Ramayana and Mahabharata
Deconstruction Literature Studies in Indonesia
Kundharu Saddhono, Budhi Setiawan and Kartika Rahmat Sari Dewi
Graduate of Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia
Keywords: Ramayana, Mahabharata, Deconstruction’s perspective, puppet, Sociology of Deconstruction Literature.
Abstract: This study aims to describe Ramayana’s and Mahabarata’s Epos in deconstruction’s perspective with
sociology of literature studies. This research is a descriptive qualitative study with of sociology of literature
approach. The data source is some novel about puppet stories of Pitoyo Amrih. It employed the qualitative
research design. Based on the analysis, the conclusion of the research are; (1) Antagonist characters of those
Epic, had some kind in themself that can be best figure for the audience of the puppet’s show, (2) There’s lot
of wisdom value as result of deconstruction’s analysis of the Epic, and (3) The assessment results of this study
showed different sources of conflict, namely the seizure of the woman and the seizure of the kingdom.
1 INTRODUCTION
The term of multicultural is an appropriate calling
name for Indonesia because its tradition, ethnicity,
language, art and other cultures diversity. The
diversity of culture apparently adds the value of
culture richness of Indonesia to worldwide. Art is one
of the most famous cultural richness in Indonesia. In
line with Aithal and Acharya research (2016: 187)
and
Das, Chowdhury, and Miju (2014) which examines
the strategies used in Indian Epics. This is appropriate
with Indonesia diversity which has potential to bring
up in international level (Isnaini, 2013: 223).
On development, the arts in Indonesia serves as a
means of ritual contains religious values. In
Prehistoric times, in where people believed in the
powers beyond the human’s, this belief was embodied
in the culture of animism and dynamism that until
now can still be found in some inland tribes in
Indonesia. Bala (2016: 38) also discusses about the
power in a story. In animism - dynamism, the role of
art firstly appeared as a form of people worshipping
the ancestors in the past. For instance, puppetry art
once used as medium to communicate with ancestors
(Sutardjo, 2006: 12), Mantra, as the oldest literary
works acted not only as a verbal aesthetics art, but in
the past also became means to pray and meditate with
the Creator. Beside puppetry, there are still many
other arts that eventually became the beginning of
ritual ceremony, as time goes by it adds up the
diversity of Indonesia culture. S. Majumdar (2005:
182) also provides a similar case, concerning
priceless local wisdom legacy.
Javanese literary development is no longer
confined to the classical texts of previous poets, but
has been widely transformed into various forms of
modern literary works which still carries of treasure
stories, particularly Javanese. Dutt’s study (2002: 46)
regarding Ramayana and Mahabharata also discusses
on the classic tale is transformed into a modern
masterpiece. Supported by Evanss (1997) in his study
on Ramayana, Mahabharata, and Bagavata gives
whole different perception on narrative study.
Puppet story is a classic tale that has close links
with Javanese. Wayang comes from term Ma Hyang
(Sanskrit), means the Almighty, this connects the
function of wayang in previous time and its function
as medium of ritual in custom ceremony in past
(Lisbijanto, 2013: 1). The definition provides the
conclusion that the definition of a puppet is a
performance art that uses puppets and brings story
relates to Ramayana and Mahabharata. Thaker’s
study (2011: 378) also discusses the entity of
Mahabharata puppetry as culture development.
Relation to the literary aspect in Mahabharata
puppetry is discussed in detail by Sharma (2015: 302)
that there is a relationship between the puppet and
literature as a form of development and creativity.
The development of artist creativity in the country,
especially in East Java and Central Java evokes
various forms of puppet performing arts. The
526
Saddhono, K., Setiawan, B. and Dewi, K.
Ramayana and Mahabharata - Deconstruction Literature Studies in Indonesia.
In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Sociology Education (ICSE 2017) - Volume 1, pages 526-530
ISBN: 978-989-758-316-2
Copyright © 2018 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved

development of the puppet art shows not only the
physical aspects of the puppet itself, but also in the
delivering story to the public, especially attracting the
interest and attention of young generation to watch.
One form of modernization in the delivering story is
in novel form including more global media of
puppetry (Sengupta, 2016: 7).
One of which is novel with puppetry story.
Indonesian novel by Amrih Pitoyo is a form of
renewal in the Indonesian literature that still retains
puppet story. Through easier language works the
purpose to bring young children closer to puppet story
can be realize d. Not only in the form of the novel, has
Singh (2009: 157) discussed the theater in form of
puppetry. Young generations are not only expected to
understand the story but critically judge especially in
character which in turn can find local wisdom in the
story. Concept about local wisdom is found in Singh’s
study (2015: 137).
Deconstruction theory was firstly proposed by
Jacques Derrida (1930-2004). Deconstruction
literature in general is associated with the effort to
change the order of literature has been built through
approach structuralism, looking a phenomenon from
such contrary angle to structuralism angle approach.
Structuralism approach has also been used by
Chakraborty (2015: 87) which was further elaborated
by exploring to generalize studies. Deconstruction is
often misunderstood, for example, as a form of
destruction upon established things. The mistake
because the reader does not understand the ethical
dimension of deconstruction that seeks to open up on
the "other" (Ungkang, 2013: 31). In brief analogy, in
deconstruction view of evil character it is invalid if
regarded as a criminal for so long, so is the
protagonist, as well as all aspects that support the
opinion. Kalra and Kalra (2016: 719) elaborate
literature view as a form of development that is
inseparable from perspective of a literary work.
Supported by Mehra’s work (2015) describes the
comparative study on previous perspective and
modern perspectives in analyzing literary work in
Mahabharata puppet. It is very suitable to be applied
on literature work that carries the puppetry. With the
aim of finding the hidden local wisdom in old
perspective of structuralism in Java classic work
2 METHODS
This study uses a literary deconstruction approach,
which tries to see the other side of the existing
characters in a literary work. Deconstruction
approach has been widely applied in the study of
literature (Gohar, 2016: 21-37). The background of
this study that the innermost character portrayed as an
antagonist character in the puppet story still has a
positive side and a background provokes the
appearance of antagonists in these figures.
Protagonist figure that has flaws and later motivates
to pursue goal in every possible way. The Selection
of puppet story is also based on previous research,
Narayan’s study (2000) and Oman’s (2008) which
both provide an overview Ramayana and
Mahabharata explicitly and used by the activator of
literature as an important reference. Sources of data
in this study is Pitoyo Amrih’s novels which concern
about puppetry in his literature work. The story of
puppet written in the novel Pitoyo Amrih delivered in
a more modern language and easy to understand so it
facilitates in making quotation.
In this study took four novels as samples, namely
Perjalanan Sunyi Bisma Dewabrata (PSBD) (2012),
Wisanggeni Membakar Api (WMA) (2013), Cinta
Mati Dasamuka (CMD) (2016), and Hanoman
(HNM) (2014) , The fourth novel are an original work
of Pitoyo Amrih which appoint the journey of
puppetry, both on Epos Ramayana and Mahabharata.
A novel entitled Perjalanan Sunyi Bisma and
Wisanggeni Membakar Api represent the story of the
Epos Mahabharata, while novel Hanoman and Cinta
Mati Dasamuka represent the story from the Epos
Ramayana.
Data collection techniques in this research is
studying the document, which is derived from the
articles, documents, and books that have relevance to
the research focus. The focus of this research is
literary deconstruction contained in the puppet story,
in which it was quoted from puppet novel. The focus
was chosen because suitability of deconstruction
approach in examining the stories of puppetry,
especially in the aspect of characters.
3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Deconstruction is one branch of literature studies that
views literature from a different angle. According to
Ratna, deconstruction is a follow up of the study of
post- colonialism literature, deconstruction is trying
to see the other side of the language and
characterizations that are involved in a literature work
(Ratna: 2014: 69).
Characterizations in a story can be shown
explicitly or implicitly in an ordered plot (Gunther:
2016). Deconstruction study in Ramayana and
Mahabharata especially can be viewed from figure
and character in the story. This is in accordance with
Ramayana and Mahabharata - Deconstruction Literature Studies in Indonesia
527

Irawan’s opinion (2015: 23) that deconstruction
relates to seeing the players from uncommon angle.
This indicates that everything backgrounds a figure is
examined in deconstruction research.
3.1 Rahwana Figure
Rahwana character described as the man who is
selfish, ambitious, intolerant, and misuse his authority
as King of Alengka to fulfill his desire (Hariwidjoyo,
2011: 51). Rahwana was selfish that could make him
ignore any advice from his brothers. The other
negative side of Rahwana was his strong will to fight
against Rama and ignore his brother telling him to
return Dewi Sinta to her husband. However, in view
of deconstruction, Rahwana had a good side. In the
novel Rahwana’s motivation to abduct Sinta Dewi
inverses with public’s perspective that Rahwana
wanted Dewi Sinta to be his wife. Vaidya (2001) also
describes the story Dasamuka at a clear and detailed
perception, so that Rahwana is possibly compared in
this novel. Rahwana kidnapped Dewi Sinta because
his fatherhood feeling towards her after knowing that
Dewi Sinta was his daughter. His brother Gunawan
Wibisana exchanged Dewi Sinta before. But
Rahwana’s courage to touch Dewi Sinta is quite up
there. This is shown by the attitude of Rahwana on
maintaining distance with for Dewi Sinta still not
opened his heart to Rahwana.
3.2 Rama Figure
Rama is the main protagonist of Ramayana story. He
was the husband of Dewi Sinta. Described as noble
man because an incarnation of the Dewa Wisnu. But
as the main character in the Ramayana, Rama had
flaws as good figure in puppetry. It is shown from
Rama’s attitude toward Dewi Sinta. He rejected Dewi
Sinta after being saved from abduction. Rama was
easily deceived by people’s slander about Dewi Sinta.
(Hariwidjoyo, 2011: 55). The purpose that caused
Rama doubted his wife purity after being kidnapped
by Rahwana’s confinement for long time. This also
caused Dewi Sinta burned herself down to prove that
she had not been touched. This deconstruction finding
indicates Rama, although prominent in puppetry as
perfect man, shows flaws. The moral value is about
giving and keeping trust to family so not easily
provoked by irresponsible people. The perspective of
the story is still relates to Hanoman and Ramayana
story. Hanoman or Hanumat is the protagonist in the
story of Ramayana and described as a white ape, son
of Batara Bayu and Anjani. The figure of Rama is also
clarified on Kang’s study (2015) of the Mahabharata
and Ramayana. From various stories can be
concluded that the character of Hanoman has strong
will and loyalty to superiors. It must be supported
with adequate capability that certainly does not come
easily. Adequate capability is the key to success in
carrying out any work. It also becomes Hanoman
main principle on life (Wig, 2004: 25-28; Hiltebeitel,
2001).
3.3 Dewi Sinta Figure
Dewi Sinta is the protagonist female character in the
story of Ramayana. Illustrated as daughter of Dewi
Widawati reincarnation so she had incredible beauty.
This what made her abducted by Rahwana, the
antagonist of the famous Ramayana series. Dewi
Sinta also has been studied in the research by
comparing with other women figures like Draupadi
and Gandari (Das, 2014: 122-125). In Javanese
puppetry, Dewi Sinta described has a noble attitude
and character because she was the protagonist female.
(Nanda, 2010; 78). However, in view of literature
deconstruction, Dewi Sinta has flaws. It is shown
when she maligned Lesmana for letting Rama died in
the woods so he could marry her. This made Lesmana
hurted and swore to not seeing any woman as proof
that he had no desire towards Dewi Sinta. From this
fact can be seen that human should behave in words
and deed to avoid causing people any problems.
3.4 Kumbakarna Figure
This figure is the brother of Rahwana. Identic to his
brother, Kumbakarna was also a giant. Described
enjoyed eating and sleeping a lot. He could many
foods and sleep for months. When Rahwana abducted
Dewi Sinta, he continuously asked his brother to
return Dewi Sinta to her husband but ignored by
Rahwana. From the point of deconstruction,
Kumbakarna deserves as good example, where he
chose to fight against Rama not in order to defend and
justify Rahwana’s deed but to defend his land,
Alengka from enemies. This is what made him then
appointed as one of good example in serat Tripama.
3.5 Gunawan Wibisana Figure
Gunawan Wibisana is a prince and youngest brother
of Rahwana. In contrast to the other brothers who
intangible giant and has a commendable attitude,
Gunawan Wibisana was handsome, good and
virtuous. He was the first to oppose when Rahwana
abducted Dewi Sinta to Alengka. He then was evicted
from Alengka after repeatedly opposed Rahwana
ICSE 2017 - 2nd International Conference on Sociology Education
528

deed. Although described as good deeds, which he
attempted to give advice to Rahwana to return Dewi
Sinta to Rama, but in the point of deconstruction,
Gunawan Wibisana also had flaws as bad exemplary.
This is reflected in his choice to join forces with Rama
and reveal secret and weakness of Alengka. Gunawan
Wibisana's actions obviously described the shape of
the betrayal to the country, where it is not supposed
to be done by a prince. This is not a good exemplary
for society that no matter how big the conflict and
crisis is, one should not be apostate for personal
interest.
3.6 Yudhistira Figure
Yudhistira is the eldest of five Pandhawa. This
character had a nickname as pure white knight
because he had a noble character and always in
accordance good obligation. Almost all plays in the
puppetry illustrate that Yudhistira is the central figure
who deserves to be an example for everyone. But on
the other hand, Yudhistira was not as perfect as
depicted in the play puppetry. Some of the negativity
contained in Yudhistira that is easily persuaded by the
enticements of the world and reckless in deciding.
This is illustrated by Pandhawa Dadu play, in time
Yudhistira easily followed the desire and call of
Kaurawa to play dice and gamble all Pandhawa’s
belonging, the worst thing put his wife, Dewi Drupadi
as bet. (Amrih. 2010: 56). The positive thing is how
human should be more patient to not easily tempted
by bad deeds.
3.7 Bima Figure
Bima is second brother of Pandhawa. The character
described as having firm, strong and strict character.
Bima upheld the truth and hated lies. Nevertheless,
Bima honored his teachers and parents. Out of five
Pandhawa, Bima had the highest and biggest physical
appearance than other siblings. In the puppetry, Bima
is the only figure that feared by enemies in battlefield,
with great strength Bima could easily beat every
opponent. But in the study of deconstruction, Bima
had some negative character. Bima upheld honesty,
strictness and equality. This made these characters did
not know Javanese manner well when talking to his
interlocutor, this is also applied when character spoke
to parents and teachers. On the other hand, Bima is
known as the sadistic character in battle. Every
enemies would lose pathetically. Bima was a
merciless and inconsiderate figure when engaged
with enemies (Amrih. 2010: 25).
3.8 Arjuna
Arjuna is a well-known figure in the puppetry. It is
known that he had unmatched beauty. Arjuna has
other names, some of which are Janaka, Permadi,
Kombang Ali-ali and Mintaraga. Arjuna is described
as diligent, knowledge-based, and steadfast toward
calamity, practice-based and dutiful towards
teacher’s order. In puppetry this character is famous
for his unusual ability in archery. But on the other
hand, Arjuna had jealousy nature a noble should not
have. It caused someone lost future (Amrih. 2010:
23). This is illustrated when a satriya named
Bambang Ekalaya learned archery to Durna, who
happened to be Arjuna’s teacher too. Apparently
Ekalya’s ability was better than Arjuna. Then he
asked Durna to order Ekalya cutting off his own
thumb. It later made Bambang Ekalaya lost his ability
in archery, as well as loss of dream as skilled archer.
Such jealousy is not supposed to be owned by a
nobleman, someone who has the nature of envy and
jealousy in the end only bring harm to others.
3.9 Kresna Figure
Kresna is a well-known figure as an incarnation of
Dewa Wisnu in Mahabharata story. As an incarnation
of Dewa Wisnu, Kresna described as wise person in
taking care of noblemen especially Pandhawa. But on
the other hand, Kresna had a flaws that Dewa Wisnu
should not inherited to. This can be seen during the
final battle between Bima and Duryudana at the end
of the Barathayudha war. Krishna sided Pandhawa
and helped Bima that no one should get into except
Bima and Duryudana (Amrih. 2010: 35). But at that
moment Kresna helped Bima notifying the weak
spots on the body of Duryudana, which caused
Duryudana got killed easily by Bima. The moral
message is not supposed to be feeling necessarily
fanatical and unfairly sides on others.
4 CONCLUSIONS
Based on discussion can be concluded that the
viewpoint of deconstruction, the stories in the
puppetry has a variety of things that are not revealed
as it is in community. This is consistent with the
concept of literature deconstruction is a model of
literature assessment methods to see literature from
different viewpoints with general one. Story can be
seen from the viewpoint of deconstruction in which
the antagonist figures have a positive value that can
be taken as exemplary. In the Ramayana epic, the
Ramayana and Mahabharata - Deconstruction Literature Studies in Indonesia
529

source conflict is a king whose wife has been
kidnapped by another character, so woman is the
figure evokes conflict. While in the Mahabharata epic
conflict arises due to the seizure of power over an
empire. It is in accordance with the description of
conflict happens generally in society. This has
emphasized that what is written in the story of the
puppetry, is a reflection of society’s social life.
REFERENCES
Aithal, P. S., Acharya, R. K. 2016. Strategic Management
Models and Indian Epics. International Journal of
Management Sciences and Business Research, 5(4),
180-189.
Amrih, P. 2010. Kebaikan Kurawa. Mengungkap Kisah-
kisah yang Tersembunyi. Jakarta: Pinus.
Bala, R. 2016. Women empowerment and Hindu literature.
Learning Community: An International Journal of
Educational and Social Development, 7(1), 35.
Chakraborty, T. 2015. The Metempsychotic Birds: An
Exploration of Samuel Beckett’s Allusions to the
Upanishands. Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary
Studies in Humanities VII(2): 83-88
Das, U., Chowdhury, S. B., Miju, M. R. 2014. Sita
(Character from the Indian epic Ramayana), Draupadi
and Gandhari (Characters from another Indian epic–
Mahabharata)-A Comparative Study among Three
Major Mythological Female Characters-Gandhari: An
exception. Education, 4(5), 122-125.
Dutt, R. C. 2002. The Ramayana and the Mahabharata:
Condensed Into English Verse. New York: Dover
Publications, Inc.
Evans, K. 1997. Epic Narratives in the Hoysaḷa Temples:
The Rāmāyaṇa, Mahābhārata, and Bhāgavata Purāṇa
in Haḷebīd, Belūr, and Amṛtapura (Vol. 74). Brill.
Gohar, S. 2016. Deconstructing/Reconstructing
Stereotypes in American and Palestinian Fiction.
Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in
Humanities, VIII (1): 21-37
Gunther, J. I. S. 2016. Shadow Theatre across South and
Southeast Asia Depictions of the Ramayana and
Mahabharata Epics within the Linden-Museum's
Collections.
Hariwidjoyo, A. 2011. Wayang dan Karakter Manusia
dalam Kehidupan Sehari-hari. Yogyakarta: Absolute
Jogja.
Hiltebeitel, A. 2010. Rethinking the Mahabharata: A
Reader’s Guide to the Education of the Dharma King.
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press
Irawan, S. 2015. Dekonstruksi, Kajian Sastra dari Balik
Layar.
Malang: Garudha Perkasa
Kalra, S., Baruah, M. P., Kalra, B. 2016. Endocrinology in
the Ramayana. Indian Journal of Endocrinology and
Metabolism, 20(5), 716.
Lisbijanto. H. 2013. Wayang. Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu.
Mehra, R. 2015. A Comparative Study Of Indian
Mythological Management And The Modern
Management. In International Journal of Innovative
Research and Creative Technology (Vol. 1, No. 3
(October-2015)). IJIRCT.
Nanda. M. H. 2010. Wayang. Yogyakarta: Bintang
Cemerlang.
Narayan, R. K., 2000. The Indian Epics Retold: The
Ramayana, the Mahabharata, Gods, Demons, and
Others. New Delhi: Penguin Books
Oman, J. C. 2008. The Stories of ten Ramayana and the
Mahabharata. New Delhi: Sundeep Prakashan
Ratna. Nyoman, K. 2010. Teori Pengkajian Sastra. Jakarta:
Citra Pustaka.
S. Majumdar. 2005. Preservation and conservation of
literary heritage: A case study of India. International
Information and Library Review 37(3): 179-187.
Sengupta, R. 2016. Iconography of violence in televised
Hinduism: the politics of images in the Mahabharata.
Continuum, 1-12.
Sharma, A. K. 2015. SR Ranganathan: Combining Library
Science With Indian Values. Library Herald, 53(3),
301-303.
Singh, A. 2009. Aesthetics of Indian Feminist Theatre.
Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in
Humanities I(2): 150-170
Singh, S. P. 2015. Concept Of Rajdharma In Adi-Kavya:
Ramayana And Mahabharata. The Indian Journal Of
Public Administration, 132.
Sutardjo, I. 2006. Serpihan Mutiara Pertunjukkan Wayang.
UNS Press.
Thaker, K. 2011. Management control insights from the
Mahabharata. International Journal of Indian Culture
and Business Management 4(4) 2011: 377-....
Ungkang, M. 2013. “Dekonstruksi Jaques Derrida sebagai
Strategi Pembacaan Sastra” dalam jurnal
HUMANIORA. Vol 1, No 1. Universitas Gadjah Mada
Vaidya, C. V. 2001. Epic India, Or, India as Described in
the Mahabharata and the Ramayana. New Delhi: Asian
Educational Service
Wig, N.N. 2004. Hanuman Complex And its Resolution:
An Illustration of Psychotherapy from Indian
mythology. Indian Journal of Psychiatry. Jan-Mar;
46(1): 25–28.
ICSE 2017 - 2nd International Conference on Sociology Education
530