Read on Twitter
had a conversation about nationalism in historiography earlier this afternoon and it reminded me of this op-ed on heneral luna that came out after the movie was released https://www.rappler.com/voices/ispeak/problem-with-heneral-luna
i remember my negative reaction when the article said that heneral luna was "too much nationalism" and five years ago i was like "so that's a bad thing???"
after the duterte candidacy rode on the consciousness that the heneral luna narrative tapped into, now it's making me think
after the duterte candidacy rode on the consciousness that the heneral luna narrative tapped into, now it's making me think
the op-ed really made a good point here and true, the movie does address that in the end even luna was, himself, blind. this was how i defended the movie too.
but that point was wrapped up in symbolism (getting shot in the eye in that last sequence) while everything else, luna's raging rhetoric and frustration with disobedience was front and center so that was the main, unchecked takeaway for most people
i mean, it's a film and not policy so i'm not expecting it to present solutions to systemic problems. it succeeded in starting conversations and that's what the film wanted to do anyway.
hindsight in 2020 includes the context of the last five years though and in the end the op-ed's critique of such a narrative, it turns out, does have bearing
because now, calls for nationalism and unity can no longer suffice as end goals of anything we produce. after harnessing a zeitgeist of frustration, the next generation of media production and research must answer, "what do we do with this?" and move the conversation along
2015 heneral luna: mahal ko ang inang bayan
2018 goyo: pero higit pa ang inang bayan sa kung sino mang nakaluklok sa pwesto
20(??) quezon movie, hopefully: dahil ang tunay na problema ng bansa ang nananalaytay na sistemang mapang-api
2018 goyo: pero higit pa ang inang bayan sa kung sino mang nakaluklok sa pwesto
20(??) quezon movie, hopefully: dahil ang tunay na problema ng bansa ang nananalaytay na sistemang mapang-api
anyway, discourse should be on a higher and wider level than the narrative themes of a movie series. this should translate to a change in policy direction.
once heard someone in the heritage tourism profession ask, "ok may mga maling nangyari noon... and so?"
true. what's next?
once heard someone in the heritage tourism profession ask, "ok may mga maling nangyari noon... and so?"
true. what's next?
nationalism is a tool of empowerment of the post-colonial state because this did, at some point, propel us into deeper discoveries about indigenous culture that was demonized, stigmatized, and erased by a colonial system
but then there's also the question (and i don't have the answer to it), that i've heard a few people ask over the years, and it's, "until when can a post-colonial state keep calling itself post-colonial?"
when does nationalism, a tool for empowerment, becomes a tool for fascism?
become* lmao buckle pa ako eh
