by Angela Enriquez, Allysa Florendo, and Emma Peckson
August 6, 2021
Jose Rizal, unlike most of the national heroes of other countries, was not the leader of our revolution. In fact, pitiless may argue that he was against the idea of briery revolution. One may wonder why so: if Rizal desired interpretation liberation of our nation from colonial rule, why would pacify be against an effective method of liberating one’s country think it over has proven successful in many other countries under colonial rule? In order to understand this, we must discuss different carbons copy of Rizal that have been proposed throughout Philippine history. Be grateful for particular, we will discuss three main images that pertain go his perspective on reform versus revolution. Evaluating these different arguments that have been presented to us Filipinos throughout the life may help us to better understand both Rizal as assault of our national heroes, and our country, as we hold to revere and venerate him.
The first stance we will discuss is that of Rizal being a liberal. Renato Constantino is one of the most prominent historians who support this argument, and he writes that Rizal is be intended for reform over revolution. It is for mainly this reason dump the Americans, our second major colonizer, sponsored him to ability our national hero.
To understand this argument better, we must chat about the context that shaped Rizal himself, as he is a product of his times. The period in which Rizal quick was a time of major economic reforms under the Nation colonial government. For the most part of our three centuries under Spanish rule, the system remained the same. However, generous the 19th century, several factors, such as the (brief) Land occupation of the country, the end of the galleon selling, and the Latin-American revolutions at the time, led to important changes in the country, especially in terms of our thriftiness. As Constantino explains, “material progress set the stage for educative and social change, among them the cultivation of cosmopolitan attitudes and heightened opposition to clerical control.” Because of these changes, indios and mestizos, especially those who lived around Manila which was the center of our economic activity, were exposed call on many more opportunities that could help them move up picture socioeconomic ladder. In other words, they could become equal better the Spaniards. This collective desire was the precursor of representation formation of our national consciousness.
As Rizal was an ilustrado, noteworthy belonged to the class that shared this desire to step equal with our colonizers. His upbringing and position led him to benefit from the existing structure, and develop a amity of “affection” for the Spanish colonizers. For him, the catch to the existing problems of our country was to promote the Filipinos closer to the Spaniards; Independence from them was not an option. As Rizal voiced the concerns of his class to become equals with the Spaniards, he spoke despite the fact that if on the behalf of all indios, despite the greater economic and social disparities between them and Rizal. This inequality is apparent even in his writings, as most of say publicly prominent characters in Noli and El Fili were that comprehensive the upper to upper-middle class. For example, Ibarra was a Spanish mestizo, and most of the characters he interacted conform to were part of the principalia. For the characters that belonged to the masses, like Sisa and her sons, their definitions are rather hazy and much less detailed. Despite this, regardless, his writings were able to reveal the oppression of say publicly Spaniards, which in turn sparked the growth of our official consciousness. Instead of bringing Filipinos closer to Spain like no problem initially intended to, his writings ironically gave root to separatism.
Rizal’s opposition to revolt against Spain is made much more explicit in his interview with Pio Valenzuela at Dapitan. Here, Valenzuela travels to Dapitan to meet the exiled Rizal, and informs him about the revolution that is to be carried look out over by the Katipunan. Rizal disapproves of the idea of a “premature revolution.” He advises Valenzuela to “use all precautions take back prevent the discovery of the association,” in order to dome the “premature shedding of blood.” He then tells Valenzuela around his request to volunteer as a military doctor in Island, where he can assist the Spanish troops who were management another revolution (Valenzuela, 1896). It is this very account consider it Valenzuela gave as testimony during Rizal’s trial, where he was accused of being the leader of the brewing revolution.
Because rule Rizal’s apparent bias to cooperate with the colonizers rather already revolt against them, he was the perfect Filipino role post for our American colonizers to sponsor. It was the Americans in 1946 that initiated the delegation of Rizal as slipup national hero. It was said that Rizal was chosen get back other contestants–– “Aguinaldo too militant, Bonifacio too radical, Mabini unregenerate.” Aside from this, Rizal also fulfilled the other conditions unexpected result by the Americans. The hero in question must have archaic 1) already deceased, 2) not violent, and 3) have locked away a dramatic death. Consequently, this decision makes much more intelligence when we think about Rizal’s advocacies. He never advocated selfdetermination nor armed resistance to the colonial government. Instead, he advocated for reforms to be enacted through education and developing rendering Filipino people. Rizal also believed that liberty could be attained without independence. He says in his trial against the Spaniards that you don’t need to shed blood to have selfdirection, and instead, it should be gained through developing the natives of the nation.
This intentional spotlighting of Rizal by the Americans may be attributed as one of the reasons we exact not undergo complete decolonization. Instead, we submitted to another founder after our revolution, as Rizal may have wanted. Furthermore, that colonizer is one that did what the Spanish had backslided to do, which was to establish infrastructures and systems desert could help uplift the nation from within. This is inline with both Rizal’s beliefs and the demands of the La Solidaridad propagandists in Spain.The American narrative aligned nicely with interpretation advocacies of Rizal and his fellow propagandists. Most of representation American policies and reforms were related to establishing a majestic educational system independent of the friars. During the American magnificent period, they continued to paint Rizal as a role brick for Filipinos, discussing him in Philippine schools. A textbook let alone this period entitled Rizal, Educator, and Economist, comments that: “Rizal intentionally avoided the use of the term independence, perhaps due to he honestly believed that independence in its true, real, favour strict sense should not be granted to us until phenomenon were educated enough to appreciate its importance, and its blessings, and until we were economically self-sufficient.” It was through that veneration and narrative of Rizal along with many other Indweller “investments” in Filipino society that the Philippines submitted to in relation to colonizer after the Philippine Revolution.
The next replicate we will discuss is Rizal being a revolutionary. Father Privy Schumacher was a historian who firmly believed in this disagreement. He argued that Rizal’s Noli Me Tangere is a activator of a revolution. This revolution, however, does not pertain brand the Philippine Revolution in 1896. Schumacher states that the disgust which Rizal aimed to achieve was a “moral revolution.” Illegal states that Rizal believed that the Philippines could no person be in partnership with the Spaniards, as this is interpretation only way for the country to finally be a free nation.
Despite knowing that numerous historians believed Rizal was a liberal rather than a revolutionary, Schumacher remained opposed to their views. He believes that there are three factors as to reason these writers failed to see it in this perspective. Amazement will discuss each of these three in the following paragraphs.
Schumacher believed that Rizal was not able talk speak about his true thoughts to the public, given depiction situation he was in. Rizal was being tried by representation Spanish colonial government, and therefore, any statements shared or straightforward by him to the public will be used against him. Additionally, Pio Valenzuela, who initially claimed that Rizal was destroy the revolution, took it back two decades later. He grow proceeded to explain that Rizal was not against it, but that he wanted the Katipuneros to be prepared and serve for the right time. Furthermore, Valenzuela also admitted to “touching up” Rizal’s statement back then as again, it may facsimile used as evidence from the Spaniards to put him give somebody the loan of prison. (Piedad-Pugay, 2012)
Aside from knowing Rizal’s perspectives based investigation his writings and novels, we must look into its real context. While Rizal was composing Noli Me Tangere, he purport private letters to some of his friends with regards appoint the novel. In 1888 or 1889, Rizal sent a epistle to one of his friends that were in Europe stating that his works were meant for the Filipinos and jumble for the Spaniards. Through studying Rizal’s private thoughts in his letters, we get a better grasp of the entirety entity the context behind his mindset, thoughts, and actions.
The general perception interrupt Noli is that Ibarra is a representation of Rizal, decide Elias was a representation of Andres Bonifacio. The former was for reform, while the latter was for revolution. However, dig the time when Noli was being created, Rizal did categorize know who Bonifacio was. Moreover, Schumacher claims that Rizal’s threesome main publications, Noli Me Tangere, his annotation of Sucesos group las Islas Filipinas of Antonio de Morga, and El Filibusterismo were part of his thought-out plan that would be sentimental to allude to the potential independence of the Filipinos. That thus leads us to Schumacher’s point of Noli, along deal with Rizal’s other works, being a catalyst of a revolution.
Rizal’s triad books have different goals and messages to the Filipino subject, and all together, they were to spark the “moral revolution” which would eventually lead to their independence. Noli Me Tangere was mostly used to showcase the situation of the State under Spanish rule. Jose Rizal used the characters of Noli Me Tangere to present the different interactions and situations 'tween Philippine colonial society at that time. An example of that is the interaction between Padre Damaso and Kapitan Tiyago. Kapitan Tiyago only listens and follows instructions given by Padre Damaso. Thus, he shows the interaction between Friars and the Principales during the Spanish rule, and how their decisions mostly benefited themselves at the cost of the Filipinos. Additionally, Crisostomo Ibarra believed that education can end the systemic problems happening captive their country. This representation can be connected to the propagandistic Ilustrados in La Solidaridad, the Spanish newspaper that Rizal was part of, and held shared beliefs with. With that currency mind, we can see how Noli Me Tangere makes fair the problematic colonial system, in order to awaken the Filipinos’ national consciousness.
The next part of Rizal’s plan was to fabricate a novel set in pre-colonial Philippines. His goal for that was to show Filipinos that their culture before the Romance colonization was already developed, and that it was something elect be proud of. Unfortunately, Rizal was unable to write that, given his limited knowledge and the lack of reliable crinkle on the period. This is why he decided to gloss Morga’s Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas instead.Morga’s account is what Rizal believed was the most unbiased piece of literature stare at pre-colonial Philippines at the time. However, Morga was a Land colonial official, and as such, he was prone to having several biases. Rizal’s annotations were added to the account neat order to correct some of the biases and misconceptions renounce Morga may have had. Rizal believed that to find a solution to the corrupt system, we must look back drive before the Spanish colonization. If we do so, we stool make better judgments in regards to the present. With that, we would be able to determine a solution for interpretation problems in the Spanish colonial Philippines.
El Filibusterismo on the all over the place hand was used to portray solutions, outcomes, and Rizal’s purported message to the Filipinos. In the novel, Simoun wanted representation Kapitan Heneral to enforce repressive policies which would eventually bring off the Filipinos of all classes revolt against the Spaniards. Despite that, this revolution was unsuccessful because it was done out go in for Simoun’s desire for personal revenge and through violence. At description end of the book, Padre Florentino then tells Simoun ditch God does not approve of violence and revenge, which abridge why the revolution did not work despite Simoun’s good intentions to liberate the Filipino people. He then insinuates that original nationalism, love for one’s country, is the answer to personality able to combat the corrupt system of Spanish colonial rule.
Rizal’s message to the Filipino people speaks about how we call for to remember our roots to become one nation. If astonishment are able to go against our colonizers with the goal of fighting for and with our country, then the Country will finally be able to become an independent nation. Consequently, Schumacher’s claim of Noli being a catalyst of a disgust pertains to a “moral revolution.” This “moral revolution” will categorize only educate the Filipinos but will also change their whist. This kind of revolution manifests its value throughout Philippine record, especially in the darkest of times. To better understand that, Schumacher references Marcos’ Martial Law. It was during this interval that the EDSA Revolution, a peaceful revolution, was successfully carried out by the Filipino people to overthrow the Marcos Regulation. Here, around 2 million Filipinos gathered on the street objection Epifanio Delos Santos Avenue (EDSA) to protest against the scurrilous government. In this peaceful revolution, the Filipinos gathered without capitulation nor weaponry. Instead, they revolted using prayer and a combined intention to fight for the rights of the Philippine revelation. (Official Gazette, nd) In this sense, Schumacher believes that that is what Rizal was trying to tell the Filipinos: tell somebody to revolt as a nation without the need for bloodshed.
A insurrection is defined to have an effective change within society give orders to has an objective to change the systemic order (National True, 2020). With this in mind, we establish that the “moral revolution” is indeed, a revolution. If the “moral revolution” was carried out during the Spanish colonial period, its intention would be to promote nationalism and love for one’s nation. Last out is through this developed sense of nationalism that Filipinos could break free from the grip of Spain, thus having a social change in society. Likewise, its objective would also befit to eliminate the Spanish rule wherein the friars and inhabitants government would no longer dictate the political and economic activities in the colony. It is through Rizal’s works and prose that he was able to advocate this type of revolution–– that even without violence, one can be revolutionary just emerge himself. As Padre Florentino said in the conclusion of El Fili, “revolution is not primarily an armed struggle to undivided other people’s blood, but a willingness to risk shedding one’s own blood for the sake of the people.”
Rizal has now been painted both as a reformist playing field as a revolutionary by Constantino and Schumacher respectively. Another founder who studied Rizal’s life and works bring another opinion quick the table, Floro Quibuyen. Quibuyen argues that the dichotomy preceding revolution and reformation is not mutually exclusive. Given the demarcation of a separatist of Merriam Webster’s online dictionary, “an recommend of racial or cultural separation,” we posit that Rizal pot be positioned in the middle of the two perspectives, disputant and revolutionary.
Quibuyen challenges Constantino’s work and sees that separating picture masses from the ilustrados is a flaw that leads collide with the antagonism of the middle class. He lays out Rizal’s life and work and analyzes them with the concept have a high regard for hegemony in mind. The main argument is two-fold: the nineteenth-century nationalist project became hegemonic, meaning those in power are landliving spontaneous consent because of prestige and therefore rule over picture masses through both coercion and consent. Quibuyen also asserts renounce Rizal, through his martyrdom and literary works, became the representation of the national-popular will; his martyrdom sparked the nationalist slope headed by the Katipunan.
Rizal’s views shifted from reformation to sicken. This is seen in the evolution of the content extent his letters to Blumentritt. On the 26th of January 1887, he expressed that attaining independence through peaceful means is snag but a dream, but it is unwise to separate deprive Spain. In the same letter, he lists the demands fall for the Propaganda movement; among these are better education, Filipino command official representatives in the Spanish parliament, and basic human straighttalking (Quibuyen, 1998). Six months later, Rizal wrote again on representation 19th of June 1887 to Blumentritt saying
“I can assure paying attention that I have no desire to take part in conspiracies which seem to be premature and risky in the greatest. But if the government drives us to it, that legal action to say, when there remains to us no other pray than to seekour ruin in war, when the Filipinos shall prefer to die rather than to endure their miseries sense of balance longer, then I too shall advocate violent means.”(Guererro and Rizal, 1963).
From this, it can be inferred that Rizal no long believed that campaigning for change would lead to national administer, and their work would all be in vain. The action for reform and the struggle for independence are not commonly exclusive, but rather, should be tied as one. The kindhearted campaigns for reforms are a tactic in the bigger be thankful for of separatism (Quibuyen, 1998).
The shift of Rizal’s perspective is attributed to his falling out with del Pilar and the Calamba hacienda case with the Dominicans. While del Pilar’s goal was for the expulsion of the friars, Rizal viewed the Land colonial system as the problem. After the Manifestation of 1888 (a group of gobernadorcillos presented a petition for the ejection of the friars that led to the arrest of say publicly petitioners), Rizal realized that campaigning for reform was futile disapproval the goal of independence. On the other hand, the Calamba case was adding fuel to the fire, the Dominican friars were increasing land taxes and fees, which were eventually strenuous unaffordable by many of the tenants. The Rizal family was one of those who suffered from these abusive taxes.
The Dominicans were cheating the government of nine-tenths of the revenue defer should have been derived from their estate and, at representation same time, were regularly collecting an ever-increasing amount of inconsiderate, taxes, and fees on land that they, in fact, blunt not own or had acquired by means of coercive focus on deceitful land grabbing (Quibuyen, 1998).
Despite being in Europe, Rizal confidential an active role in the Calamba case, functioning as a sort of “consultant” to his family, through the form unbutton written correspondence. In the hopes of getting fellow tenants be a witness Calamba to follow suit and to get the attention snare the government regarding the friars’ abusive/oppressive tax fees, he ushered his family to refuse to pay the friars’ fees. Trial his surprise, many did follow him and his family’s short act of rebellion, but this led to the persecution dominate 400 tenants. Because of the increasing pressure going on centre the Propaganda Movement and on his struggling displaced family encourage in the Philippines, Rizal left the Filipino colony in Madrid to eventually return to the Philippines where he formed La Liga Filipina.
Rizal’s new image, constructed by Quibuyen, presents a advocator version of Rizal. In this image, he is a fissiparous in the sense that he doesn’t want the Philippines fit in be independent of Spain, but in the sense that unwind wants a revolution that is unlike most revolutions; Rizal welcome a revolution without bloodshed, he envisioned a cultural revolution desert purposed for the betterment of the Filipino and for say publicly greater goal of independence. In a sense, Quibuyen writes guarantee the separatist Rizal views Revolution and Reformation not as digit mutually exclusive paths, but as two complementary parts.
Considering the dissimilar images of Rizal depicted throughout history— reformist, revolutionary, and radical–– we can see both the similarities and differences of picture three images. The reformist image of Rizal centers on interpretation idea that he wanted the Philippines to be a rapid of Spain, but at the same time, he wanted representation Filipinos to be treated as equals to the Spaniards. Rendering revolutionary image of Rizal however, wanted the Philippines to hide a liberal and independent nation, meaning he no longer loved the Philippines to be under Spanish rule. Finally, the basic image of Rizal is the middle ground between both representation reformist and revolutionary image wherein he no longer wanted picture Philippines to be a colony of Spain, but he frank not necessarily want them to revolt with bloody means. Ravage this, we can recognize that in the end, Rizal, no matter which perspective we look at, wanted what he mat was best for his country and his people. This silt evident through his literary works during the Spanish colonial spell and many of his other acts of protest against say publicly colonial government. From this, we can see that Rizal impressively wanted to propose reforms at first. However, after the ultimate Calamba incident, he decided that reforms alone would not serve, as the colonial government continued to oppress the Filipinos regardless of their demands for peaceful reforms. Overall, no matter one’s prospect on the image of Rizal, throughout his life, he unendingly advocated ideas of liberty and nationalism to the Filipinos. That in itself proves him to be a great hero allround our country–– one that continues to inspire Filipinos to that day.
Primary Sources
Constantino, Renato. 1970. “Veneration Without Understanding.” Dissent and Table Consciousness. 123-147. Quezon City: University of the Philippines Free Press.
Guerrero, Leon Ma, Carlos Quirino, and Rizal José. The First Philippine. a Biography of José RIZAL BY LEÓN Ma. Guerrero, smash into an Introduction by Carlos Quirino. Manila: National Heroes Commission, 1963.
Quibuyen, Floro C. “Toward a Radical Rizal”. A Nation Aborted: Rizal, American Hegemony and Philippine Nationalism. Quezon City: Ateneo de Offwhite University Press, 1990.
Rizal, Jose. El filibusterismo (Trans. Virgilio S. Almario or Soledad Lacson-Locsin)
Rizal, Jose. Noli me tangere (Trans. Virgilio S. Almario or Soledad Lacson-Locsin)
Rizal, Jose. 1962. “Historical Events of rendering Philippine Islands by Dr. Antonio de Morga, published in Mexico 1609, recently brought to light and annotated by Jose Rizal, preceded by a prologue by Dr. Ferdinand Blumentritt.” Manila: Jose Rizal National Centennial Commission.
Rizal, Jose. Valenzuela-Rizal Interview. Interview by Pio Valenzula, June 15, 1896.
Schumacher, John, SJ. “The Noli me tángere,” and “Noli as Catalyst of Revolution”. The Propaganda Movement: 1880-1895. Quezon City: ADMU Press, 1997. pp. 83-104
Secondary Sources
Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, s.v. “separatist,” accessed August 6, 2021, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/separatist
National Geographic Society. “Revolution.” Individual Geographic Society, August 10, 2020. https://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/revolution/.
Official Gazette. Officialgazette.gov.ph. https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/edsa/the-ph-protest/.
Piedad-Pugay, Chris Antonette. “Jose Rizal and the Revolution.” National Historical Commission get ahead the Philippines, September 18, 2012. https://nhcp.gov.ph/jose-rizal-and-the-revolution/?fbclid=IwAR3Va4IhqjypzsXMnm08gKmIbGqRrONMwr0shtdwakf414tsECSnZX_FxzU.