own private showings or do performance art pieces for friends. While anger with the regime and its endless restrictions and demands may lead to depression in some, it has only increased the spirit of defiance in others.

Performers and social work

The authorities routinely organize cash donation ceremonies for various regime-sponsored projects. Famous performers, as well as businessmen, are often informed in advance how much money they are expected to present. When entertainers seek to engage in their own social work, however, they often come under suspicion. This is particularly true if they are known to have an anti-government attitude. Nevertheless, a number of people in the entertainment industry have been motivated to work for society, particularly as the country’s social and economic problems have mounted.

For instance, the actor Kyaw Thu founded the Free Funeral Services Society in Rangoon with some friends in 2001. Supported by donors at home and abroad, it has provided tens of thousands of free funerals. The organization has also financed treatment in some hospitals and set up a free clinic. In mid-May 2007, however, the organization, along with twenty-three others, was informed that it could not renew its registration. A week later, the Home Ministry said the organizations could write letters
of appeal, apparently because of international pressure. Kyaw Thu offered alms to monks participating in the September 2007 demonstrations, and was briefly imprisoned afterwards, but the organization has continued its work and, together with Kyaw Thu, took an active role in cyclone relief efforts as well.
¹³

According to
The Irrawaddy
, an estimated four hundred people from the entertainment world volunteered for cyclone relief work.
¹⁴
They included Zarganar, a famous comedian and film-maker who had been imprisoned for his satirical mimes and speeches. When well-known entertainers take on social causes, other citizens are motivated to take action as well.

Having a positive impact on society is the desire of many in the literary and artistic community. Today, there are more ways to distribute information, more venues for performing, and more civil society organizations operating. Small numbers of writers, journalists, artists and musicians have also had the opportunity to travel abroad, gaining exposure and a breath of fresh air. Thus the cat-and-mouse game continues as the regime tries to create new ways to control and direct the creative energies of its citizens, while members of the artistic community look for new spaces in which to express themselves and better the lives of others.

12 | Religion and magic: disappearing jewels and poltergeists

    A monk cannot tell authorities about people’s problems. If he does, the authorities will consider that monk to be their enemy. (A monk, Mandalay)

While many Burmese seek solace and community through their spiritual practices, the regime also penetrates the religious sphere in many ways. The ruling generals are constantly demonstrating their own piety through lavish donations to monks in a bid to shore up their moral authority. At the same time, the regime feels it must keep monks under surveillance, because the country’s spiritual leaders are the main alternative voices of authority, and they have frequently intervened in the country’s political crises. The regime has tried to further its ideology of national consolidation by promoting the spread of Burman-style Buddhism and reducing the population of Muslims, particularly in Northern Arakan State. Meanwhile, ordinary Burmese, as well as the regime and some opposition activists, use numerology, astrology and the advice of fortune-tellers to try to cheat fate and ensure success.

Buddhism and politics

The primary duties of Buddhist monks towards lay people are to instruct them in the philosophy and practice of Buddhism and to accept their donations, so that lay people have a chance to make merit. Although these practices are frowned on by conservative monks, many monks also engage in fortune-telling, astrology, lottery number predictions, and the giving of protective charms and incantations to lay people. They themselves may believe in the efficacy of such practices, and they may want to help their supporters, whose main concerns are with their daily lives rather than with seeking enlightenment. Others may seek to enhance their reputations through such practices.
¹

At critical points in Burma’s history, monks have felt compelled to venture farther into the realm of worldly affairs to protect their religion or to call attention to injustice. In the early 1900s, monks played a leading role in organizing protests against the colonial government, particularly because they felt that Buddhism had been insulted. In the decades since
General Ne Win took over, the lay community has often looked to the monks for leadership in their struggle against unjust governance.

U Nandiya, a strict, middle-aged monk from Mandalay, put monks’ participation in political affairs into a philosophical and historical perspective. In his opinion, everyone must accept the suffering that all humans face: namely, desire, sickness, ageing and death. But suffering from injustice is not natural and should be eradicated. He explained:

    If you have a headache and take aspirin, the headache will be reduced, but if you think this is your fate, then the headache isn’t reduced. Also, everyone in Burma knows we need a good government and political system so that we can have a good life. So we must work for this. The Buddha never talked about fate, so we shouldn’t get too confused with our fortunes. We should focus on work, knowledge, and effort.

U Nandiya gave an example from the Buddha’s life to reinforce his point. He said that during his lifetime, the Buddha tried to solve social conflicts, such as a dispute over water distribution between Bihar and a neighbouring state. There are also plenty of examples from Burma’s own past. He explained how during the Pagan dynasty, King Narapatisithu (
AD
1173–1210) forced people to cut down trees, bake bricks and build pagodas. One of the Buddhist monks suggested to the king that he shouldn’t force people to do this kind of work, but the king ignored him, so the monk said that he wouldn’t stay in the kingdom because there was no justice.

What U Nandiya and many other contemporary Burmese monks hate most is the regime’s forcible collection of money, including for religious purposes. Such donations should be purely voluntary, he said. Most monks, he added, also disagree with the use of forced labour and feel unhappy that people’s lives are made so difficult by all the military government’s demands.

When I asked U Nandiya if Buddhist monks stood for the people, he replied, ‘Buddhist monks stand for justice.’ But on the subject of the slingshot fights during the 1990 religious boycott, he admitted that the monks had gone too far. ‘It was not appropriate to do this,’ he said. ‘It broke Buddhist discipline. But most who participated were very young. People supported it because they hated the military so much, but didn’t dare to fight by themselves.’

Monks have also been directly affected by military rule. Ill-conceived economic policies and heavy taxation of villagers in remote areas have made it difficult for villagers to provide adequate support for the monks.
Mandalay is a monastic teaching centre, so the population of monks is quite high. In the 1990s, as many impoverished Burmese sold their homes to Chinese immigrants and moved to the outskirts of town, it became more difficult for all the monks in the city centre to collect sufficient alms. In recent years, high inflation and sudden price increases have hit residents of Rangoon and other cities hard, leaving some unable to properly feed themselves, let alone the monks. Compassion for the lay people’s suffering – as well as their own – prompted many urban monks to join the 2007 marches.

Not surprisingly, successive military regimes have promoted monks who support them or who adhere to the belief that monks should not participate in political activities. Student activists, on the other hand, have tried to encourage and work with monks who feel compelled to fight against injustice. Monks realize that they risk debasing the monkhood as an institution by plunging into the dirty world of politics, but they also risk being seen as irrelevant if they remain indifferent to the plight of the people who bring them their daily sustenance.

At the same time, many Burmese are influenced by the belief that suffering in this life is a result of bad deeds in the past, so one might as well just accept the political situation as inevitable. When the time for change comes, it will happen by itself. Particularly in times of intense repression, such thinking tends to predominate. Individuals focus more on personal efforts to improve their chances for a better next life through praying, adhering to Buddhist discipline and making religious donations.

The temple represents an important space in society, and one that is generally perceived as belonging outside military control. Time spent in religious establishments often provides a respite from personal and political tensions outside. Meditation, in particular, has played an interesting role. When on the run, just released from prison or feeling stressed from the dangers of their political work, some activists have turned to monasteries and meditation centres as sanctuaries where they can regain peace of mind. Meditation has led more than a few out of their political lives and into a focus on spiritual development. Others have used the sense of calmness and stability obtained from meditating to help them ward off depression and continue their political work.

The regime is well aware that most political uprisings in Burma have been led by students or monks or a combination of the two. The students are bold and committed, but they lack clout. The monks, on the other hand, have moral authority among the people, as well as an organizational structure that allows them to mobilize quickly and widely. Thus,
the junta has developed a two-pronged strategy to prevent citizens and monks from coalescing into a powerful anti-government force. First, they have tried to limit the influence of the monks, particularly in their role as advocates of the people. And second, they have used combinations of awards, gifts, surveillance and intimidation to make monks hesitant to defy the regime.