The second important institution discussed in this chapter is the Map. When introduced in its European form to Southeast Asia, it changed the way locals were able to imagine places near and far. Anderson cites Thai historian Thongchai Winichakul, who showed how Thai maps before 1851 did not include borders or represent “a larger, stable geographic context” outside Thailand. While borders were marked physically in some places, they were really just rocks that showed the end of a Thai territorial claim, and borders were not considered as falling on “a continuous map-line” that separated one zone of sovereignty from another. Around the turn of the 20th century, a massive investment in geography education completely overhauled this, and indeed even changed the language used in the political sphere, introducing the rise of the word for “country,” which quickly became dominant.
ACTIVE THEMES
“Totalizing classification” is the key link between the census and the European map, which forced the whole planet into “a geometrical grid” of “measured boxes.” Although theoretically maps are supposed to represent a preexisting geographical reality, in Thailand they became, in historian Winichakul’s words, “a model for, rather than a model of, what [they] purported to represent.” Construction projects, military movements, and administrative divisions were decided on a map before they were created in reality, and the map even became the basis for census ethnic categories that were now defined as having strict geographical origins.
ACTIVE THEMES
Anderson sees “two final avatars of the map” as crucial precursors to post-independence official nationalisms. First is the way Europeans used maps to justify their rule, claiming to have legally taken over “the putative sovereignties of [defeated] native rulers.” They in turn began reconstructing historical maps of their empires, and post-colonial states adopted this practice and the “political-biographical narrative of the realm” it created in order to justify their own territorial claims and write their own national myths.
ACTIVE THEMES
The second crucial form is “the map-as-logo,” the transformation of a country’s boundaries into a symbol of its nationhood, with its internal geography and relationship to bordering states erased. The map became “an infinitely reproducible,” “instantly recognizable, [and] everywhere visible” symbol of a country. For instance, the half of New Guinea nominally occupied by the Dutch was “utterly remote,” irrelevant to the nationalist struggle, and completely unfamiliar to the movement’s leaders. But it became an important symbol of nationalism when revolutionaries were imprisoned there, and “logo-maps” of Indonesia began to show the island oddly cut in half, “with nothing to its East.”
ACTIVE THEMES
West New Guinea has transformed into a symbol of Indonesia’s independence and an integral part of the nation as an imagined community, even though its local residents are reluctant to identify with Indonesia, a country that badly oppresses them. Anderson notes that West New Guineans, a stunningly diverse group only able to communicate after the government forced them all to learn Indonesian, turned Indonesian into the language of a revolutionary nationalist struggle—against Indonesia. Indeed, this diverse group only became an imagined community capable of a unified national struggle because a map lumped them into the same province, helping them see a shared cause and leading most Indonesians from elsewhere to assume that all West New Guineans share the same culture.
ACTIVE THEMES
Finally, Anderson turns to the Museum, which—like “the museumizing imagination” that makes it possible—is “profoundly political,” and in Southeast Asia shows how postcolonial states inherit the political mindset of their former colonizers.
ACTIVE THEMES
During a short span of time in the mid-19th century, Europeans went from not at all caring about Southeast Asia’s monuments to obsessively cataloguing, studying, and displaying them. Anderson sees three principal reasons for this. First was the push for education in colonies, during which conservatives saw education about monuments and history as a way for “the natives to stay native.” Second was that the monuments served Europeans’ continual quest to prove the natives’ cultural inferiority: by attributing monuments to nonnative invaders or a past golden age, colonizers suggested that natives had always been ruled by “greater” peoples, or that their time had come and gone. Third is that protecting monuments let colonial governments position themselves as the protectors of tradition, which they did by transforming religiously important sites into reproducible logos, “regalia for a secular colonial state.”
ACTIVE THEMES
Independent postcolonial states only continued this tendency. For instance, the Indonesian government hung identical paintings in schools throughout the country, including one that erased absolutely everything distinctive about Borobudur, the famous Buddhist temple, replacing its unique sculptures with a “completely white” outline and its usual crowds with “not a single human being.” This is a depiction of Borobudur “as a sign for national identity,” not of the temple itself.
ACTIVE THEMES
In conclusion, Anderson turns to the significance of the census, map, and museum, which all “illuminate the late colonial state’s style of thinking about its domain.” This thinking hinged on the creation of a “totalizing classificatory grid” that could be used to control any people, living anywhere, speaking any language, and possessed of any history. This meant making everything countable—including the “Other[s]” who did not fit into the available categories. The census, map, and museum let the colonial government fit people, places, and history (respectively) into these absolute, black-and-white systems of classification. Maps and monuments were emptied of their specific history to become logos for colonies. And after independence, they in turn became logos for nations that inherited their colonizers’ totalizing projects, which reduced history to an archaeological “album of its [national] ancestors.”