Rizal Without the Overcoat by Ambeth Ocampo

Title: Rizal Without the Overcoat
Author: Ambeth Ocampo
Publisher: Anvil Publishing,Inc.
Original Publication Date: 1990
Pages: 272


"Jose Rizal Mercado y Alonso (1861-96) is the Philippine national hero because an American governor gave him that recognition. President Taft did not choose Aguinaldo because he was too militaristic; Rizal fitted the ideal of national leader for the Filipinos. (Arcilla 1984:88)"<

Jose Rizal is touchy subject for most Filipino scholars. It is worth emphasizing that unlike the designation of the Narra as the National tree, or the Mango as the National fruit, ejusdem generis, there is no law designating Rizal as the Philippine national hero. So contrary to popular belief, the post of 'THE' National Hero is, in all its actuality, lodged in a genuine debate, and not merely in a verbal one.

If you are interested in reading a more academic approach of why Rizal is worthy of being labeled as the Philippine national hero, read Leon M. Guerrero's book The First Filipino.

The title is not a mere designation. Rizal Without the Overcoat endeavors to present Rizal, without the overcoat, the overcoat of the European influence embossed upon this enamored persona though his European education. In some sense, this could be certainly taken as a post-colonial approach in viewing Rizal.

The book is a compilation of articles Ambeth Ocampo wrote in a Philippine newspaper, which says a lot about his writings. Ocampo's writing has been designated as 'popular history' and it is not without any grounding at all. Popular history is history writing striving for a very wide audience of non-specialists. Reading this made me feel I was going through a Rizal trivia book, it was enjoyable (who doesn't love trivias?), and had its moments. Of course the necessary critiques of this form includes the style, analytical depth and the wealth of resources/references which in Ocampo's case has suffered from existential dearth. Be critical in reading Ocampo, you may just subliminally fall into his bandwagon.

But is there a need to remove the overcoat? Who is Rizal but the man who sought education in the foreign shores to liberate his people? Is he too not defined by the knowledge, motivations, social stimuli he encountered wearing that overcoat? Is the overcoat not a part of who Rizal truly is?


P.S.
Entirely not part of this book's review!
I seem to keep reading the statement that Rizal wrote for the people, for the masses, for the 'Indios'! Rizal did not write for the masses, the two seminal novels were originally written in Spanish, a Lingua Franca known only to the Filipino landed elite, the landlords, and even to them a limited number was capable of reading. More importantly, books were a luxury then compared to today. Noli and El Fili were inaccessible when it first came out.

A Book of Five Rings by Miyamoto Musashi

Title: A Book of Five Rings: A Classic Guide to Strategy
Author: Miyamoto Musashi (宮本 武蔵)
Publisher: Gramercy (1988)
Original Publication Date: circa 1645
Pages: 96

Superb. Somehow when he speaks of the way, Star Wars' Jedi's way come into mind. However, I have yet to find a work that does not to pale in comparison with Sun Tzu's Art of War. A book of five rings talks about the way of the long sword (primary samurai sword), everything affecting it, and how, a successful master strategist could apply the "individual aspect to those of a battle of a ten to thousand warring individuals." I however miserably fail at this endeavor. I simply cannot visualize the acclaimed application of the contents to a full-scale battle (perhaps a veracious sign that I have not been born with the makings of a strategist). The book is rather concise in form and owing to the brevity and nature of the topic by which Musashi wrote, he could't have done any better. As in Musashi's words one must either "study this well" or "research diligently" to rationalize substantial parts of the work.

Crusades: The Illustrated History by Thomas Madden

Originally posted at Goodreads

Religion is the power that wields the sword that is faith.

The Crusades are seemingly anomalous in nature which however, save for the rai·son d'être that is still under great contention, was like any other war waged in the history of men: devoid of mercy, riddled with corruption and which ended in mutual defeat and further enmity if not in destruction. There is inherent difficulty in reconciling the Christian doctrine that emphasizes the value of life beyond any measure to those of taking it under the claims of being sanctioned by God, if ever it truly was. And by this inquiry a further irony is revealed that one has to have faith with God, the Church and Religion to question such disposition. This is why the crusades have such proclivity towards disquisition with scholars and laymen alike.

Let me start by saying what Madden's work is not. At an entire 228 pages, including the illustrations, explanatory boxes, sidebars and chronology, one can accurately deduct, even foresee, what the book contains and to what extent it manages the historical narrative of the Crusades. One who desires to be well versed in the history of the Crusades should think about picking this book up. It is not a historical book brimful of historical discourses nor is it chockfull of the rationalization for such discourses. It too lack the further essential milieu existing in derivative albeit vital events of the era. However, it should be the first book that one who desires to be well versed in the history of the Crusades should pick up, INITIALLY.

This is because Madden's book is a concise historical work, aspiring to provide a broad overview of the Crusades. Works such as Madden's are characterized by broadness in trying to present every facet of the narrative and yet they too are distinguished by the brevity at which they delve into each facet. One can say that the particular design books of such kind address is providing laymen with an outline of events and basic knowledge of the subject.

The dilemma of books of this kind is that they are presenting a convoluted and sophisticated narrative intricately entangled with man's history as simple and as concise as possible (with the use of these adjectives I feel I could not further improved on emphasizing my point). More essential to this argument is that books are written in the writer's perspective and it is he/she that determines the pivotal points in the historical narrative to include. Differences inevitably arise between works, but more importantly, the reader's interest falls into a deadlock (of which i pray should not happen, once is too much in this occasion) encountering a point in the narrative that is mentioned only in passing but is seemingly vital to the reader's conscious reasoning in understanding the very narrative itself.

Further consideration is, and this is true not only with Madden's work, the volume by which the people and events are mentioned are taxing to the memory of a non-eidetic intelligence (as i have experienced myself). This is also because the persona of the individuals involved does not create a connection, relation, or mark in passing mention, just as the events do not leave an impression. A pedigree would greatly help. Also a map for every vital period within the narrative, as these are limited in the work, would be a revelation.

A caveat however is needed. The perspective from where this is review is written is apparent. I would not relegate the work into failure even how much it would seem the words are couch in the negative. I picked up the book out of sheer curiosity of the illustrations inside. Critically speaking, the book did present the Crusade's narrative as objectively as possible save on one or two occasions where Madden claimed support for his thesis.

I have yet to compare the illustrations (composed of photos of ruins and relics complimented by the paintings of the era) to other books constituting of the same composition. As it stands, The included illustrations are visually pleasing, well detailed and I might say, well selected by virtue of their relevance and bearing with the discussions presented.

Revolutionary Clergy by John Schumacher, S.J.

Originally posted at Goodreads

John Schumacher, S.J. is an amazing academician and that is giving respect to where it is due. He had written 180+ books and articles (and is still continuing to do so at this review's writing), all considerably well-researched. Ironically however, I must write down that the reason by which he can be considered a successful researcher is also the reason by which his writings (most prevalent, concerning those of nationalism) must be greatly challenged if not expounded and more thoroughly (as it is well researched as it stands) researched upon. However, before expounding on the reason for giving only three stars on John Schumacher's works, I still suggest one to read his works as they provide a distinctive perspective and approach upon the topics he has grazed.

John Schumacher offers us a different perspective on the development of nationalism. He presents the standpoint of the friars, and the clergymen present in every facet of the colonial regime. His excellent academic and scholastic training merits him an effective researcher. To such end, his works have been great historical researches, founded upon documents of great importance.

Schumacher’s works, however, can only be credited as far as merit for use of sources go (my standpoint as a scholar). His works clearly provide us with a perspective but in so much that it is examined as an objective work, it fails to impress for precisely the same reason, that he is first and foremost a man of the Church.

If he is credited well in his voluminous works and use of sources in his studies, it is apparent that his authorial bias induced that parts of contrary evidences and repudiating circumstances were left out to fit in his defense for the clergy.

(One example of the manner by which Schumacher is blatantly guilty of my claims is when he repetitively asserts his argument that Jose Rizal derived his nationalistic bearings and was greatly influenced by Father Burgos though the evidence he presents to support this claim is nothing but an indirect connection between Rizal and Burgos and nothing else was presented further. This indirect connection was between Rizal and Paciano who is Burgos' nephew, who also helped him enter Ateneo Munipal, but as i stressed, no other personal and direct connection between Rizal and Burgos was presented).

This bias in research can actually be summarized in the fact that his nationalistic ideas are modernist in nature. By this consideration, never did Schumacher really give any significance in the pre-Spanish era of Filipino culture and history that post-colonial studies actually call for.

There is this fundamental conflict within his ideas that ultimately fails to impress but in effect exposes the evident bias with the friar orders. I am led to question for what reasons were such researches done. Was it in light of clarifying matters and the genuinely love for knowledge or was it in the end aimed to defend the positions the men of the faith took those pressing times? He presents a well-researched historical inquiry that is founded on the role of the clergy that in the end, demerits his claims at worst, and at best, contaminates his ideas and conclusions. The fundamental conflicts in his arguments demerit it so some extent but more importantly it exposes his attempt to wipe clean the slate of the friar orders and is a clear representation of his authorial bias.

Researchers could very well consult his works as it does provide a significantly different perspective, and it was exceptional at doing that. By doing so, one can supplement and avoid the very dilemma we consequentially aim to address, a limited and bias understanding of things. As it stands, it will provide an excellent perspective of Filipino nationalism from the eyes of the clergy.

Notes on the New Society of the Philippines by Ferdinand Marcos

Title: Notes on the New Society of the Philippines
Author: Ferdinand Marcos
Original Publication Date: 1973
Pages: 214
Genre/s: History, Academic, Filipiniana


Marcos has proven too well that his political charisma can be fully translated in what he writes. Notes on the New Society of the Philippines is no exception to that (Caution: He might win you over).

Just as his tyrannical and definitively despotic regime pretentiously stood for the mere vestiges of democracy itself, so too does this book contain what the ideals Marcos has sought to ennoble which, as history judged it to be, succumbed to nothing less than corruption and iniquity.

Aside from the standard fill of making things superficially palatable, of unfounded and unsubstantiated conclusions and the not too subtly contrived authorial biases, Notes on the New Society of the Philippines can still infallibly function as the proverbial window to the soul of one of the most remembered Presidents in the Philippines, not in a noble nor revered manner (save what could be called fundamentally fanatics in existence), but still remembered.

Let us take in hindsight what he wrote in page 50 concerning the Constitution and Martial Law.

"The Constitution therefore provides for its (Martial Law) survival in a clear, orderly and democratic manner for the instrument used is not only legal but moral in the highest sense. It places the proclamation of martial law under the Rule of Law.

This resolves the eternal moral question of Ends and Means, The Constitution, being democratic in spirit and content, does not recognize means which are not integral with, or not logically follow from, its ends, even though that end may be self-preservation itself."(Emphasis mine)

And on page 127 on Martial law and its so called uniqueness.

"Our martial law is unique in that it is based on the supremacy of the civilian authority over the military and on complete submission to the decision of the Supreme Court, and most importantly of all, the people. It is unique in that it does not seek to maintain the status quo but has instead brought about radical reforms.(Emphasis mine)

We all know how that turned out to be, with old Justice Teehankee(later C.J. under Cory Aquino) barely holding out, but certainly with great conviction and nothing less of the ideal.

Much can be said and deduced with these meager passages. I do not intend to misquote nor offer an unwarranted argument lest I fall in the same boat. Deductions are clear as can ever be as echoed in the annals of history.

In hindsight, this perspective relegates the human capacity in determining morality, which I believe is an entirely different thing with what is legal. This stand does not come with surprise. Marcos has alienated the people and these words point to his mental inclination to pursue such ends, and history sufficiently offers us the more than adequate manifestations of his bearings.

And just as most writings concerning sociological and cultural matters, Notes on the New Society lies in the plain of the ideal. And if not for critically examining the facts, all would have but remained an enigma, hauntingly questioning us, what went wrong? What revelation it would have been if the ideal remained, forever to be, an ideal, but depressingly, it became a corrupted, depraved and brutally oppressive reality beyond any recognition.