One month before the 44th commemoration of 'De Punt' on 11 June (coincidence?), Coen Verbraak's four-part documentary series entitled Molukkers in Nederland – zeventig jaar op weg naar huis (Moluccans in the Netherlands – seventy years on the way home) was launched on national television. Almost simultaneously his accompanying book appeared, titled De Molukkers. Een vergeten geschiedenis (The Moluccans. A forgotten history); this book contains a series of portraits of the fourteen Moluccans Verbraak interviewed for the documentary.
At Marinjo's request, Fridus Steijlen, senior researcher at the Royal Netherlands Institute of Southeast Asian and Caribbean Studies (KITLV) and professor of Moluccan Migration and Culture in Comparative Perspective at the Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam, reflected on Coen Verbraak's documentary series and book.
The documentary series and the book
The documentary series was broadcast weekly on four consecutive Wednesdays (19 and 26 May, and 2 and 9 June). Episode 1 tells of the passage, the KNIL, the dismissal and life in the camps. Episode 2 zooms in above all on temporariness and the changes brought by the introduction of self-catering and the move to the neighbourhoods. Episode 3 is devoted entirely to the actions of the 1970s. And the fourth and final part races through a piece of history, such as the widespread drug use and the Joint Declaration of 1986. But it deals in particular with the question of whether the interviewees feel at home in the Netherlands, which Moluccans they are proud of, how things stand with the RMS and whether they would want to live in the Moluccas. The final episode ends with the question of what a key word for the history of Moluccans in the Netherlands would be. Some of the answers round the series off, because the key words refer back to the feelings from the first episode: recognition, frustration, not being heard, and pain.
In the book the portraits of the fourteen interviewees are arranged by age, from oldest to youngest. Apart from eight pages of 'historical background', there is no structure based on a historical account.
Responses on social media
On social media the reviews were generally full of praise, and the interviewees' personal stories clearly made a deep impression. The stories had such an impact thanks to the directness with which they were told, and the feelings the interviewees made no attempt to hide. The anger, the pain and the frustration towards the Dutch government and society came across well. There was frank talk about the boat journey, the dismissal, the reception in the camps and the continuation of temporariness. It gave a sense of urgency: at last Dutch society could be confronted with this course of events. The fourteen interviewees did that convincingly and that is greatly to be appreciated, because they were after all willing to expose themselves.
It is of course impossible to capture the whole history of the Moluccans in the Netherlands in a four-part television series. This means choices have to be made from a range of subjects and events: which ones and which not, and why or why not? These are not choices made by the fourteen interviewees. The maker does that: Coen Verbraak. In his book he suggests that he wanted above all to hear what Moluccans experienced; he did not want to be guided by archive documents. That angle is too easy, because Verbraak too is guided by what he has read and by things that raise questions for him. For the stories the interviewees tell do not come about in a vacuum. They are partly steered and coloured by the questions Verbraak asks. Such as about Schattenberg, when he remarks that it is after all 'a highly banal place'. Or when he asks what people think about the civilian victims during the hostage takings. In the series you hear him put that question explicitly; in the book you read it between the lines.
What are we missing?
Choices have to be made, as already said. But what do we miss in the documentary series and the book as a result, and does it matter? A recurring question on social media concerned the absence of the South-East Moluccan story and that of the Muslims. That really is something. Beyond that, the diversity within the Moluccan community was barely brought into view. Divisions within the community lay at the root of conflicts right from the arrival in the Netherlands. The confrontation between 'Ambonese' and 'Kei islanders' on 19 August 1951 in camp Vught, for instance, led to the emergence of South-East Moluccan organisations that wanted nothing more to do with the RMS. These are not unimportant details, because that fragmentation has left its traces in the history and in the community. If you want to tell the history of a community through oral history, it matters a great deal who you approach for it. A researcher who does this on the basis of fourteen people will therefore be asked why he thinks he can tell the story on the basis of those fourteen. Verbraak really ought to account for that as well. Why do these people tell the story of THE Moluccans, as he claims in his title?
And apart from the tellers, which stories are we missing? I asked a large number of Moluccan friends (among them several who appeared in the series) what we did not hear and see. There was much recognition, such as about the frustrated fathers who punished harshly. But what they did not hear or see in the documentary was that the fathers had also resisted the dismissal, and had begun building a society of their own in the camps. They also concerned themselves with matters that would not cast them as (merely) frustrated victims. In short: signs of internal strength, sorely missed in the episodes. Take as an example the efforts of the Moluccan leaders to reach an agreement in 1986 (i.e. the Joint Declaration). Drug support services were successful too, but it did not come across sufficiently that this happened through their own efforts.
Small-scale development aid
The bond with the Moluccas remained stuck in the relationship to the RMS and memories of the poor living conditions of years ago. There was no attention for the orientation trips and the recalibration of the relationship. Nor for small-scale development cooperation, such as support for nutmeg farmers to enable sustainable cultivation, even though several interviewees have been active in that field for years. The images supporting the story about the Moluccas were old footage from the 1960s or early 1970s. That is problematic – and you may wonder whether it does justice to the people in the Moluccas today. Why not use the documentaries the Moluccan filmmaker Mary Hehuat made about 'the land where I was born'? Little attention is paid to a recalibration of the RMS idea either.
At several moments the supporting images did not quite match the story. As a political leader in the Netherlands it was mainly Manusama who came to the fore, supported by images of the commandos of his rival General Tamaela. In the last episode Tamaela was 'rehabilitated' in a sense, appearing in old footage. But who the good man was went untold: the context was not provided. Of course supporting images are chiefly intended to give colour to the spoken story. But then it is fair to ask whether images of leaking toilets in Schattenberg in the mid-1960s, after the barracks had been inhabited for 15 years and were about to be demolished, give the right picture of the reception in the camps. And it is even more questionable what images of KNIL soldiers in action are doing underneath the story that Indonesian troops are attacking the RMS.
A missed opportunity
In response to the question of how bad it is that matters such as diversity, political divisions and resilience are missing from Coen Verbraak's story, you could – flippantly – say that in this 'forgotten history' a great deal has again been forgotten. Although people who want to can certainly find the Moluccan story. The story is told in several places and has often been written down, but it is still too seldom shown on national television. That last point depends above all on how much room a documentary maker is willing to give the Moluccan voice. Moluccan KNIL soldiers ultimately did not fit into an earlier series by Coen Verbraak, Onze jongens op Java, so their voice was missing there.
An important effect of the series was, as said, that Dutch society was confronted above all with what happened to Moluccans 70 years ago, and how they were received in the camps. It was confronted with the Moluccans' pain and was shocked by it. That was, according to one of my interlocutors who also appears in the series, above all the effect of the first broadcast; and as far as he is concerned Verbraak could have left it at that. Or he could of course have added depth in the other three episodes. But in the end Verbraak did not choose that, so the series remained stuck in a familiar and one-sided story. It is therefore a missed opportunity. Or as one of my interlocutors put it pithily: 'It seems as if time has stood still with a standard story about the (forgotten?) history of Moluccans in the Netherlands (on the way home?), with too little attention for items such as political, cultural and religious diversity, community development, transnationalism, and the transition from the second to the third (and subsequent) generation(s) with the accompanying recalibration of Moluccan thought and heritage.'
Coen Verbraak "De Molukkers. Een vergeten geschiedenis". Alfabet Uitgevers 2021, €22.99
Coen Verbraak "Molukkers in Nederland – 70 jaar op weg naar huis", four-part documentary series, BNNVARA, broadcast on 19 and 26 May and 2 and 9 June 2021 on NPO 2, available to watch on NPO Start
This article appears simultaneously in the Moluccan monthly Marinjo (June/July 2021)
