Talk:Andjar Asmara

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Andjar Asmara/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TBrandley (talk · contribs) 17:04, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

• Early life and theatre: "he is recorded as establishing the magazine Doenia Film". Huh? Reads funny.
  • Changed.
• Early life and theatre: Link India
  • Not done, per WP:OVERLINKING, specifically "Avoid linking the names of major geographic features and locations,"
• Legacy: "dramas" could please you clarify?
  • Dramas --> stage plays
• References: Use actual sub-sections for Footnotes and Bibliography, as per MOS:ACCESS
  • Got that already

Great stuff; perhaps even FA worthy. I'll put this on hold for now, for the minors to be addressed. TBrandley 01:20, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Wow, that was quick. Alright, looks good now. Pass. Well done! TBrandley 01:26, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

• Might as well finish it before work, hehe. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:31, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Informal review

This is looking pretty good, but I think it needs a little more work before FAC. Reading this as someone who has no knowledge of Indonesia, film, theatre, or any combination of these, I feel after reading this that I am not quite in full possession of the facts. There are little hints here and there that a bigger story is taking place, but we are left in the dark. Given that details on his life seem to be few (I'm assuming that you have exhausted the sources), maybe fill in more of the background. Many readers (like me) will have little or no idea about the big picture at this time. He was one of the first Indonesian directors. Why had there been none before, assuming that films were being made? There are some hints that films were almost exclusively commercial rather than artistic in conception. Again, why, and what was said about this. This would draw out more why he was significant. I'm assuming that the JIF was a big deal, but this does not come across except in the legacy section says that the company flourished. And there is an impression throughout the article of his career chopping and changing quite a lot from journalist to critic to writer. This may be a reflection on the sources, but each of these seems a little under-developed, and I get little sense of what he achieved in each of them, or why he changed careers. But that may be unavoidable. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:22, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

I've copy-edited a little, but feel free to revert anything I've messed up or which you are not happy with. Some more specific points and questions:

Lead

• The lead is a little forced, like it is trying to cram the information in quickly.
• I think it needs a little expansion, as his significance does not really come across and it is a bit abrupt.
• "with the theatre in Padang": With a specific theatre, or the generic medium of theatre?
• "although he was mainly at the whim of the film production house backing him.": This is a little cryptic.

• I'll save this for later.

• Perhaps this new lede is better?

Early life and theatre

• "Initially interested in the circus, he gravitated toward traditional theatre at a young age following visits from the Wayang Kassim and Juliana Opera troupes.": I'm not sure this works, as the circus thing just hangs. Is it implying that this steered him towards the theatre? Or that he first wanted to join the circus, then changed route? Or just that he liked the circus when he was a boy?

• Circus removed as it doesn't seem to have had much of an influence in his later works.

• "…from the Wayang Kassim and Juliana Opera troupes": Any links for these, otherwise they are just names.

• Nothing as of yet (probably not notable)

• "He and his friends would pretend to act in stage plays that they had seen…": Does not seem particularly important, and breaks the flow slightly.

• Added because it shows the extent of his interest

• "…before moving to Batavia (modern day Jakarta) to work as a reporter": Did he move to work as a reporter, or move and then become a reporter?

• Fixed

• "the daily Sinar Soematera": I'm assuming this is a newspaper, but it may be worth making it explicit if there is no link.

• Linked

• "Padangsche Opera": Again, is there a link? I think we need to know at least what kind of level this was. Was it a big deal, or something quite minor?

• Doesn't seem to have been that big, and I can't find anything further on it other than it was headed by Amiruddin, another person without an article.

• "a Malay adaptation of the Dutch-language magazine Filmland": A little vague; does this mean it used the same concept/format, or that is was a straight translation?

• Clarified

• "At the time, the country's cinema was becoming established, and Andjar wrote extensively on local productions": Cinema is left hanging here. Are we contrasting the success of cinema with Andjar persevering with theatre? If so, this should be made explicit, or the cinema comment just seems out of place. Or is it that he worked in local film productions? Again, this should be made explicit; the last we heard, he was working in theatre. Also, "wrote … on" does not quite sound right to me. Either "worked… on" or "wrote … for" would be better.

• Clarified

• "the country's cinema": I think it is better to just name the country here.

• Changed to "the cinema of the Indies"

• "The Indonesian film historian credits Andjar…": Who is the film historian?

• Dur. Done.

• "The Indonesian film historian credits Andjar as inspiring the marketing for 1929's Njai Dasima, which emphasised that the cast was exclusively native.": Why is this important? Did this make the film successful? And it may be better written as "According to the Indonesian film historian X, Andjar was responsible for the [successful? highly successful? unusual?] marketing of the 1929 film Njai Dasima, which emphasised that the cast was exclusively native [or "which emphasised the exclusively native cast", but I think this loses something]"

• Added some context in a footnote.

• "He was also highly critical of The Teng Chun's Boenga Roos dari Tjikembang (The Rose from Tjikembang; 1931), among the first talkies in country.": Who is "he": the historian or Andjar? And maybe "sound film rather than "talkies". Or at least pipe it to sound film.

• Changed

• "During this period he spent some time in Medan…": Why? Doing what?

• Not in any of the sources, trimmed

• "under A. Piedro": Who? Again, link or explain, or this could just be anyone. And "under" in what sense? Was Piedro a producer, director, writer, etc? Joined in what sense? As an actor, writer, etc?

• Clarified

• "he reportedly considered the troupe dedicated to the betterment of the toneel as an art form and not only motivated by financial interests": This is a bit of a handful. "Reportedly" is often weak; who reported it? Otherwise, he either did or didn't. Maybe better as "Andjar believed the troupe to be dedicated to improving the "toneel" as an art form, rather than motivated solely by financial interests"

• Clarified

• "Andhar was able to extensively publish his stage plays": Just to check; these were already written, but he was able to publish them with the troupe's help? I've done a copy-edit using this interpretation, so please check!

• Yep

Film career and death

• "[Bollero] is recorded as having become more politicised after Andjar's departure": Again, why "recorded". It either did or didn't, and if it is in dispute, who "recorded" it? And "is recorded as having become" is very heavy going; simply "became" works better.

Done

• "The Teng Chun": Link?

Linked above, next to Boenga Roos dari Tjikembang

• "Andjar was one of several noted theatrical personnel who migrated to film following Albert Balink's 1937 hit Terang Boelan (Full Moon), which was written by a journalist named Saeroen.": Maybe detail that shouldn't concern us here. Probably better to stop after Moon. Or maybe recast the sentence as "At the time, several noted theatrical personnel migrated to film following…"

• Agree, nuked last bit.

• "…spoke to him and learned about the craft": What craft? Film or theatre? Their future careers suggest the former, but worth making it clear. Also, perhaps "discussed the [film-making?] craft with him", unless he was explicitly teaching them.

• Agree, changed.

• "important film directors": Maybe influential is better than important, which suggests editorial voice.

• Changed and add a note

• "Bunga Anggrek Bulan (Moon Orchid; 1988)": Why the late date?

• Typo. Argh.

• "Andjar published his only novel, Noesa Penida, on Balai Pustaka in 1950": "on" does not seem right here; through? with?
• In fact, is the publisher essential? It slightly messes up the sentence. As it stands, we then have "the novel was a critique of the Balinese caste system, which followed two lovers from different castes" which repeats novel. A better sentence would be "In 1950, Andjar published his only novel, Noesa Penida, a critique of the Balinese caste system, which followed two lovers from different castes."

• Agree

• "who became the country's first woman film director": Again, is there any reason not to name the country?

Avoid repetition, but reinserted

• "In 1955 Andjar headed the inaugural Indonesian Film Festival, which received critical derision when it gave the Best Picture Award to two films, Usmar Ismail's Lewat Djam Malam (After the Curfew) and Lilik Sudjio's Tarmina": Why was it derided? What was wrong with the films? Do we know what part Andjar had in this choice?

• Clarified. Doesn't say what it was, exactly.

• The end of his life is a little abrupt. Are there any more details of his death? Or what happened between 1955 and 1961?

• I only have what's in the article. Sadly, I don't even have any information if he and Ratna had children.

Legacy

• "the leftist Indonesian literary critic": Do we need to know his political leanings? And if so, maybe link leftist.

• Not especially necessary, as in this case it probably didn't influence his commentary. Now, on Hamka's Tenggelamnya Kapal van der Wijk or Marco Kartodikromo's work, Siregar's political leanings are necessary as they influenced how he judged the work.

• "brought with them new ideas that helped the company flourish until the arrival of the Japanese": Did the flourishing stop when the Japanese arrived? In fact, did the company continue? As written, this is a bit vague, and could be read as saying that they did better when the Japanese arrived, as they brought better ideas. That was my first reading, given that we already heard that Andjar admired Japanese film.

• They closed. Now implied but not explicitly stated above.

• This section seems to flit from one of his "trades" to another without really developing anything. What were his achievements as a critic or director? Sarastro1 (talk) 20:22, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

• Tried to add more critical commentary on the plays. No information on how the films performed commercially, and no awards available :-(

• Wow, thanks for these comments. I've already done part of it. I'll do more later. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:57, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Follow-up

Changes looking good, including the new lead; just a few follow-up points:

• "After returning to Batavia in 1929, he spent three years as a theatre and film critic before joining the Dardanella touring troupe as a writer, eventually going to India in an unsuccessful bid to film his stage play Dr Samsi.": Very long sentence.

• Split

• "during which time he stayed in theatre, Andjar made a brief return to film, directing three films in the late 1940s and writing four more": film...films, and "writing four more" kind of hangs. When?
• "Andjar spent the remainder of his life as a theatre and film critic, also adapting local films as serials.": film...films. Also, fragment at the end, not quite grammatical. Maybe just "and adapted"?

• I think this is better.

• "although he had little creative control and was mainly at the whim of the film production house backing him.": Maybe "creative control of his productions"?

• Sure

• "Andjar wrote extensively regarding local productions.": Why not "about local film productions": regarding seems too grand for this, and there may still be confusion over whether this means film or theatre.

• This is both film and theatre

• "The Indonesian film critic Salim Said credits Andjar as inspiring the marketing for 1929's Njai Dasima, which emphasised emphasised the exclusively native cast.": Apart from the typo of "emphasised emphasised", this is still a bit of a mouthful. "credits Andjar as inspiring" is very clunky. As I suggested above, I think "According to Indonesian film critic Salim Said, Andjar inspired the marketing..." would be a better structure.

• Fair enough

• "Andjar published many of his stage plays using the group's backing; he also wrote several works exclusively for the group": Group...group

• Changed to Dardanella

• Generally, watch out for an overdose of semi-colons, and overuse of Andjar, particularly to start a sentence.
• I think some parts could still be made more economical, and be careful with over-long verb phrases. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:35, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks, you're a really good reviewer. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:26, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Indonesian names

The article has a note that says his name is Indonesian, without a surname or family name. How is the decision made to use Andjar rather than Asmara, or both? Why is his wife called Ratna Asmara, if Asmara is not used as a surname? Thanks.--Parkwells (talk) 23:39, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

• She likely took his pseudonymic back name (for lack of a better word) to identify herself with him. Andjar was chosen instead of Asmara as it is most common in the sources. We could have hedged with "Andjar Asmara" like Cohen did, but I consider that poor writing. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:50, 20 October 2012 (UTC)