The document discusses the historical roots of theater in the Philippines, noting that it originated from indigenous community theater in rituals and traditions. It provides context from scholars on how early Spanish chroniclers did not recognize these indigenous forms of theater as drama. The summary also mentions a seminal book from 1984 that was the first authoritative book on Philippine theater history.
The document discusses the historical roots of theater in the Philippines, noting that it originated from indigenous community theater in rituals and traditions. It provides context from scholars on how early Spanish chroniclers did not recognize these indigenous forms of theater as drama. The summary also mentions a seminal book from 1984 that was the first authoritative book on Philippine theater history.
The document discusses the historical roots of theater in the Philippines, noting that it originated from indigenous community theater in rituals and traditions. It provides context from scholars on how early Spanish chroniclers did not recognize these indigenous forms of theater as drama. The summary also mentions a seminal book from 1984 that was the first authoritative book on Philippine theater history.
The document discusses the historical roots of theater in the Philippines, noting that it originated from indigenous community theater in rituals and traditions. It provides context from scholars on how early Spanish chroniclers did not recognize these indigenous forms of theater as drama. The summary also mentions a seminal book from 1984 that was the first authoritative book on Philippine theater history.
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 5
The Roots of Theater in the Philippines
SERIES ON COMMUNITY THEATER
Given the historical background of the Philippines, it is safe to assert that its theater tradition is as old as the country itself. Its early beginnings were purely indigenouscommunity theater. All its forms and manifestations were people centered,from the everyday rites and ceremonial rituals, customs and traditions to the contemporary and new routes of expressions that draw inspirations from the same. Its history and development of more than four hundred years to the present have always been community-oriented. The late theater historian-critic Doreen Fernandez extracts the same conclusion from her exhaustive research study of the historical roots of Philippine theater published in her book, PALABAS: Essays on Philippine Theater History that was published in 1996 (two years after this writer had migrated permanently in Australia), which, no doubt, broke new ground considering the sordid lack of authoritative books on Philippine theater. To quote Fernandez: The indigenous drama of the Filipino, therefore, was described and recorded by the Spaniards,but not recognized as such since it did not have the stages, costumes, scripts and conventions that they had learned to expect from their own tradition. In fact however, this drama the various imitations of life done in ritual, dance or even play was community-based drama at its purest. There was no division between the performer and the audience, since everyone in the audience was once, or would sometime be a performer. No explanation was ever needed for any of the presentations, for their were part of communal life and had meaning for everyone. They were created by the people for their needs and presented for very direct purposes to bring about a particular good, to teach definite role to the young, to consolidate the community in its common goals. In context, it was drama of a high order, (5). In The Poetics, Aristotle states that Epic poetry, Tragedy, Comedy, also Dithyrambic poetry, and the music of the flute and the lyre in most of their forms, are all in their general conceptions modes of imitation. The indigenous Filipinos already lived a life rife with rites and rituals which are undoubtedly the earliest manifestations of community theater in the Philippines, following as it were, this Western concept of drama as mimesis or the imitation of life. Unfortunately, the earliest Spanish chroniclers did not believe so and Fernandez contests them all in her germinal book. For instance, El Teatro Tagalo, the first existing record of Philippine drama written disparagingly from the point of view of a colonizer Vicente Barrantes asserted that the Philippines was a country in which only the purely vegetable developments seem possible and that the Filipinos were but races pertaining to the lowest grades of the human scale. He also argued, without proof of evidential documentation, that there was no national literature and proper drama to speak of before Spanish colonization, further stressing that all of Filipino theater consisted of derivations and influences from Spanish theater (Barrantes, 1889, 5-11). Apart from earlier anthropological findings, by eminent American anthropologist Robert Fox for example, which would readily debunk this notion, Fernandez more explicitly debates that when one remembers that the Spanish had come from a country that reached its Siglo de Oro of drama in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries , and that produced Lope de Vega and Calderon de la Barca at that time, then we realize that the drama that they were looking for must have been that which they knew from back home: the scripted, staged, costumed Spanish comedias and autos sacramentales- and which they were of course unlikely to find among Filipinos who were chanting epics, erecting rituals and celebrating victories with their own kinds of songs, dances and mimetic action. If, however, one defines drama as it was in its beginnings in the Western world as action or deed involving mimesis or mimicry one realizes that what the Spaniards dismissed as pagan or obscene, but which to their credit they occasionally recorded and described was, unrecognized by them, indigenous Philippine drama (2) . Indeed, for earlier researchers, there is a paucity of documentation on both oral and written traditions, let alone the roots of Philippine drama, but there is however, one very useful book written not by a Filipino but by an American particularly during the period of American regime. The yarn surrounding its its discovery and consequent printing is such a good story to read that I am compelled to lift the short flip side cover text, and quote it here for the telling: The Filipino Drama was written in 1905 by Arthur Stanley Riggs , right after two tears stay in the Philippines, during which he had witnessed,examined, researched and reported on the political plays which the American colonial government had judged to be seditious. His reportage of the ensuing raids, suppression, arrests, and trials is accompanied by informative sidelights on the personalities and the productions, and peppered with his own opinions and perceptions. He included and annotated the English translations of six plays of the period: Luhang Tagalog, andKahapon, Ngayon at Bukas by Aurelio Tolentino; Tanikalang Ginto by Juan Abad; Hindi Aco Patay by Juan Matapang Cruz; Malaya by Tomas Remigio; and Magdapio by Pedro Paterno. The manuscript, complete with handwritten notations, illustrations, copious footnotes, and instructions to the printer, was not published in 1905, or even a decade after. The winds of time and fate eventually wafted it into an antiquarian bookshop, where in 1965 it was found by Central Bank Governor Jaime Laya, who judged that its value to Philippine history and dramatic tradition merited publication. Doreen G. Fernandez, chairman of the Ateneo de Manila University English Department copy read the manuscript and wrote the historical introduction. In her introduction, Fernandez stipulated that Philippine drama began, as all drama begins, in mimetic ritual. The rites and ceremonies that marked the cycle of tribal life birth, puberty, courtship, marriage and death; illness and recovery; planting and harvest; battle and victory were often mimetic in nature. To somehow exert power over forces beyond mans control, the tribal Filipino mimed petition and offered gifts, battled harmful spirits to protect women in labor, imitated a hawks swooping down on its prey in a visual metaphor for a marriage, bore symbols of friendly spirits in procession to assure good harvest. He also held verbal jousts at wakes or feasts in which hypothetical situations became contexts for extemporaneous versification and performance; sang and danced out his feelings and comments on war and other work or occupations necessary for survival. Kasaysayan at Pag-unlad ng Dulaang Pilipino by Arthur P. Casanova, published and distributed by Rex Book Store, is considerably seminal being the first exhaustive, and, in its time, the only authoritative book on Philippine theater history copyright 1984, exactly ten years before the more definitive CCP Encyclopedia of Philippine Art (Vol. VII: Philippine Theater) came out . Well deserving of its Best Book Award by the Catholic Mass Media Awards in 1985, it became the yardstick of whos who in Philippine theater entertainment so that the going joke then amongst the circle of artists in Metro Manila was that you have no name, merit and credits to start with if you are not even mentioned in the book. Fortunately, without lifting my own chair, this writer had been afforded ten pages of write-up in the book that dwelt heavily on my own work on developmental community theater with PETA, CCP- Outreach Program, the MET and most significantly theDulaang Bayan Program of the University of Life of which I was once the Artistic Director).
Kundiman Magandang Diwata song may be accessed here... Casanovas book lists some examples of awiting bayan (folk songs) and katutubong sayaw (folk dances) from which sprang the traditional forms of drama in the Philippines. The songs, which are very poetic and laden with emotion and sentimentality in their melodic patterns and rhytm include: 1) Dalit (hymns for the dead) 2) Diona (songs of courtship, marriage and general revelry) 3) Kundiman (the most enduring, best-loved, and famous love songs) 4) Kumintang (songs of warfare) 5) Holohoo ( songs to appease or stop a child from crying) 6) Ombayi or Sambilan -songs amongst friends and relatives 7) Sambotani (victory songs) 8 ) Soliranin (rowing songs) 9) Tagulaylay (lamentations for the dead) 10) Talindaw (boat songs) 11) Umbay (funeral songs or very lonely songs of the bereaved) 12) Umiguing (weaving songs) 13) Uyayi (songs to induce children to sleep) To this list I should like to add the following culled from my own further research: 14) Hele (lullabies) 15) Ihiman (marriage songs) 16) Indolanin (street songs) 17) Kutang-Kutang (songs by the blind) 18) Tagumpay ( or interchangeably called in various dialects as Balikungkong, Dupayin or Hiliraw ( war songs) 19) Tigpasin (another name for rowing songs) 20) Tingad (household songs)