A TRANSITION ON RIZALS CHARACTER

MYRON DANIELLE L. MONTEFALCON | BBF 2-1

For seventeen years of my existence, my knowledge with Rizal grows deeper
and deeper. I started having knowledge about him on a one peso coin. Probably, 9 out
of 10 would say that he is our national hero that he was shot dead at Bagumbayan
(now Luneta Park) but more than that theres nothing you can get from them. How do
we really know Rizal? How do we venerate him? Is it just like a graven image and you
know nothing why youre worshipping it?

Radical by its definition, is the very new and different from what is traditional or
ordinary, very basic and important, and having an extreme political or social views that
are not shared by most people.

Oftentimes, we see radicals as catalysts for a change. They create fresh ideas
that could be of help to influence, be a difference and change something specifically in
the nature of our government. But in this case, Rizal turned out to be a radical in a
negative way, from having a strong conviction to a clumsy character.

In this paper, the readers would know Rizal deeper, the dichotomy of reformation
and revolution its perks and perils, the modernist to a traditional view, ideological
conflicts between Rizal and del Pilar and the so-called enlightenment for Filipinos.

A TRANSITION IN RIZALS CHARACTER

1. Nationalistic views (Agoncillo-Constantino)

From Agoncillos point of view, the Reform Movement is not the reason for the
1896 Revolution to spark. Other than that It is not based on historical facts, the
reformists arent for independence, they are anti-friars and not anti-Spaniards,
theyre not for armed revolution as Rizal manifested it through his literary works
El Filibusterismo and Manifesto to the Filipino people, and even denounced the
revolution for personal interests.

Meanwhile, from Constantinos point of view, he is in favor and accepts the
essentialist characterization of Agoncillo of middle classes, inarticulate masses
and the masses themselves. Middle classes who are illustrados, was said to
have an economic interest, they are cautious and conservative into what will the
ideas take in effect for them. Inarticulate masses who are composed of people
who just started being awakened to spark a revolution and inspired with the
European Ideology of Liberalism. Masses are the set of innate people who has
revolutionary consciousness.

On the other hand, Agoncillo and Constantino also differentiate reformation to
revolution, as well as with Rizal to Bonifacio.

Reformists, as we all know, are composed of those people who are in the middle
class, specifically the illustrados. This includes some of the popular reformists
like Jose Rizal, Marcelo H. Del Pilar, Antonio Luna and Juan Luna, Mariano
A TRANSITION ON RIZALS CHARACTER
MYRON DANIELLE L. MONTEFALCON | BBF 2-1
Ponce, Pedro Paterno and Maximo Paterno, Graciano Lopez Jaena and etc.
They used their talents and what they have in hand to fight for their advocacies.
While revolutionaries who are composed mainly of the masses, used violence to
fight for freedom.

Rizal being a reformist used his ability in writing to express his strong convictions
against the government of Spain, the social inequality and the likes. He remained
calmed and never ever tried to make use of violence a tool in fighting for their
advocacies. However, Bonifacio being a revolutionist, used his ability in leading
the Katipunan in fighting for freedom and social inequality with use of guns and
swords.

2. Historical Facts and 19
th
Century Filipinos perception of events

With Agoncillos and Constantinos points of view, two critical issues were raised
the historical facts and how do Filipinos during the 19
th
Century perceive
events. These two issues led us also to a more complicated yet critical and
analytical questions, which the two historians have ignored.

a. Why, of all heroes, was Rizal the most venerated in the 19th century
nationalist movement?
b. What was it in Rizals life and works that struck a chord in popular
imagination?
c. What was Rizals nationalist agenda? How was it received by the
revolutionaries?
d. Did the people of the 19th century perceive Liga and the Katipunan as
ideologically and strategically opposed political organizations?
e. Did the revolutionaries perceive Rizal as an assimilationist and therefore
opposed revolution?
f. Did they, for that matter, perceive Reform and Revolution as opposed
political agendas?

If I may add, why do we have to blame Rizal, other than being a reformist, his
way to help Filipinos to be independent is through his writing. He just expressed
what he has in mind. Why dont we blame it to the Americans (during that time)
who made him our national hero? And to the screwed up educational system we
have here in the Philippines?


3. Independence: Peaceful struggle as a dream and assimilation as a mistake

Let me quote what has been stated in the first letter of Rizal to Blumentritt:
A peaceful struggle shall always be a dream, for Spain will never learn the
lesson of her South American colonies. Spain cannot learn what England and the
United States have learned. But, under the present circumstances, we do not
want separation from Spain. All that we ask is great attention, better education,
better government, one or two representatives, and greater security for persons
A TRANSITION ON RIZALS CHARACTER
MYRON DANIELLE L. MONTEFALCON | BBF 2-1
and our properties. Spain could always win the appreciation of Filipinos if she
were only reasonable. But, quos vult perdere Jupiter, prius dementat!. (Letters of
26 Jan. 1887; Rizal-Blumentritt, 44)

As for Rizal, It will be way too long for Filipinos to have greater attention, better
education, and better government with representatives in the parliament
(Spanish Cortez), greater security for person and properties. It will only remain a
dream since it is not our call, but of the Spain.

This shows how Rizal turned out slowly in being a radical.

4. A strong Rizal turned clumsy

An idealistic Rizal whose vision was only for Filipinos to be independent from
Spain could not make it possible because people around him were not united.
They have different opinions, perspectives, and views so to speak. It was
evidently seen on his letters and literary pieces presented. Even what happened
in Calamba Hacienda Case added to his grievances and became a lame duck.

5. Rizal vs. Del Pilar

In contrary to Rizals advocacy, Del Pilar had expressed and clarifies to Rizal on
a letter that having a representative on Spanish Cortes will be another burden on
the Philippines for a very long time. Theres no doubt about his ultimate goal
independence, but what they need to worked out is how can Filipinos achieve
nationhood and develop self-awareness to a social awareness. I reiterated what
Del Pilar on the latter part of his letter, he says there it is better to be tied by the
ankles than elbow to elbow. What can we do!.

6. Revolution: Last Resort

I can assure you that I have no desire to take part in conspiracies which seem to
me premature and risky in the extreme. But if the government drives us to it, that
is to say, when there remains to us no other hope than to seek our ruin in war,
when the Filipinos shall prefer to die rather than to endure their miseries any
longer, than I too shall advocate violent means. It is Spain who must choose
between peace and ruin I cannot believe that you, as a free man, as a citizen
of Europe, would like to advise your good friend to endure all and to act like a
cowardly man, without courage. (Guerrero trans. 1963, 286)

When all else fail and there seems no hope at all but to depend on ourselves. It
is better to die fighting rather than doing nothing. This makes me think why we
still have to wait for the last resort, if we could get into the battle and fight for
freedom and independence from Spaniards Colonization.



A TRANSITION ON RIZALS CHARACTER
MYRON DANIELLE L. MONTEFALCON | BBF 2-1
Conclusion:




From a two peso bill devaluated to a one peso coin in comparison to who Rizal
was in the country, what he has done, what impacts him in every Filipino lives. Did he
not do his best; he being calm would not go for bloodshed. Rizal had an independent
mind he could not be dictated on. Rizal was also a human being he has soft part, he
could have felt failure during this time. Like a two peso bill to a one peso coin
sometimes in his life hes at his highest peak and sometimes in his lowest point.