Category Archive for: kultura

When a stage is filled with a king-size bed, a dresser, and an ottoman you don’t know when to begin feeling uncomfortable: the mere sight of a bed conjures up a sex scene, and sex is always reason for discomfort amongst an immature audience, including the three guys behind me who chatted each other up throughout the play before this one. But sex as we imagine it wouldn’t be reason for discomfort in that cold little theater; it would be politics that would hush the noisiest of audiences, encapsulated as it is in this bedroom. Floy Quintos’ Evening at the Opera (directed by Jomari Jose) is the story of rural politics, as we know it, as we hear it in the news, as it has been imagined in movies, presented by documentaries. That this is also the story of dynasties left unquestioned, of marriages of convenience, of political machismo, of class versus crass, of the wealthy and rich among us, are layers that thicken this stage of a stark white bed and a governor’s wife in a bright red dress. She is Miranda: intelligent kolehiyala, smart as it can only happen in English. She is prepping for the opera being staged at the provincial kapitolyo. She is finishing a glass of scotch as she finishes her make-up and puts her hair in a bun. She is talking to her Mamang, dead as she is but present in Miranda’s life, like a conscience not quieted down, a lesson unlearned. The mother and daughter are exchanging barbs: daughter says she only followed the mother’s wishes, the mother says that certainly this has meant her daughter’s happiness.

But happiness is irrelevant in this bedroom; in fact it has no place at all here. Miranda’s marriage to Governor Bingo Beloto is made of the corrupt dynasties they were born into, is made of this life of power they live, where Miranda is allowed her love for culture even staging an opera in the town plaza, and Bingo is allowed to throw his weight around the whole province. The image of both Miranda and Bingo make this more real than imagined: Miranda is frail thin wife, Bingo is dirty and hefty, sleazy and scary. Between the two of them the province is run the good ol’ malakas and maganda way, where the oppressive and dictatorial is balanced out by the true, good, beautiful. But within that bedroom, in this conversation, the point was the power play between the two of them: who’s in control of what, who’s got more skeletons in the closet, who’s complicit in the corruption? Bingo is everything a corrupt politician is, fearless and untouchable, but in the face of his wife and her world he is half-confused, sometimes seeming like a dimwit, other times part of a conversation doomed to fail given his provincial accent, her kolehiyala English. It doesn’t help Bingo any that save for the usual political wifely duties of charity work and culture, Miranda is in control: just like her mother, she’s got the goods on her husband’s infidelity. Unlike her mother, she’s got more on her husband, complicit as she is in his corruption. This gives Miranda the upper hand in conversations such as this one, the one about the opera and the governor who arrives late, the one that’s about infidelity, corruption, abuse. Miranda is in control because she has conceded to the inevitable and expected, because she insists on honesty no matter how painful, because she is steel even when the hand of violence is on her. In that small theater, Miranda’s eyes were steel.

This kind of power is in all of three actors on that stage, forcing the audience to suspend compassion and distrust. Frances Makil Ignacio as Mamang has the most succinct timing, as her own narrative is interspersed with the conversation of husband and wife, where her silence is a presence still. Jonathan Tadioan’s Governor Beloto is stereotype perfectly portrayed, scary and disgusting, proving our greatest fears about the powerful in our midst, about machismo made worse by politics. Tadioan’s characterization here is also about that language he brings to life, where the provincial Tagalog and English becomes part of the character’s shamelessness. Anna Abad Santos’ Miranda will have you in the palm of her hand as the woman who might have wanted to live life differently, but between her mother and husband is stuck where she is. It’s to Abad Santos’ credit that when she finally speaks of the opera, the melancholia could bring you to tears. It’s to her credit that there is barely sadness or pity for this character, but there is a sense of sisterhood with this woman no matter that she doesn’t seem to need a sister.

But it is because of Quintos’ skill in Evening at the Opera that these characters make sense without being cliche, within a text that weaves a narrative with nary an uncertain word, with language that is spoken across two generations, between a husband and wife, in English and Filipino, one that is not reason for confusion but makes sense, is real to us who are here. Quintos’ story of one evening inside a bedroom unfolds and seamlessly includes the audience as an integral part of it: instead of being voyeurs, the political narrative forces us into silence because we are its victim, we are complicit in it, we are doomed to it. Private bedrooms, Italian operas, provincial politics, it’s all about us here. That we might not know it otherwise, is precisely the point.

Published in GMA News Online, July 8 2011. 

i’ve begun to call the saturday inquirer Nestor Torre Day: open it on any given Saturday, and there he is dishing it out about local TV and celebrities. now this would be fine, though a bit shameless (isn’t it, to have your name appear so many times in one section of the paper, on any given day?), were he obviously keeping in touch with popular TV and contemporary culture. but this, as he himself reveals, he doesn’t do.

recently Torre raised two things in separate articles (of course) about the epic serye Amaya: (1) Marian Rivera’s acting and whether or not she deserves the title “queen of teleseryes” and (2) Amaya‘s storytelling as predictable over and above a setting that’s nothing but exotic. on the latter, Torre says:

<…> after some weeks in play, the series’ plot line is turning out to be a mere variation on teleseryes’ generic penchant for love, perceived betrayal, revenge, and all sorts of strife and convoluted conflicts.

really now. Torre obviously missed a chunk of this show if this is his assessment of it. he seems to have missed that wonderful father-daughter relationship between Datu Bugna and Amaya, one that was anything but simple, one that was informed by the complexities of honor and trust, of woman power and oppression. and what of Amaya’s refusal to be tied to her hut as binukot, her insistence on being brought out into the night by her uripon, and knowing enough to take responsibility for it when they got caught?

via igma.tv
via igma.tv

and where is romantic love here, really? Torre makes it seem like this is nothing but a love story, when in fact Amaya hasn’t been shown to care much for Bagani’s fascination with her. in fact, the kind of focus Amaya keeps on her struggle for liberation after her father’s murder is what resonates here: love isn’t on the table, and her heart is not a topic of conversation.

and yet Torre’s saying this is nothing but cliche, and is completely unhappy with this story, which makes one wonder: how much of it has he seen? this tells us how much:

To be fair to Marian, she works really hard to make her latest TV starrer a success—to the extent of “going backless” in some scenes to show how cruelly her character has been punished and degraded. She also shouts and expresses anger with greater unction than ever.

Unfortunately, she looks too fair and soft to be believable as a “warrior princess” in the making. Her crying scenes are still too “hagulgol” to be truly touching. And, her training scenes as a warrior are patently nominal and phlegmatic.

first of all, ser, the bare back is culturally grounded in the epic’s pre-colonial setting: a sign of Amaya turning from binukot to uripong. she is not the first or only one who’s backless in this show, which should tell us all that it’s symbolic for something bigger than just, uh, going backless. second of all, and more important, ser, fairness is a trait of the binukot, a product of her being kept inside her hut, her feet never touching the ground, her face unseen.

as for Marian’s acting, i do wonder what the peg is for good acting as far as Torre is concerned. because i’d like to think that i’d scream too were my father being murdered in front of me; i’d scream too were i being lashed with a stick; i’d cry and scream in defiance when my servants-turned-friends are being lashed as well. were Torre watching this show, he might have a sense of how this louder voice Amaya’s now using is but logical in light of her voice as daughter: playful and loving in equal turns, too intelligent for her own good, smarter and kinder than her half-sisters, hidden as she was. were Torre watching, he would’ve seen this as an evolution of the lead character versus just the one truth about her character.

as for whether or not Marian is the “queen” of teleseryes, it seems but logical doesn’t it, that we look at the terrain of soaps in recent times: lead female characters are few and far between, as the male leads have begun to take on equal if not the more central roles in soaps and seryes across both networks (Coco Martin in Minsan Lang Kita Iibigin, Robin Padilla in Guns and Roses, Richard Guttierez in Captain Barbell, for example). in this sense it’s easy to see that Marian as queen is premised on the fact not just of a network investing in such a huge project for her, but that she’s in this title role at a time when there’s no other show like it.

but too, what Torre fails to consider is Amaya as a show, period. he fails to see how this show’s pre-colonial reality actually works and is difficult to dismiss, which of course would only be apparent if you’re actually watching the show. this is a show that had obviously prepared to take itself seriously, at the same time that it was careful in dealing with its fictionalization of history. and of making sure to create a story of one binukot that can only be powerful as it highlights the possibility of a powerful woman being part of our roots, if not as historically viable ideological truth.

now if all that a reviewer can see in Amaya is simplicity and cliché, then that barely seems like the show’s problem.

Alwin Reamillo’s Ang Balut Viand exhibit is like balut: it looks like a standard generic egg from the outside, but is an unborn duck on the inside. Which is of course to say that you might not have the stomach for that sisiw literally and figuratively; or find that you actually quite have a taste for it, from sipping that hot balut liquid straight from the shell, to the process of slowly peeling the shell, and downing it whole: the eating of balut isn’t just about eating, as it is of knowing, of identity.

The balut is one claim to fame we’re uncertain about, seeing as it is equated with hissing cockroaches on Fear Factor. Talk about bringing us back to the dark ages of being the exotic and barbaric brown siblings of America.

In Reamillo’s hands though the balut becomes reason for pride, as it is reclaimed in its process of being changed: there are no duck fetuses here, but there is plenty of balut made out of plaster and emulsion.

the rest is here!

In The Name of Love (directed by Olivia Lamasan, written by Lamasan and Enrico Santos) had the promise of courage.

Its OFW story is one that deals carefully with the fact of male bodies, where Emman Toledo (Aga Muhlach) and his dance group are hostos in Japan: dancing in a club and stepping out of there with blonde women in tow. The crisis of the Filipino family in the face of the OFW phenomenon is shown here with a bright honesty: there is no one to blame, there are no judgments, some loves don’t survive the distance. Coming home from Japan and into poverty is shown as a matter of provincial conditions: the OFW is home, he’s got nothing.

But the crisis of Emman, as powerful as this story already is, is made more complex in a narrative that didn’t know when to stop, as if the unhappiness wasn’t enough.

read the rest here! :-)

Louie Cordero's "My We"

Two Pinoy artists were chosen to be part of the Singapore Biennale 2011, and while this might seem like a quirk of fate that’s like most of the grants and awards they’ve individually received before, there is much to be said about the fact that these two artists are Louie Cordero and Mark Salvatus.

In an essay written for the Biennale on these two artists, Dr. Patrick D. Flores (Curator, Vargas Museum) draws similarities between Cordero and Salvatus succinctly: These two are masters of living in these spaces that are theirs, both imagined and real. The former via popular culture that’s crass and painful and class-based, the former based on the streets we walk, the poverty that’s normal, the deprivation that’s default. With eyes wide open, Cordero and Salvatus are able to live here, even as they elude it, escape it, and find a way for it to become the subject of art without romanticizing it.

I might not be doing justice to Flores here, of course. But there is much justice in the works of Salvatus and Cordero.

click here for the rest of it! :-)