Free Essay

Rizal

In: Historical Events

Submitted By francis88
Words 5222
Pages 21
On the occasion of National Hero's birth month this June, let me share with you this interesting article about the great Malayan sexuality: Was Rizal Gay? By Neil C. Garcia Sometime during the Centennial of Rizal’s martyrdom, Isagani R. Cruz, local pop-culture Provocateur and professor of literature and Philippine studies at the De La Salle University, wrote a column for the now-defunct Filmag: Filipino Magazin, shockingly titled “Bakla ba si Rizal?” (1) The answer to this question, if Cruz is to be believed, is a resounding and categorical “Yes!” And he offers what he calls “biographical evidence” in order to arrive at this question’s confidently affirmative answer. First, Rizal was a bakla because he was afraid of committing himself to the revolutionary cause. Second, Rizal’s kabaklaan made itself apparent in his periodic “failings” in his relationships with the women to whom he was supposed to have been romantically linked. Third, Rizal, unlike his compatriots, didn’t go “wenching” in the brothels of Barcelona and Madrid (at least, not very often). Fourth, Rizal might not have even been the father of Josephine’s benighted baby boy, since—paraphrasing noted Rizalist historian Ambeth Ocampo’s feelings on the matter of Rizal’s “disputable paternity”—Josephine would seem to have been routinely sexually abused and consequently impregnated by her stepfather. Of course, these four “conjectures” hardly qualify as proof. They are more likely the end-results of what I can only describe as a largely catty evidential procedure that begs now to be challenged, if only for its underlying assumptions concerning what being a bakla means: one, a bakla cannot ever be a revolutionary because he is essentially spineless and a coward; two, failing in your relationships with women makes you abakla; three, a bakla cannot possibly have sex with women, not even when they are wenches; and four, to be a bakla is to be impotent or at least incapable of getting a woman pregnant. The dubiousness—and utter stupidity—of these assumptions hardly needs to be emphasized: according to them, basically, kabaklaan is the negation of everything good and desirable in masculinity and is hence, devoid of its own inner substance and worth. Indeed, even if I were to champion the cause of the bakla and would like to win someone as “big” and popular as Rizal over to my side, I would nonetheless balk at Cruz’s way of going about such a task. His “biographical evidence” demonstrates nothing, other than the unflattering and sadly naive opinion he holds of who (or what) a bakla is. In saying that I do not find Cruz’s method credible in the very least, I am of course also saying that there is a better way of making the project of ascertaining Rizal’s “gender and sexuality” work. And this method involves, first and foremost, asking if the question itself is sensible, given the historical period in which I would wish it to make sense. Examining the categories one is using in one’s study of such slippery “realities” as sexuality and gender is the necessary first step, then. This is because the categories we use are always culture-bound and historically specific, and as such are never quite neutral and “scientific,” let alone universally reliable and insightful. To ask if Rizal was a bakla, one has, first and foremost, to be clear about what the concept baklameant at the time and in the place that Rizal lived. In other words, the way we understand bakla today most probably was not the way people in these islands a century ago understood it. This alone makes one’s project more difficult than it might have originally appeared, for it requires one to undertake a comprehensive study of the “sex/gender system” of mid-nineteenth-century Philippines—in particular, the sexual and gender categories that operated in the lives of the Tagalog ilustrados, whom Rizal most certainly was. My own tentative findings about the “social semantics” of bakla—in other words, the career this concept has enjoyed in Philippine social history—would seem to indicate that, until recently, it didn’t even connote an identity that is distinguished by its sexuality, but merely a quality of emotional wavering, indecision or uncertainty—something that anyone unlucky enough can suffer from at any point in his or her life. Until early in this century, in fact, bakla wasn’t so much a noun as a verb: one was nababakla if he or she was not sure of his or her choices, or if one was suddenly afraid or confounded by the unexpected turn of events. (2) In contrast, nowadays, a bakla is an effeminate male who wishes to have sex with “real men” or tunay na lalake. Thus, the bakla in our midst is a variety of male homosexual who can easily be recognized because of his swishy ways, and whose sexual desire defines his innermost and most authentic sense of self. Obviously, during Rizal’s time, there was no bakla or effeminate homosexual: there may have been effeminate men (called, among others, binabae/yi, bayoguin, asog and bido), but they were not defined as such by virtue of the desire they possessed, but only by their choice of occupations (feminine ones, like weaving, pottery-making, and the like), and their womanlike appearance and behavior. In fact, the idea that people were different on account of the gender of the object of their sexual desire (in other words, that people were either heterosexual or homosexual) was alien to our turn-of-the-nineteenth-century ancestors, who most probably desired and had sex with whomever they wanted at whatever point in their lives, without thinking of what such desires or acts had to say about their identities, their conceptions of who they essentially were. If we must be accurate about things, even in Europe itself, homosexuality was not a reality until it was officially “invented” in 1869—in Germany, to be exact, by sexologist Karl Maria Kertbeny. (3) Thus, even when Rizal had lived there at around the same that the discourse of homosexuality was steadily being “normalized” and propagated, it is quite doubtful that he was influenced at all by the latest sexological revolutions that were being waged inside the psychiatric clinics in Europe’s more technologically advanced countries (Spain most certainly not being one of them.) A passage in El Filibusterismo, from the chapter titled “Manila Characters” illustrates how, to Rizal, the thought—the blatant image—of two men having an intimate relationship was not a particularly upsetting thing: That respectable gentleman who is so elegantly attired is not a physician but a homeopathist on his own, sui generis: he believes totally in the similia similibus, the attraction of likes. That young Cavalry captain with him is his favorite disciple. (4)

The chapter from which this passage comes treats the Fili’s reader to a menagerie of Manila’s “queer” residents. This passage not only confirms the existence of same-sex-loving men in Hispanic Philippines, but the very casualness of its tone tells us that Rizal was not phobically affected by what it represented. In fact, the almost-funny “pun” he must have intended to make when he chose to denominate this doctor a “homeopathist,” (5) reveals he found the subject slightly amusing, or at least amusing enough that he chose not to abominate it, which he could very well have done, as he often did in his writings, including this chapter itself. This would have arguably been the case had he been sufficiently “Europeanized” in the sexological sense—which is to say, had Rizal been sufficiently raised and trained in the newly inducted homophobic regime that had begun to take hold of the European imagination in the latter part of the nineteenth century. As the constructionist historian Arnold Davidson puts it, this regime of “sexuality” was made possible by the emergence, in Europe, of a new, psychiatric style of reasoning, (6) a manner of arguing about sexual personalities, orientations, “paraphilias” and other such “categories of being,” which arose alongside the various neuroses and psychoses that were being discursively produced by the different “biomedical” dispensations of the time. Thus, Rizal could not have been a bakla (the way we currently know this concept), nor a gay/homosexual, simply because these were categories of being that were not available during his time. To call him gay orbakla would be to commit a grave anachronistic mistake, similar perhaps to calling him a “yuppie” or even—pundits in UP would hate me for saying this—a “Filipino.” (7) Obviously, it would have been impossible for someone coming from that era to self-identify with the nuances and complexities of the many dizzyingly new-fangled nomenclatures of our own time. All this doesn’t mean, most certainly, that there were no men who had sex with each other previous to homosexuality’s unfelicitous debut into the world. (One wonders just how accurate is this El Fili passage, coming as it does from the chapter that purports to present and introduce the typical “characters” of Rizal’s Manila). We can only imagine how, from the earliest times, all over the planet, the male and female of the species had manifested both heterosexual and homosexual behaviors. But to repeat that oft-repeated mantra of social constructionism, engaging in homosexual sex is one thing, being a homosexual is another. (8) Previous to the sexological “production” of the homosexual as a “species”—in Michel Foucault’s formulation—of personality, there were men who loved other men, and women who loved other women, but they were not much different from everybody else (in fact, most probably they were everybody else.) The same thing must have been true in the Philippines at the turn of the nineteenth century. If the confession manuals from the early Spanish period were to be believed, it would seem that the newly converted natives of the islands were not much loath to the activity of mutually arousing one another—men with men, women with women, men with women, etc.—within such “harmless” contexts and occasions asel burlarse, or “childish play.” (9) We might wish to recall, in this regard, just how scandalized the properfrayles were, when they first saw rowdy men in the Visayas sporting all sorts of penile implants (penis pins and the like), which they gamely used in order to make their sexual encounters both bloodier and—they themselves gamely admitted, upon being asked—considerably more pleasurable. (10) Needless to say, prior to the arrival of the Spaniards, the precolonial inhabitants of the Philippines enjoyed a kind of sexual “innocence” (or at least unselfconsciousness) that only later on became corrupted when the colonial Church introduced the discourse of sodomy, which it propagated through the confessional. The discourse of sodomy, however, was not the same as that of homosexuality, for it referred to a number of nonprocreative, extra-conjugal and/or sexually “non-missionary” acts that anyone might be weak enough to sometimes commit (with men, women, or animals) but that, because merely a variant of “unnatural sin against the sixth commandment,” didn’t define one’s psychological constitution, or sense of self. (11) Moreover, the concept of sodomy was itself “utterly confused,” for not only were the varieties of acts it encompassed dizzyingly plural and shifting, it also functioned, in Europe’s “pre-sexological regimes,” as a most convenient stigmatizing weapon, a demonizing label with which it was practically impossible to identify, inasmuch as it was, in fact, an “empty category” into which the powerless were thrust by those who dictated the scope and signification of its use. (12) In the case of Hispanic Philippines—as historian John Leddy Phelan concludes—the resident Sangleyes or Chinese were the colonial administrators’ most convenient target for this xenophobia-driven charge, on whom the Spanish settlers in the islands depended for vital economic services. (13) Strangely enough, in his annotations to Dr. Antonio de Morga’s Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas, (14) Rizal himself echoes the Sinophobic accusation of sodomy, unmindful of the obvious bias in Morga’s account, which had obviously been “cribbed” from previous relaciones and cronicas, written by such dubious sources as Marcelo de Ribadeneira and Miguel de Benavidez (15). While Rizal’s intention in his annotations was clearly the unpacking of Spanish colonialist “fantasies” and racist misrepresentations of the Philippines in the available documents and histories, he didn’t himself realize—rather, he didn’t wish to realize—just how fantastic was the claim that the indios of the Philippines had been innocent of the “unnatural sin,” until they were corrupted by the foreigners, particularly the Chinese. Typically, the argument used by the Spanish commentators in the early years of the Conquista was that there wasn’t even a native word for sodomy among the indios of the Philippines, as though by virtue of this linguistic voiding of the “unspeakable crime” (or the nefandam libidinem), the many acts that constituted it could no longer be possible among them. (16) Of course, it is the Hispanic colonial archives themselves that can be shown to contradict this amazingly specious argument. In one “confession manual” or confesionario, written by the friar Gaspar de San Agustin and published in Manila in 1713, a question relating to “sins against the sixth commandment” went: Cun nagpuit, o cun nagpapuit, o cun nagcasala sa hayop. (17) This question, inquiring as it did into the penetrative or receptive position the penitent might have assumed during anal sexual intercourse—as well as into probable acts of bestiality on the side—unequivocally proves that Tagalog words existed, at this stage of Spanish evangelization, to refer to at least these three forms of sodomitic congress. Nonetheless, Rizal’s “denial” of the Filipino native’s “innate capacity” to commit sodomy was, in the end, quite understandable, especially when we recall the fact that his general purpose in putting out and annotating Morga’s Sucesos was that he wished to paint a bright and “noble” picture of his countrymen (and only incidentally, countrywomen)— something that might serve to locate the Philippines in an Enlightenment, “evolutionary” narrative of development to which he subscribed, as well as to rectify the vulgarly unflattering, “Quiaoquiapist” stereotypes that circulated in Spain

and that personally afflicted him and the other reformists during this time. (18) In his study, “Rizal Reading Pigafetta,” Resil Mojares makes a similar observation: in his edition of the Sucesos, we see Rizal effectively writing a “counterhistory,” (19) a marginal though no less arrogant text from someone who fancied himself capable of adjudicating between foreign and native perspectives, between “dubious” and “correct” knowledges about the Philippines. Predictably enough, such an undertaking was characterized by Rizal’s own nativist mystifications and expropriations of European Orientalist imaginings. In any case, by furthering his own uncritical Orientalism, Rizal unwittingly bought into the same “Humanist,” colonialist logic against which he was trying to inveigh, countervailing his own project and contradicting himself now and again. For instance, in regard to Morga’s remark that the native men and women of the islands were sexually “incontinent,” Rizal argues that they simply saw no sin in sex, believing the act of reproduction, “like many other peoples… [as] a natural instinct.” Further, he states that the pagan indiosweren’t so much “loose” as possessing “an excess of naturalism,” and that they were not fettered by “religious or moral prohibition.” (20) Reading his textual “intervention,” we realize that the contradiction is clear: while Rizal sees the unbridled sexual activities between native men and women—which were much remarked about and bewailed in the early Spanish accounts—as constitutive of a kind of natural innocence or “naturalism,” he cannot imagine that such an innocence could have allowed the same people to “wander through [sodomy’s] mistaken paths.” In other words, Rizal criticizes Morga by “denaturalizing” his moralistic account of sexuality, yet stops his argument short when it begins to dangerously wander into the “unnatural” (yes, Rizal unblinkingly accepts this adjective!) terrain of sodomy. This seems stranger since, reading further into the same annotation, we realize that Rizal understood sodomy to chiefly include conjugally “heterosexual” acts, as when he writes that the sodomitic Chinese and foreigners commit it with the “indiowomen, who are their wives.” This well-meaning “defense” by Rizal of his people is, of course, merely one out of so many others in the Sucesos, and we must remember that sodomy, while a social stigma against which Rizal obviously demurred, was, finally, only a matter of misguided or “mistaken” activities, and did not, in the way it was conceived during this pre-sexological period in Philippine history, constitute an intimate or definitive sense of identity. (Suffice it to say that sodomy was simply a discourse of acts, not selves.) ONTINUATION.... WAS RIZAL GAY? By Neil Garcia If Rizal wasn’t—because he couldn’t have been—a bakla or a gay/homosexual, just exactly what was he? Might he have been a binabae/yi, which was a category of gender identity that he most probably understood? Perhaps not, (21) for not only was it highly unlikely that anyone of his class or stature could have voluntarily identified with what in this nineteenth-century masculinist culture was clearly a pejorative term of effeminophobic abuse, there exists no mention of this appellation ever being tacked on him in any of the available—which is to say, approved—accounts of his life. (Of course, it is healthy to stay suspicious regarding such “official” accounts: knowing how blind nationalistic zeal had damaged the objectivity of so many of Rizal’s commentators and chroniclers, we cannot be too sure these accounts have not been sanitized precisely to conform with the nationalist imperative to apotheosize the greatest scion of the Filipino race!) Most probably he was an hombre, an hombre ilustrado to be precise, which, on second thought, tells us nothing new about him at all. What I wish to stress at this point is this: previous to the invention of homosexuality, individuals were not heterosexuals either, for the simple reason that homo and hetero were inverse forms of the same sexual logic that had not existed before the regime of sexuality (of sexuality, as we know it) overtook our modern lives. Indeed, while men and women throughout history married and begot children, they nonetheless were not defined along the lines of sexual object choice until the last quarter of Rizal’s century—and then, only in Europe at first. Thus, for the longest time, men and women were not cloven into the identities of “the homosexual” and “the heterosexual.” Whatever sexual discourse that might have operated as a significant force in their lives didn’t discriminate between those who were attracted to members of their own sex, and those who desired the opposite sex, although it perhaps might have had something to say about the frequency in which they had sex, or the positions they assumed while doing it (these, of course, were the basic issues which the discourse of sodomy busied itself with.) As individuals whose lives were not governed by the homo/hetero distinction, they were relatively free to commit homosexual and heterosexual acts without thinking how these acts affected their selfhoods. By contrast, in our own sexually self-conscious time, one can scarcely think of having sex with another man without at the same tremblingly pleasurable moment becoming at the very least “worried” of what this could mean about who one really is, deep inside.Rizal and the other ilustrados of his time were presumably socialized to think of marriage as the logical social destiny. But this had little to do with what they could actually experience sexually, within the privacy of their own lives. Hence, if we cannot make use of the relatively recent homo/hetero dichotomy with which to describe the sexual and erotic milieu in which Rizal lived, we might perhaps look at the organizing social principles that determined the relations one gender at that time could have with the other, or—and this is extremely important—with itself.Just like in the greater part of Europe, middle-class males and females in the Philippines during the time of Rizal were socialized separately from each other. Boys went to boys’ schools, girls to girls’ schools—a policy that was implemented by the Spanish colonial administration from the smallest parochial schools in the barrios to the biggest collegios and “normal schools” in Manila. (22) And of course, even outside this context, piety and propriety dictated that young men and women meet only under the assiduous supervision of spinster aunts and trusted yayas. Suffice it to say, such “unnecessary meetings” were generally frowned upon and discouraged. Thus, the basic social structure that determined the relations between the male and female genders of theilustrado class in nineteenth-century Philippines, can be called “homosocial”: individuals were expected to develop bonds within each of the two genders, bonds that could be expressed in several ways. Some of the ways, for example, in which men bonded with one another were through exclusive friendships, “discipleships” and cliques, or memberships in fraternities and clubs (La Liga Filipina would be one of the more illustrious examples of an “all-boys club” that existed during the period of the Propaganda movement). Women bonded with one another within the realm of the home, in particular,

the grantedly “feminine space” of the kitchen, where they were seen to become their own naturally gossipy selves, while the men talked endlessly about matters of consequence (such as the affairs of state) in the entresuelo or sala. I am of course not really interested in male bonds per se, except perhaps where these bonds may be seen to express themselves sexually, as they often did in the heavily homosocial past. Rizal and the otherpropagandistas and their European patrons and supporters were all male, and they all bonded. Vicente L. Rafael, examining the records and photographs of the period, notices the overtly “masculine” texture of such bondings: not only did Rizal and his compatriots organize themselves into a mutual-aid association calledIndios Bravos (“Brave Indians”), they also took pains to “masculinize” their bodies by lifting weights and engaging in sports like fencing and the martial arts, if only to offer a more virile alternative to the Orientalist stereotypes circulating in Europe concerning the Philippine indios’ effeteness. (23) Thus, while their common ideological persuasion— their collective wish to enact political reforms back in the Philippine islands—provided a basis for this bonding, their gender was also, in truth, the real common ground on which they confidently stood, embracing one another, in fond solidarity, as it were. Just where does the social end and the sexual begin, as far as these bondings and embracings were concerned? I for one cannot tell. All we might safely say in this regard is this: in the absence of the paranoia-making discourse of homosexuality—a discourse that suddenly rendered suspect one’s desires and hitherto unselfconscious longings to bond with others of one’s own gender—men like Rizal most probably expressed their fellowship and camaraderie with one another in ways that did not, at times, exclude the genital. We also know, especially as regards Rizal and Blumentritt, just how affectionate and loving this epistolary discourse could become, so much so that they would write (jokingly) how they are “desperately in love” with the other, (24) would keep sending photos, bric-a-brac, mementos and flowers (!) to the other, (25) would say that they would “dare everything” for the sake of the other, (26) would profess that they were always thinking of the other, (27) or would suffer disturbing dreams about the other. In one letter, Rizal relates that his strange dream of his “dear brother and friend” ended with him “waking up tired and sweating; it was very hot on the bed.” (28) While it may be a mistake to read anything more into such declarations of intimacy between the younger Rizal and the “fatherly” Blumentritt— whose strongest point of affinity with one another would seem to be, to all intents and purposes, an intellectual one—we must nonetheless remember just how such bonds between men at that time constituted a continuum, and how this continuum conceivably stretched from one form of affection to the other, such as fraternal intimacy to romantic love. How else can we explain the ease with which Rizal and Blumentritt could call each other “dear,” (29) or declare that they “love” each other in their letters, without any sense of shame?

Adolf Rizal (and his Half Brother, Rizal Zedong) Manuel L. Quezon III, Saturday, September 17, 1994 Here is the craziest thing I’ve heard (and I’ve heard it more than once, at parties): Adolf Hitler was really the illegitimate son of Jose Rizal. Here is the second craziest thing I’ve heard: Mao Zedong was actually Rizal’s illegitimate son. Two variations, I suppose, on the idea that "Yes, the Filipino Can!" Sadly, I found the two theories so funny that I never thought of asking the people who told them to me to explain on what grounds they based their claim about Der Fuehrer and the Great Helmsman. A dentistry student friend from UE has also heard these fanciful theories, but it also did not occur to him to ask on what evidence these fanciful claims were based. So I did a little research to find out how people could make up such a story. The claim that Adolf Hitler was Rizal’s progeny must be based on the following facts: · Adolf Hitler was born on April 20, 1889 (that means he could have been conceived sometime in August 1888), in the little village of Braunau, near the German- Austrian border. · He was born an Austrian and remained one until the 1930s. · The name of Hitler mother was Klara Polz. · At one time she was a maid in Vienna. · Hitler always considers a town Linz, in Austria, as his hometown (in his Political Testament he referred to " my hometown of Linz on the Danube"). · Hitler's oldest brother, Gustav born on May 17, 1885, and his sister Ida, born in 1886, both died before he was born. · Bavaria was considered the "cradle" of Nazism. · The Nazis made Japan one of the Axis powers. At one point they tried to prove that the Japanese were Aryans, to make the Japanese members of the "master race." Now combine the above information with the following, culled from the life of Rizal: · On February 1, 1886, he left Paris for Germany. He went to Heidelberg, Wilhelmsfeld, Munich (in Bavaria), all somewhat near a German–Austrian border; on August 9, 1886 he left for Leipzig ("visiting various German cities along the way," one book says), arriving

there on August 14. In October he went to Dresden and then to Berlin.

· In Berlin he finished Noli Me Tangere. One of the book’s characters is named Maria Clara. · On May 11, 1887, Rizal began his Grand Tour of Europe. He went to Dresden, Teschen (now Decin in the former Czechoslovakia), Prague, and then Brunn (where he lost a diamond stickpin), and Vienna (where he got back his diamond stickpin, which was found by maid in the hotel he stayed in Brunn) in Austria. · On May 24, 1887, he left Vienna by riverboat to see sights on the Danube River (on the boat he saw paper napkins for the first time). His voyage ended at Linz. · From Linz he went to Munich (where Hitler attempted a putsch in 1923) and Nuremberg (site of the Nazi Party rallies and the War Crimes trials), and other German cities. · Rizal was in the German Empire, sometimes past the German-Austrian border, from February 1886 until he went to Switzerland in early June 1887. · Rizal was again in Europe from May 24, 1888, until October 18, 1891. He was in London, Paris, Brussels, Madrid, Biarritz, Ghent. He was in Europe during the time Hitler was conceived and when he was born. · Rizal in 1888 had an affair with a Japanese woman, Seiko Usui, when he visited Japan. She had an only daughter, Yuriko, by a foreign husband some years after her encounter with Rizal. Yuriko later married the son of a Japanese politician. Put all these information together and you may be able to conclude the following: Hitler was conceived either in 1887 when Rizal passed through Linz or other towns (such as Brunn - How do you think he lost the diamond stickpin? And who was the "maid" who found it later and gave it to Blumentritt who forwarded it to Vienna?) near the Austrian border. In which case Hitler’s older siblings were fictitious, to cover up his mother’s being pregnant with him. In other words, Hitler was actually born before 1889. Or he was conceived in August 1888, when Rizal was supposedly in London. Or perhaps in September 1888, when Rizal went to Paris for a week (to have a rendezvous with Klara?). Maybe he went to Paris in 1889 so he could communicate more easily with the now-expecting Klara? Klara Polzl’s affair with Rizal may have centered around Linz, which is why the Hitler family moved there later (so Mama Hitler could live where she had An affair to Remember), which would explain Hitler’s fondness for the town. Finally, Seiko Usui’s only daughter was not really fathered by her husband, Alfred Charlton. He was simply a front. Yuriko, you see, was Rizal’s daughter! And Hitler knew she was his half-sister. She used her influence on her brother Adolf to persuade him to enter into an alliance with Japan (making it one of the Axis powers). Which is why Japan invaded the Philippines! Yuriko made it clear to Hirohito that Hitler would appreciate it if his ally were to take over his father’s homeland. And of course the reason why Hitler wanted to become dictator of Germany was because his natural father had spent some of the most interesting years of his life there! That, I think, is the rationale behind such a fantastic claim based on information that can be gathered from any high school textbook on Rizal and any good biography of Adolf Hitler. Naturally, this can only be done through selective use of the evidence, but it does make for an amusing piece of historical fiction. Now, as to the idea that Mao Zedong was also Rizal’s son. Unfortunately this claim cannot be supported by even the most spurious evidence. Mao Zedong was born in 1893, in Hunan Province, which you could say is kind of near Hong Kong. But at that time (1893), Rizal was in exile in Dapitan. Now it would have been possible for Rizal to scamper around Europe and get Klara pregnant without anybody noticing, but he couldn’t possibly have jumped into a boat and rowed to Hongkong without being caught. He did pass through Hong Kong in 1888 and 1891 but he never seems to have visited other parts of China (unless you count Xiamen and Macao). So there are no details that can be manipulated. These exercises in foolishness prove how creative Filipinos can be. What other people would be able to make the bogus claim that one of their heroes fathered the man who almost turned Europe into a "howling wilderness" (to borrow from the instructions for the extermination of Samar by American forces at the turn of the century). That would have been poetic justice, I suppose. The brown man strikes back and all that sort of thing.…...

Similar Documents

Free Essay

Rizal

...MAIKLING TALAMBUHAY NI JOSE PROTACIO RIZAL (Manunulat, Pambasang Bayani ng Pilipinas, Dakilang Henyo ng Lahing Malayo) ISINILANG SA: Calamba, Laguna (Hunyo 19, 1861) BINARIL SA: Bagumbayan (ngayo’y Luneta; Disyembre 30, 1896) Mga Magulang: FRANCISO MERCADO at TEODORA ALONSO (“Z” sa ibang aklat) Mga Ninuno: Domingo Lamco, sa panig ng ama (negosyanteng Instik); Lakandula, sa panig ng ina (pinuno ng Tondo na namuno sa isang bigong pag-aalsa sa mga Kastila, inapo ni Rajah Sulayman ng Maynila) Nagbinyag: Padre Rufino Collantes Ninong: Padre Pedro Casañas Paboritong kura paroko/parish priest: Padre Leoncio Lopez (nagturo kay Rizal ng pagrespeto sa karapatan ng ibang tao) Buong Pangalan: Jose Protacio Mercado Rizal y Alonso Realonda Jose Protacio - first name Jose: sa karangalan ni San Jose, patron ng mga manggagawa, asawa ng Birheng Maria, tatay sa lupa ni Hesukristo Protacio: sa karangalan ni San Protacio (isang martir; kapistahan/feast day niya tuwing Hunyo 19) Mercado: tunay na apelyido ng kanyang ama; nangangahulugang “pamilihan/market” sa wikang Español Rizal: apelyidong pansamantalang pinagamit kapalit ng Mercado upang makaiwas sa gulo (kabibitay pa lamang sa Gomburza; konektado kay Padre Burgos si Paciano kaya delikado ang apelyidong Mercado); mula sa salitang Español na “ricial” (luntiang lupang tinatamnan ng trigo/green fields of barley) Alonso: tunay na apelyido ng ina noong dalaga pa/maiden name; middle name ni Jose Rizal Realonda: middle name ng kanyang......

Words: 3770 - Pages: 16

Premium Essay

Rizal

...Life of Jose Rizal JOSE RIZAL, the national hero of the Philippines and pride of the Malayan race, was born on June 19, 1861, in the town of Calamba, Laguna. He was the seventh child in a family of 11 children (2 boys and 9 girls). Both his parents were educated and belonged to distinguished families. His father, Francisco Mercado Rizal, an industrious farmer whom Rizal called "a model of fathers," came from Biñan, Laguna; while his mother, Teodora Alonzo y Quintos, a highly cultured and accomplished woman whom Rizal called "loving and prudent mother," was born in Meisic, Sta. Cruz, Manila. At the age of 3, he learned the alphabet from his mother; at 5, while learning to read and write, he already showed inclinations to be an artist. He astounded his family and relatives by his pencil drawings and sketches and by his moldings of clay. At the age 8, he wrote a Tagalog poem, "Sa Aking Mga Kabata," the theme of which revolves on the love of one’s language. In 1877, at the age of 16, he obtained his Bachelor of Arts degree with an average of "excellent" from the Ateneo Municipal de Manila. In the same year, he enrolled in Philosophy and Letters at the University of Santo Tomas, while at the same time took courses leading to the degree of surveyor and expert assessor at the Ateneo. He finished the latter course on March 21, 1877 and passed the Surveyor’s examination on May 21, 1878; but because of his age, 17, he was not granted license to practice the profession until......

Words: 998 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Rizal

...soldiers with bayoneted rifles moved. A few meters behind, Rizal walked calmly, with his defense counsel (Lt. Luis Taviel de Andrade) on one side and two Jesuit priests (Fathers March and Vilaclara) on the other. More well armed soldiers marched behind him. Rizal was dressed elegantly in a black suit, black derby hat, black shoes, white shirt, and black tie. His arms were tied behind from elbow to elbow, but the rope was quite loose to give his arms freedom of movement. To the muffled sounds of the drums, the cavalcade somnolently marched slowly. There was a handful of spectators lining the street from Fort Santiago to the Plaza del Palacio in front of the Manila Cathedral. Everybody seemed to be out at Bagumbayan, where a vast crowd gathered to see how a martyr dies. Going through the narrow Postigo Gate, one of the gates of the city wall, the cavalcade reached the Malecon (now Bonifacio Drive), which was deserted. Rizal looked at the sky, and said to one of the priests: "How beautiful it is today, Father. What morning could be more serene! How clear is Corregidor and the mountains of Cavite! On mornings like this, I used to take a walk with my sweetheart". While passing in front of the Ateneo, he saw the college towers above the wallls. He asked: "Is that Ateneo, Father?" "Yes", replied the priest. They reached Bagumbayan Field. The spectators crowded a huge square formed by soldiers. The cavalcade entered this square. Rizal walked serenely to the place, where he was......

Words: 926 - Pages: 4

Free Essay

Rizal

...Sa dalawang dulang napanood o nasaksihan ko, ipinapakita sa mga dulang ito na ang bawat tauhan sa dula ay may kanya-kanyang istilo para maipamalas sa mga manonood ng maganda at mahusay ang mga karakter na kanilang ginagampanan. Sa unang dula na pinamagatang Ang Panghimakas ni Donya Teodora, dito sa dulang ito, tanging si Donya Teodora lamang ang tauhan. Ipinakita dito ang pagiging ina ni Donya Teodora sa mga anak nya lalung-lalo na kay Pepe. Pinangalanan ni Donya Teodora si Jose Rizal na Jose sapagkat siya ay deboto ni San Jose. Sobrang maalaga at mapagmahal si Donya Teodora kay Pepe, kaya nga ng umalis si Pepe para mag-aral sa ibang bansa ay sobra itong nalungkot at sa pag-aaral ni Pepe doon sa ibang bansa ay naisulat nya ang isang nobela na kung saan ang isang tauhan doon ay si Sisa na inihalintulad nya sa kanyang ina na sa kasawiang palad ay nabaliw din. Sa pag-aaral ni Pepe sa ibang bansa at ang pagsulat nya ng mga nobela ang naging dahilan para siya ay mamatay. Sobrang hinanakit ang naramdaman ni Donya Teodora na nagging isa sa mga dahilan para sapitin ni Donya Teodora ang pagkabaliw kasama pa ang pang-uuyam ng mga tao na naririnig nya, mga kung anong usap-usap tungkol sa pamilya nila at idagdag pa na ang pamilya nila ay nakakulong sa mga kamay ng gwardya sibil. Dito sa dulang ito, inilabas ni Donya Teodora ang poot at gait nya sa mga praye at sa mga gwardya sibil pati na ang hinagpis nya sa alala ni Pepe, na hanggang sa kahuli-hulihang parte ng dula ay nanaig pa......

Words: 777 - Pages: 4

Free Essay

Rizal

...Rizal Sa Dapitan Rizal Sa Dapitan A Film Analysis There are only a few people who are able to stand up and fight for what is right. Only few can get the courage and believe that there really is hope if we all just fight for our rights, our beliefs and our country and one of these people showed Filipinos that we are not inferior and that we deserve a life that is the same as others. Our national hero, Dr. Jose Rizal, opened our eyes and fought for our freedom even if it means endangering himself and his family. He knew the consequences of his actions yet he still continued and never gave up the fight and stood till the very end. Being exiled in Dapitan is not really a haven for him, it was a prison, a place where he is away from his family and friends, where he felt sad and alone and still made the most out of it. Rizal Sa Dapitan is probably the one that stands out from the other Rizal movies that I know since it was very specific, focusing only on Rizal’s exile in Dapitan, Zamboanga del Norte. It gave viewers a quick glance of what life was like when our national hero was in a remote place and how did he cope up not only with the lifestyle in Dapitan but with his separation from his family. The film was able to depict how he used his talents and intelligence to help the small community in Dapitan and impart knowledge to young men. He made an irrigation system; he planted plants and crops, raised chickens and cure those who are sick. Even if our hero is in a remote......

Words: 380 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Rizal

...sBUHAY, GINAWA, AT MGA SINULAT NI JOSE RIZAL KABANATA 1 - ANG PAGDATING NG PAMBANSANG BAYANI A.    Pagsilang 1.     Isinilang si Rizal Noong Hunyo 19, 1861 sa Calamba, Laguna 2.     Bininyagan sa simbahan ng Calamba noong Hunyo 22, 1861. 3.     Padre Rufino Collantes - paring nagbinyag kay Rizal 4.     Padre Pedro Casanas - nagsilbing ninong ni Rizal A.    Magulang 1.     Francisco Mercado 1. Ipinanganak noong Mayo 11, 1818 2. Nag-aral ng Latin at Pilosopiya sa Colegio ng San San Jose 3. Lumipat ng Calamba upang maging kasama sa Haciendang Dominicano sa Calmba. 4. Namatay noong Enero 5, 1898. 2.     Teodora Alonzo 1. Ipinanganak noong Nobyembre 8, 1826 sa Maynila 2. Nag-aral sa Colegio de Santa Rosa 3. Mayroong interes sa literatura at mahusay sa wikang Espanyol. 4. Namatay noong Agosto 16, 1911 A.    Magkakapatid na Rizal 1.                 Saturnina 2.                 Paciano 3.                 Narcisa 4.                 Olympia 5.                 Lucia 6.                 Maria 7.                 Jose 8.                 Concepcion 9.                 Josefa 10.            Trinidad 11.            Soledad A.    Mga Ninuno 1.     Ninuno sa Ama 1. Domingo Lamco (Mercado) napangasawa si Ines de la Rosa naging anak si 2. Francisca Mercado at napangasawa si Cerila Bernacha naging anak si 3. Juan Mercado at napangasawa si Cerila Alejandro at naging anak si 4. Francisco...

Words: 16364 - Pages: 66

Free Essay

Rizal

...maintindihan. Hanggang sa ipakita ang kawawang ina ni Rizal. Ngunit nalito ako nang may ipakita na may inililibing at tila hinahanap ng isang babae at pagkatapos nuon ay biglang ipinakita si Rizal noong unang gabing ipinatapon siya sa Dapitan. Ang unang impresyon ni Rizal? Malungkot ang Dapitan. Ngunit ito ay pinabulaan ng isang heneral. Sinabi niya na hindi malungkot ang Dapitan kung hindi, ito ay tahimik at mapaya. Walang gulo. Kung ako naman ang tatanungin, papanig ako sa sinabi ng heneral. Dahil kung ang isang taong kagaya ni Rizal na madami ang poblema, mas mapapalagay ang kanyang isipan sa isang maaliwalas at mapayapang lugar. Isang paraiso para sa mga namomoblema. Isa-isa ding binanggit ni Rizal ang kanyang mga ninanais na reporma para sa Pilipinas- ang dahilan kung bakit siya ay nagbalik dito sa bansa kapalit ng kaligtasan niya sa Europa. Kaya naman idolo ko si Rizal dahil sa kanyang mga balak na gawin para sa mga Pilipino na hindi maintindihan ng iba. Una na dito ay ang pagkakaruon ng kinatawan ng mga Pilipino para maipaabot sa hari ng Espanya ang mga hinanaing ng mga Pilipino. Pangalawa, ang pagbabawas ng pangingialam ng mga prayle sa mga ginagawa ng mga tinatawag nilang indio. Ngunit ito ay napakahirap makuha o makamtan sapagkat malakas at makapangyarihan ang pagkakakapit ng mga prayle sa ating bansa. Natuwa din ako ng makita ko sa pelikulang iyon ang mga pinagkaabalahan ni Rizal sa Dapitan. Nakapagtanim siya doon......

Words: 723 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

Rizal

...learn and love our own first as a symbol of being nationalistic. The western influences especially their languages are influential and embraced by the Filipinos without hesitations. Even I, I came to a point that I do not like and patronize OPMs and local films--- why? I believe that the language used is so “cheap”. This should not be! These foreign influences are rampant and contagious! Rizal is right in writing a poem that encourages us to enrich and love our own dialect, our own language. In the poem he cited, “Ang hindi marunong magmahal sa sariling wika, mas higit pa sa hayop at malansang isda…” I am one of those Filipino who is obviously guilty of the crime--- I hated to speak in Filipino even my text messages and Facebook status shows that English is my medium to express myself. As I read thoroughly the poem, I have realized that we still have the same issue in Rizal’s time. One good example is the teaching of Mother Tongue Language to the primary years of the pupils in the K-12 curriculum. Some understands its value but almost criticize it. “The youth are the hope of the nation” Rizal taught us that. I hope each of the Filipino people can understand and discover the value of teaching the Mother Tongue language to children. Yes, to speak in English in necessary to the era today but mind you, people, have you ever learned to love your own dialect as much as you love English? Are we really worthy to be called as Filipinos? Maybe, it is time for us to think, reflect, act......

Words: 315 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Rizal

...The movie Jose Rizal which was excellently played by Cesar Montano as the lead role was a heartwarming one that shows how Rizal runs his life. While watching the movie, I felt mixed emotions given the fact that it was made to help us, Filipinos, understand what our national hero had done for the country. It shows how Rizal really love his mother country for him to sacrificed his own life. The film also works through a series of flashback showing Rizal as a genius, a write, a doctor, an artist, a lover, a friend, a brother, a son that gives texture to his character. It shows the great explanation of the Philippine history, the nationalism and heroism in a non-violent manner, though, there were times that the characters speak in Spanish language and I couldn’t understand it unless I will read the subtitles. I could also say that the other characters weren’t having any difficulties in reciting their Spanish lines. The actors’ dedication for the film is inevitable especially Cesar Montano who is very perfect for the role of Rizal. His values and great performance as the lead actor is impeccable and has a great impact on me as the audience of the said film. Also, the supporting casts like Jhong Hilario who played as Rizal’s servant, Jaime Fabregas as Rizal’s attorney did a great job on portraying their role fluently. They made it easy for me to understand the flow of the story. However, there are also negative comments that I must say about the movie. The plot......

Words: 484 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Rizal

...Reaction on Dr. Jose Rizal Dr. Jose Rizal is one of the Filipino heroes and he is the very famous enthusiast of the changes in the Philippines in the time of Spaniards invasion. He recognizes as one of the primary hero and selected as one of the national hero of the Philippines. Rizal was a great writer, he is a poet and novel writer, he wrote two novels the Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo. Thesew were very harsh indictments of Spanish tyranny and of the church which came to acquire immense political power. He founded the La Liga Filipina one organization that became way instead of integrality aggregation leaded by Andres bonifacio, one of the secret organizations that started a filipino rebellion against Spain that became fundamental of first republic of the Philippines under Emilio Aguinaldo. He is mainstay of having the Philippines own government in peaceful way instead in blustery rebellion, and just support the violence as the lasted resorted. He believe that the only reason of liberation of the Philippines and having own government was returning reputation of the citizens. Jose Rizal was the Filipino hero who sacrifice his life to gain the aspire freedom for the Philippines . Even we can say that he did not fight using sword but he fight using pen. And because of what he did, his life became miserable. His novel entitled Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo was the reason why Spaniards displeasure him. I can say that Jose Rizal is a tough; he can......

Words: 359 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Rizal

...Rizal's third letter from Heidelberg: Germany, Thursday, 11 March 1886 MISS TRINIDAD RIZAL MY DEAR SISTER TRINING, Since I left our country, I have received only four or five lines written by your hand, one or two insignificant news about you and nothing more. I don't know how you are and I cannot imagine your person. When I left you, you were very small. Now within two months you are going to be 18 years and in four years I suppose that you have grown up and you are becoming a young lady. At your age, German women seem to be 20 or 24 years, as much for their faces as for their ways.The German woman is serious, studious, and diligent, and as their clothes do not have plenty of color, and generally they have only three or four, they do not pay much attention to their clothes nor to jewels. They dress their hair simply, which is thin, but beautiful in their childhood. They go everywhere walking so nimbly or faster than men, carrying their books, their baskets, without minding anyone and only their own business. As I said to Pangoy, they are home-loving and they study cooking with as much diligence as they do music and drawing. If our sister María had been educated in Germany, she would have been notable, because German women are active and somewhat masculine. They are not afraid of men. They are more concerned with the substance than with appearances. Until now I have not heard women quarreling, which in Madrid is the daily bread. It is a pity that there in our...

Words: 451 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Rizal

...TALAHANAYAN NG BUHAY, GINAWA, AT MGA SINULAT NI JOSE RIZAL KABANATA 1 - ANG PAGDATING NG PAMBANSANG BAYANI A. Pagsilang 1. Isinilang si Rizal Noong Hunyo 19, 1861 sa Calamba, Laguna 2. Bininyagan sa simbahan ng Calamba noong Hunyo 22, 1861. 3. Padre Rufino Collantes - paring nagbinyag kay Rizal 4. Padre Pedro Casanas - nagsilbing ninong ni Rizal A. Magulang 1. Francisco Mercado 1. Ipinanganak noong Mayo 11, 1818 2. Nag-aral ng Latin at Pilosopiya sa Colegio ng San San Jose 3. Lumipat ng Calamba upang maging kasama sa Haciendang Dominicano sa Calmba. 4. Namatay noong Enero 5, 1898. 2. Teodora Alonzo 1. Ipinanganak noong Nobyembre 8, 1826 sa Maynila 2. Nag-aral sa Colegio de Santa Rosa 3. Mayroong interes sa literatura at mahusay sa wikang Espanyol. 4. Namatay noong Agosto 16, 1911 A. Magkakapatid na Rizal 1. Saturnina 2. Paciano 3. Narcisa 4. Olympia 5. Lucia 6. Maria 7. Jose 8. Concepcion 9. Josefa 10. Trinidad 11. Soledad A. Mga Ninuno 1. Ninuno sa Ama 1. Domingo Lamco (Mercado) napangasawa si Ines de la Rosa naging anak si 2. Francisca Mercado at napangasawa si Cerila Bernacha naging......

Words: 15260 - Pages: 62

Premium Essay

Rizal

...Reflections on Rizal - Three Thoughts Tiny Dancer Hero There is this idea that heroes inevitably reflect their country. When you think about it historical heroes exist as receptacles of a nation’s hopes and dreams. They are the guiding lights, the individuals who helped shape the nature of a people. Heroes are, in other words, can be considered the soul and conscience of a country. Their philosophies, ideals, and examples acting as the benchmarks for right collective action. That, as well, is why each generation must recast their nation’s heroes in new forms and view them in new perspectives. Heroes and their actions, much like all of history, are consistently up for reinterpretation. Without that process they will never be relevant. A disturbing question to ask is if our heroes are really relevant today. As a result, studying how our heroes are approached and constructed in the public sphere gives a country an understanding of who they are as a people. Heroes are a reflection of the values of a people. And if that is the case, as I strongly suspect it is, then the way we currently construct Jose Rizal (the way we approach him and his legacy) does not speak too well of us. There is something faintly disturbing about the fact that more is written, and known, in popular society (and pop history) about how many languages Rizal spoke (and how many women he supposedly bedded) than the importance of his annotated Morga. Or even that there is this pervasive sense of Rizal......

Words: 1293 - Pages: 6

Free Essay

Rizal

...pelikulang pinanghawakan ni Abaya, ang “José Rizal” ay isang makapangyarihan at maipluwensiyang obra sapagkat matapang at puro ang intensyong ginamit nito upang mahikayat ang mga tao sa panunuod lalo na’t maraming mga mananaliksik at Rizalista ang naglalayong mas makilala ang pambansa nating bayani. Mabuti na lamang at patuloy pa rin ang pag- usbong ng mga ganitong direksyon sapagkat mas maimumutawi sa ating mga Pilipino ang tungkol sa mga bagay- bagay na siyang bumubuhay sa ating kasaysayan. II. Paksang Diwa Dito naipakita ang buhay ng ating Rizal gayundin ang relasyon nito sa kaniyang mga nobelang El Filibusterismo at Noli Me Tangere. Maliban rito ay napaisantabi rin ang mga pangarap niya para sa bansa, ang pagsasakripisyo niya para sa taong bayan, ang padungis nito sa katauhan para sa pagmamahal at sa pag- iwan nito sa Inang bayan at pamilya para sa edukasyon, karangalan at pagbuo ng isang lipi na maglalayong pakawalan ang bansa sa bisig ng mga mapanirang- puri at mapagmalabis na Kastila. Sa pagkakatapon niya sa Dapitan ay maraming pagmumuni ang naipahatid sa atin. Bagamat naging usap- usapan ito sa mahabang panahon at hanggang ngayon ay hindi pa rin malaman ang kung anong kahiwagahang batid nito sa ating pagkatao ay patuloy itong namayani sa kaisipan at nagsilbing inspirasyon sa ating mga Pilipino upang kilalanin, purihin, patayin at muling buhayin si Rizal sa ating mga diwa. Alam naman na ’ting lahat na malaki ang naiambag ni Rizal sa ating pambansang kalayaan......

Words: 3721 - Pages: 15

Free Essay

Rizal

...Jose Rizal at the University of Santo Tomas Gian Linardo Mari T. Estrella  Enrolment at the University of Santo Tomas Even if Rizal liked painting much, he was not then intending to make art as his profession. He was not yet certain of what course to pursue. In his Memorias de un estudiante, he says that he was still undecided then about the university career he would follow as the school year 1877-1878 is nearing. Different authors of Rizal give different answers on what and who influenced Rizal in opting what course to take. It is the question of who made the final choice, he himself, his mother, his father, his brother or the Jesuits. Rizal tells us that his mother was worried about him pursuing a university career in Manila because of her ingenuity, or possibly her motherly instinct. His mother Teodora feared that Rizal would come to a bad end just as the fate of ilustrados before like Father Burgos. Buthe does not say in memorias de un estudiante, he did not specify what her mother preferred for him. His brother Paciano discouraged him from taking law, because of the belief that Rizal would not be able to practice that profession due to the political conditions that time. In his memorias de un estudiante, he recalls: “I enrolled in Metaphysics because, aside From the fact that I had doubts about the career I should follow, my father wanted me to study it (Metaphysics).”  Very likely, Don Francisco had pictured Rizal having a career in Civil Law. And due to this,......

Words: 2045 - Pages: 9