Continuing relevance of the past

NOW that there is much ferment going on in our political life, writing on the past may seem like a useless exercise. But history is sadly overlooked when we are in crisis. How we coped with the events of the past weekend is proof that we seldom use the past as a means to understand the present and chart the future.

Last weekend, an international symposium on "Manila, World Entrepot: 16th-19thC exchange of objects between Asia, Europe, and the Americas" was held at the Ayala Museum in Makati City. It was well attended and provided a means to look beyond the present and go beyond living memory, two or three centuries back to see the Manila-Acapulco Galleon Trade as the first example of what we now call globalization. In this exercise, those who attended the symposium saw the continuing relevance of the past.

When I was in school, I was trained by some teachers who still held the 1960s brand of rabid nationalism that rejected the four centuries of Spanish rule and stressed what was Philippine in a vain attempt to capture that elusive thing we call national identity. One professor even proposed tearing down the ancient walls of Intramuros, not only because it was seen as a symbol of colonial oppression, but because it was hoped that by sacrificing Intramuros in an intrusive archeological assessment, there was a remote possibility that we would find the pre-Spanish remains of Raja Soliman's palisades.

This brought to mind the annual celebration of Araw ng Maynila [Day of Manila] on June 24 that recalls the founding of "the distinguished and ever loyal" city of Manila -- Spanish Manila. Carmen Guerrero Nakpil reminds us that the beginnings of Manila go way back even before the Spaniards even dreamed of the Philippines, hence the yearly celebration of Araw ng Maynila is actually Araw ng Kastila [Day of Spaniards]. So the move to see Philippine history from Filipino eyes is not new and it is this welcome paradigm shift that could result from the papers presented in the symposium.

While the Galleon Trade is an integral part of any lesson on Spanish Philippines, it is often used as yet another example of oppression and exploitation of the country and its people. I was taught that whatever economic benefits emerged from the Galleon Trade stayed with a small group of Spaniards (and the Church) but did not trickle down to develop the country or its people. The Ayala Museum symposium and inaugural exhibits prove that there were other lasting changes brought about by our Spanish past.

Fifty years ago, Nick Joaquin reacted to the prevailing nationalist mindset in a landmark essay, "Culture and History," and proposed his list of the 13 greatest events in Philippine history. For a history teacher looking for events like the 1872 execution of Gomburza or the Declaration of Independence on June 12, 1898, there is nothing but disappointment because Joaquin directed our attention to ordinary things we take for granted: the invention of the wheel, the introduction of paper, printing, the horse, and even vegetables that we think native to the Philippines like corn and cocoa that were imported from Mexico. Something as common as cooking the "guisado" way says a lot more about our past and our culture than any history book.

The overview of the Galleon Trade by Dr. Benito Legarda gave us the setting for the paper by Dr. Fernando Zialcita that gave examples of cultural exchanges in language, cookery, crops and culture. Mexico gave us chocolate, we gave them mangoes. It came as a surprise that coconut wine or tuba or cooking in coconut milk or "guinatan" is also done in Mexico. Thus, the Filipinos were not just passive recipients of cultural exchange but we appropriated these outside influences and made it our own. Chocolate may have come from Mexico, but "champorado" [chocolate rice porridge] is our invention. Fr. Rene Javellana talked about Jesuit art and architecture, giving some examples of Namban art in Japan, leading me to remember that "tonkatsu," the deep-fried breaded pork chop, is not really Japanese but Portuguese and that some of the very slow and refined movements of the tea ceremony could have been picked up from the way the Jesuits poured wine into their chalices and cleaned them afterwards.

The religious art in ivory, once said to have been the handiwork only of Chinese artisans, is now being reviewed in the light of some characteristics like a fold in the back of images of the Virgin that Regalado Trota Jose calls "suksok" and cannot be found in ivory carvings made by non-Filipino hands. There is even one ivory head of the Virgin that has the hair tied into a bun at the back of the head, which is typical of the Philippines but not Catholic iconography. These papers, following Joaquin's lead, provide another way of interrogating the past and interpreting artifacts that should help us find context and perspective in our lives.

One could only wish that the symposium was not limited by the inaugural ivory exhibit at the museum because aside from this, there were many products and goods exchanged between Asia and the West during the Galleon Trade. Further research could have produced papers on porcelain, textile, spices and much more. But then one is free to dream and hope that these can be subjects for future exhibits and symposia.

Comments are welcome at aocampo@ateneo.edu.