Prof. Pepa Series

A BOOK REVIEW OF ROSARIO M. CORTES et al’s THE FILIPINO SAGA, HISTORY AS SOCIAL CHANGE

Ruel F. Pepa

[Cortes, Rosario Mendoza; Boncan, Celestina Puyal; Jose, Ricardo Trotan. 2000. The Filipino Saga, History as Social Change. Quezon City: New Day Publishers.]

The endorsement of the book written by retired UP History Prof. Oscar Evangelista in the foreword is recognition enough of its plus points and the authors’ scholarship in general. However, this review looks at the other side of the coin. I have found in it some minor and major flaws that need to be rectified in keeping with the spirit of true scholarship.

Among the minor flaws, on the one hand, are the following:

1. On page 22, Magellan is described as “the haughty Spaniard.” I think it is safe to       assume that even elementary pupils know that Magellan was a Portuguese.

2. On page 23, the community chieftains in Luzon are called Lapu-lapu’s “compatriots.” The term “compatriots” is inappropriate to refer to groups of people located in different pre-colonial communities which were actually independent/autonomous from each other in terms of socio-political jurisdiction.

3. On page 158, a locale called “Limbon” is mentioned without identifying its larger geographical reference point. [Limbon is a barrio of Indang, Cavite.]

4. On page 160, “Mt. Buntis” is mentioned without identifying its larger geographical reference point. [Mt. Buntis is a part of the Sierra Madre range which extends to Maragondon, Cavite.]

5. On page 437, the statement “Cory’s rise to power united the two military factions [pro-Marcos faction and Enrile’s RAM]” is simply inaccurate and hence false.

6. On page 438, the statement “The first coup attempt staged on July 1986 at the Manila Hotel was led by the RAM-supported Marcos loyalists” needs a preceding/background information on how a falling-out occurred between Cory and RAM because it is mentioned earlier in the book that RAM played a very crucial role in catapulting Cory to power. Hence, the question: Why a sudden turn of events?
On the other hand, I consider the following major:

1. Why does the book have to be entitled “The Filipino Saga” when a saga is actually a prose narrative about legendary heroes? Well, true to its title, I’m amused to note that it really devotes a lengthy narrative about the “greatness’ of Philippine president Fidel V. Ramos without mentioning the Martial Law era. [Webmaster's note: Some notes here are deleted. Please contact the author for clarification.]

2. Had the book seriously considered the magnitude of its subtitle “History as Social Change” it should have included substantial discussions on very significant matters like the historical background of:

a. how the Philippine loan from World Bank-International Monetary Fund started and the historical factors why it has worsened through generations.

b. how the Mindanao conflict began and led to the formation of rebel groups like the MNLF and the MILF.

c. how the left movement started and led to the formation of the NDF-CPP-NPA.
These are distinctively crucial issues that need more critical and in-depth discussions if the authors would want to project the idea that their book is focused on social change.

The challenge at this point is not only to rectify the errors but to elevate the book to its imagined scholarly value.


©RUEL F. PEPA, 11 April 2005