Hilmar Farid: A cultural revolution must start at the grassroots

TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - Hilmar Farid rejects the notion that his new position as director-general of culture at the education and culture department was given to him for his contribution to President Joko Widodo's campaign in 2014. Hilmar insists he had to undergo the entire recruitment procedure, beating all his rivals through a very tight selection process. Hilmar, 47, a University of Indonesia graduate, was sworn in into his new job on December 31, 2015.

He can be said to be the first echelon-one government official outside the bureaucracy to have won the job. Hilmar, who will head a corps of about 3,600 employees, must now adapt to the rhythm of his new job. It is, after all, his first time as a bureaucrat. Until now, he had always been a historian, working in the world of academics, with people's organizations and pro-democracy groups.

He has, for example, been conscientious about efforts to set the record straight over the 1965 incident. Today, although he is part of the government, Hilmar's attitude about that tragic period in Indonesia's history, remains unchanged. Even so, he claims he will not use his authority as cultural affairs director-general to change the school curriculum on the 1965 tragedy. "That would be as equally frightening as the New Order itself," said Hilmar. 

Two weeks ago, he spoke to Tempo reporters Tito Sianipar, Dian Yuliastuti, Ayu Primasandi and Mitra Tarigan at his office in south Jakarta. Excerpts:

***

Describe the process of how you were selected? 

It was held in May of last year, according to the the law on civil servants, which allows non-bureaucrats to hold echelon-one positions. At first I had no idea there was such a process. I decided to try my luck after a friend told me about it. I had two reasons for doing it. First, because the institution is right there and what it is doing, so far, provides broad benefits. Secondly, this is something new in terms of bureaucratic reforms. Until now, it's been an uphill career. However, in the process, I never communicated with the education minister or any other official. I followed the administrative requirements, wrote an essay, took a written test and I was interviewed. The entire process was completed in August. After that, I did nothing until the decision was announced.

Rumors say you were selected because you were once active in the Jokowi national secretariat. 

I don't think I need to respond to that question. Send your criticism to the selection committee. I wasn't the one who made the decision. I went through the whole process, just like the other (candidates). It was open, transparent and audited. There was an even a final session by the evaluators. If it was indeed the decision of the President, don't ask me, ask him. I see bureaucracy executing the programs the President announced during his campaign. It became his mandate. So, it makes sense for the bureaucracy to understand well what the programs are. If people say I'm close to Jokowi, that is true. What's the harm in that? It would be strange if he (Jokowi) picked someone who opposed his programs.

As an echelon-one non-bureaucrat, are you prepared for possible internal resistance? 

I personally have seen no resistance. In the past 15 years, bureaucracy itself has undergone changes. Many people who took part in the 1998 demonstrations are today government employees. They are the ones who brought the changes. Today, many good people have become local and regional leaders. So, perhaps it's not resistance, but the style and work patterns that are different. I lead a corps of 3,600 employees, a general-secretariat, five directorates and 33 task forces, a cultural conservation association, a cultural value conservation association all over Indonesia. There's no need for unnecessary programs.

When you applied for the job did you have a specific program in mind?

For now, programs can't be changed because it's been set since last year. I will have a chance to do it through the amended state budget, changing here and there. But in a substantial way, that would be unlikely because then we would have to deal with the DPR (House of Representatives). Right now, all that can be done is add weight and more focus. This includes, for example, the internalization value, which would benefit tens of thousands of people. I want to know in a social, geographic and economic sense who those thousands are and what they do. The focus can be altered and the weight added. That's what I can do.

The basic idea is Pak Jokowi's program on pluralism and multiculturalism. There's this thing about the nation's character. The way to create a pluralist people is to raise the habit of reading books. Push for an inclusive type of culture, ensure people's participation and venture beyond borders, whether ethnically, religiously and so forth. The tendency today is to form strong sectarian, separate groups. One example is houses enclosed by high fences and separate rooms. And this isn't just about identity. Take the handicapped people. Apparently one out of 10 Indonesians have special needs. But on the streets, in shopping malls, schools, we ignore them. Without our knowing it, the space we have created is very exclusive. They cannot access it, unable to live like us. For me, that is even more frightening than identity segregation.

How can this problem be resolved?

Cultural parks will revitalized, add more spaces for those people with special needs. I have no blueprint for them, but the easiest thing would be to bring them over and talk to them. Unintentionally, we are throwing away amazing assets. In Singapore, handicapped people work, clean up and wash dishes at restaurants. And it's all so simple, all we need are regulations issued by the governor or by the labor minister. That's a culture and mind set on how to look at the world.

Another issue is the museums. The number of visitors in Indonesia is the lowest in all of Southeast Asia. One thing that makes people refuse to go to museums is that they know nothing about them. They not only don't know the programs, they don't where they're located and what days they're open. This lack of knowledge is so puzzling given this age of digital information. I think that's very strange. We know what happened at Machu Picchu (Peru) but we don't know when the National Museum was opened. That's strange. So, let's say that what we will do is find an institutional breakthrough by bombarding the public with information. Young kids never voluntarily ask to go to museums, they go only when their teachers tell them to. But now we'll turn that around: Make children ask the teacher or the parents, "I want to go to the museum." That's what I imagine: a change of attitude towards a social and cultural environment.

Museums are also not well-maintained. Look at the Ceramic Museum, where some of the artifacts are used as door stoppers. 

I've checked, and that's only one sad example. The problem is with the massive bureaucracy. To handle a letter alone is a gigantic task. Assessing the bio-data to recruit someone can take six months. We must seek a solution, like a continuous system of education within the bureaucracy. Send them abroad, let them see how the security guards take care of museums.

Many of them have been sent to observe museum overseas, but when they come back to Indonesia, there's still no change. 

In many cases, the people they send overseas are trained but back home, they're relocated, no longer in positions requiring the expertise they acquired overseas. As I said before, this should be the task of the director, to direct everything.

Is it a problem of lack of funding?

This is what I tell my directors: no matter how much money they give us, it'll never be enough to manage culture. And we will never have enough funds. That should be the starting point. With limited resources, how can we continue to work effectively? I believe that the first work we must do is to ensure that information flows smoothly, so that we know what is being threatened and what should be prioritized. And I will open a special (call) number for all the employees, up to echelon-four, all 300 of them, to go ahead and submit problems. Then give me options, what policy or steps should be taken. Don't expect me to know everything when I wake up in the morning, and do what I'm supposed to do. (*)

Read the full interview in this week’s edition of Tempo English Magazine