There is a conflagration online, and it began with a young would-be politician from the Revilla clan praising Magellan as our hero.
Much as I would not conspire with his supporters to let go of an error from someone with a following, I like to think I know where this young man is coming from. In fact, if he has knowledgeable assistants, he could have been briefed by them about how our government has been spending so much time and effort celebrating the name of Magellan and a host of other foreigners who became part of the circumnavigation of the world that they are beginning to appear as our own heroes. Or that Magellan may not be a national hero but he is a global hero.
If so, does it become our responsibility to declare Magellan as such?
Count the symposia, conferences, and forums where the subject matter is about Magellan and you can understand the confusion about the obsession with the 500 years. While you are at it, count also the number of symposia, conferences, and forums dealing with Lapulapu. The fact of the matter is very few are excited to take up this Mactan man’s case.
I mean, listen to what the historians, Filipino academics included, are singing about the value of this circumnavigation.
After 500 years, this is all we can manage?
After 500 years, we cannot be brave and daring enough to confront a conjured past to the point of dismissing it?
Imagine this scenario: countries approach the Philippines to ask that it participate in the commemoration of the circumnavigation of the globe. Imagine a response where we tell them that, with due respect, we cannot celebrate an event that initiated the enslavement of this country. I do not think these inviting countries will send armies to occupy our islands once more. That is a thinking that comes solely from this government, and we, citizens, know better.
So, here we are again, attempting to paint Lapulapu by using the archives written by his enemies then. I thought we have learned already the basic tenet of deconstruction: who said it? The identity of the speaker determines the value of the fact.
Can the subaltern ever speak? Not if we keep on using the language of those who caused the subaltern to be submerged. Not if we maintain the point-of-view of those who produced the images for the subaltern.
The point is after 500 years, all we can manage to talk about is where the First Mass was held, and where it really was. But, who cares?
People of faith—and this we have to respect—have their knowledge of a God not because the First Mass was held anywhere. All this obsession about where Limasawa was and what icon was given is part of this module symptom. After centuries, we are students learning the evils of colonialism and coming out of it wishy-washy about colonization. We need to memorize names of people and places because, at the back of our mind, we are convinced that is the only way to be a Filipino.
The fact again is: the arrival of Magellan, the circumnavigation, the First Mass and the First Baptism are empty records. They do not have anything to do with our identities; they provide the bulk of the colonizer’s bag of achievements. This Filipinoness shall come later and that search for identities will be a part of other histories and other circumstances. The identities that we are linking to those events in the 16th century are connected by histories buffeted by archives that are not anywhere near us. In the distance between those days, which we can only imagine and mystify, and our present moments can be located something else—this notion that historicized, we do not necessarily become ideal and exciting race.
Here is the myth of the brave Lapulapu and a host of other brave heroes and all we do on days composing the 500 years is to scamper all over to debunk their age, their presence in major battles and their vaunted bravery, leaving in the end, ghosts of warriors that may not have existed at all.
There is a statue of Lapulapu—muscled, proud, holding a mighty shield. Keep that. Keep the memory, we tell ourselves. They are good, potent symbols. They make us think of how there was in us this strength to turn back invaders.
Think about this: We are not questioning that Cross of Magellan not because of history but mainly because it is a cross, a symbol made intimidatingly sacred. Then there is the Sto. Niño who cannot be critiqued because he is the Child Jesus. And so what is left for this country of confused scholars and cultural leaders? Attack its own. Scour all archives that will reveal how fake this Lapulapu we were raised to praise.
So, who needs another hero? No one. We cannot have our own hero because, right here, in our nation live ourselves who remain to be our own perfect enemies.
E-mail: titovaliente@yahoo.com