1. Floro Quibuyen
2. Teodoro Agoncillo 1 st Nationalist view Reform movement did not cause the Revolution DICHOTOMY: REFORM REVOLUTION Renato Constantino Echoed Agoncillo Accepts: Essentialist characterization of Agoncillo DICHOTOMY RIZAL BONIFACIO 3. NOT based on historical FACTS FACTS: (REFORMIST) Province of Spain NOT for INDEPENDENCE Anti-Friar NOT anti-SPANIARD Not for Armed Revolution RIZAL: El Fili and Manifesto to the Filipino People Denounced the Revolution Antonio Luna: x Katipunan 4. MIDDLE CLASS Illustrados Economic interest Cautious and conservative MASSES Revolutionary consciousness born of praxis INARTICULATE MASSES “ inchoate” revolutionary consciousness European Liberalism 5. REFORMIST Middle class Illustrados Rizal La Liga Filipina “ hatred of the masses” REVOLUTIONARIES Masses Bonifacio Katipunan 6. RIZAL Assimilationist Self-serving Counter-revolutionary BONIFACIO Fighting for the country’s liberty 7. What are the “historical FACTS” How did the people of the 19 th century perceive events? 8. Why, of all heroes, was Rizal the most venerated in the 19 th century nationalist movement? What was it in Rizal’s life and works that struck a chord in popular imagination? What was Rizal’s nationalist agenda? How was it received by the revolutionaries? Did the people of the 19 th century perceive Liga and the Katipunan as ideologically and strategically opposed political organizations ? Did the revolutionaries perceive Rizal as an assimilationist and therefore opposed revolution ? Did they, for that matter, perceive Reform and Revolution as opposed political agendas? 9. Ileto’s : “history from below” Two opposite and irreconcilable meanings Modernist discourse Traditional discourse Reproduces the Agoncillo-Constantino binary opposites Answers the first 2 questions 10. MODERNIST Elite/official Liberal reformist Elite TRADITIONAL Folk/ vernacular Tagalog christ Masses “ realm of the familiar” 11. RIZAL Prim and proper Sensitive Anti-SPAIN DEL PILAR...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document