Minangkabau’s Kinship in Novel by Marah Rusli and Novel by
Muhammad Subhan
An Intertextual Study
Syofiani Syofiani, Hasnul Fikri and Nur Aidah Ramadhani Wadiah
Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Bung Hatta University, Indonesia
Keywords: Minangkabau’s Kinship, Intertextual Study.
Abstract: The purposes of this research were to describe: (1) the structure and Minangkabau’s kinship in Memang
Jodoh novel by Marah Rusli (2) the structure and Minangkabau’s kinship in Rinai Kabut Singgalang novel
by Muhammad Subhan; (2) comparison of the structure and Minangkabau’s kinship in Memang Jodoh with
Rinai Kabut Singgalang. This research is descriptive qualitative with intertextual approach. The step in
analyzing data were (1) classifying and describing the data about structure and Minangkabau’s kinship in
both novels; (2) interpreting the relation of structure and Minangkabau’s kinship between those novels; (3)
formulating conclusions based on interpretation relation between those novels. The result of the research
showed the contradictory of intertextual relationship between the both novels. The similarity those novels
appeared on social themes of Minangkabau marriage custom; both main characters against Minangkabau
costumes, and background of place were Padang, Bukittinggi, and Jakarta. The difference was on plot, i.e.
Memang Jodoh has regressive, while Rinai Kabut Singgalang has progressive, time difference in the story
was approximately 90 years. Minangkabau kinship was discussed by Memang Jodoh first, then it was
opposed by Rinai Kabut Singgalang. It can be concluded that Memang Jodoh is the hypnogram and Rinai
Kabut Singgalang is the transformation.
1 INTRODUCTION
Literary work was not born only by experience or
social life of society. But, the work that embraces
various streams was also inseparable from the
influence of the literacy which preceded it. Thus, it
is necessary to conduct a study about an intertextual
study. The intertextual study is the study about a
number of literary texts, alleged to have certain
forms of relationships, for example to discover any
previous literary influences, or connections between
their intrinsic and extrinsic.
Memang Jodoh novel by Marah Rusli (In the
next description abbreviated as MJ) and Rinai Kabut
Singgalang by Muhammad Subhan (In the next
description abbreviated as RKS) are some example
of literary works that have similarities and
differences, especially in terms of culture, the
problem of women and men role, and the
contradiction of customs. Both of these novels have
same cultural background of Minangkabau people
with strong customs. The expertise from both
authors describe the story. They make the two
novels interesting to read. This is certainly not apart
from the background of the author who came from
Minangkabau which is rich with the tradition of
storytelling. Despite having the same cultural
background, but these two novels were created at
different timescale so it is believed to have a
difference. Thus, the two novels are suitable for
research with intertextual studies.
The interesting thing to explore in the two novels
is a kinship that contains the contradictions of the
role and position of men and women in
Minangkabau community. The role and position of
the father,
Mamak, mother, child, nephew, and the people
who should carry out their respective duties are
actually taken over by other relatives which allowing
for conflict to arise.
The purposes of this research were to describe:
(1) the main structure and relationship of
Minangkabau kinship in MJ; (2) the main structure
and relationship of Minangkabau kinship in the
208
Syofiani, S., Fikri, H. and Wadiah, N.
Minangkabau’s Kinship in Novel by Marah Rusli and Novel by Muhammad Subhan - An Intertextual Study.
In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences (ICES 2017) - Volume 2, pages 208-212
ISBN: 978-989-758-314-8
Copyright © 2018 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved

RKS; and (3) comparison between structure and
relationship of Minangkabau kinship in MJ with
RKS.
Literary works are included into novels which
are built by several elements of intrinsic and
extrinsic elements. The intrinsic elements are the
elements that build the literary works themselves,
such as characterizations, plots, themes,
backgrounds, point of view, language styles and so
on. In contrast, Nurgiyantoro (2010) says that
extrinsic elements are elements that are outside the
literary works, but indirectly affect the building of
literary works, such as, culture, background of
author and so on.
The kinship system which is adopted by
Minangkabau community is matrilineal. In
matrilineal kinship there are three dominant
elements, namely: (1) the lineage "according to
mother line", (2) the marriage must be with another
group, outside the group itself now known as
eksogamimatrilineal, (3) the mother holds a central
role in education, wealth security, and family
welfare. In main family, women act as nephews and
mothers, while in group as Bundo Kanduang. Amir
stated (2016) that in matrilineal kinship, men and
women have equal position. Men have the right to
regulate everything in the tribe, whether in the use or
distribution of inheritance.
Actually, Intertextuality is a word coined by Julia
Kristeva, a French linguist who has written much on
this topic. This word has a broader meaning in
today′s context than the theories she expounds in her
seminal work on intertextuality which are "word,
dialogue and novel". Her notion of Intertextuality
refers to the literal and effective presence in a text of
another text. ‘’A text’’, according to her, ‘’is a
permutation of texts, an Intertextuality in the space
of a given text, in which several utterances, taken
from other texts, intersect and neutralize one
another”. Kristeva’s own contribution to literary
theory had its origin in another theory. The subject
of Kristeva’s essay in which she introduces the term
“intertextuality” is the literary theory of Mikhail
Bakhtin. In this essay she transforms and reinterprets
his literary theory and formulates her own theory of
Intertextuality. She does this by fusing Saussurian
linguistics with Bakhtin’s literary theory. An
intertextual research is a part of comparative
literature. Endraswara (2011: 130) explains that "if
most intertexts are philological movements that
always relate to literary texts, comparative literature
can actually widen in the direction of comparisons
between literature and other possible fields (outside
of literature). it means that intertextual will only
perform structural analysis on the texts ".
Intertextuality in accordance with the dynamic
relationship between the signifier and the signified,
which has been elaborated by Julia Kristeva in her
studies because she senses that when one uses the
same words in some contexts that are different from
other contexts he has used in, those words will not
have the same meanings as before owing to the
dynamicity of the relationship between the signifier
and the signified. Meanwhile, Intertextuality is one
of the most commonly used and misused terms in
contemporary critical vocabulary. ‘An Intertextual
Study of…’ or ‘Intertextuality and …’ are such
commonplace constructions in the titles of critical
works that one might be forgiven for assuming that
intertextuality is a term that is generally understood
and provides a stable set of critical procedures for
interpretation. Nothing, in fact, could be further
from the truth. The term is defined so variously that
it is, currently, akin to such terms as ‘The
Imagination’, ‘history’, or ‘Postmodernism’: terms
which are… underdetermined in meaning and over
determined in figuration. Besides that, intertext is
defined as the relationship between one text with
another text. Production of meaning occurs in
intertext that is, through the process of opposition,
permutation, and transformation. literary works
include; (1) expansion, i.e. expansion or
development of works; (2) the conversion is the
perversion of the hypnogram or its matrix; (3)
modification, alteration of linguistic level,
manipulation of word order or sentence; (4) ekserp,
is a kind of quintessence of the element or episode in
hypnogram that is intercepted by the author
(Endraswara, 2011). Hypnogram is like pain; even if
one is not willing to find it in the text, it is repeated
in the text so many times through
ungrammaticalities that the reader feels obliged to
find it through retroactive reading, which compels
the reader not only to return to the previous parts of
the particular text but also activate his experience of
previous texts in the culture.
2 METHODS
This research is a qualitative research, that is by
paying attention to the behavior of the subject and
describe it in detail and carefully in circumstances,
symptoms, events related to the structure and
kinship of Minangkabau community in MJ and
RKS. To analyze the structure and kinship
relationship on MJ and RKS, used descriptive
method. In terms of literature, the approach used in
Minangkabau’s Kinship in Novel by Marah Rusli and Novel by Muhammad Subhan - An Intertextual Study
209

this study is an intertextual approach that aims to
determine the relationship between novel MJ and
RKS.
The steps in collecting the data are: (1) reading
MJ and RKS repeatedly; (2) record and mark data
related to the research object; and (3) grouping data
based on research problems. The steps used in
analyzing the data are: (1) classifying data in the
structure and relationship form of Minangkabau
kinship in MJ and RKS; (2) describes the data about
structure and relationship of Minangkabau kinship in
MJ with RKS; (3) comparing the structure and
relationship of Minangkabau kinship in MJ and
RKS; (4) interpret the relation of structure and
kinship relationships that have been grouped based
on similarities and differences in MJ and RKS; And
(5) formulate conclusions based on interpretations
on the relationship between MJ and RKS.
3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In accordance with the aspects studied, the
presentation of research results is grouped into (a)
comparison of main structure of MJ and RKS, (b)
comparison of Minangkabau kinship between MJ
and RKS, and (c) intertextual relationship between
MJ and RKS.
3.1 Main Structure of MJ and RKS
MJ and RKS have same social issues. MJ discusses
the problem about rules of Minangkabau customs
that have been distorted and cannot be maintained
anymore, especially in the aspect of marriage. This
novel tells the main character who is a noble in
Padang, he chose to marry Pasundan girls and
opposed the encouragement of polygamy from his
extended family. RKS also discusses about
Minangkabau-related matters of marriage. The main
character of this novel becomes a wasted person, so
his life suffered misery and even lost his lover
because of the customs in his mother's hometown.
Both of these novels have differences in terms of
grooves. MJ has a regressive flow, because the story
begins when Hamli and Din Wati's old days
celebrate her wedding anniversary, in the event,
Hamli remembers all the events he has been through
from school graduation, going abroad and the
difficulties he faced with his wife. When viewed
from the density of the story this novel has a loose
groove, because many additional events that make
the story longer. In contrast, RKS has a progressive
flow because the story is delivered chronologically.
The story begins during the teenage years of the
main character with his miserable life, and then
chooses to migrate to Padang and meet his lover,
until the difficulties he endured until the end of his
life. From the density, the stories of this novel have
a solid groove, because each event is an important
event and influence each other.
MJ has more characters than the RKS, but the
main characters of the two novels are Hamli and
Fikri are children of different tribe marriages.
Hamli's character in MJ was born from a marriage of
a Minangkabau nobleman in Padang and a Javanese
noblewoman, while Fikri in RKS was born from the
marriage of Acehnese men and Minangkabau
women in Pasaman.
There is an interesting difference between the
two novels in the social status of the main character.
Hamli's character whose mother is from Java is still
a Padang because his mother has joined and become
part of the Malay tribe in Minangkabau. On the
other hand, Fikri, although his father is Acehnese
and his mother are a Minangkabau but he is a child
who is wasted because Fikri's mother ever violated
custom and eloped. Then the two main characters
are both in love with women who were introduced
by other figures. Hamli met and fell in love with Din
Wati a Sundanese girl because it was met by the
aunt of Hamli who was the adoptive mother of Din
Wati, while Fikri fell in love with Rahima a Padang
girl because they were met by the acquaintance of
Rahima's mother who had been assisted by Fikri
when stolen by someone.
MJ uses more background of place, they are,
Bukittinggi, Padang, Bogor, Sumbawa, Blitar,
Jakarta, Semarang and Sukabumi, while RKS uses
Aceh, Pasaman, Padang, Jakarta, Bukittinggi,
Padang Panjang. Thus, there are several similar
places in both novels namely Bukittinggi, Padang
and Jakarta. Judging from the background of time,
MJ is more complex than RKS. MJ's story begins
with Hamli completing his school at the age of 20
until he is 72 years old in 1961. It means the story of
the novel has been started since 1909. The events in
the RKS began when Fikri was a teenager in 1990s.
The social background of this novel has similarities
that describe the state of Minangkabau society, but
in the MJ social background becomes diverse
because it is influenced by the background of the
place which is more than the RKS.
ICES 2017 - 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences
210

3.2 Comparison of Minangkabau
kinship relationship in MJ and
RKS
MJ tends to feature a depiction the men’s role as
father and the women as mother. RKS tends to
highlight the role of men in as nephews and the role
of women as nephews and mothers. MJ describes the
role of Hamli as a father who does not want to be
treated like a man in Minangkabau who is more
responsible to his nephew than his wife and children.
He prefers to take full responsibility for his wife and
children instead of giving up the responsibility to the
Mamak of his children. As well as Hamli's father
who also has more role in educating and financing
his children than Mamak of his children. In contrast,
in RKS, the shifting of roles and position of men is
more due to Fikri's position as a wasted person, and
Rahima's brother takes the role of Mamak against
Rahima, so the nephew / son becomes dominant in
this novel.
Although MJ recounts in the 1900s but there are
already many contradictions. This arises because of
Hamli’s principle which considers many
obsolescence in Minangkabau customs, especially
related to the system of matrilineal kinship. Hamli
protested many of the marriage rules that normalized
a man has many wife and gave priority to the
offspring of the man. Even in his time, a husband /
father does not have full rights to his wife and
children, they do not have to bother to make a living.
That job is precisely the job of Mamak and the
parents of his wife. Hamli's principle merely arises
because of his own parents. His father and mother
divorced because his father had to marry another
woman, because it was considered low if a
nobleman had only one wife. Though from both of
them love each other.
RKS contains many deviations, both in terms of
role and position of relatives. It is even seen from
the beginning of the story. First, her mother chose to
marry the migrants when they did not get the
blessings from her ninik Mamak. Second, Fikri get
rumah gadang inheritance, whereas inheritance rules
passed down to girls. Third, Rahima's sister took the
role of Mamak to match her sister with the man of
her choice, whereas her mother was still alive.
Rahima's sister named Ningsih feels that she is in
charge of her sister because she is the one who
fulfils the needs of her family in Padang. Fourth,
Aisyah is a mother of Rahima and Ningsih cannot do
anything about Rahima's matchmaking because
Ningsih has been the one who feed her. In fact, the
rule in Minangkabau a mother reigns over her
children, and marriage matter becomes the affair of
parents and Mamak. Fifth, Fikri wants to propose
Rahima through his friend Yusuf. It is done because
he has no family anymore, whereas in matters of
marriage, Mamak from the two parties must discuss
it first. From these deviations because it has entered
reformation era, the more foreign cultures enter and
affect the habits of Indonesian people, especially
Minangkabau.
3.3 Intertextual Relation between MJ
and RKS
From the results of the research described above, it
can be said that the problem of Minangkabau
customs related to marriage was discussed first by
Marah Rusli in MJ (1961), then followed by
Muhammad Subhan with various irregularities and
contradictions in the RKS (2013). Thus, MJ became
a And RKS became the transformation works. The
statement of intertextual relations in these two
novels is based on the cultural background of this
novel; Minangkabau. From the background of the
author apparently Marah Rusli and Muhammad
Subhan are children of different ethnic marriages as
seen in their novels namely MJ and RKS. Marah
Rusli is a descendant of Padang nobility and
Javanese, while Muhammad Subhan is Aceh and
Minangkabau descent.
Minangkabau kinship relations in both novels
can be seen from direct relationships of kin,
marriage, and the matter of inheritance. In these two
novels kinship relations are more visible in terms of
marriage. There are two problem of marriage which
is strictly prohibited by Minangkabau custom. First,
marriage with Minangkabau and tribal people
(abstinence marriage), it will damage the customary
system. Second, marriage with outsiders, especially
marrying outsiders as it will be a burden for the
whole family. MJ and RKS talked more about
marriage with outsiders, while inherited property
issues were not much discussed in both novels.
Thus, both authors see the importance of kinship
(social relations) rather than material matters in the
life of a society, especially Minangkabau.
However, Muhammad Subhan did not directly
make the MJ as his work because the novel was only
published in the same year as Rinai Kabut
Singgalang novel, But the problem of customs, both
from marriage, has been used by Marah Rusli in his
last work or in previous works. Faruk (2002) says
that it can be associated with the literary period in
the time of Marah Rusli; Balai Pustaka which at that
time the works of literature appears a lot to discuss
the problems of customs, marriages, forced marriage
or tribal marriage different.
in these two novels is not seen from the
difference in the year which was published in 2013,
Minangkabau’s Kinship in Novel by Marah Rusli and Novel by Muhammad Subhan - An Intertextual Study
211

but, from the time of telling the story that the
difference is about 90 years. The kinship problem
first discussed by Marah Rusli then raised again with
the contradiction by Muhammad Subhan. The
difference that arises is the problem of Minangkabau
kinship which arises in the case of marriage. In the
MJ, marriage with Minangkabau people is
considered more dignified it is better if someone
marry a noble family, because according to society
in that year the offspring of marriage that is more
important, and the dignity of the family, while the
RKS property becomes more important than the
descendants. In terms of finding a spouse for
relatives, ninik Mamak, parents and families, besides
from respected families, but he also must be rich. It
arises, because in ancient times the kinship and also
the marriage still uphold the dignity of the family,
whereas now, the property becomes an important
consideration in the household affairs.
4 CONCLUSIONS
Based on the results of research and discussion can
be conclude that. First, in terms of main structural,
MJ and RKS have similarities in terms of themes
and some background of places, but different in
background of time, background and fate of the
main characters also the plot. Second, in terms of the
depiction of Minangkabau kinship relations, MJ
tends to feature a depiction the men’s role as father
and the women as mother. RKS tends to highlight
the role of men in as nephews and the role of women
as nephews and mothers. Third, there is a unique
intertextual relationship between MJ and RKS.
Minangkabau customs issues related to marriage had
been discussed earlier by Marah Rusli in MJ (1961),
then followed by Muhammad Subhan with various
irregularities and disagreements in the RKS (2013).
Thus, MJ became the work of and RKS became the
work of transformation. However, Muhammad
Subhan did not directly make MJ as work because
the novel was published in the same year as RKS.
Because in this study the relation between MJ
and RKS is limited to the main structure covering
theme, plot, characterization, and background,
besides kinship relationships, it is necessary to
proceed with the study of other aspects such as
mandate, language style, and center of separation as
well as other extrinsic elements for more thorough
review. In addition, to understand the development
of Minangkabau's composing about Minangkabau
community's kinship, this study can be expanded by
examining a novel with Minangkabau background.
REFERENCES
Amir, M. S., 2006. Adat Minangkabau, Mutiara Sumber
Widya. Jakarta.
Endraswara, S., 2011. Metodologi Penelitian Sastra
Bandingan, Buku Pop. Jakarta.
Faruk, F., 2002. Novel-novel Indonesia Tradisi Balai
Pustaka, Gama Media. Yogyakarta.
Ibrahim, I., 2009. Tambo Alam Minangkabau, Kristal
Multimedia. Bukittinggi.
Nurgiyantoro, B., 2010. Teori Pengkajian Fiksi.
Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press.
ICES 2017 - 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences
212