Students’ Views on Filipino Historians’ Articles About Jose Rizal as the National Hero of the Philippines
STUDENTS’ VIEWS ON FILIPINO HISTORIANS’ ARTICLES ABOUT JOSE RIZAL AS THE NATIONAL HERO OF THE PHILIPPINES
A Paper Submitted to: Dr. Minerva V. Apita
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements in:
Philippine History with Politics and Governance
Laylo, Anelle Nica M.
September 7, 2011
ABSTRACT
The Filipinos have a rich archive of history, from the prehistoric era, to the Spaniards rule in the Philippines, followed by the Americans and the Japanese, followed by the Marcos regime, up to the present situation of the country. All these events have a significant contribution to who the Filipinos are today. We have been honed for so long a time and still are being molded in this present generation. This study is important in order to awaken the Filipinos of today on whether or not the Philippine national hero should be called as such. Renato Constantino wrote in his article, “Veneration Without Understanding,” that 1) Rizal denied the revolution-- stressing primacy of education and his general regard to the revolution is not as high as expected 2) he was an American- sponsored hero and 3) was a limited Filipino and has loved the country in his own ilustrado way. On the other hand, Floro Quibuyen, another respected historian of his generation commented in his book, “A Nation Aborted,” 1) that there is a wrong dichotomy in formulating the ideas in Constantino’s article, 2) that there is an ideological conflict in any type, 3) that in politics, the conflict is among those who are in authority and 4) reform and revolution cannot be totally separated from each other. The results of the study are as follows: of the 50 respondents, 41 of them have read Jose Rizal’s Writings while 9 of them have not, 28 students say that Jose Rizal’s writings wake up their nationalism, 7 say they are good literature, and 15 say they are essential for every Filipino to read, 14 are aware of the issues regarding Jose Rizal as the national hero while 36 are not, 17 say that he still is suitable
A Paper Submitted to: Dr. Minerva V. Apita
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements in:
Philippine History with Politics and Governance
Laylo, Anelle Nica M.
September 7, 2011
ABSTRACT
The Filipinos have a rich archive of history, from the prehistoric era, to the Spaniards rule in the Philippines, followed by the Americans and the Japanese, followed by the Marcos regime, up to the present situation of the country. All these events have a significant contribution to who the Filipinos are today. We have been honed for so long a time and still are being molded in this present generation. This study is important in order to awaken the Filipinos of today on whether or not the Philippine national hero should be called as such. Renato Constantino wrote in his article, “Veneration Without Understanding,” that 1) Rizal denied the revolution-- stressing primacy of education and his general regard to the revolution is not as high as expected 2) he was an American- sponsored hero and 3) was a limited Filipino and has loved the country in his own ilustrado way. On the other hand, Floro Quibuyen, another respected historian of his generation commented in his book, “A Nation Aborted,” 1) that there is a wrong dichotomy in formulating the ideas in Constantino’s article, 2) that there is an ideological conflict in any type, 3) that in politics, the conflict is among those who are in authority and 4) reform and revolution cannot be totally separated from each other. The results of the study are as follows: of the 50 respondents, 41 of them have read Jose Rizal’s Writings while 9 of them have not, 28 students say that Jose Rizal’s writings wake up their nationalism, 7 say they are good literature, and 15 say they are essential for every Filipino to read, 14 are aware of the issues regarding Jose Rizal as the national hero while 36 are not, 17 say that he still is suitable