Last week, I finished reading Tenggelamnya Kapal Van der Wijck, a novel written by Hamka and later adapted into a film by Sunil Soraya. I first discovered this story through the film back in 2018 when I was fifteen years old. At that time, I was fascinated by stories set in the past, especially films such as Pride and Prejudice and Titanic. That fascination led me to discover this tragic love story.
However, reading the novel years later gave me a completely different experience. When I first watched the film, I mainly saw it as a heartbreaking romance between two people who were separated by circumstances. But after reading the novel, I realized that Tenggelamnya Kapal Van der Wijck is not merely a story about two lovers who could not be together. It is a story about tradition, identity, social expectations, wealth, gender roles, and how human choices can shape the course of one's life.
After finishing the book, I read several discussions about it and learned that many people view it as Hamka's criticism of Minangkabau customs and traditions. I am by no means an expert on Minangkabau culture, but according to the notes included in the edition I read, Hamka was critical of how rigid customs could separate people who genuinely loved each other simply because they did not fit the community's expectations. This can be seen through the relationship between Hayati and Zainuddin.
Although Zainuddin's father was Minangkabau, his mother was Bugis. Because Minangkabau society follows a matrilineal system, where lineage is traced through the mother's side, Zainuddin was not fully accepted as a legitimate member of the community. His connection to Minangkabau through his father was not enough to overcome the fact that his maternal lineage came from outside the community. Because of this, Zainuddin was considered unsuitable to marry Hayati despite their love for one another. Through this conflict, Hamka portrays how painful it can be when someone's worth is judged based on ancestry and social identity rather than personal character. However, while many readers view the novel as a criticism of rigid customs, I personally found myself questioning not only the strict application of adat but also the consequences of the social structure itself.
Whether or not this was Hamka's intended message, the novel made me reflect on how a matrilineal system could create difficulties for individuals who do not fully belong within the maternal lineage. One example that stood out to me was the discussion regarding inheritance. The novel explains that Zainuddin's paternal grandparents' inheritance did not pass to his father because inheritance followed the maternal line. Instead, it went to his father's female relatives. Reading this made me question the consequences of a system where family belonging and inheritance are determined primarily through one side of the family. I do not mean that a patriarchal system would automatically be better, because every social structure has its own strengths and weaknesses. Rather, the novel highlights how any system can create hardship when individuals are bound by rules that leave little room for personal circumstances. The tragedy of Zainuddin is that he is constantly made to feel as though he does not fully belong anywhere. He is too Minangkabau to be considered completely foreign, yet too foreign to be accepted completely by Minangkabau society. His identity becomes something that others use to determine his worth.
Another issue that caught my attention was, the question of financial stability. Throughout the novel, Zainuddin is judged not only because of his uncertain social position but also because he appears to have no wealth. To Hayati's family and community, he is a young man without status, connections, or financial security. They do not know that he actually has wealth in Makassar. I understand that Hamka may have wanted to criticize the idea that love should be measured through money and social status. However, I also think that questioning a person's financial ability before marriage is not necessarily wrong.
Financial stability is often unfairly dismissed as materialism, especially when women are the ones considering it. But marriage is not only about emotions. It also involves responsibilities, including food, shelter, healthcare, children's needs, and the ability to build a stable household. A person can love someone deeply and still need to consider whether both partners are prepared for the realities of married life.
This becomes even more relevant when discussing gender roles. Women are often criticized when they no longer look the way they did before marriage. Society sometimes blames women for becoming less attractive or less attentive toward their husbands, while ignoring the responsibilities that may have caused that change. Before marriage, many women have the time and energy to take care of themselves. They can choose their clothes, apply makeup, and focus on their appearance. After marriage, especially after having children, many women take on responsibilities such as childcare, cooking, cleaning, and managing the household. It is unrealistic to expect someone to maintain the same lifestyle while carrying significantly more responsibilities.
So, when a woman or her family considers whether a man can provide stability, it should not automatically be interpreted as greed. It can also be an attempt to ensure that both partners are entering marriage with realistic expectations. If people believe in the idea of susah senang sama-sama, then both husband and wife must share responsibilities. Providing financially, managing the household, and raising children should not be viewed as duties belonging to only one gender. For this reason, I think Hayati's family was not entirely wrong for considering Zainuddin's financial situation. The problem was not that they questioned whether he could support a family. The problem was that they rejected him because of his origins and social position before truly understanding his character and circumstances.
Another character whose role I found particularly interesting was Khadijah. At first, I thought Khadijah was simply a concerned friend who wanted the best for Hayati. From her perspective, she seemed to be protecting Hayati from a difficult future. She saw Zainuddin as someone who could not provide the comfortable life that Hayati deserved, and she believed that Aziz would be a better choice. However, after reading the novel more carefully, I realized that Khadijah's role was much more complicated. I would not describe her as a villain who intentionally wanted to destroy Hayati's happiness. In fact, what makes her character interesting is that she genuinely believed she was helping. The problem was that Khadijah assumed her own understanding of happiness was the correct one. Khadijah valued wealth, social status, modernity, and a more liberal way of living. Because of this, she viewed Hayati's traditional lifestyle as something that needed to be changed. She did not only want Hayati to avoid hardship; she also wanted Hayati to become more like herself.
This can be seen through her relationship with Aziz. Aziz had a reputation that was far from admirable. He was known as someone who enjoyed gambling and had relationships with many women, qualities that were clearly not respectable, especially according to Islamic values. Yet Khadijah believed that Hayati could be the person who changed him. She saw Hayati's gentle personality, religious character, and good manners as qualities that could reform Aziz. In other words, Khadijah did not only want Hayati to have a wealthy husband, she also saw Hayati as the ideal woman who could "fix" her brother. This reveals an interesting contradiction in Khadijah's character. She wanted to save Hayati from what she considered a miserable future with Zainuddin, but at the same time, she was willing to place Hayati in a marriage where she would carry the responsibility of changing Aziz.
Her influence over Hayati became even clearer when she began questioning Zainuddin's character. When Zainuddin expressed discomfort about Hayati wearing a revealing kebaya during the pacu kuda event, Khadijah interpreted his reaction as evidence that he would become a controlling husband. She painted a future where Hayati would lose her freedom: being confined to the house, restricted in her movements, and unable to live according to her own wishes. She suggested that Zainuddin's love and jealousy were not signs of affection but warnings of future oppression. However, what makes this scene important is that Hayati initially defended Zainuddin. She explained that Zainuddin's jealousy came from how deeply he loved her. To Hayati, his concern was proof that he cared about her. At that point, she still believed in him and did not immediately accept Khadijah's interpretation. But, Khadijah slowly planted doubts in her mind. She transformed something that Hayati viewed positively, Zainuddin's love and protectiveness, into something frightening. She made Hayati question whether the love she cherished would eventually become a burden.
This was not the only way Khadijah influenced her. She also challenged Hayati's understanding of what a successful marriage should look like. When Khadijah showed Hayati her diamond engagement ring and talked about how fortunate it would be if both of them married men who could stand equally high in society, her words affected Hayati deeply. At first, Hayati rejected that way of thinking. She did not immediately abandon her love for Zainuddin. However, those words remained in her mind.
Over time, after experiencing life outside her village and seeing the differences between her old environment and the more modern lifestyle in Padang Panjang, Hayati began to question her future. The question she had once wondered about which is why so many marriages ended in separation, slowly became clearer to her. Perhaps love alone was not always enough. Perhaps financial struggles and differences in lifestyle could also destroy a marriage. This is where Hayati's internal conflict becomes more complicated.
I do not think Hayati loved Aziz in the same way she loved Zainuddin. Her feelings for Zainuddin were built on emotional attachment, trust, and a deep personal connection. Aziz, however, represented something different. He represented stability. He was wealthy, charming, socially accepted, and approved by her family. He was not someone Hayati found completely undesirable. She did not see him as a terrible person whom she could never accept. This distinction is important because, if Aziz had been someone she completely disliked, someone she found unbearable or incompatible with her, then his wealth and status alone would probably not have been enough to convince her. However, because Aziz possessed qualities that made him a reasonable choice, he became a genuine alternative to Zainuddin. Therefore, Hayati's conflict was not between love and hatred. It was between love and security. She loved Zainuddin, but she also began to understand the appeal of the life Aziz represented. The tragedy is that she was not choosing between a good person and a bad person. She was choosing between two different futures.
One future offered emotional attachment but uncertainty.
The other offered stability but lacked the same depth of love.
This is why I find Hayati's character tragic rather than simply selfish because she was a young woman raised in a society where family expectations, respect for elders, and social approval carried enormous weight. Going against her family was not an easy decision. She had spent her entire life following the values taught to her by the people around her, so rejecting their wishes required a level of courage that she ultimately did not have. But of course, sympathy for Hayati does not erase her responsibility. She had once promised Zainuddin that she would wait for him. She had made a commitment, and she knew how much that promise meant to him. Therefore, when she eventually allowed herself to accept Aziz, she was not merely choosing a different husband. She was also breaking the trust of someone who had believed her words. This is what makes her decision so painful. Hayati was not someone who never loved Zainuddin. She was someone who loved him, but when faced with uncertainty, fear, and social pressure, she was unable to stand firmly by that love.
One of the greatest ironies in Tenggelamnya Kapal Van der Wijck is that Hayati's own words eventually become the source of her greatest sorrow. When Zainuddin was forced to leave the village because of the rumours surrounding their relationship, Hayati promised that she would wait for him. She assured him that only death would separate them. At that moment, her love and commitment seemed unquestionable. However, despite that promise, circumstances eventually changed. Influenced by her family, society, Khadijah's opinions, and her own fears about the future, Hayati chose Aziz instead.
The irony is that the future Hayati feared with Zainuddin did not necessarily become the reality she experienced with Aziz. She chose Aziz because he represented stability, wealth, and social acceptance, but those things did not guarantee happiness. Her marriage did not bring the peace and comfort she imagined. Instead, it became a source of suffering, and eventually Aziz himself passed away after realizing the damage caused by his actions.
After Aziz's death, he sent a letter to Zainuddin asking him to forgive him and acknowledging that he had taken Hayati away from him. He also encouraged Hayati to return to the man she had truly loved. This moment is tragic because Aziz, the person who once represented the "better" choice, eventually recognized that wealth and social status were not enough to create happiness.
Hayati, who once chose security over uncertainty, eventually returned to Zainuddin. But by then, everything had...
changed.
The person she left behind was no longer the same young man who desperately waited for her. Zainuddin had experienced years of loneliness, rejection, and heartbreak. He had rebuilt himself through his writing and achieved success, but he also carried the wounds from the past. This is why I think Zainuddin's rejection of Hayati is one of the most complicated moments in the novel.
At first glance, it may seem cruel. Hayati returned to him, confessed that she still loved him, and wanted to repair what had been lost. From a romantic perspective, one could argue that Zainuddin should have forgiven her because they still loved each other. However, understanding Zainuddin's pain makes his decision more complicated.
Before he left the village, Zainuddin had already experienced rejection because of his origins. He was constantly reminded that he did not fully belong. Despite having Minangkabau blood from his father, he was still considered an outsider because of his mother's background.
His relationship with Hayati was the one place where he believed he was accepted completely. Therefore, when Hayati chose Aziz despite promising to wait for him, Zainuddin did not experience it as a simple heartbreak. To him, it confirmed his deepest insecurity: that he would always be judged by his background, social position, and wealth. In his eyes, Hayati had become similar to the people who rejected him from the beginning. She had chosen someone who was more accepted by society. She had chosen someone who represented the status and security that he lacked. This explains why Zainuddin struggled to accept her back. He was not only angry because Hayati married another man. He was hurt because the person who promised to stand by him was the same person who eventually abandoned him.
However, while Zainuddin's pain is understandable, I do not think his decision was entirely free from fault. His rejection also reveals his pride and inability to release the pain of the past. Zainuddin had spent years building his identity around his suffering. His heartbreak became part of the story that shaped him into the successful writer he became. When Hayati returned, accepting her would mean confronting the possibility of forgiveness and letting go of the resentment that had protected him for so long.
In a way, Zainuddin wanted justice for the pain he had experienced. He wanted Hayati to understand what it felt like to lose someone who had promised to stay. But forgiveness requires vulnerability, and that was something he was unable to give. This is what makes the tragedy of Zainuddin and Hayati so powerful. Neither of them is completely innocent, yet neither of them is completely cruel.
Hayati was not a heartless woman who abandoned love for money. She was someone who allowed fear, social pressure, and uncertainty to overpower her commitment. And, Zainuddin was not simply a bitter man who refused to forgive. He was someone who had been deeply wounded and struggled to separate his present from the pain of his past. Both of them loved each other, but unfortunately love alone was not enough.
In the end, Tenggelamnya Kapal Van der Wijck is much more than a tragic romance. It is a story about how human beings navigate love when it clashes with tradition, family expectations, social class, financial concerns, and personal fears. The tragedy of Zainuddin and Hayati was not caused by one person alone. The rigidity of adat created the circumstances that separated them. Social expectations influenced Hayati's decision. Khadijah, despite believing that she was helping, planted doubts that slowly changed Hayati's perception of her future. Aziz took advantage of an opportunity that was available to him, but eventually realized that his actions had caused suffering. Hayati herself failed to stand firmly by the love she once promised to protect. And Zainuddin, despite being the one who suffered greatly, allowed his pride and resentment to prevent him from finding forgiveness.
Perhaps that is what makes this novel so heartbreaking. It is not a story about two people who stopped loving each other. It is a story about two people who continued loving each other but were unable to overcome everything standing between them. Hayati's greatest tragedy was that she abandoned the person she loved because she feared an uncertain future, only to discover that certainty did not guarantee happiness. Zainuddin's greatest tragedy was that he finally gained everything he once lacked; success, recognition, and respect... but lost the one person he had always wanted because he could no longer forgive the wound she left behind.
This novel, Tenggelamnya Kapal Van der Wijck asks a difficult question: when love conflicts with security, society, and pride, what are people willing to sacrifice?
And perhaps the saddest answer is that sometimes people sacrifice the very thing they were trying to protect.
