|
In the history of modern Malay literature, the 1960s are labelled by many literarycritics as era picisan (the age of dime fiction) because of the flood of karya picisan(dime fiction) in the local market. Karya picisan here refers to works that clearlymanipulate sexual themes, with the intent of conjuring an atmosphere of eroticismto attract readers. Critics generally do not consider these works to be karya sastra(literary works) because they do not fulfil two important criteria that commonlyclassify the term ?literature?, namely bahasa yang indah (aesthetic language) and isiyang berfaedah (beneficial content). In the context of this definition of ?literature?,Shahnon Ahmad?s 1965 novel Terdedah is considered problematic because ofincongruities in the estimation of its ?literariness?. As opposed to critics whoinitially labelled it karya picisan, the ?literariness? of Terdedah was defended byits own author because it contained elements social criticism. This difference inopinion raises an important point regarding the commonly accepted definitionsof ?literature? and ?literariness? in Malay literature: after Shahnon proclaimed hisnovel?s worth based on its social criticism, critical reception towards Terdedahshowed an unmistakable shift. With respect to this shift of opinion, this articlewill perform a critical analysis of the meaning of ?literariness? in relation toTerdedah, and in doing so, clearly determine its status as either a karya picisan orkarya sastra, based on the definition of ?literature? practised in Malay literature. |
