Komodifikasi Wayang Kulit Cina Jawa Sebagai Souvenir: Studi Kasus Ghriya Ukir Kulit Sagio
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.64730/jrdbantul.v26i3.170Kata Kunci:
komodifikasi budaya, wayang kulit cina jawa, souvenir budaya, warisan budaya, pariwisata budayaAbstrak
Pariwisata budaya mendorong transformasi warisan budaya menjadi produk ekonomi kreatif tanpa menghilangkan identitas budayanya. Penelitian ini bertujuan menganalisis proses komodifikasi Wayang Kulit Cina Jawa (Wacinwa) sebagai produk souvenir di Ghriya Ukir Kulit Sagio, Bantul, Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta. Penelitian menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif dengan desain studi kasus tunggal. Data dikumpulkan melalui wawancara semi-terstruktur, observasi, dan dokumentasi, kemudian diuji menggunakan triangulasi teknik serta dianalisis dengan model interaktif Miles, Huberman, dan Saldaña. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa komodifikasi Wacinwa berlangsung melalui transformasi visual, transformasi fungsi, reproduksi budaya, serta negosiasi antara tradisi dan pasar. Transformasi visual dilakukan dengan memperkecil ukuran wayang dari sekitar 40 cm menjadi sekitar 17 cm tanpa mengubah penggunaan kulit perkamen, tangkai berbahan tanduk, maupun teknik tatah sungging tradisional. Fungsi Wacinwa bergeser dari media pertunjukan dan artefak museum menjadi souvenir, koleksi, dan elemen dekoratif, sementara reproduksi budaya dilakukan dengan menjadikan koleksi Museum Negeri Sonobudoyo sebagai acuan visual. Temuan ini menunjukkan bahwa komodifikasi tidak menyebabkan degradasi nilai budaya, tetapi menjadi strategi pelestarian melalui adaptasi selektif yang tetap mempertahankan autentisitas dalam mendukung pariwisata budaya dan ekonomi kreatif.
Referensi
Z. Duan, S. Tan, and S. W. Choon, “Crafting a Place-Based Souvenir for Sustaining Cultural Heritage,” Heliyon, vol. 9, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19308.
L. He and D. J. Timothy, “Tourists’ Perceptions of Cultural and Creative Souvenir Products and Their Relationship with Place,” J. Tour. Cult. Chang., vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 143–163, 2024, doi: 10.1080/14766825.2023.2293287.
W. Chiengkul and P. Kumjorn, “Cultural Souvenir Attributes and Identity-Based Intentions in Heritage Tourism: Scale Development and Validation,” J. Qual. Assur. Hosp. & Tour., pp. 1–21, 2026, doi: 10.1080/1528008X.2026.2634775.
Y. Yang, M. Shafi, X. Song, and R. Yang, “Preservation of Cultural Heritage Embodied in Traditional Crafts in the Developing Countries: A Case Study of Pakistani Handicraft Industry,” Sustainability, vol. 10, no. 5, p. 1336, 2018, doi: 10.3390/su10051336.
W. J. Ariffin, S. Shahfiq, F. Ahmad, A. Ibrahim, and F. S. Ghazalli, “Handicraft Innovations: A Strategic Approach to Preserving Intangible Cultural Heritage of Malaysia,” ISVS e-Journal, vol. 10, no. 7, pp. 137–146, 2023.
D. Ashton and K. Patel, “‘People don’t buy art, they buy artists’: Robot artists – work, identity, and expertise,” Convergence, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 790–806, 2024, doi: 10.1177/13548565231220310.
A. Arumugam, S. Nakkeeran, and R. Subramaniam, “Exploring the Factors Influencing Heritage Tourism Development: A Model Development,” Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 15, p. 11986, 2023, doi: 10.3390/su151511986.
E. Park, B.-K. Choi, and T. J. Lee, “The Role and Dimensions of Authenticity in Heritage Tourism,” Tour. Manag., vol. 74, pp. 99–109, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2019.03.001.
M. Zhang, X. Guo, X. Guo, and A. Jolibert, “Consumer Purchase Intention of Intangible Cultural Heritage Products (ICHP): Effects of Cultural Identity, Consumer Knowledge and Manufacture Type,” Asia Pacific J. Mark. Logist., vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 726–744, 2023, doi: 10.1108/APJML-11-2021-0831.
Soelarto B and I. Albiladiyah, Yogyakarta Wayang Cina-Jawa. DIREKTORAT JENDERAL KEBUDAYAAN . DEPARTEMEN PENDIDIKAN DAN KEBUDAY AAN, 1980.
H. B. Prasetya, “Khai So Bun Lena,” Yogyakarta, 2021.
H. B. Prasetya, “The Head Iconography of the Chinese - Javanese Shadow Puppet ( Wacinwa ) Collection of the Sonobudoyo State Museum of Yogyakarta , Indonesia,” no. Iconarties 2019, pp. 308–313, 2020, doi: 10.5220/0008764003080313.
H. B. Prasetya, “Reconstruction of Chinese-Javanese shadow puppet Theatre,” 2014.
F. Ferdiani, Wayang Cina-Jawa: Sie Djin Koei Tjeng Tang. PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama, 2020.
H. Kurniawan, N. Supriatna, A. Mulyana, and L. Yulifar, “Public History of Chinese-Javanese Harmony in Yogyakarta for History Learning with Diversity Insights,” vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 139–149, 2023.
A. M. Irianto, “Komodifikasi Budaya di Era Ekonomi Global terhadap Kearifan Lokal: Studi Kasus Eksistensi Industri Pariwisata dan Kesenian Tradisional di Jawa Tengah,” J. Theol., vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 212–236, 2016, doi: 10.21580/teo.2016.27.1.935.
M. S. Ulum, “Kesenian Tradisional di Era Komodifikasi Budaya: Pergeseran Makna Magis-Religius dalam Kesenian Jaranan,” Empirisma J. Pemikir. dan Kebud. Islam, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 87–102, 2020, doi: 10.30762/empirisma.v29i2.169.
F. Saptodewo, “Kajian Karakter Wayang Jabang Tetuka melalui Metode Penelitian Artistik,” J. Desain, vol. 4, no. 03, pp. 184–197, 2017, doi: 10.30998/jurnaldesain.v4i03.1133.
L. He and D. J. Timothy, “Souvenirs and place: suppliers’ perspectives,” Curr. Issues Tour., vol. 27, no. 24, 2024, doi: 10.1080/13683500.2023.2277391.
J. W. Creswell and C. N. Poth, Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications, 2016.
R. K. Yin, Case study research and applications: Design and methods, 6th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications, 2018.
Sugiyono, Metode Penelitian Kualitatif, 3rd ed. Bandung: Alfabeta, 2023.
J. W. Creswell and J. D. Creswell, Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches, 5th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications, 2018.
M. B. Miles, A. M. Huberman, and J. Saldaña, Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications, 2014.
J. Saldaña, The coding manual for qualitative researchers, 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications, 2021.
K. Patel, Craft as a Creative Industry, 1st ed. London: Routledge, 2024. doi: 10.4324/9781003301714.
E. Cohen, “Authenticity and Commoditization in Tourism,” Ann. Tour. Res., vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 371–386, 1988.
A. Febriyanto, S. Riawanti, and B. Gunawan, “Mitos Rambut Gimbal: Identitas Budaya dan Komodifikasi di Dataran Tinggi Dieng,” Umbara Indones. J. Anthropol., vol. 2, no. 1, 2017, doi: 10.24198/umbara.v2i1.15670.
J. Larkin, “``All Museums Will Become Department Stores’’: The Development and Implications of Retailing at Museums and Heritage Sites,” Archaeol. Int., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 109–121, 2016, doi: 10.5334/ai.1917.
S. Toepler, “Caveat Venditor? Museum Merchandising, Nonprofit Commercialization, and the Case of the Metropolitan Museum in New York,” Volunt. Int. J. Volunt. Nonprofit Organ., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 99–113, 2006, doi: 10.1007/s11266-006-9012-6.
D. Petrelli, M. T. Marshall, S. O’Brien, and others, “Tangible Data Souvenirs as a Bridge Between a Physical Museum Visit and Online Digital Experience,” Pers. Ubiquitous Comput., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 281–295, 2017, doi: 10.1007/s00779-016-0993-x.
Y. Kang, Z. Zhang, M. Zhao, X. Yang, and X. Yang, “Tie Memories to E-souvenirs: Hybrid Tangible AR Souvenirs in the Museum,” in Adjunct Proceedings of the 35th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, in UIST ’22 Adjunct. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2022. doi: 10.1145/3526114.3558722.
I. Trabskaia, I. Shuliateva, R. Abushena, V. Gordin, and M. Dedova, “City Branding and Museum Souvenirs: Towards Improving the St. Petersburg City Brand: Do Museums Sell Souvenirs or Do Souvenirs Sell Museums?,” J. Place Manag. Dev., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 529–544, 2019, doi: 10.1108/JPMD-06-2017-0049.
