The Rizal Law, Literature, and Society | Lecture notes History

Life and Works of Rizal (GRIZAL)

MODULE 1 | THE RIZAL LAW, LITERATURE AND SOCIETY

The Rizal Bill

REPUBLIC ACT 1425 OR THE RIZAL LAW

→Was proposed and debated in the

Philippine Congress in 1956.

→It was originally authored by statesman

CLARO M. RECTO. The author believed that

reading Rizal’s novels would strengthen the

Filipinism of the youth and foster patriotism.

SENATE BILL NO. 438

→The original version of the Rizal Bill states

that “it is an act to make the novels of Rizal

compulsory reading materials in all public

and private colleges and universities and for

other purposes” (Laurel 1960).

COMPULSORY

→The use of the word was one of the

oppositions to the said bill.

→The oppositionists pointed out that making

it compulsory for all students would limit or

deny the rights and privileges regarding the

faith and religion of individuals.

→A great debate ensued when the Rizal Bill

was proposed.

→The two opposing sides were the Catholic

hierarchy and the tandem of the main

proponents Senators CLARO M. RECTO and

Jose P. Laurel.

Actions/Contentions (Catholic side)

→urging the Filipino Catholics to write their

congressmen and senators to oppose the Bill

and for it not to be passed in Congress (from

the Philippine catholic Action)

→pointing out that the novels belong to the

past and that it would be harmful to read

them because they presented a false image

of the conditions of the country at that time.

(From Father Jesus Cavanna)

→claiming that the Noli Me Tangere was an

attack to the clergy and that it targets to

ridicule the Catholic faith (from Father Jesus

Cavanna)

→declaring some parts of the novels as

“objectionable matter” by the Catholic

hierarchy and that Catholics had the right to

refuse to read them so as not to “endanger

their salvation”. (Jesus Paredes)

→claiming that the Rizal Bill was Rafael

Rectos Revenge against Catholic voters who

were responsible for his poor showing in the

1955 senatorial elections.

→pointing out that majority of the Filipino

people are at the same time Catholics and

Filipino citizens and that their COUNTRY and

their FAITH are their two great loves; two

great loves that are NOT CONFLICTING

LOVES. (From Senator Rodrigo).

Contentions (Senators Recto & Laurel)

→that the novels must be read by all Filipinos

and to be taken to heart for in these novels

the Filipinos see themselves in a mirror.

→That the novels had NOT been motivated

by detestation against the Catholic religion

→That Rizal portrayed faithfully the general

situation in the country as it then existed.

→That Senator Claro M. Recto courageously

and stubbornly defended the Rizal bill

despite the fact that he was going against

Catholic voters.

→That in response to the threat of catholic

schools to close if the Bill would be passed,

Partial preview of the text

Download The Rizal Law, Literature, and Society and more Lecture notes History in PDF only on Docsity!

MODULE 1 | THE RIZAL LAW, LITERATURE AND SOCIETY The Rizal Bill REPUBLIC ACT 1425 OR THE RIZAL LAW →Was proposed and debated in the Philippine Congress in 1956. →It was originally authored by statesman CLARO M. RECTO. The author believed that reading Rizal’s novels would strengthen the Filipinism of the youth and foster patriotism. SENATE BILL NO. 438 →The original version of the Rizal Bill states that “ it is an act to make the novels of Rizal compulsory reading materials in all public and private colleges and universities and for other purposes” (Laurel 1960). COMPULSORY →The use of the word was one of the oppositions to the said bill. →The oppositionists pointed out that making it compulsory for all students would limit or deny the rights and privileges regarding the faith and religion of individuals. →A great debate ensued when the Rizal Bill was proposed. →The two opposing sides were the Catholic hierarchy and the tandem of the main proponents Senators CLARO M. RECTO and Jose P. Laurel. Actions/Contentions (Catholic side) →urging the Filipino Catholics to write their congressmen and senators to oppose the Bill and for it not to be passed in Congress (from the Philippine catholic Action) →pointing out that the novels belong to the past and that it would be harmful to read them because they presented a false image of the conditions of the country at that time. (From Father Jesus Cavanna) →claiming that the Noli Me Tangere was an attack to the clergy and that it targets to ridicule the Catholic faith (from Father Jesus Cavanna) →declaring some parts of the novels as “objectionable matter” by the Catholic hierarchy and that Catholics had the right to refuse to read them so as not to “endanger their salvation”. (Jesus Paredes) →claiming that the Rizal Bill was Rafael Rectos Revenge against Catholic voters who were responsible for his poor showing in the 1955 senatorial elections. →pointing out that majority of the Filipino people are at the same time Catholics and Filipino citizens and that their COUNTRY and their FAITH are their two great loves ; two great loves that are NOT CONFLICTING LOVES. (From Senator Rodrigo). Contentions (Senators Recto & Laurel) →that the novels must be read by all Filipinos and to be taken to heart for in these novels the Filipinos see themselves in a mirror. →That the novels had NOT been motivated by detestation against the Catholic religion →That Rizal portrayed faithfully the general situation in the country as it then existed. →That Senator Claro M. Recto courageously and stubbornly defended the Rizal bill despite the fact that he was going against Catholic voters. →That in response to the threat of catholic schools to close if the Bill would be passed,

MODULE 1 | THE RIZAL LAW, LITERATURE AND SOCIETY Recto strongly moved for the nationalization of schools which would be a great step for fostering a more vibrant nationalism among the citizenries. It is interesting to note however, that there were neutral or moderate minds coming from the Catholic side who expressed positive attitudes toward Jose Rizal. Schumacher (2011) stated in his analysis of the Rizal bill that “not all are unanimous on the outright condemnation of Rizal’s novels. Schumacher (2011) cited that FATHER HORACIO DEL COSTA was convinced that “Rizal emerges as an outstanding moral figure whose devotion to the truth made his novels a source of moral as well as social and political wisdom for Filipinos. In conclusion, we say, first, that we find nothing that constitutes a danger to the fait or morals of the mature well instructed Catholic,” but “much in conformity with the teachings of the Gospel and right reason.’ Secondly, prudence demands that they should not be given as reading matter to the young without proper direction and guidance in the form of annotations to the printed text and explanations by the living teacher. If this prescription of prudence is complied with… the salutary political and social ideas of our national hero will strike deep roots in the minds and hearts of our people.” The debate about the Rizal Bill raged on until Senator Laurel removed the term “ COMPULSORY ” in the substitute Bill. The Philippine Senate then voted unanimously and the then PRESIDENT RAMON MAGSAYSAY affixed his signature on JUNE 12, 1956. Traditional Teaching ✓ When the Rizal Bill was passed, writers, educators and social scientists scrambled to come with materials for the teaching of the life and works of the national hero. ✓ As a result, educators came up with approaches in trying to educate their students about the life and works of Jose Rizal. ✓ The HAGIOGRAPHIC TEACHING of Rizal’s life and works became one of these. Hagiography narrates biographies of saints and religious leaders. ✓ Up to these days, the life of Jose Rizal is still being taught in a hagiographic manner at the tertiary level. ✓ One of the critics of this approach was Dan (2006). “I was required to purchase and read this book for a class in the University of the Philippines, and boy was my money and time wasted. This reads not so much as a sober historical biography, but as a gospel of Jose Rizal, a hagiography of a deified savior of the Philippines. There is a paucity of critical analyses of historical data, and an overly credulous acceptance of anecdotes and unsubstantiated stories.” ✓ “As is quite common of early Filipino historians, their methodology is nothing more than creative storytelling and recounting legendary embellishments as though they were fact. To them, the historico-critical method of modern

MODULE 1 | THE RIZAL LAW, LITERATURE AND SOCIETY →There was a strong surge among the middle-class Filipinos to determine their origins and similarities which are powerful catalysts in the founding of a nation. →The creation of a national literature would then be of great help in this clamour for nationhood.

2. “The Philippines needed Rizal (through his writings) to reflect the desire to become distinctly national.” →National literature must help in the recognition of a certain society to be known throughout the whole world. →It must tell something about the past and the present of a people. →Rizal’s novels somehow were able to contribute to the attainment of this national objective by depicting the true political, economic and the socio-cultural images of those times as well as the present and the future.

The birth of the Filipino nation was, however, not the solo handiwork of Jose Rizal. His works were complemented by other efforts such as those of the other propagandists, GOMBURZA, Spanish and Creole writers like Jose Felipe del Pan, Francisco, Paula de Entrala, Antonio Vasquez de Aldana, Pascual Poblete, Pedro Paterno, Gregorio Sancianco, Trinidad Pardo de Tavera, Francisco Balagtas, Graciano Lopez Jaena, and Marcelo H. Del pilar. 4. “Series of intellectual moves in the (invention) of national literature” → In the 19TH CENTURY , intellectuals coming from the middle class focused on the establishment of the Filipino national character through their works. →With their masterpieces and other laudable intellectual achievements, they targeted to establish a national literature that reflect a distinct nation, a nation with distinct characteristics and at par with other nations different from what the colonizers projected. 5. “People’s literature must be grounded in their own history.” → LITERATURE is a mirror of society. When a person would like to know the people (especially in their cultural aspect and their history) of a certain country or nation, reading their literature would be of great help. 6. “There is a need to converse with the rest of the world.” →In his article, Mojares also pointed out that “A nation’s literary capital is built up not just by harnessing the local but by appropriating the foreign.” Thus, realizing the need to internationalize through their works, Rizal and his other compatriots wrote in Spanish and demonstrated in their actions many of the characteristics of other nations especially the Western ones. →Their goal was also to let the whole world recognize the Filipino nation.

MODULE 1 | THE RIZAL LAW, LITERATURE AND SOCIETY

7. “National literary capital is not just a collection of texts but a living discourse.” →National literature must not only be kept on shelves or hidden in archives. It should be learned and expanded by the young generations and that they would realize through the national literature that the formation of the nation is a continuing process and that they too have an important role to play. →It is important, however, for society to note that literary pieces or works are not absolute resources or materials especially when it comes to knowing the people’s culture and history and that these should not be held immediately as facts. It has already been widely acclaimed that the lives and works of our heroes are the symbols of nationalist ideals and by embracing these ideals, “the Filipino was presumably inspired to live with these ideals (Hau, 2000).” The Rizal Bill is given merit for the articulation of literature as it serves:

As a link between nation and culture
As a mediating force between the universal ideals of freedom and nationalism
As an avenue of new insights to the society
To illuminate a set of issues true to the Filipino experience
To transmit oral achievements of cultures and nations
As a bridge to the local and international literary arena and forms a connection among generations of people. There is, however, a problem with the use of literature in teaching nationalism. Hau (2000) cautioned readers of literature not to engage preaching without understanding as she wrote “Rizal was visible but largely unread”. Every reader is now faced with the challenge to see the effectiveness of literature to portray the history of a people truthfully. Readers must have to consider that literary works are sometimes translated, interpreted, and appropriated in different ways and there’s a great tendency that the original perspective and intention of the author are not already reflected. Literature can have its excesses. Lit. & the Hazards of Translation →Readers of Rizal’s novels, therefore, must take extra precautions in dealing with these. →It may be true that these novels can be instruments in instilling patriotism and nationalism, but readers have to bear I mind the context when these were written. →This was pointed out by Anderson (2004) in his article entitled “Hard To Imagine.” In its desire to come up with appropriate materials for the teaching of Rizal’s novels, the government then sponsored a prize competition for the best new translation of these novels. LEON MA. GUERRERO , a prominent Filipino historian was one of those who joined. This Filipino historian also wrote a book about Rizal entitled “ The First Filipino ” published in 1969.

MODULE 1 | THE RIZAL LAW, LITERATURE AND SOCIETY ANACHRONISM →Is the assigning of someone or something into a context that is not in its proper historical or chronological time. →Anderson found out that in Guerrero’s translation of the Noli, the young Filipinos would at once see that they do not exist within the novel’s pages. →This was because the term Filipino as used in the novels used to refer to the full-blooded Spaniards who were born in the Philippines(creoles/criollo) and not to the natives. →But for Anderson, the term Filipino began to be used to include the native Filipino after the Philippines became independent from Spain- “all the sons and daughters of the country no matter what their racial origins are” (Anderson, 2004).

So, for Guerrero, there was a problem on the contextual use of the term Filipino. POSTSCRIPT →Anderson also noticed that in Guerrero’s translation, some of Rizal’s postscripts were not included. →This would again result in a different interpretation of the translated text. In conclusion, a person translating a certain literary work may commit the following:

Wrongly interpreting a text
Translating texts and discourses verbatim
Misinterpreting the use of a particular language
Differences in the context and evolution of meanings 5. Removal and interpretation of concepts and explanations With all these hazards of translation of Rizal’s works, it is indeed important to heed the words of Father Horacio Dela Costa. He wrote: “the main danger we foresee in their indiscriminate and undirected reading, especially the young, who are apt to take as literally true whatever they see in print…Therefore it is our judgement that, while Rizal’s novels should be made familiar to students, the editions should be accurate translations from the Spanish text, properly annotated by a scholar familiar with the ecclesiastical history of Rizal’s period, and should ordinarily be commented on and explained by the teacher in charge.”

The Rizal Law, Literature, and Society, Lecture notes of History

Related documents

Partial preview of the text

Download The Rizal Law, Literature, and Society and more Lecture notes History in PDF only on Docsity!