National Myth Making

I finally decided it was high time I visited the new national museum, given that I had not done so since its re-opening three years ago. I had been to the new wing for theater and movie performances, but hadn't had a chance to view the new Singapore history section, which forms the core of the museum.

History itself is not immutable, and Singaporean history itself, the way it is presented and taught in schools, is very much subject to the overriding grand narrative that the government wishes to portray. Not that the manipulation is as blatant as the continued disavowal of wartime atrocities by the Japanese, specifically the massacre of Chinese civilians, the subjugation of Korean and Chinese women into forced prostitution as 'comfort women' and also the use of prisoners as human guinea pigs for the testing of biological and chemical agents. Still, my encounters with the way Singapore history is taught, and to compulsory 'National Education' campaigns, have made me wary of the specific grand narrative and subtexts that pervade the presentation of Singapore history.

This was evident right from the beginning. The start of the exhibition proper constituted a scene of a village in flames. The helpful tour guide told us that this was Singapore in the past, a prosperous fishing village (Temasek) that had been attacked and destroyed by enemies in Java or Sumatra who were jealous of her prosperity. This scene was played out across a wall that greeted the visitors upon immediately entering the exhibition space, little kampong houses surrounded by coconut and palm trees engulfed in a rictus of computer projected orange and yellow flames, complete with ominous sounding crackles.

Reading in between the lines, it is not hard to see this applying to a more modern context. Singaporean leaders have always seen the world in a hard-edged, realist, perhaps even Manichean way, with Singapore seen as inherently vulnerable, a majority Chinese ethnic enclave surrounded by much larger Malay Muslim neighbours. The message is clear - Singapore's independence must never be taken for granted. These neighbours may grow jealous of our success and seek to destroy us - it has happened before, it can happen again.

It was also unsurprising to see that the initial portions of Singapore history dealing with the lead up to independence was rather selectively dealt with. The usual exhibits outlining the grave communist threats and the communal riots were followed immediately by a picture of Lee Kuan Yew in 1958, returning from Whitehall having achieved self-government for Singapore. David Marshall and Lim Yew Hock, and their roles in the early days of Singapore politics were conveniently airbrushed, not to mention the PAP's early association with the far left trade unions. Self-government was immediately followed by a small series of exhibits showing the advance of such consumer technologies as television sets. Thus subliminally, the PAP government's wisdom led to technology progress and material wealth.

In a recent book by two Australian academics - Constructing Singapore - they contended that the PAP had been so successful in monopolizing the national narrative and implementing their version of the 'Singapore Story' that the younger generation could conceive of no other narrative thread to understanding Singapore's past, present and even future. That is debatable, though probably more true that I would care to admit. However, it should be evident that even, or perhaps because of the pernicious attempts by the government to force 'national education' down our throats, we at the very least view their master narrative with general suspicion and with a studied cynicism.