There are letters in the Zubir family donation to the Nanyang Academy of Fine Arts which reveal Zubir in a professional, yet personal, light.
Zubir wrote letters of complaints to minister S. Rajaratnam as well as to the press. These letters reflect a strong sense of pride in his compositions and intellectual property rights, although this concept was not yet entrenched in a society of collective conscience in the early years of Independence. He was much aggrieved when his music and text were amended without consultation. In a firm but diplomatic tone, he declared:
I am very sorry to say the way it was treated to make the composition shorter, is wrong and spoils the composition; and it may affect our reputation as well. We all will be ashamed to have an anthem which is out of musical form. But yet it is not too late to put it in the right way if a short version is needed. . . . I am at your service to discuss the matter and do something about it.[i]
On another occasion in 1974, Zubir wrote to the editor of the New Nation and requested for the publication of his letter of complaint. In the letter, he contends that his song Semoga Bahagia from 1957 was amended without his consent. This 2-page unsigned letter objects to the way that
Several alterations in the words and music were made. I was not informed at all concerning the alterations. A melodic phrase has been changed, another one omitted and the refrain entirely cut out. A few bars squeezed in perhaps to balance the proportion of the lost climax of the melody [which] resulted from the changing. . . . And yet, somebody else’s name is written on top of the song sheet as the writer of the words. . . . So, the entire song composition has been mutilated without my consent.[ii]
As proof of evidence he meticulously attached the original composition and the contested version with the ‘adulterated words and music’. These cumulative slights prompted Zubir to engage directly with the public and schools. ‘The Story of Majulah Singapura’ was a speech he wrote to express his belief that one should stay true to a purpose (the national anthem) once its selection has been determined.[iii]
Had Zubir lived into his eighties, he would have been bitterly disappointed to learn that a group of grassroots leaders and a lawyer had brought up the matter about ‘adjustments’ to the anthem (The Straits Times, 22 July 1991). But this time, retired senior minister S. Rajaratnam came to its spirited defence and called out a political motivation behind the request as the difference between ‘hot-potato politics and statesmanship’, and that ‘changing our present national anthem must also mean a significant re-writing of Singapore history’. S. Rajaratnam would be familiar with such rival national ideas as he had written the pledge (We, the citizens of Singapore, pledge ourselves as one united people, regardless of race, language or religion) to forge a sense of nationhood during the challenging period of racial conflict and political unrest. One appreciates the acerbic wit for which S. Rajaratnam was both feared and admired:
Its composer Zubir Said has been officially honoured for his gift of Majulah Singapura. His Malay lyrics were so simple that anyone over the age of five, unless mentally retarded, had no difficulty singing the anthem. All Singaporean children of kindergarten age have not only had no difficulty memorising the words but have for decades sung it every morning with ‘strong feelings and emotion’ (The Straits Times, 26 July 1991).
It has been six decades since the Majulah Singapura was selected as the national anthem. And yet, the work still continues to attract controversies. The latest of which took place during the national day celebrations on 9 August 2019. Veteran soul artist Ramli Sarip was invited to sing the anthem as arranged by Dr Sydney Tan, music director of the national day parade. Ramli’s soulful rendition caused confusion amongst viewers who mistakenly thought that it was the official version. Zubir’s daughter Dr Rohana Zubir also joined in the fray, attesting to her father’s faith in the Majulah Singapura which bears repeating here:
It is not a commercial song nor a romantic song. To me it is a prayer.[iv]
Controversies aside, the Majulah served to establish the concept of ‘Merdeka’ (Independence) in the early years, and asserted Singapore’s identity within Southeast Asia. Its significance for the nation and its people can thus be assessed within a creative, layered reading of the controversies that it attracted over the past decades, offering a multifaceted picture of what was within the psyche of Singapore’s evolving cultural and political landscapes. More crucially, these spirited discussions have reignited our historical and national consciousness, contributing to a rich discourse on the Majulah Singapura and what it means to be a Singaporean in the 21st century.
[i] NAFA Collection. Letter to S. Rajaratnam dated 14 October 1959.
[ii] NAFA Collection. A draft copy, not on letterhead, dated 25 August 1957. However, there is an early recording of Zubir’s uplifting song from 1955 made by Keris Film Productions (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHFeaGd7foA).
[iii] NAFA Collection. 3-page typescript ‘The Story of Majulah Singapura’ (c1986). Also in the collection is a national day speech to Kong Yiong High School on 8 August 1985. A decade earlier, Zubir addressed students twice in August 1975, sharing the history and underlying philosophy of the anthem. See further Rohana Zubir. Zubir Said: The Composer of Majulah Singapura. Singapore: ISEAS, 2012, pp.217-20.
[iv] Rohana Zubir. Zubir Said, p.6. See also https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2019/12/06/every-national-anthem-deserves-to-be-sacred-not-to-be-experimented-with-dr-rohana-zubir-daughter-of-majulah-singapura-composer-on-ramli-sarips-new-rendition/; https://www.asiaone.com/digital/angry-netizens-mistake-ramli-sarips-rendition-new-national-anthem-recording. Accessed 20 May 2020. For historical versions of the Majulah, see Joe Peters’ video and timeline https://youtu.be/VIxgy81T0Ek. Accessed 20 May 2020.