Invention of National Lit (Feat Rizal)

JOSE
RIZAL &
INVENTION OF
NATIONAL LITERATURE
- RHACEL A. COMPUESTO
- José Protasio Rizal Mercado y
Alonso Realonda
- June 19, 1861 Calamba, Laguna,
- Ateneo Municipal de Manila
- Santo Tomas (Medicine)
- Universidad Central de Madrid
- University of Paris
- University of Heidelberg
- Berlin Ethnological Society and Berlin
Anthropological Society
- Polyglot (22 languages)
- Opthalmologist
- Sculptor
- Painter
With varying degrees of - Educator
expertise in; - Farmer
- Architecture - Martial Arts - Historian
- Cartography - Fencing
- Journalist
- Economics - Pistol Shooting
- Ethnology - Sociology
- Anthropology - Dramatics
• In 1880, José Rizal, then a nineteen-year-old student,
won first prize in a literary contest in Manila.
 an allegorical essay “El consejo de los dioses” (The
Council of the Gods).
• The year 1880, when Rizal wrote the essay,

 the year the Propaganda Movement was born.
Amovement that emerged with the “events of 1872”
(the Cavite mutiny and execution of the priests José
Burgos, Mariano Gomez, and Jacinto Zamora)an
allegorical essay “ El consejo de los dioses” (The
Council of the Gods).
• The young Rizal was not completely untouched by these
events. In the 1880s, however, the propaganda
movement was still largely “assimilationist” in its call
for colonial reforms, equal rights, and local autonomy
• Writing in Spanish, praising a Spanish classic,

inserting himself into European discourse,Rizal claimed
parity with Spaniards as heir to a great Western
tradition. (The claim was rebuffed.)
• Rizal’s critique had a different critical edge, the literary
space Rizal and like-minded Filipinos operated in, or
sought to claim, was still Spanish-colonial, pre-
national space.
• This was dominated by Spanish and Creole writers

based in Manila .
 José Felipe del Pan
 Francisco de Paula Entrala
 Antonio Vasquez de Aldana
• The space of literature is not fixed and immutable,
it is a site of incessant struggle, innovation, and
challenges to authority.
• In 1880, point in time when the country’s literary

scene was qualitatively changing from “pre-
national” to one that would, in the course of events,
become distinctly “national.”
• In “inventing” a national literature,
 the first move is that of asserting difference
 To assert difference was to disengage from a
dominant discourse that rendered one
voiceless and invisible, carve out autonomous
space, and lay claim to one’s own resources
for creative production .
 claims to a deep native tradition
 claims to a wealth of local linguistic and
cultural resources
• Inspired the effort of Rizal and colleagues,like Pedro
Paterno, T.H. Pardo de Tavera, and Isabelo de losReyes.
• His familiarity with vernacular literature was evident

in 1887, he delivered in German a lecture on Tagalog
metrical art before the Ethnographic Society of Berlin,
and in 1890, he defended the integrity of Tagalog
theater against the attacks of the Spanish academician
Vicente Barrantes.
• Rizal was the first to attempt to write a “national”

history that would disengage the country from being
treated as a mere appendage to Spain.
• in a second move, he recognized as well that this
literature can only grow through a vital
conversation with the rest of the world.
• Rizal appreciated that a people’s literature must
be grounded in their own history and store of
social, psychological, andlinguistic resources
• to “internationalize” was not an option but a
necessity.
• recognized, moreover, that in the work of nation-
creation, they had to begin with the living reality
of a culture already contaminated, and vitalized,
by the intrusion of foreign.
• Rizal positioned himself between the “inside” and
the“outside.” Discussing Tagalog poetry, Rizal took an
insider stance in correcting Spanish misinterpretations,
arguing that Tagalog poetry had its own rules of
practice.
• Responded to Barrantes’ attack on Tagalog theater,

Rizal said that Barrantes “does not know a single thing
about Filipino writing” and is ignorant of Asian theater
traditions
• His orientation and methods were Western and literate

when he discussed questions of syllabication, rhyme,
meter, and stanza in Tagalog poetry
• Finally, Third move Rizal recognized that a
country’s literary capital is not just a collection of
texts and artifacts but a living discourse.
 “is not so much the sum of individual works as

the system of relations between them.”
It is “a field of affinities and oppositions,”
“intellectual space” where, through the medium
of criticism,
works meet and enter into active dialogue with
each other.
-Octavio Paz
• vital conversation within the nation must be enabled
through an infrastructure of publishing, literary
societies and academies, and an active community of
writers, critics, and readers.
• proposed in 1883 an anthology of essays to be

contributed by members of the Círculo Hispano-Filipino
in Spain, and to lay the groundwork in 1889 for
launching an Association Internationale des
Philippinistes in Paris. While both projects did not
materialize
• He was interested in making visible a community of Filipino
writers and intellectuals. It was in this context that he
repeatedly urged Filipinos in Europe not only “to buy,
read, but critically, the books about the Philippines”
but to “buy books by Filipinos”
• Rizal exercised command when he wrote Noli me tangere

(1887) and El filibusterismo (1891).
• Rizal did not close the circle he has unfinished business

 his third, unfinished novel (Makimisa) it was written in
1891-1892, after the appearance of the El
filibusterismo.
• What moved Rizal to write a third novel?
 First Reason : he said, was to write a novel in

Tagalog, addressing Tagalog readers rather than
Europeans
his third novel, he wrote:

“If I write it in Spanish, then the poor
Tagalogs to whom the work is dedicated, will
not get to know it, though they may be the
ones who need it most.”
• It turned out, Rizal began his third novel in Tagalog
but thens witched to Spanish
 In a letter written in German to his friend
Ferdinand Blumentritt on 20 April 1891, he said:
… I have already given up the idea of
writing the third part in Tagalog for it would not
be appropriate to write a work in two languages
as they would be like the sermons of the friars.
So I am writing it now in Spanish
• His second motive, Rizal said,
 was to write “a novel in the modern (modernen)
sense of the word. an artistic and literary novel.
 he resolved to write a novel more “artistic and
literary,” distanced from the polemical imperatives
that drove the writing of Noli me tangere and the El
filibusterismo
 Luna praised Rizal’s “extraordinary realism” in
capturing the dynamics of a society’s development.
 Rizal, he said, is “a modern novelist who sacrificed
incomprehensible beauty [of the Romantics] to plain
truth [of the Realists]” in depicting a “corrupt, weak
society.”
• Rizal’s third motive
 was to write a novel that would deal “exclusively
with the usages, virtues, and defects of the
Tagalogs.”
 “I want to sacrifice politics and everything for art.”
Rizal had turned to writing for Tagalogs in their own
language, he (again one surmises) meant to write of
Tagalog society in its own terms, integral and
autonomous, rather than a reflex of the colonial
encounter
 Rizal came face to face with the impossibility of
writing a novel outside of the present and outside of
history.1
• Writing Makamisa, he did not only struggle with the
Tagalog language but gravitated (as the extant
fragment of Makamisa shows) towards composing
what seems a reprise of the Noli me tangere.
• When Rizal abandoned his third novel, he may have

thought that it was a novel to be written in another
time and perhaps by writers other than himself
• Rizal’s “turn to the native” is not vain, if taken as a

sign of the desire for a literature more deeply
anchored in the realities of home.
• At a time when Rizal’s novels both have been
“monumentalized,”
• It is one of history’s fine serendipities that, in the end, Rizal

left us a novel that is unfinished – which is what the national
literature must always be
• Now:
• The literature that Rizal and his contemporaries tried to
bring about was vigorously promoted in the work of
nation-building nthat began with the establishment of the
Malolos Republic and continued under the new conditions
created by U.S. colonial rule.

Invention of National Lit (Feat Rizal)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Invention of National Lit (Feat Rizal)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Invention of National Lit (Feat Rizal)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

JOSE

• The year 1880, when Rizal wrote the essay,

• Writing in Spanish, praising a Spanish classic,

• This was dominated by Spanish and Creole writers

• In 1880, point in time when the country’s literary

• His familiarity with vernacular literature was evident

• Rizal was the first to attempt to write a “national”

• Responded to Barrantes’ attack on Tagalog theater,

• His orientation and methods were Western and literate

 “is not so much the sum of individual works as

• proposed in 1883 an anthology of essays to be

• Rizal exercised command when he wrote Noli me tangere

• Rizal did not close the circle he has unfinished business

 First Reason : he said, was to write a novel in

his third novel, he wrote:

• When Rizal abandoned his third novel, he may have

• Rizal’s “turn to the native” is not vain, if taken as a

• It is one of history’s fine serendipities that, in the end, Rizal

You might also like