The Indolence of the FilipinosBy Jose Rizal

When? Published in 5 instalments, from July 15 – September 15, 1890, in Madrid, Spain (La Solidaridad). Why? To explain the alleged “laziness” of the Filipinos during the Spanish colonization Rizal’s Purposes:

- To serve the country by telling the truth.- To show how we were discriminated.- To illustrate how we inherited some of our negative traits from the Spaniards.- To let us know how we could rise from oppression.- To show us that we have been deceived- To remind us what we were, are, and could be.

Before the Spaniards came, we were active and honest in trading, use our abilities and resources for our country’s benefits, never corrupt, industrious and passionate, independent, value nature, and protective and defensive of our territory.

When the Spaniards came, we became gamblers, dependent, powerless, corrupt, amnesiacs, disloyal to our “identity”, and indolent.

Being discontent, having continual wars and tolerance, due to slavery, getting deceits from the Spaniards, allowing pirates from the south (Mindanao Muslim pirates), and lacking unity, the Filipinos became indolent.

Two main reasons why the Filipinos are indolent: Defects of training

Limited training at home, school Inactivity results from this One will move to being a copycat (suited to nature) Do what is told to us (e.g., giving gold to church, etc.)

Lack of national sentiment “A man in the Philippines is only an individual; he is not a member of a nation. He is

forbidden the right to association, and is; therefore, weak and sluggish.” The summary of the essay:

He defends the Filipinos by saying that they are not indolent by nature because in fact, even before the arrival of Spaniards, Filipinos have been engaged in economic activities such as agriculture and trade. Indolence therefore has more deeply rooted causes such as abuse and discrimination, inaction of the government, rampant corruption and red tape, wrong doctrines of the church and wrong examples from some Spaniards who lead lives of indolence which ultimately led to the deterioration of Filipino values. In the end, Rizal sums up the main causes of indolence to the limited training and education Filipino natives receive and to the lack of national sentiment and unity among them. Education and liberty, according to Rizal, would be the cure to Filipino indolence.

Notes:- You adapt to the climate; the climate does not adapt to you.- “siesta”

Significance:You should not judge an individual especially if you do not know the culture of that person. Remember the importance

of having Filipino values and qualities, regardless of how other nationalities accept us.

The Indolence of the Filipino

I. SummaryThe Indolence of the Filipino was published in La Solidaridad in Madrid in 1890. This was written by Jose Rizal as a response

to the accusation of Filipino indolence. Rizal admits that indolence among the Filipinos exists, but there could be numbers of reasons behind it. He traces its causes to factors such as the climate and social disorders. He defends the Filipinos by saying that they are by nature not indolent, because in fact, Filipinos have been engaged in economic activities such as agriculture and trade even before the arrival of Spaniards. In the end, Rizal summarizes the main causes of indolence to the limited training and education Filipino natives receive and to the lack of national sentiment and unity among them. According to Rizal, education and liberty would be the cure to Filipino indolence.

II. Salient Points “Indolence, instead of holding it to be the cause of the backwardness and the trouble, we regard it as the effect of the trouble and

the backwardness, by fostering the development of a lamentable predisposition.” “Man's object is not to satisfy tile passions of another man; his object is to seek happiness for himself and his kind by traveling

along the road of progress and perfection.” “Man works for an object. Remove the object and you reduce him to inaction.” “Man’s is his self-esteem. Take it away from him and he is a corpse, and he who seeks activity in a corpse will encounter only

worms.”III. Reaction

Jose Rizal’s The Indolence of the Philippines is a self-defense against the hatred and calumnies of the oppressors who condemn the Filipinos as inert, unresponsive and useless. I disagree on what those people say that Filipino workers are unskilled, untrained, misguided, irresponsibly haughty, intoxicated with show, romp and glory, and unconcerned with the intrinsic value of work. It’s not a concrete reasons or basis for them to conclude that Filipinos are indolent. Filipinos were in fact hardworking people who are very dedicated with their works. It is more right to say that indolence of Filipinos is he effect, not the cause, of Philippine

backwardness. They way Spaniards treated the Filipinos made them indolent. They snatched the land of Filipinos and work for their own soil without benefiting from it. They made Filipinos believe that rich people have no place in heaven and poor’s have, making them give more offerings, because of wrong doctrines of the church, to the extent of leaving nothing for them. They introduce miracles that made Filipinos very dependent to it. Abuses and corruptions ultimately faded the true Filipino values.

If Filipinos had only retained their rights over their properties, their own land, they would be more determined to improve their ways of living. If they were free to learn, they would know better. If they were not being fooled by the wrong doctrines, they would still have their own ways. If they were just taught the best, they would not be worsening. But it’s never too late to correct the wrong impression. We Filipinos should also do our part for this. Be educated and learn from the past. It is true that education and liberty would be the cure for Filipino indolence.

The Indolence of the Filipinos: Summary and Analysis

La Indolencia de los Filipinos, more popularly known in its English version, "The Indolence of the Filipinos," is a exploratory essay written by Philippine national hero Dr. Jose Rizal, to explain the alleged idleness of his people during the Spanish colonization.SUMMARY           The Indolence of the Filipinos is a study of the causes why the people did not, as was said, work hard during the Spanish regime.  Rizal pointed out that long before the coming of the Spaniards, the Filipinos were industrious and hardworking.  The Spanish reign brought about a decline in economic activities because of certain causes:        First, the establishment of the Galleon Trade cut off all previous associations of thePhilippines with other countries in Asia and the Middle East.  As a result, business was only conducted with Spain through Mexico.  Because of this, the small businesses and handicraft industries that flourished during the pre-Spanish period gradually disappeared.        Second, Spain also extinguished the natives’ love of work because of the implementation of forced labor.  Because of the wars between Spain and other countries in Europe as well as the Muslims in Mindanao, the Filipinos were compelled to work in shipyards, roads, and other public works, abandoning agriculture, industry, and commerce.        Third, Spain did not protect the people against foreign invaders and pirates.  With no arms to defend themselves, the natives were killed, their houses burned, and their lands destroyed.  As a result of this, the Filipinos were forced to become nomads, lost interest in cultivating their lands or in rebuilding the industries that were shut down, and simply became submissive to the mercy of God.        Fourth, there was a crooked system of education, if it was to be considered aneducation.  What was being taught in the schools were repetitive prayers and other things that could not be used by the students to lead the country to progress.  There were no courses in Agriculture, Industry, etc., which were badly needed by the Philippines during those times.        Fifth, the Spanish rulers were a bad example to despise manual labor.  The officials reported to work at noon and left early, all the while doing nothing in line with their duties.  The women were seen constantly followed by servants who dressed them and fanned them – personal things which they ought to have done for themselves.        Sixth, gambling was established and widely propagated during those times.  Almost everyday there were cockfights, and during feast days, the government officials and friars were the first to engange in all sorts of bets and gambles.        Seventh, there was a crooked system of religion.  The friars taught the naïve Filipinos that it was easier for a poor man to enter heaven, and so they preferred not to work  and remain poor so that they could easily enter heaven after they died.        Lastly, the taxes were extremely high, so much so that a huge portion of what they earned went to the government or to the friars.  When the object of their labor was removed and they were exploited, they were reduced to inaction.        Rizal admitted that the Filipinos did not work so hard because they were wise enough to adjust themselves to the warm, tropical climate.  “An hour’s work under that burning sun, in the midst of pernicious influences springing from nature in activity, is equal to a day’s labor in a temperate climate.”

ANALYSISIt is important to note that indolence in the Philippines is a chronic malady, but not a hereditary one.  Truth is, before the Spaniards arrived on these lands, the natives were industriously conducting business with China, Japan, Arabia, Malaysia, and other countries in the Middle East.  The reasons for this said indolence were clearly stated in the essay, and were not based only on presumptions, but were grounded on fact taken from history. Another thing that we might add that had caused this indolence, is the lack of unity among the Filipino people.  In the absence of unity and oneness, the people did not have the power to fight the hostile attacks of the government and of the other forces of society.  There would also be no voice, no leader, to sow progress and to cultivate it, so that it may be reaped in due time.  In such a condition, the Philippines remained a country that was lifeless, dead, simply existing and not living.  As Rizal stated in conclusion, “a man in the Philippines is an individual; he is not merely a citizen of a country.”It can clearly be deduced from the writing that the cause of the indolence attributed to our race is Spain: When the Filipinos wanted to study and learn, there were no schools, and if there were any, they lacked sufficient resources and did not present more useful knowledge; when the Filipinos wanted to establish their businesses, there wasn’t enough capital nor protection from the government; when the Filipinos tried to cultivate their lands and establish various industries, they were made to pay enormous taxes and were exploited by the foreign rulers. It is not only the Philippines, but also other countries, that may be called indolent, depending on the criteria upon which such a label is based.  Man cannot work without resting, and if in doing so he is considered lazy, they we could say that all men are indolent.  One cannot blame a country that was deprived of its dignity, to have lost its will to continue building its foundation upon the backs of its people, especially when the fruits of their labor do not so much as reach their lips.  When we spend our entire lives worshipping such a cruel and inhumane society, forced upon us by aliens who do not even know our motherland, we are destined to tire after a while.  We are not fools, we are not puppets who simply do as we are commanded – we are human beings, who are motivated by our will towards the accomplishment of our objectives, and who strive for the preservation of our race.  When this fundamental aspect of our existence is denied of us, who can blame us if we turn idle?

Indolence of the Filipinos (“La Indolencia de los Filipinos”)

The essay itself originally appeared in the Filipino forthrightly review, La Solidaridad, of Madrid, in five installments, running from July 15 to September 15, 1890. It was a continuation of Rizal's campaign of education in which he sought by blunt truths to awaken his countrymen to their own faults at the same time that he was arousing the Spaniards to the defects in Spain's colonial system that caused and continued such shortcomings. (Craig, 1913)

PART 1    indolence – misused in the sense of little love for work and lack of energy indolence does exist among the Filipinos examine the causes based on facts before proposing a remedy climate – factor for being indolent

o “A hot, climate requires of the individual quiet and rest, just as cold incites to labor and action.”o “A man can live in any climate, if he will only adapt himself to its requirements and conditions.”

Working hours of Filipinos (tenants) vs. Spanish Official and Landlords Tendency to indolence is very natural Effect of misgovernment

PART 2    analogy of physician( friars, Spanish government) , patient(Philippines), illness (indolence) indolence as a chronic illness

o “Indolence in the Philippines is a chronic malady, but not a hereditary one”     Before the arrival of Spaniards, Malayan Filipinos raised on an active trade, not only among        themselves but also with other neighboring countries (evidence that Filipinos were not indolent)

an illness will worsen if the wrong treatment is given “How is it that the Filipino people, so fond of its customs as to border on routine, has given up its ancient habits of work, of

trade, of navigation, etc., even to the extent of completely forgetting its past?”

PART 3    enumerates several reasons that may have caused the Filipinos cultural and economic corruption wars: conflict among Spaniards, natives and Moros invasion of Pirates

o Results: diminished number of native Filipinos forced labor : Filipinos were sent abroad to fight for Spain or shipyards to construct vessels Some Filipinos hide in the forest and mountains and abandoned their farm lands (because of fear) “Still they struggled a long time against indolence, yes: but their enemies were so numerous that at last they gave up!

PART 4   §   Cut-off of trading§            Monopoly§            Abuse of land lords (ecnomenderos)o    Permission to labor (KASAMA System)§            Absence of encouragement from the governmento    no aid for poor cropso    does not seek market for its products§  Wrong teaching:o    Why work? If the rich man will not go to heaven.o    False teaching of churcho    Gambling – promise of sudden wealth§  Discrimination on education§  Spaniards insisted to Filipinos:o    “The Filipino is convinced that to get happiness it is necessary for him to lay aside his dignity as a rational creature, to attend mass, to believe what is told him, to pay what is demanded of him, to pay and forever to pay; to work, suffer and be silent, without aspiring to anything, without aspiring to know or even to understand Spanish,without separating himself from his carabao, as the priests shamelessly say, without protesting against any injustice, against any arbitrary action, against an assault, against an insult; that is, not to have heart, brain or spirit: a creature with arms and a purse full of gold ............ there's the ideal native!”§  Yet Filipinos still have inspirations, he thinks and strive to rise

PART 5§  causes of indolence can be reduced to two factors(emerged from the people)

o    limited training and education of Filipino native·         developed inferiority

o    lack of a national sentiment of unity among them·        “A man in the Philippines is only an individual; he is not a member of a nation.”

§  education and liberty is the key to solve this issue

Jovie Marie P. Gabison MWF 3:30 – 4:30 pm October 9, 2009

The Indolence of the Filipinos Final Requirement

Questions:

1) Define Indolence. Cite sources.

*Indolence - Inactivity resulting from a dislike of work

Synonyms:Laziness ; inactiveness , inactivity - a disposition to remain inactive or inert Faineance , idleness - the trait of being idle out of a reluctance to work

Shiftlessness - a failure to be active as a consequence of lack of initiative or ambition (thefreedictionary.com)

- The quality or state of being lazy: idleness, laziness, shiftlessness, sloth, slothfulness, sluggishness. (answers.com)

- (n.) Freedom from that which pains, or harasses, as toil, care, grief, etc.

- (n.) The quality or condition of being indolent; inaction, or want of exertion of body or mind, proceeding from love of ease or aversion to toil; habitual idleness; indisposition to labor; laziness; sloth; inactivity. (thinkexist.com)

2) Why should indolence of the Filipinos be not considered hereditary?Indolence in the Philippines is a chronic malady, but not a hereditary one. The Filipinos have not been always what they are, witnesses whereto are all the historians of the first years after the discovery of the Islands.

Before we judge a person if he is indolent or not, we should first recognize what is his objective and the circumstance he has been through before asserting that he is an indolent.

Laziness is subjective. Maybe this time, a certain individual strives hard to achieve his goal, and the next thing, we’ll be seeing him chilling under a big tree drinking his mango shake. A person may feel doing what he wants or not. It is when he has got motivated in doing it so.

3) Explain and give an example for each of the following factors that contribute to the indolence of the Filipinos.a. Climate

A hot climate requires the individual quiet and rest, just as cold incites to labor and action. For this reason the Spaniards are more indolent than the Frenchman; the Frenchman more so than the German. The Europeans themselves who reproach the residents of the colonies so much, how do they live in tropical countries? Surrounded by a numerous train of servants, never going afoot but riding in a carriage, needing servants not only to take off their shoes for them but even to fan them! And yet they live and eat better, they work for themselves to get rich, with the hope of a future, free and respected, while the poor colonist, the indolent colonist, is badly nourished, has no hope, toils for others, and works under force and compulsion! Perhaps the reply to this will be that white men are not made to stand the severity of the climate. A mistake! A man can live in any climate, if he will only adapt himself to its requirements and conditions. What kills the European in hot countries is the abuse of liquors, the attempt to live according to the nature of his own country under another sky and another sun. We inhabitants of hot countries live well in northern Europe whenever we take the precautions the people there do. Europeans can also stand the Torrid Zone, if only they would get rid of their prejudices.

Accordingly, the Filipinos, in spite of the climate, in spite of their few needs, were not the indolent creatures of our time, and, as we shall see later on, their ethics and their mode of life were not what is now complacently attributed to them.

b. Wars

Wars are the internal disorders which the new change of affairs naturally brought with it. It was necessary to subject the people either by cajolery or force; there were fights, there was slaughter; those who had submitted peacefully seemed to repent of it; uprisings were suspected, and some occurred; naturally there were executions, and many capable laborers perished. Add to this condition of disorder the invasion of Limahong, add the continual wars into which the inhabitants of the Philippines were plunged to maintain the honor of Spain, to extend the sway of her flag in Borneo, in the Moluccas and in Indo-China; to repel the Dutch foe: costly wars, fruitless expeditions, in which each time thousands and thousands of native archers and rowers were recorded to have embarked, but whether they returned to their homes was never stated.

These rough attacks, coming from without, produced a counter effect, in the interior, which, carrying out medical comparisons, was like a purge or diet in an individual who has just lost a great deal of blood.

c. Gambling

We do not mean to say that before the coming of the Spaniards, the natives did not gamble. The passion for gambling is innate in adventuresome and excitable races, and such is the Malay. Pigafetta tells us of cock-fights and of bets in the Island of

Paragua. Cock-fighting must also have existed in Luzon and in all the islands, for in the terminology of the game are two Tagalog words: sabong, and tari (cockpit and gaff). But there is not the least doubt that the fostering of this game is due to the government, as well as the perfecting of it. Moreover, excepting the two Tagalog words sabong and tari, the others are of Spanish origin, as soltada (setting the cocks to fight, then the fight itself), presto, (apuesta, bet), logro (winnings), pago (payment), sentenciador (referee), case (to cover the bets), etc. We say the same about gambling: the word sugal (jugar, to gamble), like kumpisal (confesar, to confess to a priest), indicates that gambling was unknown in the Philippines before the Spaniards came.

d. Attitude of the Friars

For the first time in three centuries, the Filipinos were obliged to support the Church which formerly had cost them nothing. They could not comprehend the situation. They were reluctant to pay. But, on the other hand, the friars were forced by circumstances to collect these fees. The official commissioner, De Mas, in his report wrote: One of the acts to which the curas now see themselves obliged, and which robs them of great prestige, is the collection of the parochial fees at marriages and burials.

At any rate, strict censorship and constant supervision was the friar policy. On the other hand, the freedoms of press and speech and other such rights were the propagandists' battle cry. It is also true that most of these friars were behind the social and political currents of their time. While young they left their families and entered a monastery as novices. Their training completed, they were shipped to Manila to finish theological studies and to be prepared for the missionary work in the islands. After this they were assigned to a distant pueblo where there was hardly another white man to be seen. No wonder then that most of them should not have been abreast of the latest political, social, and economic trends. Somehow the friars, for the greater part, never realized that the Filipinos would aspire for more than just simple contentment. They did not understand that the people would care for anything more than just to prepare themselves for the next life. To them it was impossible that these indios should ask for more. That the friars looked upon the Filipinos as people of lesser capabilities is evident in their writings and in their attitude towards the ordination of the natives to the priesthood. Beyond their first impressions of these once “uncivilized” natives, they never passed. Added to this was the classic Spanish notion of superiority. Consequently, the friars taught and gave to the people what they thought would befit them. This is clearly demonstrated in their school curricula. Thus they fell prey to the vituperations of the progressive reformers as obscurantist. The attitude towards the friars of those who advocated separation from Spain is all too understandable.

Later the friars had suddenly become the reverse, doing all possible harm to the natives, as many would have us believe. Of the personal charges they had been acquitted. It is true that some wrongs were committed in the administration of their haciendas, but in the nineteenth century only the tenants of Calamba made loud complaints. Whether their lands brought the friars more harm due to the vested interests of some rather than to the alleged hardships some were suffering is merely a speculative question. Be that what it may, the fact is that the friars, as they were constituted and as they functioned, stood in the way of the aspirations of a newly awakened people. To the Filipino people who had come to desire to forge the destiny of their own nation by themselves the civil authority of the friars posed a distasteful barrier. In the ultimate analysis, it was the political significance of the religious which had cost them so much trouble.(Source: Nineteenth-Century Philippines and the Friar-Problem Vicente R. Pilapil; The Americas, Vol. 18, No. 2.)

e. Fiestas

Along with gambling, which breeds dislike for steady and difficult toil by its promise of sudden wealth and its appeal to the emotions, with the lotteries, with the prodigality and hospitality of the Filipinos, went also, to swell this train of misfortunes, the great number of fiestas. Remember that lack of capital and absence of means paralyze all movement, and you will see how the native has to be indolent for if any money might remain to him. And if this does not suffice to form an indolent character, if the climate and nature are not enough in themselves to daze him and deprive him of all energy, recall then that the doctrines of his religion teach him to irrigate his fields in the dry season, not by means of canals but with masses and prayers; to preserve his stock during an epizootic with holy water, exorcisms and benedictions that cost five dollars an animal; to drive away the locusts by a procession with the image of St. Augustine, etc. It is well, undoubtedly, to trust greatly in God; but it is better to do what one can and not trouble the Creator every moment, even when these appeals redound to the benefit of His ministers. We have noticed that the countries which believe most in miracles are the laziest, just, as spoiled children are the most ill-mannered. Whether they believe in miracles to palliate their laziness or they are lazy because they believe in miracles, we cannot say; but the fact is the Filipinos were much less lazy before the word miracle was introduced into their language.

f. Apathy of the Government

The apathy of the government itself towards everything in commerce and agriculture contributes not a little to foster indolence. There is no encouragement, at all for the manufacturer or for the farmer; the government furnishes no aid either when poor crop comes, when the locusts sweep over the fields, or when a cyclone destroys in its passage the wealth of the soil; nor does it take any trouble to seek a market for the products of its colonies.

g. Ownership of big lands

The fact that the best plantations, the best tracts of land in some provinces, those that from their easy access are more profitable than others, are in the hands of the religious corporations, whose desideratum is ignorance and a condition of semi-starvation for the native, so that they may continue to govern him and make themselves necessary to his wretched existence, is one of the reasons why many towns do not progress in spite of the efforts of their inhabitants. We will be contradicted with the argument on the other side that the towns which belong to the friars are comparatively richer than those which do not belong to them. They surely are! Just as their brethren in Europe, in founding their convents, knew how to select the best valleys, the best uplands for the cultivation of the vine or the production of beer, so also the Philippine monks have known how to select the best towns, the beautiful plains, the well-

watered fields, to make of them rich plantations. For some time the friars have deceived many by making them believe that if these plantations were prospering, it was because they were under their care, and the indolence of the native was thus emphasized; but they forget that in same provinces where they have not been able for some reason to get possession of the best tracts of land, their plantations, like Baurand and Liang, are inferior to Taal, Balayan and Lipa, regions cultivated entirely by the natives without any monkish interference whatsoever.

h. Education of the Filipinos

Finally, passing over many other more or less insignificant reasons, the enumeration of which would be interminable, let us close this dreary list with the principal and most terrible of all: the education of the native. From his birth until he sinks into his grave, the training of the native is brutalizing, depressive and antihuman (the word 'inhuman' is not sufficiently explanatory: whether or not the Academy admit it, let it go). There is no doubt that the government, some priests like the Jesuits and some Dominicans like Padre Benavides, have done a great deal by founding colleges, schools of primary instruction, and the like. But this is not enough; their effect is neutralized. They amount to five or ten years (years of a hundred and fifty days at most) during which the youth comes in contact with books selected by those very priests who boldly proclaim that it is an evil for the natives to know Castilian, that the native should not be separated from his carabao, that he should not have any further aspirations, and so on; five to ten years during which the majority of the students have grasped nothing more than that no one understands what the books say, not even the professors themselves perhaps; and these five to ten years have to offset the daily preachment of the whole life, that preachment which lowers the dignity of man, which by degrees brutally deprives him of the sentiment of self-esteem, that eternal, stubborn, constant labor to bow the native's neck, to make him accept the yoke, to place him on a level with the beast--a labor aided by some persons, with or without the ability to write, which if it does not produce in some individuals the desired effect, in others it has the opposite effect, like the breaking of a cord that is stretched too tightly. Thus, while they attempt to make of the native a kind of animal, vet in exchange they demand of him divine actions. And we say divine actions, because he must be a god who does not become indolent in that climate, surrounded by the circumstances mentioned. Deprive a man, then, of his dignity, and you not only deprive him of his moral strength but you also make him useless even for those who wish to make use of him. Every creature has its stimulus, its mainspring: man's is his self-esteem. Take it away from him and he is a corpse, and he who seeks activity in a corpse will encounter only worms. Thus is explained how the natives of the present time are no longer the same as those of the time of the discovery, neither morally nor physically.

4) Are the Filipinos of the 21st century indolent? Defend your answer.

The Filipino of the 21st Century is indolent in the sense that the blundering outlook which encompasses since the Spanish era is still practiced nowadays. And that we, Filipinos, don’t endeavor to make ourselves better as a nation. As defined, Filipinos are so unrefined as to be lacking in discrimination and susceptibility.

5) What are some of the attitudes of the Filipinos today that were cited in Rizal’s essay?

Filipinos always settle for less, we never strive and we stay idle. We have dreams but we won’t work for it. As a consequence, there is no grasp of perfection. At times, authorities are held liable for these adversities. Filipinos are known to be indolent because some condemn us as useless, lazy, misguided, and irresponsible. Because of these misconceptions, we tend to admit or be contented of the things that surround us. We don’t have the desire to become learned and wealthier because we don’t improvise ways to uplift our standards of living. Indolent here refers not on the competence to do work but on self-advancement or innovation as a race. And that is where we fall. We fall on that because we don’t recognize our talents and abilities to further ourselves, to make ourselves better. We don’t enthusiastically seek avenues or methods to make ourselves better. When I heard the title (³Bayaning Third World ́by Mike de Leon) of this film that we were about to see, I was intrigued. I was excited to watch it. Then, the viewing day came. The movie started with several questions: Was the reason why Rizal did not approve of the revolution was because he was not the one who started it? Did he really make love to Josephine Bracken or was he gay? Was he holding a rosary in his right hand when he was gunned down? And the biggest question of all which will be the main topic of discussion in this paper: was the retraction letter of Rizal genuine or fake? Retraction means withdrawal or drawing in. Rizal’s said-to-be retraction letter was about his withdrawal of all the things he said which were against the Church. Could this be true? I think it couldn’t .In the movie ³Bayaning Third World,́ Doña Lolay and Paciano believed that Rizal did not retract because it was inconsistent to what he believed in. I knew this was an insufficient reason, but both of them were close to Rizal and I assumed they already knew him very well by then. And what they said really made sense ± Rizal went abroad (away from his family), wrote a lot of nationalistic poems, essays, and novels, joined several groups, sacrificed his love life many times ± all for one main goal: to give  justice and equality for the Filipinos. Did these acts deserve retraction? No. Retraction was against Rizal’s beliefs and based on the many years of struggles to liberate the Philippines, to retract seemed to be the last thing he would do. His sisters, Narcisa and Trinidad, on the other hand, gave ambiguous, inconclusive testimonies. It was not clear whether they believed that Rizal retracted or not. As for Josephine Bracken, do you really think Rizal would give up all the efforts he had done throughout the years just for a woman? If your answer is no, then I’ll go with you. Romance never came first in Rizal’s priority. This was exemplified by his affairs with O-Sei-San and several other women, which did not end happily because of Rizal’s duty to the Fatherland. And if he really retracted only because he wanted to marry Bracken, why did he not do it earlier? Why would he retract only just hours before his execution? Makes sense, right? When it comes to religion, Rizal had not been a good Catholic (because he did not believe the practices of the Church), but this didn’t mean that he was a bad servant of God. He loved God. It’s just that he had his own way of showing it. His letter to the Malolos women was the proof. There, he said that uttering memorized prayers, singing religious songs, and doing rituals were nothing when not done with all your heart. So, if Rizal really loved God, why was there a need to retract, right? The friars were not God. Documents, like the retraction letter, were nothing compared to what Rizal really felt about our Creator. These are only my opinion about the retraction issue. No one really knows about the truth. But whatever it is, it will not make Dr. Jose Rizal less of a hero, because through his life, works, and writings, without any doubt, he deserved to be our national hero.

 

REACTION PAPER: BAYANING THIRD WORLD Though the movie has a lot to point out about our national hero, there about three main points on which the author concentrated; (1) Rizal, pro or against the revolution (2) Retraction System (3) Speculation whether Josephine and Him got married or not or if their relationship was authentic or not.Rizal at the beginning of the movie may have stand firm about his statement that he was against the revolution, however, many speculated about his bravery. Two sides of the coin was open, the first side tells the he was a not that brave enough in facing the enemies through sword and shields. Second side was he wanted to fight back through pen and paper so that it would not be easy for the enemies to track him down. Though in my perception, even he was pro or against the revolution, it would not make any differencebecause from the Spaniards perception he was the one who started the revolution eventhough at the back of the story he even declined it.The second issue on the retraction system was the most controversial in the moviewhere they have to decipher whether the signature was authentic or not. From my point ofview, a document older than the people today is really a tough job to think upon becauseat the first place, there were only two priests who were there during the signing andthat these two was really determined that Rizal would sign the retraction document.However, the idea that it was falsified would not be removed from my idea because theprimary source of the information is a priest who were with the Spaniards and reallypushed Rizal to convert in being a Catholic again. So goes with issues that arise thatwhen he was about to be sentence to death, did he really kiss a cross, had a rosarywrapped around his wrist? Or did he not kiss a cross, no rosary wrapped around his wrist?In accordance to the second issue, the authenticity of his relationship withJosephine Bracken was touched. Historians have battled whether or not Josephine lovedRizal or if she was just one of the spies sent by the friars? Or if Rizal really lovedJosephine just to prove he was a man by himself? Seeing it from my point of view, Ithink, there was really love between the both of them. Because Josephine, having a goodlife outside the country gave it all up just to be with Rizal and that even though Rizalwas in probation for his death, she never gave space in their relationship. He was thereall throughout the trial and when Rizal was killed in Bagumbayan.Was there really marriage? Married or not, it does not make one less or above thesociety married or not. Today, marriage is not a big issue for some. For them, livingtogether was enough, though not evident by the Church written document, as long as acommitment is being kept by the two. Just like in Josephine and Rizal’s relationship,maybe it was a way of telling the people that even before living together without anymarriage contract was already being practice.Was the child labored by Josephine, Rizal’s or was it from his step father; Anissue that came up when Josephine gave birth to a premature still birth child. This issueso far for me lacks evidence because no one could prove the authenticity of thestatement. And that, when we compare it to reality, if the child was really from his stepfather, it would make Rizal a man more because he whole-heartedly accepted the childdespite the controversy.The movie, despite of the controversies, had put me in becoming more curious in thelife of Rizal, though it takes a lot of effort and commitment in finding out his reallife story, the question that still makes us think about if he is really deserves to becalled our national hero. In my opinion, I think he was placed in the position notbecause he deserving but because our history needs to fill up a space since we have a“national” on everything. Being a countries national hero would be hard for one because alot would be critique, even the credibility and authenticity of the man’s life.Rizal, could be a national hero, but could never be as perfect as everyone thinks.Like what the movie had emphasized that in the year 1904, Father Aglipay built a Churchand made Rizal the saint. The question is, what was there pro’s and con’s in making him asaint? It would take a lifetime to know a man’s and life and that Rizal’s life is farincomplete than we really think though a lot had spoken, it would not still be enoughunless Rizal, himself, speaks up. As the famous line says, “it takes one, to know one”.

Higit na nabago ng pelikulang Bayaning 3rd world ang aking pananaw tungkol sa ating pamabansangbayani na si Jose Rizal. Simula nung bata pa ako ay naniwala na akong isang napakagaling atnapakabait na tao si Rizal. Naniwala akong si Rizal ay namatay na isang Katoliko. Noong napanood koang pelikulang Bayaning 3rd World ay nalaman ko ang lahat ng kontrobersiya ukol kay Rizal. Isa sakontrobersiya ay ang isang sulat na nagsasaad na“I retract with all my heart whatever in my words,writings, publications and conduct has been contrary to my character as son of the Catholic Church. Ibelieve and I confess whatever she teaches and I submit to whatever she demands.” –walangkasiguraduahan kung ang sulat na ito ay totoo o hindi. May dalawang argumento ang nauukol sapaglaban ni Rizal sa simbahan. Isa ay ang si Rizal ay lumaban sa mga simbahan dahil ito ang ugat ngpaghihirap ng mga tao; at pangalawa, may dahilang pampolitika–ang simabahan ay ang gobyerno atang gobyerno ay ang simbahan. Ang isa sa pa sa kontrobersiya ay ang isyung‘Si Rizal ba ay lumabansa mga Espanyol dahil gusto niyang makamit natin ang kalayaan? O ginawa niya ito dahil gusto niyangsiya ang mamumuno sa pagmamalabis ng mga Espanyol?’Pati na ang relasyon ni Rizal kay Brackenay ginawang kontrobersiya. Sa kontroberisyang may ginawang sulat si Rizal na nagsasaad na binabawiniya ang lahat ng kanyang nasabi laban sa simbahan, naniniwala kong ito ay gawa gawa lamang ng mgatao. Dahil walang prowebang naipapakita na ang sulat ay ginawa mismo ni Rizal. Hindi maghihirap siRizal para lang sa wala. Kung babawiin lang di niya ang kanyang mga sinabi, para na ring walang dahilanupang gawing pamabansang bayani si Rizal.Sa pelikulang Bayaning 3rd world, ipinakita na ng director ng sine ay pumupunta sa nakaraan upangkausapin si Rizal, mga kapatid niya, si Bracken, ang nanay niya, atbp.Ito ay isang magandang stratehiya upang mas maging realistic ang pelikula.

 

Bayaning Third World: My Reaction 

July 30th, 2008 by Dianne Peña The most common thing or if I may say the only thing that people answer when you ask them about Jose Rizal is that he is our national hero idol and he is found in our 1-peso coin icon. Sad to say that, in our modern times today, people have very limited knowledge about our national hero. The facts above are the only two things most of us know about Jose Rizal but for historians and experts; they have so much adjectives to connect with our national hero.Bayaning Third World, a “detective” story about Rizal being Philippine’s National Hero. Commenting on the movie per se, at first I thought it was some boring documentary about Rizal but understanding the facts exposed made me interested. The film was in black and white but it didn’t hindered my amusement because of the funny way they presented the most serious facts about Rizal. The movie was easy to understand if you were able to read about his life story or if you have tackled his life in your Filipino or Rizal subject but if not, you may get confused. Good thing, I have read and we have tackled his life in our lecture that helped me follow through the film. This film also highlighted Rizal being a “Pilosopo” which reflected the Filipino attitude both in a good and not so good way. They also showed Rizal’s letters and documents which was commonly taken for granted to unveil the truth about his controversies. The movie made it “viewer friendly” by face to face interviews with the persons involved and that is why I appreciated Rizal’s significant others behind their names.The main point stressed in this film was Rizal’s Retraction, which involved his marriage to Josephine Bracken and the rumors about her being a spy for the friars. There were many possibilities and speculations brought about in this film, which also made me, think. First point, they said that Rizal died a catholic despite of him being a mason through his signed letter, others said that the letter was real but the signature was forged given the fact that Rizal’s signature was easy to copy. On the other hand, some said that the letter was completely invalid and was just made by the insecure and threatened friars to destroy Rizal’s reputation. Second point, if you would ask me if he really retracted or not, for me, it doesn’t matter because as long as his death gave credence to what he believed, fought for our democracy and his convictions, Retraction really doesn’t make him less of a hero. I believe that Rizal only became a mason because he was against the government, which happened to be the church and vice-versa. He isn’t against about God and Catholicism per se but in the “supposedly” instruments of God’s love and greatness which were the priests who were ruthless to the Filipino people. Also, he was against the people who sold their religion for wealth and for people who exchanged their religion for power .At the part where in Rizal almost burn the manuscript of Noli Me Tangere made me think that it was a symbol of him letting go of what he strongly believed in connection to him not involved with “Himagsikan”.He became hopeless and I think he became afraid of death, probably, however, since he continued the publishing of Noli Me Tangere, I believe, he gained back his strong convictions regarding our democracy and showed his nationalism and patriotism. I thought what I know about Rizal was enough to understand his life, works and writing but having finished this independent film widened my understanding not only for Rizal’s positive sides but also for his flaws. Jose Rizal being a national hero considering his great influence not only in the Philippines but to other countries he had gone also with his works, the great impact he left with our history as a country and culture as its citizen, his weight to some indigenous religions also has his own flaws and faults because he is also a human being capable of doing those things.Less people know Rizal’s “dark side”— controversies, I myself was one of those before I watched this film. We were focused on his good side, his achievements and contributions for the betterment of our country but having the chance to know his flaws which until now haunts him, we must understand him and not condone the fact that he was still a human being. Rizal really don’t want to be a hero, he just wanted to prove his great passion and love for our country. Indeed, Rizal chose to die because it was one way to give weight to his beliefs and philosophy. We all have our own Rizal. We have different perceptions and understanding regarding his life, works and writings. As for me, though he is not as “perfect” as a national hero should be, I still salute and look up to him for his immense contributions and grand legacy which is applicable until now.Despite his imperfection, it didn’t lessen his heroism. In fact, his controversies made his life more interesting and it only made him more famous not only during his time but now and in the future generations. I didn’t get surprised that many critiqued his life but for me he is still the 3rd world hero of all time. How can we become Rizal in our own little ways? By following simple rules and regulations and by paying the right tax. There are a lot more and it is up to you to think of whatever way it suites you. Let us be a modern-day Rizal to continue his legacy for the future generation. Bayaning Third World is a film of substance. It is very appealing and is highly recommended for other students studying Rizal. It is effective for my learning. Even if our 1-peso coin is in constant devaluing, Rizal still remain number one in our hearts.

The most common thing or if I may say the only thing that people answer when you ask them about Jose Rizal is that he is our national hero² idol and he is found in our 1-peso coin² icon. Sad to say that, in our modern times today, people have very limited knowledge about our national hero. The facts above are the only two things most of us know about Jose Rizal but for  historians and experts; they have so much adjectives to connect with our national hero. Bayaning Third World, a ³detective´ story about Rizal being Philippine’s National Hero. Commenting on the movie per se, at first I thought it was some boring documentary about Rizal but understanding the facts exposed made me interested. The film was in black and white but it didn’t hindered my amusement because of the funny way they presented the most serious facts about Rizal. The movie was easy to understand if you were able to read about his life story or if you have tackled his life in your Filipino or Rizal subject but if not, you may get confused. Good thing, I have read and we have tackled his life in our lecture² that helped me follow through the film. This film also highlighted Rizal being a ³Pilosopo´ which reflected the Filipino attitude both in a good and not so good way. They also showed Rizal’s letters and documents which was commonly taken for granted to unveil the truth about his controversies. The movie made it³viewer-friendly´ by face to face interviews with the persons involved and that is why I appreciated Rizal’s significant others behind their names. The main point stressed in this film was Rizal’s Retraction, which involved his marriage to Josephine Bracken and the rumors about her being a spy for the friars. There were many possibilities and speculations brought about in this film, which also made me, think. First point, they said that Rizal died a catholic despite of him being a mason through his signed letter, others said that the letter was real but the signature was forged given the fact that Rizal’s signature was easy to copy. On the other hand, some said that the letter was completely invalid and was just made by the  insecure and threatened friars to destroy Rizal’s reputation. Second point, if you would ask me if he really retracted or not, for me, it doesn’t matter because as long as his death gave credence to what he believed, fought for our democracy and his convictions, Retraction really doesn’t make him less of a hero. I believe that Rizal only became amazon because he was against the government, which happened to be the church and vice-versa. He isn’t against about God and Catholicism per se but in the ³supposedly´ instruments of God’s love and greatness which were the priests who were ruthless to the Filipino people. Also, he was against the people who sold their religion for

wealth and for people who exchanged their religion for power .At the part where in Rizal almost burn the manuscript of Noli Me Tangere made me think that it was a symbol of him letting go of what he strongly believed in connection to him not involved with ³Himagsikan´. He became hopeless and I think he became afraid of death, probably, however, since he continued the publishing of Noli Me Tangere, I believe, he gained back his strong convictions regarding our democracy and showed his nationalism and patriotism. I thought what I know about Rizal was enough to understand his life, works and writing but having finished this independent film widened my understanding not only for Rizal’s positive sides but also for his flaws. Jose Rizal being a national hero considering his great influence not only in the Philippines but to other countries he had gone also with his works, the great impact he left with our history as a country and culture as its citizen, his weight to some indigenous religions also has his own flaws and faults because he is also a human being capable of doing those things. Less people know Rizal’s ³dark side´² controversies, I myself was one of those before I watched this film. We were focused on his good side, his achievements and contributions for the betterment of our country but having the chance to know his flaws which until now haunts him, we must understand him and not condone the fact that he was still a human being. Rizal really don’t want to be a hero, he just wanted to prove his great passion and love for our country. Indeed, Rizal chose to  die because it was one way to give weight to his beliefs and philosophy. We all have our own Rizal. We have different perceptions and understanding regarding his life, works and writings. As for me, though he is not as ³perfect´ as a national hero should be, I still salute and look up to him for his immense contributions and grand legacy which is applicable until now. Despite his imperfection, it didn’t lessen his heroism. In fact, his controversies made his life more interesting and it only made him more famous not only during his time but now and in the future generations. I didn’t get surprised that many critiqued his life but for me he is still the 3rdworld hero of all time. How can we become Rizal in our own little ways? By following simple rules and regulations and by paying the right tax. There are a lot more and it is up to you to think of whatever way it suites you. Let us be a modern-day Rizal to continue his legacy for the future generation. Bayaning Third World is a film of substance. It is very appealing and is highly recommended for  other students studying Rizal. It is effective for my learning. Even if our 1-peso coin is in constant devaluing, Rizal still remain number one in our hearts.A complex film within a film that attempts to explore the myth of Philippine national hero Jose Rizal, director Mike De Leon's study in manufactured mythology attempts to explore the life of Rizal while simultaneously investigating his influence on modern Philippine society. It seems that the culture has embraced the idea of a nation icon rather than the physical reality of the man behind the myth, and director De Leon begins to study the historical accounts of Rizal's life while attempting to contact the family and friends that were closest to him. Confounded by the controversial letter of retraction that Rizal signed in his later days, the filmmakers attempt to uncover the motivation of the legend in renouncing all he stood for and opting for and embracing the society that he so vehemently denounced. Soon coming to the end of their search for facts and unable to solve the mystery of the letter, the filmmakers, at odds with their belief of recorded history, find that discovering the ultimate truth to the legend may be an unattainable goal. ~ Jason Buchanan, Rovi

CALAYAN EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION INC.REACTION PAPERThe essay was written by Jose Rizal during the writing of La Solidaridad in 1887 in Berlins, was a continuation of Rizal's campaign of education in which he sought by blunt truths to awaken his countrymen to their own faults at the same time that he was arousing the Spaniards to the defects in Spain's colonial system that caused and continued such shortcomings. Rizal wrote this essay to make us realize that we deserve to be treated equally and that we have to be aware of our rights. He specifically pointed out the lack of cooperation and awareness of the Filipinos to the current situation of the country and how the government took away the eyes and ears of its people through its deceiving and countless assurance that resulted to the masses' remorse and destruction. In my own perception indolence does exist among the Filipinos. Past writings on indolence revolve only on either denying or affirming, and never studying its causes in depth. One must study the causes of indolence. As Rizal says, before curing it we must know the causes of indolence and elaborates on the circumstances that have led to it. Rizal described the people in the tropical and non-tropical countries. In tropical areas, the people there do not work a lot when it’s hot especially at noon time. It is because they have to rest because of the sun’s heat.The fact that in tropical countries violent work is not a good thing as it is in cold countries there it is death, destruction, annihilation. Nature knows this and like a just mother has therefore made the earth more fertile, more productive, as compensation. An hour ' s work under that burning sun, in the midst of pernicious influences springing from nature in activity, is equal to a day ' s work in a temperate climate; it is, then, just that the earth yield a hundred fold. An illness will worsen if the wrong treatment is given. Rizal enumerates several reasons that may have caused the Filipinos ' cultural and economic decadence. The frequent wars, insurrections, and invasions have brought disorder to the communities. Chaos has been widespread, and destruction rampant. Many Filipinos have also been sent abroad to fight wars for Spain or for expeditions. As a result, the population has decreased in number. As forced labor, many men have been sent to shipyards to construct vessels. Meanwhile, natives who have had enough of abuse have gone to the mountains. As a result, the farms have been neglected. The so-called indolence of Filipinos definitely has deeply rooted causes. Filipinos, according to Rizal, are not responsible for their misfortunes, as they are not their own masters. The Spanish government has not encouraged labor and trade, which ceased after the government treated the country’s neighboring trade partners with great suspicion. Trade has declined, furthermore, because of pirate attacks and the many restrictions imposed by the government, which gives no aid for crops and farmers. This and the abuse suffered under encomienderos have caused many to abandon the fields. Businesses are monopolized by many government officials, red tape and bribery operate on a wide scale, and rampant gambling is tolerated by the government. This situation is compounded by the Church’s wrong doctrine which holds that the rich will not go to heaven, thus engendering a wrong attitude toward work. There has also been discrimination in education against natives. These are some of the main reasons that Rizal cites as causing the deterioration of values among the Filipinos. The same applies to  indolence. People, however, should not lose hope in fighting indolence. China men, as industrious traders flee away from their country to accumulate wealth in other land. In other colonies, they till soil for quite a little time and then stop it. Truly, this just proves that agriculture is such a difficult profession. While the Filipinos, does not give up on or leave agriculture. This is his passion, his means of living. Though difficult it may seem, this is where he gets satisfaction for himself as a worker. To till his own soil makes him more fulfilled. He sees the need to perfect his job like any other skill or art the Filipino indolent because they do not see in the Filipino the desire of getting wealthier and richer. The Filipino is contented with what he has. He is determined to work in the fields, getting his hands all callused and dirty with soil. Unlike the Chinese, who improvised ways to uplift his standards of living through trade in the tropics, yes, agriculture is such a dirty job. You will not have the porcelain hands as the majestic rulers of the land. I praise Rizal for his beautiful masterpiece a Filipino has written to expose the truth and nothing but the truth. This writing will give a period for all the insults of the

foreigners to the Filipinos about our culture. Him for his beautiful masterpiece a Filipino has written to expose the truth and nothing but the truth. This writing will give a period for all the insults of the foreigners to the Filipinos about our culture. Today, the indolence and hopeless mentality stays toward the masses. Many corrupt officials, unsettled reforms, poverty, misdistribution of money and taxes, poor tenancy, illiteracy, slow progress, etc. are still there. History truly repeats itself. If the Filipinos before were educated then there’s a possibly to reduce the chance of having an indolent people. That’s the importance of education and studying our past. Education and complete analysis of this fact is very important, not only this day, but also to the next generation. Truly that article is excellent in describing our situation and delighting everyone who reads it.

Bayaning 3rd World Reaction Paper

I. Synopsis The film Bayaning 3rd world is about the questions about our Filipino hero Jose Rizal. The film attempts to answer the

questions about the life of Rizal that are vaguely being explained in books about Philippine history while simultaneously informing the viewers about the great contributions he is famous for. The film emphasizes on the fact that people of the Philippines only learns or studies about Jose Rizal being the national hero and not facts and questions that lies in his writings and actions when he was still alive.

The directors emphasizes on the controversies in his life including his family and his love affair with Josephine Bracken regarding the retraction that Jose Rizal signed during his later days while attempting to be wed with her. The directors tried to portray Jose Rizal as a coward that doesn’t really want to be a hero, but an average Filipino person.

They tried to convince themselves that he was willing to denounce all his teachings and all his hard work just to free the Filipinos just to be able to be wed with Josephine Bracken. But, because of lack of evidence, the filmmakers accepted the fact that the ultimate truth behind the legend shall be kept a legend.

The film makers also tried to add some facts that are just their mere subjective perceptions about Jose Rizal. They also assumed a lot of things about Jose Rizal, like the camaraderie between Jose Rizal and his brother, the being “Masungit” of Jose Rizal’s mother to them and a lot more.

Basically it’s the life of Jose Rizal with a twist by modern filmmakers.

II. Historical Content

Provide evidence that religion has used by the Spanish Crown to instill authority to all Indios.

o It is a fact that the Spanish church forced most natives to convert their religion from being Islamic to Catholicism. It was very advantageous for them since they took advantage of the ignorance of most Filipinos. They used their teachings to manipulate Filipinos into doing what is according to them. Dr. Jose Rizal even stated in one of his letters to his family that he wasn’t completely convinced with the teachings in the Catholic church.

Although they were able to build schools, it was limited only to those who are not in poverty during that time. Even if most Filipinos were educated by the friars, their teaching were only limited to the point that the Filipinos are still ignorant enough to follow the dictatorship of the Spanish church. Faith to god wasn’t much emphasized by them, but faith in them is accentuated to the Filipinos.

Jose Rizal himself didn’t want to be under the teachings of the Spanish friars back then, that he even fled the country to get better education and not have biased teachings by the Spanish friars. He even stated that the Spanish friars used Catholicism to kill people, to earn money and so on and so forth. He also included in his writings about the abuses of the powers of the Spanish friars. It was very vague at first to the Filipinos but after his teachings, some of the Filipinos were able to see through the façade the spanich friars are trying to portray.

o The Catholic church even prohibited students to read Doctor Jose Rizal’s writings, Noli Me Tangere to be specific because it contains the stories that depicted the maltreatment of the Spaniards towards the Filipino.

Compare the context of Europe with the Philippines as described by Rizal in his letters to his mother.

o “The streets were filled with dirty and thick mud, the ground was slippery and between the holes in the old and worn-out pavement were pools of water and little marshes like the lubluban ng mga carabao. (2) Afterwards a cold that penetrates through the marrow of the bones ensues, which is the limit.  How ugly was Madrid!  The sidewalks and the streets are full of umbrellas whose merciful points left many one-eyed.  When least expected a wind would blow turning the unfortunate umbrella inside out, placing the owner of such a flexible gadget in a ridiculous and serious embarrassment.   At least over there (Philippines), when it rains, it rains heavily enough to wash the streets, and the houses have eaves under which one can take shelter, but here the rain is very fine like matang Europa.  Then the newspapers speak of storm; but my God, what storm?” this is an excerpt of Doctor Jose Rizal’s letter to his family. He described Madrid as dirty compared to the Philippines. In this letter we can tell that he was very faithful to his country. That compared to Madrid, the Philippines is cleaner and have less muddy streets.

o “We are going through a most delightful season: a cloudless and blue sky, almost like the Philippine sky, a bright moon, less cold, a weather so pleasant that I have gone out without an overcoat, a  cuerpo, as they say here.  I’m in good health, they say I’m stout; I’ve only a slight cold.  I don’t know if I’m growing, but my face must have changed a little” here is

another excerpt of Rizal’s letter to his family. He now compares the weather of Madrid and the Philippines. He wrote about a positive observation on the weather of the Philippines.

o  “Here in Spain they have very false notions about the Philippines and there are many people who are so ignorant of that country that it is not strange that they should take us for Chinese, Americans, or mulattos, and many, even of the young students, do not know whether the Philippines belongs to the English or to the Spanish.  One day such a one asked one of our countrymen if the Philippines was very far from Manila, and the like. 

Josephine Bracken (relationship with the Rizal Family, views about Filipinos, Retraction Issue, Rizal Experience bad life while exiled in Dapitan?

o Josephine Bracken is the apple of Doctor Jose Rizal’s eyes. She was the girl Doctor Jose Rizal was indenting to marry, but because of Doctor Jose Rizal’s political views on the catholic church of Spain, they were not allowed to be wedded. He had to comply with their requests such as his conversion to be a catholic again. Even though they didn’t allow them to be wedded until he complied to their conditions, he still considered her as his wife that they even had a son but apparently wasn’t able to survive. The family saw her as a bait to get to Doctor Jose Rizal’s Achilles heel.

o She had a bad perception towards the Filipino people because of the treatment of the siblings of Doctor Jose Rizal towards her, It was even depicted in the movie Bayaning 3rd World that the sister of Doctor Jose Rizal was “bad-mouthing” her in her face. She also thought of Filipinos as being rude, bad-mannered and inconsiderate because they used the word stupid to describe her and they also say bad things about her.

o The retraction issue was about the withdrawal of all Doctor Jose Rizal’s writings about how the Spanish friars / Spaniards in general through signing a paper that states it. There were some speculations that the letter signed by him is not authentic because of the questionable signature, it was very peculiar compared to the usual signature of Doctor Jose Rizal in his letters. It brought up a lot of arguments one side says that it was only the friars who made up that letter and the other side says that it was the redemption of Doctor Jose Rizal for his sort of emancipation from the catholic church.

o While he was in Dapitan, he tried to make himself available or busy at all times. He had clinical hours, he studied some more and based on the movie he even caught bugs and dissected it. He tried to make himself useful around there too. He wrote a lot to his family back in Laguna and told them about what he preoccupied he is. It was also in Dapitan where he met Josephine Brackem. She was with a blind mind, and she immediately caught his attention. It was there the all the romance started.” Here he describes the knowledge of the people of Spain about the Philippines.

III. Conclusion Rizal: Revolutionary/Reformist

o The difference between Revolutionary and Reformist is that revolutionists use brute force to get what they want while reformists uses literature or democracy to promote what they want. Another difference is that revolutionists during Andre Bonifacio’s time, wanted to be emancipated from the rule of the Spaniards, while for the reformists during the time of Doctor Jose Rizal, for them is to enlarge the worth of the Filipinos in their country.

o I believe that Doctor Jose Rizal was a reformist, because his main focus was not to free Filipinos from the Spanish rule, but to improve the way of living of Filipinos. He wanted the Filipinos to have an equal amount of rights compared to the Spanish settlers. He wanted Filipinos to have the opportunity be educated right even if they didn’t have much money. He wanted to improve the privileges of the Filipinos to their own country.

o Unlike revolutionists, reformists were not secretive of their works and organization. Doctor Jose Rizal was able to address all his perceptions towards the treatment of the Spaniards towards the Filipinos why writing it in books and posting it to a newspaper.

The Philippines celebrated the centennial of its independence in 1998 and a nationalistic wave swept the country. Philippine cinema rode the crest with films on revered national hero Dr Jose P. Rizal  (1), the most notable of which was Jose Rizal by acclaimed director Marilou Diaz-Abaya. A record-breaking (by Philippine standards), US$2 million biographical epic,  Jose Rizalwent on to become the most successful Filipino film of all time. Through a meticulous accumulation of historical and mythical detail, Diaz-Abaya masterfully creates a commemorative, hagiographical portrait of the 19th century martyr – a Rizal monument painted in light. (2) She also settles a bitterly-debated issue once and for all: Rizal’s alleged retraction of his strongly anti-colonial and anti-clerical writings. In Diaz-Abaya’s film, Rizal is the prodigal son who returns to the colonial Catholic religion of his oppressors and renounces the very works that “served to restore dignity, self respect, pride, and patriotism among the Filipinos”. (3)

The original choice for director of Jose Rizal was the reclusive film artist Mike de Leon. (4) He was, however, dismayed by the production delays that beset the dream project and walked out shortly after shooting began. But all was not lost for de Leon. Working outside the studio system, he personally funded an alternative Rizal film project that promised to break the closed marble-and-concrete representation of Diaz-Abaya’s Jose Rizal. His vision was to create an open-ended Rizal film that had more questions than answers:

We face the issue head on. It is not merely a question of whether he returned to the fold or not. What’s more important is did he retract his writings, his pronouncements, his lifework? If he did, then what’s so heroic about him? (5)

That said, de Leon puts Rizal’s alleged retraction and along with it, Spanish colonial Catholicism, on trial. Jose Rizal’s shadow, the satirical independent film 3rd World Hero (original title “Bayaning 3rd World”), premiered before a Manila arthouse audience in 2000. Wickedly hilarious yet insightfully cerebral, 3rd World Hero is the first Filipino feature film in many years to

be shot entirely in black and white, a visual option that serves to cue the audience to consider the layers of meaning embedded in the filmic text. (6)

In this essay, I examine the ways in which 3rd World Hero represents colonial clerical power within the rubric of the retraction controversy. 3rd World Hero deconstructs what the mainstream Jose Rizal takes for granted and interrogates the cacophony of voices surrounding the national hero’s final moments. Social-historical analysis, as such, is constitutive for the film’s representational trajectory. De Leon does not just rely on the thematic, more literary aspects of the film’s storyline to carry out this filmic deconstruction. He traipses along the threshold of language, in the grammar of stylistic strategies, to create a film where visuals provide socio-political comment and not just avant-gardist embellishments. In this regard,  3rd World Hero importantly resonates with the project of not just Third World Cinema, but of a type of political film known as Third Cinema. I discuss Third Cinema in some detail further on. Suffice it to say at this point that Third Cinema critical theory provides the discursive theoretical framework for my analysis of 3rd World Hero.

Summary of 3rd World Hero 3rd World Hero opens with a prologue; we see cut-to-cut stills from an elementary school textbook featuring various Philippine

national symbols. It ends with a frame that says “National Hero – Jose Rizal” (Figure 1). The narrator introduces two main characters – a director and a screenwriter – brainstorming on a Rizal film project. It becomes clear that this is a meta-film, a film within a film.

The two filmmakers embark on an investigative research to explore the cinematic potential of Rizal’s biography. We see a series of eclectic flash-cuts as the filmmakers review the “omnipresence” of Rizal in Philippine culture. Rizal had been canonized as a saint by folk religion, memorialised in the one-peso Philippine coin, and revered as a demi-god by filmmakers and historians. In addition, the national hero’s name had been used for every imaginable purpose – from naming streets to funeral homes. When the writer suggests a commemorative Rizal film for the Philippine centennial, the director dismisses it as tawdry, as though Rizal could be sold like a deodorant. (7)

The filmmakers rummage through Rizal’s life and zero-in on a controversial document which allegedly contains the hero’s retraction of his writings, his renunciation of freemasonry and his full submission to the authority of the Catholic church. They are suspicious, believing the retraction to be out-of-sync with Rizal’s character and convictions.

The film then blurs space-time boundaries as it sends the two filmmakers on assignment to interview the key characters surrounding the hero’s life. Rizal’s mother Doña Teodora; siblings Paciano, Narcisa and Trining; his love interest, the Hong Kong-raised Irish woman Josephine Bracken; and Jesuit fraile (8) Padre Balaguer all give testimonies of various shades of grey. The filmmakers finally come face-to-face with the man himself and they are frustrated that he does not provide the answers they need for their film project.

The two filmmakers end up with as many questions as they had in the beginning. 3rd World Heroreaches its open-ended dénouement: Rizal’s formidable body of work, and, indeed, the witness of his life as an exemplary nationalist, will continue to interrogate the validity of the retraction document.

A reprisal of the prologue featuring the intercut images of Philippine national symbols serves as the film’s epilogue. The end frame indicates “National Hero – Jose Rizal”.

3rd World Hero as Third Cinema The critical question in this essay is not Rizal’s alleged retraction per se but the distinct cinematic way in which 3rd World

Hero represents the contentious issue. A noteworthy feature of the filmic text is its employment of ideologically-determined stylistic codes that work to interrogate the religious-political power-play in Rizal’s 19th century colonial milieu. I submit that de Leon’s stylistic strategies importantly resonate with the trajectory of Third Cinema where ideology and style are mutually imbricated to portray a Third World emancipative vision.

Third Cinema does not so much point to a film’s geographical origins as it does a film’s dedication to an authentic representation of Third World peoples who continue in the struggle to become agents of their own history in the postcolonial aftermath:

What determines Third Cinema is the conception of the world, and not the genre or an explicit political approach. Any story, any subject can be taken up by Third Cinema. Third Cinema is a cinema of decolonisation, which expresses the will to national liberation, anti-mythic, anti-racist, anti-bourgeois, and popular. (9)

Third Cinema had its genesis in 1968 when Argentinean filmmakers Fernando Solanas and Octavio Getino launched a social and artistic movement with a subversive agenda: that of establishing a “guerrilla cinema” geared at countering the overwhelming dominance of western cinema. Solanas and Getino distinguished Third Cinema from other forms of cinema, necessarily classified as First Cinema (commercial cinema epitomized by Hollywood) and Second Cinema (represented mainly by European Auteurist Cinema). Drawing mainly from the paradigm of decolonisation as conceptualised in Frantz Fanon’s 1961 book The Wretched of the Earth (10), and driven further by the “film experience” of creating the radical documentary La Hora de los Hornos (The Hour of the Furnaces, Argentina, 1968), the Argentinean filmmakers metaphorised Third Cinema filmmaking as virtual revolutionary warfare: “The camera is the inexhaustible expropriator of image-weapons; the projector, a gun that can shoot 24 frames per second.” (11)

In its later evolutionary turn, Third Cinema had become less strident and more methodical. Ethiopian film scholar Teshome Gabriel is credited for the development of a critical theory of Third Cinema where cinematic style and an ideology of Third World emancipation are inextricably linked. For Gabriel, the Third Cinema experience is “moved by the requirements of its social action and contexted and marked by the strategy of that action”. (12) As such, he contends that “Style is only meaningful in the context of its use – in how it acts on culture and helps illuminate the ideology within it.” (13)

Presently, Third Cinema is no longer considered as a demolition order against Hollywood and Auteur Cinema. Rather, it is dialectically angled towards giving voice and visibility to socially-resonant films that foreground the Third World experience and perspective. It is the exigency of social and historical analysis – “a rational interpretation of a historically defined reality so that a line of causation can be established” (14) – not sheer Third World miserabilism, that is constitutive for Third Cinema. Alongside the conjoined aspects of style and ideology, this is the linchpin that distinguishes Third Cinema from films belonging to the wider political genre. The canon of Third Cinema includes Ousmane Sembene’s Xala (Senegal, 1974), Tomás Gutiérrez Alea’s La Ultima Cena(The Last Supper, Cuba, 1976), and Kidlat Tahimik’s Mababangong Bangungot (Perfumed Nightmare, The Philippines, 1976).

While Third Cinema holds the distinction of being the only major critical theory of film that did not emanate from the west, it is ironic that there has been an almost complete blackout of discussions relating to Southeast Asian Cinema, let alone Philippine Cinema. The oversight is evident in Gabriel’s groundbreaking work and carries on to the current scholarly debates on Third Cinema. My re-situating 3rd World Hero as an example of Philippine Third Cinema is a modest effort to fill in at least one of the missing jigsaw pieces.

At this juncture, I draw from the heuristic touchstones proffered by Third Cinema critical theory as I examine the ways in which 3rd World Hero represents colonial clerical power within the rubric of the Rizal retraction issue.

The Sentence of History In 3rd World Hero, which, as earlier mentioned, is a film within a film, the search for the cinematic in Rizal’s life is first framed

within the context of Philippine colonial history. This socio-historical context is seen through the optic of the two filmmaker-characters themselves. This is, after all, a film about their home country, and it is not possible for them to detach from their cultural base and assume a position of complete objectivity. The filmmaker-characters of 3rd World Hero are properly motivated by their own queries as members of the culture in question and it is clear then that their filmic investigation will not be value-free.

From the outset, the epistemological resonance between 3rd World Hero and the Third Cinema project can be drawn. Teshome Gabriel points out that the Third Cinema filmmaker is unequivocally committed to a liberative, decolonising vision and is thus unapologetically partisan for the colonized culture.

In selecting the themes and styles for his or her work, the filmmaker’s choice is both ideologically determined and circumscribed. Since the filmmaker disclaims a “non-class” or “above-class” ideology, he/she is necessarily committed to a certain ideological mode of perception and a codified way of interpreting not only culture but reality itself. (15)

Visually, the appearance of Rizal himself, stealthily darting through the filmmakers’ space-time sphere at violative turns, suggests that they cannot separate themselves as objective onlookers; the filmmakers are themselves imbricated in the investigation. They are not just filming, they are filming as postcolonial Filipinos.

As they begin their investigation of Rizal and the retraction issue, the filmmakers re-visit the sentence of history on their home country. They trace the successive colonial occupations of The Philippines in parodic fashion, referring to the colonizers in irreverent, present-day colloquial terms: the Spaniards as “coño boys”, the Americans as “Am-boys” and the Japanese as “Honda boys”. Simultaneously, the film presents flash cuts of still photographs for each colonizing period. It is notable that the image used to represent the “coño boys” features a Filipino hanging from a wooden cross while a Spanish torturer gives him a lashing with a whip. The camera is positioned just behind the shoulder of the crucified so we get a good high angle of the characters looking on, two of which are Spanish sentries. The other two are Spanish frailes, and standing between the clerics is a Filipino man identifiable from the native straw hat he wears. One of the frailes points an accusing finger towards the crucified man and he appears to be explaining the moral lesson behind the bloody spectacle to the onlooking Filipino beside him (Figure 2). The still, which recalls the imagery of medieval Spanish inquisition, appears twice in the film’s first quarter and we get to see that it actually hangs on the wall of the filmmaker-characters’ office. The telling image strategically displayed in the filmmakers’ work-space presupposes a “hermeneutic of suspicion” that will pervade the inquiry. It is a re-assertion that the filmmakers are native informants whose own postcolonial questions are reflected in the film. Another frame hanging alongside the crucifixion photograph – a reproduction of the actual 1896 photograph of Rizal’s execution (Figure 3) – provides the validation of the filmmakers’ hermeneutics of suspicion. Could the syntagmatic organization of the crucifixion photograph vis a vis the actual still of Rizal’s execution be iconic of a religious-political conspiracy surrounding Rizal’s alleged deathbed retraction and, thus, indexical of the outcome of the investigation? The filmmakers’ suspect that the fingerprints of Spanish clerical power play are all over the retraction controversy. (16)

Retracting Rizal’s Retraction Me retracto de todo corazon de cuanto en mis palabras, escritos, inpresos y conducta ha habido contrario a mi cualidad de

hijo de la Inglesia Catolica. Creo y profeso cuanto ella enseña y me somento a cuanto ella manda. I retract with all my heart whatever in my words, writings, publications and conduct has been contrary to my character as son

of the Catholic Church. I believe and I confess whatever she teaches and I submit to whatever she demands. The above statement formed part of the retraction document (17) attributed to Jose Rizal. It was dated 29 December 1896, a

day before his execution ordered by a Spanish court martial. Rizal had written two politically-leavened novels in Europe, Noli Me Tangere (Touch Me Not) and El Filibusterismo (The Subversion), both of which represented a strident satirical indictment of the unholy conjugal oppression committed by the colonial governing authorities and the Roman Catholic religion in occupied Philippines. Rizal had been constantly hounded by the Spanish authorities who accused him of being the central rallying figure of a grassroots independence movement threatening to revolt against Mother Spain. Four copies of the retraction documents had surfaced after Rizal’s execution, each one allegedly expressing Rizal’s turnabout from freemasonry, his renunciation of all his writings and his repentant submission to the authority of the Catholic church. None of these documents, however, have been convincingly authenticated, let alone proven, as having been penned by Rizal himself. Nonetheless, official versions of history have taken the retraction issue for granted.

3rd World Hero’s investigation begins with its prologue, presenting Philippine national symbols most Filipinos learn by rote from childhood. The crudely-drawn images of a typical schoolbook are presented one after another in cut-to-cut edit, like elementary school flashcards used as memory aids. With this as a point of departure, the film establishes the way in which official versions of Philippine history, including Rizal’s heroism and retraction, are treated as mere givens in learning institutions and thus remain unquestioned. Like most schoolchildren of my generation, I, for one, was taught that Rizal died a Roman Catholic. The filmmaker-characters presumably share this uncritical indoctrination and they now seek to deconstruct it in “an investigation of the national hero status of Rizal” and, for them, the retraction controversy is the rubric within which to do just that.

We see a slide projection of the retraction document as the director presents the facts of the case. He notes that opinions about the retraction have always been polarized between those who accept the documents as genuine, and those who believe that a religious-political conspiracy fabricated the story and forged Rizal’s penmanship. Two comparative images are intercut to problematise the contentious issue through mise en scène. The first shows what could be Rizal’s hand, writing the retraction with a feathered pen. The second is more intriguing: it shows hooded monks seated in a row, forging copies of the retraction

assemblyline-style, with one of them photocopying the forged documents. The representation is humorously satirical and, right away, it questions the validity of the retraction documents as too obviously farcical to be believable. The blurring of time boundaries, as evoked by the incongruous blending of 19th Century monks and a photocopying machine, represents the filmmakers’ present-day suspicion of the probable role of the Catholic church in a conspiracy against Rizal. Again, it is shown here how imbricated the filmmakers are in the Rizal project. Moreover, it indicates that the investigation will play out as an ideological analysis of the retraction issue based on their serious doubts about the authenticity of the official documents. There is an undeniable confrontational intent, a “praxis of Third Cinema”, if you will, that becomes evident in the film’s æsthetics:

The aesthetic of Third Cinema also moves between two poles; one, the demand that the works engage the actual pressing social realities of the day, and the other that the film achieve its impression of reality, not by simply mirroring, but by transforming the given. (18)

Gabriel’s assertion finds further crystallization in the stylistic options of 3rd World Hero during a sequence when the director asks his writer why he thinks the retraction issue is unimportant. The film gives an answer to the contrary by way of strategic editing. It shows Rizal in c. 1890 Paris, writing a letter to his Austrian friend E. Blumentritt. Heard as a voice-over, Rizal denounces the Spanish clerics for selling out their religious beliefs to enrich themselves, attacking Filipino nationals, and seducing The Philippines (metaphorised as a young innocent maiden), all in religion’s name. (19) Rizal would then remark:

Why then should I not fight against religion with all my might when it is the primary cause of our sufferings and grievances. (20)

Documentary footage featuring a wide-angle shot of a present-day “Black Nazarene” procession in Quiapo, Manila, is immediately edited in. This is an annual pilgrimage where thousands of devotees parade a Spanish colonial statue of a black Christ bearing his cross. The procession scene vis a vis the Rizal scene and voice-over are incongruous; they are, at least, a century apart. The use of present-day documentary footage represents the filmmaker-characters’ sphere of reality, not Rizal’s. Yet again, the filmmaker-characters’ own postcolonial viewpoint finds representation in the blurring of temporal boundaries as the intercut scenes represent the crossings between past and present. What is even more telling is the very image of a coloured Christ bearing a heavy cross, which bespeaks of the infusion of a penitential culture perpetuated by colonial religion to sacralize the passivity of the colonized, who were made to believe that suffering and self-mortification meant participation in the passion of Christ. (21) The ongoing ramifications of colonial religion – a culture of passivity and inferiority – in the filmmakers’ own sphere of reality is represented by the indexical symbol of the Black Nazarene, a relic of the Catholicism of Rizal’s milieu.

How probable is it then that Rizal could have admitted that he was in error and retracted his denunciation of colonial religion when its negative reverberations are still felt by today’s Filipino and his writings continue to hold prophetic-liberating power, the director asks. In a heated debate, the writer plays devil’s advocate and argues that Rizal was considered a convicted political criminal; the real issue is political, not religious. Thus, Rizal’s anti-clerical sentiment must be treated as a separate issue. The director fires back:

DIRECTOR: Let’s not kid ourselves, you know that what you’ve just said is ludicrous … in Rizal’s time, the church was the government, and the government was the church! (22)

Just at the tail-end of the director’s argument, a flash cut of the earlier discussed crucifixion photograph re-appears. This time, it is a tighter close-up of the Spanish fraile pointing an accusing finger at the crucified Filipino; the expression of contempt is now more visibly etched on the cleric’s face. The camera pulls out to reveal the other fraile, the Spanish sentries, and the Filipino intently listening to what appears to be the cleric’s explication on the moral lesson behind the crucifixion.

At this pivotal turn, the photograph clearly becomes a leitmotiv in the film and iconic of the suspected colonial clerical power play behind Rizal’s retraction.

3rd World Hero continues to search for answers via magic realism, as the filmmakers take turns breaking through spatial and temporal boundaries and personally interviewing the key personages surrounding Rizal. His mother and brother, despite their personal reservations, believe the retraction to be false and inconsistent with what Rizal stood for, while his sisters give ambiguous, inconclusive testimonies. Rizal’s mistress, Josephine Bracken, insists that Rizal married her in Catholic rites, thus, indirectly confirming the retraction. Finally, the director gets to interview Padre Balaguer, the Jesuit priest who claims to have been the direct witness to the retraction.

I draw attention to the Padre Balaguer sequence as it is decisive for an understanding of 3rd World Hero’s representation of the role of colonial clerical power in the retraction controversy.

The Padre Balaguer sequence showcases de Leon’s mastery over the language of cinematic visuals, already letting out the verdict of the investigation through the language of mise en scène, editing, lighting and music. We see the director in Padre Balaguer’s cramped wood-panelled office. Balaguer is seated behind his desk, a crucifix hanging on the wall behind him. As the point-of-view shifts, through editing, between Balaguer and the interviewing director seated opposite him, two very odd things become apparent. First, Balaguer’s office is conspicuously shaped like a coffin. Second, the office has no doors (Figure 4). The syntagmatic meaning evoked by the mise en scène and editing is clear. Balaguer’s room configured as a coffin connotes that Rizal had already been sentenced to death from the outset. The absence of doors indicates that his fate is sealed and there is no way out.

As the interview carries on, the visual foreboding is further supported when a scene is introduced showing Rizal positioned between two frailes, here shown facing him. The shot is composed in such a way that the two clerics are shot from behind the shoulder so that their habits provide internal framing for Rizal, who stands between them in the background. Again, the leitmotiv of the crucifixion photograph finds expression, with Rizal playing the Filipino walled in between two frailes. The message is consistent: Rizal is trapped, his death looms.

In the ensuing interview, 3rd World Hero presents a visual re-enactment of the priest’s testimony and we appreciate how it unfolds like a comedy of errors. The historical testimony of Balaguer claims that Rizal repentantly wept, confessed three times and received communion in a span of just a few hours prior to his execution. While that in itself sounds suspicious, the visual rendering of a weeping Rizal going through three consecutive confessions makes it look even more ludicrous. When Rizal is finally shown with the Jesuit priests, kneeling before an image of the Immaculate Conception, a light shines through a window and bathes him in divinised radiance. With an accompanying ethereal musical score, the scene plays out like a parodic appropriation of classical hagiographical movies in the mould of Fratello Sole, Sorella Luna (Brother Sun, Sister Moon, Franco

Zeffirelli, 1973). As the Balaguer scene ends, we notice that the crucifix behind him had disappeared; in its place is the reproduction of the 1896 photograph of Rizal’s execution.

At this point, 3rd World Hero’s ideologically-determined stylistic strategies all click firmly into place. The very stylistic strategies conspire to set up a Damocles’ sword over Rizal and, as a result, de Leon is able to seamlessly present the Balaguer’s testimony for what he suspects it is – a comical farce – albeit one that is protectively veiled by the mantle of the Catholic church.

The tragic reality portrayed by the Third Cinema optic of 3rd World Hero is that Rizal had been crucified on the cross of colonial clerical power. It would then be eerily comical to believe that the retraction document was written by Rizal’s own colonially-pierced hand.

National Hero – Jose Rizal Towards the ending of Marilou Diaz-Abaya’s mainstream biopic Jose Rizal, the national hero makes a tearful confession

before Padre Balaguer, kisses a crucifix on his way to the firing squad and firmly clutches rosary beads until he breathes his last. It is the hero of elementary schoolbooks which uncritically accept that Rizal had disowned his writings and died a Roman Catholic.

3rd World Hero ends where it begins: with a reprise of the textbook pages of national symbols Filipino schoolchildren learn by rote. The epilogue, however, can now be viewed after having gone through the critical lens of Third Cinema. De Leon had maximized the grammar of film to stylistically present an alternative historiography of the national hero that rises to challenge “official versions” of history Diaz-Abaya’s film had memorialised.

In the clear-eyed view of 3rd World Hero, Rizal will always be framed by the context of his Third World culture and that culture carries the sentence of history – a long drawn and particularly abusive Spanish colonial occupation. This contextual framework is very relativising. 3rd World Herocritiques the way in which religion had been used by the Spanish frailes for their own colonial profit and collective egoism; to think that the frailes represented the interests of Rizal is the stuff of Chaplinesque comedy. In the process, 3rd World Hero insists that Jose Rizal is not the Philippine national hero for nothing. His life work attests to his profound commitment to the restoration of freedom and human dignity in his beloved motherland. And as far as many Filipinos are concerned, this is the kind of Catholic religion Rizal lived and died for. (23)

That said, we no longer view the film’s epilogue through “reductive” eyes, but through “restorative” eyes – or to borrow from the hermeneutical thought of philosopher Paul Ricouer, through a “second naïveté”. (24)

Notes - 31 anyos ng bumalik si Pepe sa Hongkong

--> dahil nakialam ang mga Heswita at sa halip na bitay, ipinatapon na lamang siya sa Dapitan.-Jose Rizal Mercado y Alonzo--> Gobernador Heneral ng Isla sa Pillipinas.---> lisensyado sa Medisina at Filosofia y Letras mula sa Universidad ng MadridDapitan 1894(Letter to Gob. Blanco---> ipinatapon si Pepe sa isang isla na hindi man lamang pinahintulutang ipagtanggol ang sarili.Dapitan 1892(Letter to Donya Lolay)*para hindi si Pepe, pinagkaabalahan niya ang ilang bagay tulad ng:--> marami syang pasyente at maraming ginagawang operasyon.--> minsan sinuswerte sa lotto --> hinuhuli ang mga insekto, palaka at butiki. :))Dapitan 1896(Letter to Trining)-->Si Josephine ay maamo, di matigas ang ulo at masunurin kaya kelangan na lang bayaran ang pari ngunit hindi nila iyon pwedeng gawin dahil maaaring sabihin ng publiko na iskandalo ito.Josephine Bracken--> Si Rizal ay polite, swabe at "askal"--> si Josephine ay maamo, di matigas ang ulo at masunurin--> hindi siya gusto ng pamilya ni Rizal--> sinasabi na nagsama lang sila at nagkaroon ng anak pero namatay din.Padre Balaguer--> isang Spanish priest--> nakatestigo sa pag-iiba ng relihiyon ni RizalAng Dokumento-->" isang malaking controversy ang pirma ni Rizal"-->sabi ng isa(Ricky Davao sa Pelikula) -> peke ang pirma dahil ito ang Dapitan retraction na naiwan sa Heswita.-> sabi rin nya na ang retraction na pirma ni Rizal ay ginamit sa Fort Santiago(pineke ang pirma!)--> sabi naman ng isa(Cris Villanueva sa pelikula)-> pero genuine ang text pero unquestionable ang pirma.--> Manila at Dec. 29, 1896-> kasama sa teksto-> imposibleng sinulat sa Dapitan noong 1895.*may sinulat si Pepe na retraction paper sa Dapitan na gusto niyang pakasalan si Bracken pero hindi niya ito pinirmahan.*fake lahat- ang pirma at text.- pakana ito ng simbahan kasabwat si Bracken at Padre Balaguer.- convicted political criminal si Rizal sa mata ng mga Kastila, siya ang investigator ng rebolusyon* Noong panahon ni Rizal, ang simbahan ang gobyerno at ang gobyerno ay ang simbahan.

Narcissa, "Ang Biktima ay si Pepe"--> wala siya sa Dapitan nung unang dumating si Bracken ngunit andun ang kapatid na si Maria.--> Dumating si Bracken sa Hongkong kasama ang kanyang MadrastoMadrasto - isang Ingles- halos bulag na at nais magpasuri kay Pepe

* Madalas makita si Bracken sa Arsobispado*Pio Valenzuela-->nakasabay nina Trining sa barko--> sinamahan niya ang isang bulag upang magpatingin kay Rizal-->dumaaw upang hingiin ang payo ni Pepe para sa binabalak na pag-aalsa--> Katipunan ang tawag sa Kilusan at naitatag ito 4 na taon na ang nakalipas--> Layunin: HimagsikanDecember 1896--> Manifesto to certain Filipinos--> si Pepe ang nasisi kaya siya ang nakulongTrining--> tinanong siya ng mga Espanyol na " Sa inyong opinyon, meron bang isinulat na retractasion(?) ang iyong kapatid?--> nung ipakita ang dokumentasyon, alam niyang iyon ang pirma ni Rizal1935-Contra La Masonaria Los Documentos de Retractasion--> ang mga dokumentong retractasion, mga Pilipinong mason, mga bayaning nagbalikdibdib sa Iglesia.1949--> opinyon ni Trining:--> nagpakasal ang kanyang kapatid bilang regalo sa kanyang asawa.--> bumalik siya dahil sa lumabas na dokumento*naniniwala siya na totoo pala ang lumabas na retractasion ng kanyang kapatid.--> hindi niya matandaan ang sinabi niyang pahayag-> "walang katotohanan ang retractasion"--> hindi niya matandaan ang mga ito dahil matandang matanda na siya.* Noong ika 29 ng Disyembre, 1896 sa pagitan ng 7-8 ng gabi sa kampilan, ipinagbilin sa kanya si Rizal, ang "Cusinilia de Alcohol"1948- komunsulta sa isang ekspertista upang makausap ang bangkay ng kanyang kapatid1886 Berlin--> "Hindi ko maisip na malilimbag ang nobelang ito. Mas mabuti pang ito'y sunugin na lang mang bilang isang bagay na isinumpa. At karapat dapat na maglaho"--> isa ito sa isinulat ni Rizal sa kanyang mga paper works laban sa mga Kastila.* Ika 30 ng Disyembre 1896, binaril siya ng firing squad ng sunadalong Pilipino ng 7:03 a.m.--> handang-handa harapin ang kamatayan--> isang bayaning bingyan ng libing ng mga Kristyano o isang bayaning inusig hanggang sa kabila ng buhayPadre Balaguer*Anong nagyari nung dumalaw ang kanyang nanay:-nag-engkwentro sila-hinawakan ang kamay ng Ina-humingi ng tawad at umiyak-iyak*Ipinakiusap niya sa nanay na hingiin ang bangkay ni Pepe matapos ang lahat dahil nais niyang malibing ng marapat.*Bago mamatay si Pepe. nandoon din ang ilan sa kanyang mga kamag-anak tulad nina:-mga kapatid na babae-Dona Lolay-Josephine Bracken-ilang pamangkinTrining-marunong mag-Ingles-ibinulong sa kanya ni Pepe na "Inside that lamp, there's something inside of it"*nangumpisal siya ng 3 beses at humingi ng misa kay Padre Balaguer upang mangomunyon.*Pagkatapos, nakaluhod siya at hawak-hawak ang retractasion para marinig nilang lahat ang kanyang pagbabalik sa Santa Iglesia--> nilalaman ng kanyang binabasa:"Ako'y isang Katoliko. At sa relihiyong ito, nais kong mabuhay at mamatay. Binabawi ko ng buong puso ang anuman sa aking mga salita, mga ipinalimbag at binasa at di sang-ayon sa aking pagkatao bilang anak ng Iglesia. Pinaniniwalaan ko at pinahahayag ang kanyang mga itinuturo. At sumusuko ako sa kanyang ipinag-uutos. Kinasusuklaman ko ang mga masunoriheya bilang kaaway ng Iglesia."*Pinamagatang Bayaning Third World dahil sa pagiging marupok o third class ng pagkabayani ni Rizal.*Ipinakasal ni Padre Balaguer sina Bracken at Rizal, ngunit ayaw maniwala ng pamilya ni Rizal.ConfrontationAdios, Patria adorado, region del sol queridas"-->isang tula ni Pepe--> habilin niya sa kanila, at sa lahat*meron din daw na itinagong sulat sa sapatos ni Pepe--> "Hindi na mababawi ang na agnas na panahon"(nakalagay sa sulat)Kanya-kanyang Rizal*kung hindi siya namatay, hindi siya sasapi kay Bonifacio*sabi niya na hindi niya ginustong maging bayani.* sabi rin niya na " Nabasa biyo na ang halos lahat sa aking mga sinulat, halos lahat ng isiulat, lahat sa akin. Ngunit hindi niyo pa rin ako nakikilala. Sana sinunod niyo ang aking sinulat sa aking pamilya ... ilibing niyo ako sa lupa, lagyan niyo ng bato at krus sa ibabaw. Ilagay niyo anga king pangalan, ang aking kapanganakan, ang aking kamatayan. Wala nang iba, kahit na

aking anibersaryo."*habang may Pilipinas, mananatili si Rizal na National Hero at mananatiling isang monumento.*habang may pera, mananatiling habang panahon g nasa piso*hindi pampelikula ang buhay ni Rizal, hanggang libro lang siya.