My hero, Jose. Rizal without Ambeth Ocampo!
Frank A. Hilario
June 18, 2010
To honor the memory of the Rizal family and their way of life, the National Historical Institute (NHI) chose to paint the Rizal Shrine Calamba in hues of green. This choice is appropriate; in 19th century Philippines, the upper stories of the bahay na bato were painted in a variety of bright tints.
I cannot reconcile the house of green of Rizal with the "bright tints" of Ambeth Ocampo. His green doesn´t look very bright to me.
In any case, the greening of Rizal by Ambeth Ocampo reflects his predilection in his writing for trivia or details, such as what Rizal ate for breakfast, which was dried fish; or what was the name of his dog, which I forgot; or gossip, like who was the father of Antonino Lopez who married Rizal´s sister Narcisa? A Mexican priest, Fr Leoncio Lopez. Gossip does not make history.
Ambeth Ocampo's book Rizal Without The Overcoat may be entertaining and even absorbing; now expanded, still it is not history. The Emperor Has No Clothes! This is not history. This is not helping students of Rizal appreciate Rizal´s life and writings in relation to his works. History is not a micro but a macro view. The details, the parts are important only in so far as they relate to the whole. Details as details don´t make wholes.
It´s just like painting the house of Rizal green - I do not find any significance of that to the life, writings or works of Rizal. One color doesn´t make a rainbow, which has meaning.
Details do not make history, just as details do not make the poem.
To honor the memory of the Rizal family and Rizal´s way of thinking, to celebrate the birthday of my hero, let me tell you about a neglected poem of his. It is now my favorite example of misplaced emphasis on detail, this poem that Jose Rizal wrote when he was only 8 years old (Asuncion Lopez-Rizal, 1994, Indio Bravo, page 24).
Sa Aking Mga Kabata
Ni Jose P Rizal
Kapagka ang baya´y sadyang umiibig
sa kanyang salitang kaloob ng langit,
sanlang kalayaan nasa ring masapit
katulad ng ibong nasa himpapawid.
Pagka´t ang salita´y isang kahatulan
sa bayan, sa nayo´t mga kaharian,
at ang isang tao´y katulad, kabagay
ng alin mang likha noong kalayaan.
Ang hindi magmahal sa sariling wika
mahigit sa hayop at malansang isda;
kaya ang marapat pagyamaning kusa
na tulad sa inang tunay na nagpala.
Ang wikang Tagalog tulad din sa Latin
sa Ingles, Kastila at salitang anghel,
sapagka´t ang Poong maalam tumingin
ang siyang naggawad, nagbigay sa atin.
Ang salita nati´y tulad din sa iba
na may alfabeto at sariling letra,
na kaya nawala´y dinatnan ng sigwa
ang lunday sa lawa noong dakong una.
By the way, the original word in the title was Kabata, not Kababata as some assign it. In translation, details like that are important.
Kabata has been made an anthem by those who favor Tagalog as the basis of the national language, that which they now call confusingly Filipino. These ultra-nationalists claim that in the 3rd stanza of Kabata, but especially the first 2 lines, the young Jose Rizal pen-pushed for love of language (Tagalog):
Ang hindi magmahal sa sariling wika
mahigit sa hayop at malansang isda;
kaya ang marapat pagyamaning kusa
na tulad sa inang tunay na nagpala.
I´m sorry to disappoint those who love the Tagalog language as the epitome of the Filipino, the Tagalistas and their advocates, but their more than 100-year-old interpretation is not only timeworn but also incorrect. Too ancient and too skewed in favor of a particular tongue.
This Ilocano will now show you what he means; let us now examine the poem in English, my translation, with an a/b/b/a rhyme scheme, which is daring, in contrast with the original´s a/a/a/a, which is boring:
To Kids Of My Own Time
Translated by Frank A Hilario
If the people naturally love
its tongue that is a gift from Heaven,
pawned freedom too it will seek to gain
as the bird that flies the sky above.
Since language is an estimation
of kingdom, town and community,
and man is like, a match to any
creature who has been of freedom born.
His native tongue who does not treasure
is worse than a beast or smelly fish;
´tis right that on our own we nourish
like a mother who bestows favor.
Tagalog language is like Latin,
English, Spanish, and angelic tongue,
because God who has the wisdom
is He who gave, to us did assign.
Our own language, like any other,
had alphabet and letters, its own,
now vanished since by waves overthrown
like bancas in the lake long before.
Actually, I translated this little poem in 1998, or 12 years ago, and that was when I discovered the linguistic error in interpretation. Something is always found in the translation.
Now then, let´s examine the whole poem and not only the 3rd stanza. It is true that Kabata mentions tongue in the 1st stanza, language in the 2nd stanza, tongue in the 3rd stanza, language and tongue in the 4th stanza, and language in the 5th and last stanza. Tongue (salita) and language (wika) in this poem mean the same thing: language. And this has been the source of error in interpreting the poem as a paean for love of language.
The source of error is that what the poem says is taken literally, not as it should be, literarily. The clue to the real meaning of tongue or language is in the last stanza:
Our own language, like any other,
had alphabet and letters, its own,
now vanished since by waves overthrown
like bancas in the lake long before.
The use of the word "language" in the poem cannot really mean "language" because the poet says this one had its own alphabet and letters but now they´re gone. The fact was that the poet was using that very same language that (the ultra-nationalists thought) he was lamenting had gone. Therefore, the poet did not really mean the Tagalog language but freedom, which the Filipinos lost to the Spanish conquerors. "Language" (with its component "alphabet" and "letters") was his metaphor for "freedom." In fact, he repeats the word "freedom" in the 2nd stanza:
and man is like, a match to any
creature who has been of freedom born.
The very young poet had misled his readers even with his title, "Sa Aking Mga Kabata," which is not poetic at all. I suspect he didn´t want the Spaniards or their spies to suspect, much less to easily understand, what he was saying.
The poem was written sometime in 1869. So, all these 141 years, all those literal thinkers had missed the real import of Kabata; in fact, it is plain to liberal thinkers that the essence of the poem lies in the very first stanza:
If the people naturally love
its tongue that is a gift from Heaven,
pawned freedom too it will seek to gain
as the bird that flies the sky above.
The 8-year-old Jose Rizal multiplied his mention of "tongue" and "language" in his little poem so that it can hardly be noticed that in fact he was talking about freedom. The boy already knew (or his mother had already taught him) the use of subterfuge in language. His mother had taught her son very well.
The boy poet was in fact writing of "pawned freedom" and not "pawned language" - the Filipinos had effectively surrendered their freedom to the Spaniards. (In case of doubt, I must say that in this poem freedom is not independence, which is a different subject.) In all those steady subservient centuries and sporadic revolutionary times, the Tagalog language (not to mention the Ilocano language) was always within reach of the tongue, but freedom was out of reach of the hands and feet. In other words, with Kabata, the boy Jose Rizal was already calling for a revolution of consciousness among the Filipinos! He was silently screaming, "Countrymen, set your minds free!" They don´t make boys like they used to anymore.
Print
Email
