Venuses of the Masses


A recent, memorable non-fiction piece that I’ve read, written by a Filipino, is Joel Pablo Salud’s “A Venusian Tale.” This essay is part of the Blood Republic non-fiction collection.

It talks about the author’s short stint as a “creative manager” for a swanky Malate bar. I’ve written elsewhere that “A Venusian Tale” had a steady pulse that I found refreshing and intriguing at the same time, because the journo explored prostitution in Malate in a way that defeats common ‘outsider’ attempts to make sense of how it works.

Prostitution is often explored in as nothing but defilement, as if in the process of uncovering the underground economy of warm bodies, the spectator also becomes a merciless judge of humanity and morality – and the women involved are turned into helpless commodities.

We can see this process of unwitting dehumanization when prostitution dens are ‘busted’ on TV.

The maceration of womanity plays out easily enough, usually at dinnertime when everyone’s eating and hankering for the day’s news from any of the TV networks.

A footage rolls of a camera zooming in on the dark entrance of a bar/hotel/house. Then come the red flashing lights – signaling the onslaught of police forces.

Sometimes, random pistol shots will ring out. These are called ‘warning shots.’ The scene darkens and resumes in harsh fluorescent light. Women of various ages and builds are herded into police trucks like cattle. Some are even in some stage of undress – the police don’t care.

The women cover their heads in shame, fear or sheer terror.

The final scene adds the necessary element of guilt, one that people love watching. A reporter saunters close and asks one of the women: “what were you doing in there?” The woman will answer “I don’t know anything” or “I’m just a waitress.”

These women are now subjects of the state. They are also immediately held hostage by popular perception. You see, imprisonment has many forms. Iron bars are just one of the many ways that a person can be incarcerated.

They are now part of the Philippine zarzuela that is occupied by both “good guys” and “bad guys.” These women are the unspeakable ones – women who have gone over to the ‘other side,’ the irredeemable side, the side where humanity is exchanged for cash.

Salud’s “A Venusian Tale” tells a strikingly different story.

For one, the accomplices and operators are clearly outlined. Abstracted society disappears from view. The portrait of the immoral streetwalker is replaced with an image of a tired woman who cannot wait for the day to end.

Endings are beginnings. What the night ends is the struggle for material survival. Daylight reconciles the women, the streetwalkers, with the other struggles of life – parts of their lives that we know nothing about.

The cover of darkness provides the enticement to participate in alcohol binges and partake of the warm touch of a willing woman. Desire, longing and lust are rolled into a convenient transactional activity with no strings attached and no awkward calls the morning after.

Near the end of “A Venusian Tale,” the author comes into contact with one of the sex workers – a lovely lady by the name of Venus. Venus helps the author one night, when customers weren’t streaming in as they used to and the bar where the author is an undercover journalist was at risk of losing money.

Nothing in the text suggests that Venus is anything but a woman who, by chance or circumstance, works in the clandestine corners of society, sought out by the ‘respectable’ middle class locals and moneyed foreigners.

This is not to say that the fabric of her being does not buckle under the weight of her work’s hefty toll:

“During those rare occasions when she needed to squeeze out the little of what had remained of her faith in God, Venus would visit the Baclaran Church in the wee hours. She did this to avoid being seen by those she knew.” (Salud, Joel Pablo “A Venusian Tale” The Blood Republic, Makati: The Philippines Graphic Publications, Inc. 2013 p. 21)

Anonymity is a streetwalker’s shelter from pockets of moralistic rain and the harsher and more insidious hurricane of the state’s brutality. In the end, Venus, like so many others, remains in the shadows and fringes of society so that she can be left in peace.

Let the Venuses of the masses speak.

Teaching Theory pt. 1

Teaching Theory

How can theory be taught? The purpose of this exposition/critique is not espouse a singular method of teaching critical theory (in the social sciences/ arts/ humanities) but to examine the visible strains of thought that emanates from most of these disciplines. With the exemption of the life sciences and some exclusivist schools from the social sciences, the sociology of culture, literature, art, etc. can be better understood with the most basic intellectual traditions available for consumption on the level of the academia. In the Philippines, the problem is not comprehension (is there comprehension?) but the mode of teaching. While erstwhile academics in the west like Homi Bhaba and Gayatri Spivak have acknowledged the so-called emancipating role of critical theory (I’m not sure if we’re talking about the specific constellation of concepts) in thought and practice, academics in the Philippines have yet to arrive at the point where theory can readily be used and appropriated for the purpose of critical pedagogy, and not just teaching. A distinction has to be made here; in the context of so-called traditional “modern” teaching in the Philippines, a neo-Aristotlean and colonial model of teaching is employed. If one were to fondly remember the concise description of Freire in his work on the Pedagogy of the Oppressed, we would come to realize that the Philippines is not only a repressed and oppressed country ideologically and economically, but the Philippines is also suffering from a retrograde educational system espoused by equally retrograde institutions using antiquated methods that are unable and would never be usable for the purpose of examining and criticizing the current world order.

World order seems to be too big a word; the apologists of the formalist, neo-Aristotlean and therefore neocolonial methods of teaching would say that a blank page would need inscription. But how can a page be blank if the person has already enrolled himself with money borne from hard labour? For the upper classes in the modern, neocolonial Philippine society, the blankness stems not from the lack of reading materials but from the generic avoidance of such. The rich, due to their material wealth, no longer needs to be emancipated because they already have their comfortable niches in the present economic order. But this cannot be said for the millions of the other Filipinos in the country. From this point alone we can see the large contradiction or gap between the interest of the educational institutions (privately owned or state-owned, it does not matter) and 95% of the population of the country. From an objective point of view, only two ways out can be seen: either you reform the institutions (it is not in their interest to be altered!) or destroy them. Or, as the popular song goes, they should be killed softly with a song. And the song is critical theory. Or rather, critical theory is but one note- a melodic spark that would hopefully encourage an intellectual conflagration to burn off the wicked weeds of the educational system. If Nietzschean politics is fascist, then it’s time to do an uberman and destroy the aristocratic educational system that serves education a la carte, with a hefty price tag for soured goods.

Reading, unlearning and the rejection of colonial ideological principles

There should be a clarification, a direct clarification regarding the role of reading in a person’s life. Reading is not merely pleasure (if it were, let’s go back to the Florentine merchant era where a few families were the only ones who had access to art) but rather, a tool to free yourself. The presupposition that it is a tool for liberation also presupposes that there is something to be freed from. And as we have made mention earlier, the thing that must be purged is the old neocolonial model of teaching which is parading itself repeatedly in classrooms across the country. The first step in the destruction of the old neocolonial model of teaching is the recognition that the very commodities used by the educational system are repressive (stupid) and obsolete. Even the teaching of language, which is still being done in such a horrendous manner is so damaging that children who already have a rich Filipino vocabulary end up understanding less of the language than before they came into the classroom. The teachers themselves must recognize that what they mentors had taught them are not the best methods for teaching. It doesn’t matter that you used old textbooks written by Americans or Britons. The point here is that whatever they’ve learned from the colleges of Education around the country are not sufficient to instruct, not at all. Which accounts for the fact that many students, after graduating from primary school and high school, don’t remember jack about what they’ve been wasting their time on the past 10 years of their life. It is an unjust social contract between the institution and the agents.

There is no need for senseless self-pity here. Since the problem has already been recognized, the next step is in order. After the recognition that the faulty model is in place, the second most important step is the unlearning, which may be the most difficult step of all. Learning is one thing; if it means imitation like parrots. Unlearning means letting go of all your cherished beliefs and that can drive a person mad, especially if after the unlearning there is absolutely nothing to replace what has been unlearned. This perhaps is the reason why extremely religious individuals find it difficult to cope after the historicity of religion has been revealed and examined closely; there’s nothing to replace the lost belief. Since education also forms a large part of a person’s habitus or socialization, there is also a need to question the ideologies operating alongside the teaching methods. For example, the simple belief that males are good at numbers while women are good in language is a destructive belief, because it necessitates favoring one group of persons over another for the mere purpose of living out some belief. Instead, what should replace such a belief is a goal; that both males and females be adequately capable of numbers and language to produce a well-rounded person competent in the two different skill groups. Specialization can only be useful if a person is indeed already knowledgeable of the larger groups of knowledge. But if you trap a person to believing that he or she can be good in only one particular set of skills, then that person would probably end up pursuing only that group of skills for the simple reason that it was what she or he had been made to believe by the teacher.

Lumang Konsepto, Mga Bagong Tiga-pagtaguyod

Nakakalungkot isipin na may mga estudyante sa Unibersidad ng Pilipinas na nagtatanggol sa tuition fee hike ng mga nakaraang taon. Hindi rin mapapagakaila na ang marami sa mga nagtatanggol sa hike ay nagmumula sa ilang mga kolehiyong kilala sa pagsuporta sa mga maling desisyon ng administrasyon, pang-bansa man o sa loob lang ng unibersidad. Nakakatakot isipin na mismo sa loob ng unibersidad ay maraming mga matatandang mga propesor ang patuloy na nagtuturo ng kabalbalan at kabulukan; at ang mga estudyante na wala namang ibang alam ay maniniwala naman. May mga estudyanteng tunay na naniniwalang ang tinatawag na deficit ng unibersidad ay masosolusyonan ng pagtataas ng tuition hike. Matapos nilang sabihin at ulitin ang mga pinang-brainwash sa kanila ng mga propesor nila ay wala rin naman silang maisagot sa simpleng tanong na: nagkatotoo ba ang mga sinabi ng mga propesor mo? May malaki tayong problema pagdating sa uri ng impormasyon at pagiisip na nagiging ordinaryo na sa Unibersidad na inaasahang ipaglalaban ang karapatan ng lahat na makapag-aral. Alam ko, isa lamang ito ideyalismong bunga marahil ng oposisyonal na kaisipang itinuring ko nang malaking bahagi ng kung sino ako at kung ano ang nais kong gawin sa hinaharap. Ideyalismo sa mata ng marami, ngunit isang potensyal na realidad na maaaring makamit kung magsasama-sama ang pwersa ng masa at maging ang peti-burgesya. Mahirap man isipin, ngunit darating din tayo sa puntong maging ang mga peti-burgesyang pamilya ay pahihirapan na rin ng husto ng kapital. May mga estudyanteng nagrereklamo sa bracketing sa tuition fees sa Unibersidad; ang isa pang nakausap ko ay mula sa bracket A (ibig sabihin ay kumikita ng isang milyon pataas ang pamilya niya). Sa ordinaryong araw ay wala na akong pakialam sa taong ito kung singilin man siya ng 120,000 kada semestre. Ngunit mayroon din siyang hinanakit: marami silang magkakapatid na pinipilit tapusin ang kaniya-kaniyang karera. Alam ko kung gaano kahirap magtapos ng isang karera sa kolehiyo; hanggang ngayon nandito pa rin ako dahil sa linsyak na General Education program na yan. Ano ba ang dapat gawin? Madaling isipin ang solusyon ngunit napakahirap ng implementasyon. Tulad ng parati kong sinasabi sa mga drayber ng jeep, mga tindero at iba pang mga nakakasalimuha ko sa araw-araw, “kung walang mahihita, walang kikilos”. Sa kanayunan, maraming kumikilos dahil wala nang natira: ninakaw na ng ilang pamilya. Sa mga siyudad, mahirap sabihin na ang mga hindi kumikilos ay walang interes. Mayroong interes, ngunit hindi alam kung anong direksyon nga ba. May ilan na sa halip na tumulong sa siyentipiko at malawakang pagbubuwag ng kabulukan ng lipunan ay tumutulong pa sa mga naninira dito. Wala silang pinag-iba sa mga lokal na lider na walang inatupag kundi ang interes ng pamilya nila. Bigasang bayan? Hindi. Bigasan ang bayan. Sa mga estudyanteng nagtataguyod ng hike at patuloy na sumusuporta rito, isa lang ang masasabi ko sa inyo: Sana habambuhay kayo sa bracket A at hindi na sana kayo magkagradweyt! Mga panget!

An Introduction to the Sociology of the Work of Art

Marius D. Carlos Jr.

The application of sociological concepts in the examination of art, both as an historical, cultural artifact and as a whole field situated within a larger system of production can be more easily understood if some basic concepts of sociology are employed. The following are some of the basic concepts that can be used to understand the possible meaning of a work of art, and its relationship with culture and everyday life.

Key concepts

1.   Object- the object is the large environment or system where individuals are situated. The object can be studied for its sub-systems, codes, laws and effects on the individual itself.
2.    Subject– the subject is the agent within a larger operating structure. The agent or individual is an individual to the state-structure when it is ‘hailed’ or constituted as a subject of the state. From thereon, a person is a state-person, and becomes a member of state-structure, if only to prolong its scope of power.
3.    Objectivism- objectivism is a particular trend in the social sciences wherein the objective structure is given emphasis; the individual is viewed as mostly powerless, overtaken by dominant material practices and unable to move away from these practices and motivations, as a result of being constituted by a large apparatus of coercion/power/violence.
4.    Subjectivism- subjectivism is the anti-thesis of objectivism, though both trends make use of similar concepts. Usually, the focus of subjectivism is to find out how exactly an individual is constituted in the larger objective structure, and how a person can resist these structures. The reason for resisting varies from one critic/theorist/person. Judith Butler, a late-modern French feminist, makes use of subjective performativity to undermine popular, sexualized notions of what the woman should be. In Butler’s most popular works, she takes off from Simone de Beauvoir and other earlier feminists in an effort to map out just how a woman is sexualized and rendered inferior within a phallogocentric male order. She also makes of Lacan, Freud and the occasional Marx to make sense of the current world order and its implications to the performance of gender.
5.  Discourse- according to Michel Foucault, all hitherto existing knowledge are accumulations or discursive formations that have been rationalized by society through time. The selectivity of human knowledge reveals that knowledge is only knowledge if it is sanctioned and approved by the status quo. It becomes heretical or insane once it is rejected.
6.    Ideology- simply put, ideologies are sets of material practices that exist in political practice, religious worship, cultural activity and other practical planes. These practices are the result of long, bloody histories and often, is historicized and appropriated by the state.
7.    Capitalism– the most recent stage of human civilization. In capitalism, the means and forces of production are relegated to a handful of people (the capitalists), to the detriment of the rest of society. This is where the contradiction between capital (money) and labour (human labour, un-abstracted) begins.
8.    Practice- according to Pierre Bourdieu, are the very stuff of human life. These are the activities that we take for granted day by day, but have huge implications in the way we deal with other people and with society. The simply act of saying “We the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of almighty God” is already a manifestation of the state, and banal nationalism. Banal nationalism is how the nation-state is inscribed into the minds of its citizens; it is reflected in practice, and these practices are repetitive and often meaningless already to the ones doing them. Yet they constantly remind people to whom they pledge their allegiance to.
9.    Capital– capital in the modern re-formulation are composed of different species; but all lead back to the larger frame, which is capitalist production. Capital can be money, the family’s political affiliations and connections, etc.
10. Habitus– or simply, the socialization of the individual. The habitus is formed at childhood and continues until adulthood. The socialization of a person varies depending on the educational level of the family, the direct environment, the education of the person and the dominant exclusionary and inclusionary practices that a person is subjected for most of his life. The offspring of the owner of a shopping mall will not find shopping malls strange, nor will the offspring think that they are actually doing in any harm. Habitus is differentiated from ideology as so for as its main theorists focus more on the ordinary lives of people rather than on formulation complex theories of how socialization, language and nations are formed. Which would explain why Bourdieu would always look at how a person survives a particular historical period rather than go back to a pure abstraction of human political and cultural life.
11.    Hexis– hexis is the embodiment of the various strains of political mythology that operate within a given society. These political mythologies may be part of a residual set of material practices, prolonged by ignorance, or worse, conformity or may be newer appropriations of old practices. In gender studies, the traditional roles of the women apply in the home, but erode outside. The erosion of these traditional roles is due to a stronger ideology- that of the international division of labour.
12.    Field– the social field is society itself; in Bourdieu’s theorization, the social field is the whole of society, which is divided into inter-dependent sub-fields of production and administration. Similar to what Adorno saw in Holocaust Germany, modern society for Bourdieu was a little more than a sophisticated assembly line of commodities and opportunists, ready to abandon everyone for the next “big thing”.
13.    An easy way to remember Bourdieu’s theorization of human practice is through the formula FIELD X CAPITAL = PRACTICE. This simply means that a person can only penetrate a given field of production based on his or her capital. When inside a particular field of production, the person will be limited by his or her knowledge, capital and position inside the field. This is what is known as practice.

Althusser’s ISAs and RSAs

No other post-Marx theory would be better known than Louis Althusser’s essay on ideology and ideological state apparatuses. In a nutshell, Althusser’s essay tackled how a capitalist-driven state can sustain itself through the reproduction of all the means and forces of production. One way of keeping everyone in line was securing power through the ideological state apparatuses and the repressive state apparatuses. ISAs are societal institutions that progressively interpellate an individual into being a person of a state. From the family ISA to the trade union ISA, these social formations and institutions allow people to move with a certain degree of freedom, so long as they do  not contradict in any way the various irrational rationalities of capitalist society. The ISAs maintain the status quo by literally constituting people as state subjects with roles, functions, wants and needs. Even desire is manipulated and dictated depending on the political and historical precedents of a particular state formation. In case the ISAs fail, the RSAs step in to make sure that no armed conflict will arise. This is how capitalist states are maintained and preserved. And this is how power is reproduced over a wide field, over a striated, heterogeneous space.

To extend this, Althusser’s student Michel Foucault rebelled against Althusser by literally excavating through human knowledge, showing that agency exists if we can deal with the networks of coercion and power. The subject or agent is located in specific time periods where some networks of power are still in their infancy; therefore, resistance is relative to the historical period. The postmodern re-assessment of events transpiring, filling homogenous empty time is questioned by post-Marxist and postmodern critiques of grand narratives, challenging the validity of ideologies such as Marxism itself. Jean Francois Lyotard himself would question Marxism for its basic failure in defending the very class it was supposed to put to power. Lyotard’s main argument was that no matter how grand a narrative is, it cannot possibly put to words everything that had transpired dialectically as human history, and therefore, it can never truthfully position itself as a source of truth. Of course, critics like Aijaz Ahmad are on the vanguard, refuting the “lies” of Lyotard and other postmodernists.

Basic Concepts in Marxism

Since the real focus is Bourdieu’s theory of art, distinction and taste, a few concepts from the Marxist constellation of concepts would be helpful in later analyzing the relationship of art (as object), artist (as subject of a field) and the understanding of art (historicization of art versus the universal aesthetic).

1.  Ideology- according to Marx, the inverted illusions of society that serve to mask the historically determined, materially-based social relations between individuals in society. An example that would be quickly understood is the relationship between a buyer (person A) and the a worker in a shoe factory (person B). The loyalty of the buyer is to the brand, the corporation but never to the worker. The worker is a spectral entity that hovers between darkness and light- present, but never visible enough to be recognized for what they are. Representations of people in popular media can also be viewed as ideology in action; the smiling workers of Happee toothpaste factories serve to inform people that the company is running a happy bunch of workers.
2.    Commodity– a commodity is the product of alienated labour. A worker produces something with his labour, and yet within the capitalist framework the product of his labour transforms into a commodity. A hostile force in itself, the commodity has power over the worker, but never the other way around. The commodity is also a fetish, since it’s viewed for merely its uses and never for its historically-determined position among all the produce of modern capitalist society.
3.    Reification- reification is the process of rendering a discourse/pseudo-knowledge/condition “natural” by all standards, dehistoricizing the mode of becoming of such. When a person states that everything is “falling into its rightful place”, then that individual is reproducing reified knowledge.

Pierre Bourdieu

Pierre Bourdieu is a French Marxist anthropologist, sociologist and philosopher. Outspoken about his political views, he held the view that sociology should be viewed as a combative sport to question and critique societies many inequities and shortcomings. Bourdieu’s lecture The Essence of Neoliberalism is a significant contribution to the study of globalization and the exploitative neoliberal policies of the United States.

The Sociology of Art

The Rules of Art

To understand Bourdieu’s perspective regarding the historical production of art, we must understand that what art is to a particular society, at a particular period in time is defined by institutions. These institutions utilize experts; experts that have aligned themselves more or less to the objectives of the larger societal formation. These individuals include semiologists, philosophers, linguists and art historians. From a certain angle, the presence of these individuals might be construed as harmless; but they represent  the power of the state itself, as it asserts itself through meaning-production and knowledge-production. The “art world” itself is a product of society; it is not an organic entity that had been formed naturally because art and artists exist side by side. Rather, the art world is a very structured, systematic environment where cultural artifacts are consecrated, and eventually, bought and sold like shoes or nails.

According to Bourdieu, art has the primal function of not having any function. Art cannot be useful, otherwise, it cannot be art. A toilet bowl inside a museum can be regarded as avant-garde art, but a toilet bowl that people sit on in a public restroom in San Miguel, Bulacan cannot be art. It can be constituted as art, if someone snaps a picture, and that someone has enough cultural capital to declare that such and such is art. Art then becomes an abstract category, and has little to do with the object (art) itself. Bourdieu also mentions “disinterested interestedness”, where people appreciate a work of art for its formal qualities (using the universal gaze of aesthetic perception and understanding) but never for its historical becoming. In literature, this can be seen in the way Harry Potter is consumed. Harry Potter is the source of knowledge, of sadness and adventure, and people do not ask whether the appropriation of “magic” or the Sphinx are truthful or not. For a literary work that has such a large following, Harry Potter engages only the reader on a very superfluous level. This is precisely how cultural commodities are meant to be consumed. This means that the historicity of Harry Potter will not matter, nor will it ever matter to the readers. Readers turn to other things for truth and depressing truth; but literature? Most of the time, no. This approach to the consumption of literature gives rise to art/literature as a transhistoric norm. This simply means that these objects have always existed and have never been reflections or criticisms of the age that gave birth to them. The Mona Lisa of Da Vinci will forever be the graceful, mysterious smile, but never just one product of a prodigious artist from a small town, that made use of different media to express one of the more insightful reflections of contemporary life (at least in his time).

The Historical Genesis of the Pure Aesthetic

Another important point made by Bourdieu is that if we are to fruitfully and meaningfully study art, we cannot separate aesthetics from history. One cannot simply say, “I prefer the beautiful than the sociological” and pretend to be truthful about art at the same time. Because production of art and the perception of it (the universal aesthetic gaze) cannot be separated. They exist side by side, they develop side by side. Shifts in the terrain of Philippine paintings define which approach is sophisticated, and which is granular already or kitsch.

The Field of Art

As we have mentioned earlier, the larger social field is composed of smaller, ‘independent’ fields of production. Some of these fields are existent specifically for cultural production. This includes of course, the art field. What do we have to remember regarding the field of art? First, the artist does not create the artistic field. Rather, an inverse logic is at work here- the artist is formed as a subject by the artistic field. You cannot be an artist if you have not been recognized and consecrated as such by the artistic field. It is only upon recognition can the artist be an artist. This is applicable also to art itself. Art cannot be a work of art if the artistic field has not recognized it. A painting will only be a painting in the most common sense of the word only if it has been exhibited and scrutinized by representatives of the artistic field. These representatives are either experts or functionaries; in either case, they hail a work of art as art.

How is meaning produced? How do we know what to feel or what to say when we see an Amorsolo painting? Truth is, not everyone can appreciate an Amorsolo painting, because not everyone has the same degree of education. Education, in the broadest sense of the word, is also part of a person’s socialization and cultivation of what is constituted as culture, art, literature, science, logic, etc. Meaning is produced when there is harmony between the field of art and the socialization of individuals, which brings to the fore why the educational apparatus exists. Education reproduces the knowledges that are necessary for surviving in hostile territory.

The artistic field’s relationship to the field of power

According to Bourdieu, the field of art is subsumed under a larger field of power (the social field) which in turn is constituted by other fields of production. The artistic field specifically creates an illusion of independence from other fields of production. This is done through the symbolic rejection of indices of commercial success of other fields of production (the artistic field does not care that Nike shoes are produces in the thousands; an Amorsolo painting is rare and therefore more expensive even if it the material it is painted on can easily be burned and turned to ashes). Nonetheless, we must understand that the artistic field will always be in a dominated position. It has its own market, and therefore, it has to create its own indices of what is valuable, what is not valuable, what is art, and what is not art.

The value of a work of art can be determined also by looking at its audience. Who thinks that the work of art is indeed priceless? A menial worker that says that the Mona Lisa is beautiful or ugly will not matter to the world of art. But when a bureaucrat from a formal discipline says that indeed, the painting is beautiful, everyone believes it and deems the artwork priceless.

Distinction and the Judgment of Taste

Bourdieu clarifies that the economy of cultural goods that we now see have specific logics- but these logics are never far from the larger logic of capitalist production. He reminds us that all the things that we crave for in life are a direct result of one’s upbringing and one’s education in the world. A person who has lived all his life in the mountains will not want to use Friendster, unless the technology is taught to that person, and the need is created. And by then, there would be no proof that the person would be as dependent on such a thing any more than the ordinary thirteen year old who was had been brought up on Disney movies and speaks English with an American accent.

The consumption of cultural goods are dependent on a person’s knowledge and education too- because consumption in this sense is actually the act of decoding. Decoding presupposes the existence of a prior knowledge- the code itself. Without the code, a work of art would not make sense. A painting would only be a jumble of colors and lines. How is ‘intention’ approached in this manner? The intention of the artist is to of course produce something that would be ruled by him, and given meaning by him and his aims in life. The artists tends to reject whatever is said about his work of art, but he cannot help but accept in the end the judgment of the institutions regarding his work.


Althusser, Louis. Lenin and philosophy and other essays. Trans. by Ben Brewster New York: Monthly Review Press, 1971.

Bourdieu, Pierre. The rules of art: genesis and structure of the literary field trans. by Susan Emanuel Cambridge: Polity Press, 1996.

_______, _____. Distinction: a social critique of the judgment of taste trans. by Richard Nice Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1984.

Foucault, Michel. The archaeology of Knowledge. Trans. by M. Sheridan Smith London: Routledge, 2002.

Jenkins, Richard. Pierre Bourdieu. London and New York: Routledge, 1992.

Leitch, Vincent. ed. Jean Francois Lyotard The Norton anthology of theory and criticism. New York: Norton, 2001.

Marx, Karl. The portable Karl Marx, sel. & trans. by Eugene Kamenka Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin, 1983.

Torrent, Edukasyon at ang Neoliberalismong Pumupuksa Rito

Nitong mga nakakaraang mga araw ay mas naging interisado ako sa pag-iipon ng mga librong pinamimigay ng mga tao sa Internet. Tulad ng maraming iskolar sa mahirap na bansa, masaya ako at may ilang mga taong pagpapaguran pa ang pagu-upload ng mga materyales na ito sa Internet. Bukod sa mga restriksyon na malamang ay ginagawan pa ng paraan ng marami sa mga ito (lalo na yung mga nanggaling sa Britanya, Estados Unidos at iba pang mga lugar sa mundo na malakas ang mga batas sa copyright at anti-piracy) ay isang uri rin ng pag-ibig ang ibinibigay ng mga taong ito. Pag-ibig sa kaalaman at kritikal na pag-iisip, na humuhubog sa mga indibidwal, upang maging handa sila sa kolektibong aksyon. Mula sa watak-watak at industriyalisadong mga nasyon ang mga taong nagpapalaganap ng mga libreng libro sa Internet. Madalas, may mga sulat pa ang mga taong nag-rip, nag-transcribe o nangopya ng mga materyales. Luma na ang iba, may mga galing pa noong taong 1992. Ang mensahe madalas ng taong ito?

Libre dapat ang kaalaman.

May kaibigan akong propesor sa Unibersidad, siya ang katangi-tanging Pilipino na nag-aral ng kanyang post-doctoral sa Max Planck Institute sa Alemanya. Ang taong ito, buong buhay ay ginugol sa pag-aaral, at sakop ng kanyang kaalaman hindi lamang ang simpleng pisika at kemika, ngunit malalawak at komplikadong mga larangan pa sa geophysics, at iba pa. Sa dami ng karanasan ng tao na ito, ay napagtanto rin niya ang isang bagay, sa gitna ng kanyang pagtuturo sa Estados Unidos, Australya at sa iba pang mga industriyalisadong bansa: libre dapat ang pag-aaral, at higit sa lahat, libre dapat ang kaalaman.

Bilang isang miyembro ng isang bansang nagpapakita ng galit o kung hindi naman ay malalang pag-iwas sa karunungang mapagpalaya, masasabing malayo pa ang ilang adhikain ng mga progresibo, tulad ng libre o tunay na murang pag-aaral, atbp. Ngunit hindi ito dahilan upang abandonahin ang mga adhikain. Hindi purkit mahirap ay imposible. Dapat nating tandaan na ang mga simpleng aktibidades ngayon, tulad ng pagboto ay tila imposible noong unang panahon. Ang pagtatrabaho at pag-unlad ng kaisipan ng kababaihan ay parang imposible rin noon dahil sa dominasyon ng mga patriyarkal na institusyon, ngunit ngayon ay nagagawan na ng paraan upang hindi na ito mangyari ulit. May boses na ang kababaihang progresibong aktibong nakakisama sa mga kilusang naglalayong basagin ang katahimikan ng konformismo at pasibong pagsunod sa tradisyong baog sa karunungan at pagpapahalaga sa tao.

Ang doktrina ng neoliberalismo ang pangunahing dahilan kung bakit naging malala ang pagiging bulok ng sistemang edukasyon sa Pilipinas. Simple lang naman ang dahilan kung bakit lason ang neoliberalismo sa anumang bansa, lalung-lalo na sa mga bansang walang industriya: dahil walang pagpapahalaga sa kolektibong epekto ng libreng edukasyon, kanya-kanya ang mga tao sa paghahanap ng ganansya. Sa huli, nagiging mga alipin lamang ng mga kumpanyang matagal nang humihita sa bansa ang mga gradweyt ng kolehiyo. Kung hindi naman ay nagsisilipad ang marami, para buhayin ang sarli, ang pamilya at ang pangarap na magkapera ng marami. Ngunit kung susuriin natin ng maigi, kung babasagin lamang natin ang neoliberal na mga patakaran sa edukasyon at sa mga pampublikong serbisyo ay hindi na kailangang umalis pa ng mga propesyunal, tulad ng mga mananaliksik sa siyensya, mga gurong mahuhusay sa kanilang ginagawa at maging ang mga nars na tunay namang buto ng lahat ng institusyong medikal. Kailangang tulungan ang sarili, ngunit mas maigi kung tulungan natin ang isa’t isa- at magagawa ito kung tutulungan natin ang bansa.

Bakit ang Brazil ay nakakaranas ng kasaganahan sa gitna ng recession? Simple lang din ang sagot dito- dahil sa regulasyon ng komersyo at industriya at dahil sa libreng pag-aaral. Bahala na kayong magconnect the dots sa puntong ito.

Trans(nation): Global Migration and the Filipino Diaspora

Published in March 2009 issue of Playboy-Philippines


Global Migration and the Filipino Diaspora

Marius D. Carlos Jr.

Immigration, in other words, has had its own contradictions: many have been propelled by need, others motivated by ambition, yet others driven away by persecution; for some, there really is no longer a home to return to, in many cases, need and ambition have become ambiguously and inextricably linked.

Aijaz Ahmad

Global migration may be the clearest sign of world poverty today. According to William Robinson, a sociologist from the University of California-Santa Barbara, the world is now polarized into the ratio of 80-20. Eighty percent of the world’s population is living on the world poverty line (subsiding on $2 or less a day), while only twenty percent are living comfortably with much higher incomes. To add to this continuing turmoil, which had been happening even before the Second World War, the largest industrial countries in the world are now experiencing economic downturns. The United States of America, which is viewed as the “land of opportunity” by millions of Filipinos, is experiencing an unemployment rate of more than 6%. Local and international news wires around the globe report massive layoffs, the closing of factories and the collapse of big businesses. The price of oil is steadily dipping owing to the slowing demand for world oil- because even national middle classes are feeling the heat. Either way, these signs point to global downturn where the poorest become even poorer.

Cruel reversals

In the Philippines, migrant workers come in a myriad of official names. OCWs (overseas contract wokers), OFWs (overseas Filipino workers) and Bagong Bayani (Modern-Day Heroes). The Philippine government regularly pays tribute to migrant workers through television infomercials, flyers and posters declaring its allegiance to the individuals who help stabilize the peso-dollar exchange through foreign remittances. Telecommunication companies ceaselessly advertise on popular television shows, offering remittance systems, cheap SMS services, satellite phones and cheap calls abroad. The image of the proud migrant Filipino is shamelessly bannered across different media. The stories of suffering and unceasing hardship remain untold. The image is substituted for the real thing; and we remain deluged with a million renditions of the same false picture.

It is ironic that often, popular media plays up “life abroad” as a joyful rendezvous with snow, foreign food and dollars. Glimpses of hardship are used by politicians to create a niche for themselves in the coming elections. It is as if the plight of migrant Filipino workers are now in the giving hands of millionaire politicians who make it appear that they have no interest other than to help fellow Filipinos. In the end, the problem remains. Alms have no business in trying to resolve a problem that is rooted in economic relations among people. That is exactly what Filipinos are being asked to be supportive of. The much-maligned concept of charity is put in place of progressive reforms against social ills. In the end, we are led to believe that supporting the charity projects of million-peso corporations will do much good. Reality television adds a blip in the blinding collection of false promises. To gain the support of television viewers, participants of reality television shows produced by multinational media companies like Endemol are asked to “be one of the masses” and to “help the children”. The sad faces on television only hint at the hardship of families of migrant workers. These families have been fragmented, and often, separation, drug addiction and social apathy become clear consequences of the fragmentation of the nuclear Filipino family.

Exodus to the Middle East

The old concept of imperialism is no longer applicable today. Instead, a more sinister structure (economic, political and military in nature) had developed to compensate for the bourgeoning trade routes that had developed after embargos post-WW2 have been lifted. In the United Kingdom, the Thatcherite administration had declared war on the welfare state with the T.I.N.A (There Is No Alternative) and the Third Way. In the United States, the cult of multiculturalism and neoliberal foreign policies (which implicates the G-8, the World Trade Organization and the World Bank) had grained ground. Political commentators like the French political anthropologist Pierre Bourdieu had been quick to denounce the ills of the Free Market system and the global financial system, which is now a supra-national entity. In France, the ideological and economic doctrine of Pensee Unique, which takes away the veils of Moslem women who wish to be naturalized also takes away the power of collective structures, such as worker’s unions. The impeccable logic of late capitalism had rendered man incapable of helping himself through hunger and strife.

In weak, fragmented and poor nation-states such as the Philippines, the symptom had begun, as we have stated earlier with political glosses like The Global Filipino or Bagong Bayani. The Philippine National Bank even has a separate counter for “Foreign Remittances/Dollar Accounts”. This might spell relief for relatives in the Philippines, who quickly grab and go (to where, nobody knows, but Duty Free Philippines certainly made a killing last Christmas). But what does this mean? Popular television shows on primetime often contain heavily edited interviews of migrant Filipino workers. It appears that they are having a grand time abroad, scrubbing the toilet bowls of foreigners, so that their children can buy shoes at home. These shoes on the other hand, have been produced in poorer Third World countries for Nike. The dollars that migrant workers have worked so hard for are simply returned to the First World through the Free Market system. And the children are smiling, happily tearing through the plastic and boxes of the new shoes and dresses that they’ve been able to buy with “green money”.

A. Sivanadan, a critic for the journal Race and Class identified more than twenty years ago the massive shift from import-substitution to export-oriented industrialization. The various interweaving patterns of national labor migrations (which spans the Philippines to Latin America to China) is affected greatly by this shift to export-oriented trade. Export-oriented industrialization, which had given birth to global crises such as peak oil production is what drove millions of Filipinos to the Middle East. In a literal “quest for bread”, millions of Filipinos flew to Middle Eastern countries, distributed and segregated, based on their qualifications (high school graduate, college graduate, semi-skilled, skilled). Many ended up being underemployed, doing menial tasks for wealthy employers, while swallowing the fact that they had finished degrees back at home. Years later, the discourse of Bagong Bayani would still serve to undermine the reality of labor migration. Presidency after presidency would take the mantle of Bagong Bayani and give it another whirl, prolonging the agony of millions of migrant workers who had only been forced by circumstance to leave their families.

It is estimated that more than 10 million Filipinos are working abroad. According to Epifanio San Juan, a Harvard-trained cultural critic, “Malubhang eskandalo ito, na tila walang nakakapansin” (“This is a huge scandal, which no one seems to be noticing.”) This is the global diaspora of Filipinos. Diaspora, a neologism of Greek origin (“to spread/to scatter”) is the singular term that capture the world-historic moment of the disintegration of whole national communities. In the wake of “counter-terrorism” and the new faith in the presidency of Barack Obama, many are crossing their fingers that the whole thing would turn around for the better. Unfortunately, Obama had arrived too late in the scene, if he is truly sincere with his promises of “change that we need”. Already, the United States is no longer the biggest lender in the global landscape. It is, however, the biggest spender. The ironic (yet fitting) term of military Keynesianism has put the United States at a precarious position among the other world powers. Already, it has allotted and spent billions of dollars on military power- covert operations, paramilitary operations, the war in Iraq, etc. Thousands of nuclear warheads stand ready in hidden bases around the US. Each nuclear warhead, if spent on agriculture or on welfare services, could have fed thousands of people a month. And yet, this artificial paranoia, “justified” by the events of September 11 is being used to gain more and more economic and military power in strategic regions in the world. Let it be said that the owner of the last trillion barrels of oil will be the wealthiest country in the world.

Modern slavery

Students of college history are often taught that “world history” is split into the following historical periods: ancient (as in “ancient Greece” and “ancient Rome”), the middle ages (where bad translations of Dante Alighieri’s Inferno is studied), renaissance (virtually nothing is understood of this time period). After the renaissance, centuries are skipped, until the student is suddenly faced with the “modern times”. An examination of college history books (including classics like Zaide’s) would reveal that the chatter about “history” stops at the exact moment that would matter to all Filipinos- modernity. With this in mind, we can sadly conclude that whole archives, from the chronicles of Carlos Bulosan to the wisdom of poets such as Tato Laviera, have been completely obliterated. The true dialectic of “world” history, including the events that had affected our own country has been removed. What we are left with are unusable “husks” or dead and freeze-dried pieces of trivial information, fit for afternoon game shows. This is when “history” is killed repeatedly by textbook writers. One consequence is the gravest of them all- selective amnesia. We have learned to selectively forget what matters most.

We have learned to forget what migration really is, or what it has already been years before the youngest generation had been born. Epifanio San Juan Jr., in his study of modernity and the modern exclusionary practices of nation-states, states clearly:

“Since the nineties, the average total of migrant workers has been about a million a year—close to three thousand every day—bound for 129 countries. They remit an amount totaling over 5 percent of the Gross National Product; in the process, millions of pesos are collected by the Philippine government through innumerable taxes and fees for passports and other documents.”

San Juan continues to examine the statistics laid out by Migrante International, and the figure of the Bagong Bayani:

“Migrante International and other organizations have investigated the horrendous conditions of work, the racist abuses and humiliating deprivations, they suffer every day. But they continue to fly overseas, undeterred by the future of overwhelming debt, mental derangement, physical injuries, rape, and violent death. Hence these Overseas Filipino Workers (OFW) are glorified as “modern heroes, ” mga bagong bayani (the “new heroes, ” in the words of former president Corazon Aquino), the most famous of whom are Flor Contemplacion, who was falsely accused of two murders and hanged in Singapore; and Sarah Balabagan, flogged in Saudi Arabia for defending herself against her rapist-employer, and deported. Were their fates the signs, or stigmata, of a portentous heroism?” (in Working Through the Contradictions, p. 260)

San Juan had just reminded us of the two infamous cases related to immigration in the nineties- Flor Contemplacion and Sarah Balabagan. There was a two-fold reaction to the headlines of the day (back then): outcries from the progressive (yet largely unsupported) groups like Gabriela and Migrante and movies that depicted the life of the two women. In both instances, the government had been mute, completely mute in addressing the problems posed by inequities in juridical systems abroad. The inability of the government to speak when necessary, and to act when most needed is a dire sign that we are required to expect nothing from the national government but slogans and taxes. In a nutshell, we are to subside on streamers stating “Pilipinas Kong Mahal!” and “May Silbi, Works Well, MMDA Labs You”. The hopelessness of the situation of the migrant workers is perhaps further satirized by balikbayans in a popular noontime variety program, who do nothing but praise the “goodness” of the host toward “the poor”. In reality, the poor are paraded and asked to sing and dance for alms. In return for the popularity of the show, millions of pesos are exchanged for a few hours a day for a transient fantasy that ends as quickly as it begins.

Characteristic of the “age of migration” is the camouflaging of the real relationships between migrant workers vis-à-vis foreign employers and host countries. While there are some instances that migrant workers are not starved or raped, there are many documented cases where host countries strike down harder on migrant workers than guilty natives. In a world completely flabbergasted and rendered anxious by the “atrocities” of “Islamic terrorists”, the real terrorism is ignored. The question of who has the more resources or capital is rendered operational on all levels of legal existence. “Justice” is only an informal category retained for the purpose of qualifying or discounting points of discussion on national broadsheets. Social justice, aimed at addressing individual inequities among social subjects has already been abandoned. Even in Europe, in France, where they cannot stop talking about “Man” (but cannot stop oppressing its workers), the figure of the French worker is being erased to be replaced with the figure of “the foreigner”: the migrant worker. This is the surreal and violent reality that Filipino migrants have to face when they fly to Fortress Europe in search for a few Euros.

Dos Kapital?

In a debate between the prophet of neoliberalism, Thomas Friedman (author of The World is Flat) and the combative French journalist Ignacio Ramonet (journalist for Le Monde Diplomatique and founder of ATTAC), Thomas Friedman declared the death of the German philosopher and political economist Karl Marx’s analysis of modern industrial society. He titles his own reformulation of economics “Dos Kapital”, a play on the title of Marx’s treatise on political economy Das Kapital. Friedman states:

“Unlike the Cold War system, globalization has its own dominant culture, which is why integration tends to be homogenizing. In previous eras, cultural homogenization happened on a regional scale – the Romanization of Western Europe and the Mediterranean world, the Islamization of Central Asia, the Middle East, North Africa, and Spain by the Arabs, or the Russification of Eastern and Central Europe, and parts of Eurasia, under the Soviets. Culturally speaking, globalization is largely the spread (for better and for worse) of Americanization from Big Macs and iMacs to Mickey Mouse.”

“Whereas the defining measurement of the Cold War was weight, particularly the throw-weight of missiles, the defining measurement of the globalization system is speed the speed of commerce, travel, communication, and innovation. The Cold War was about Einstein’s mass-energy equation, e = m[c.sup.2]. Globalization is about Moore’s Law, which states that the performance power of microprocessors will double every 18 months. The defining document of the Cold War system was “the treaty.” The defining document of the globalization system is “the deal.”” (in Dueling Globalizations, Foreign Policy Press)

It should be noted immediately that Friedman is actually espousing globalization, the same way the World Bank is doing it. Friedman is unable to see the world beyond the blinding presence of neon lights advertising the largest brands in the world. In Friedman’s mind, productivity is still productivity regardless of whether the proponents of the productivity are eating three times a day or not. Friedman continues to enumerate the various “innovations” of the new world system, including the “social mobility” of the Individual as opposed to the “walls” of the old nation-state systems. Friedman is simply thanking the world because he has a nice niche in the Market, and he can eat Big Macs anytime.

Ignacio Ramonet was quick to counter Friedman’s arguments:

We have known for at least ten years that globalization is the dominant phenomenon of this century. No one has been waiting around for Thomas Friedman to discover this fact. Since the end of the 1980s, dozens of authors have identified, described, and analyzed globalization inside and out. What is new in Friedman’s work and debatable – is the dichotomy he establishes between globalization and the Cold War: He presents them as opposing, interchangeable “systems.” His constant repetition of this gross oversimplification reaches the height of annoyance.

Furthermore, our author appears incapable of observing that globalization imposes the force of two powerful and contradictory dynamics on the world: fusion and fission. On the one hand, many states seek out alliances. They pursue fusion with others to build institutions, especially economic ones, that provide strength – or safety – in numbers. Like the European Union, groups of countries in Asia, Eastern Europe, North Africa, North America, and South America are signing free-trade agreements and reducing tariff barriers to stimulate commerce, as well as reinforcing political and security alliances.

The political consequences have been ghastly. Almost everywhere, the fractures provoked by globalization have reopened old wounds. Borders are increasingly contested, and pockets of minorities give rise to dreams of annexation, secession, and ethnic cleansing. In the Balkans and the Caucasus, these tensions unleashed wars (in Abkhazia, Bosnia, Croatia, Kosovo, Moldova, Nagorno-Karabakh, Slovenia, and South Ossetia).

The social consequences have been no kinder. In the 1980s, accelerating globalization went hand in hand with the relentless ultraliberalism of British prime minister Margaret Thatcher and U.S. president Ronald Reagan. Quickly, globalization became associated with increased inequality, hikes in unemployment, deindustrialization, and deteriorated public services and goods.

It is clear from Ramonet’s arguments that the premise of the first author had been completely misguided- because social criticism requires another level of analysis- the degree and effectiveness of social distribution. This has been around for the longest time- and is visible in works by Joseph Schumpeter, who discusses the relationship between democracy and the current world order. This point of discussion is relevant to the “age of migration” because the “age of migration” would have never gathered force if not for the eternal “quest for bread”. It is with these specific features of our current epoch that we shall begin to understand anew our real positions in relation to other nation-states in the world.

Rekomended: Mula Tore Patungong Palengke: Neoliberal Education in the Philippines

Multa Tore Patungong Palengke: Neoliberal Education in the Philippines
Mula Tore Patungong Palengke: Neoliberal Education in the Philippines

Mula Tore Patungong Palengke: Neoliberal Education in the Philippines

Eds. Bienvenido Lumbera, Ramon Guillermo & Arnold Alamon

Publikasyon: 2007

(Mula sa introduksyon)

The present education system clearly curtails the development of a genuine nationalist consciousness among the youth and the students.  It continues to shape the thinking and consciousness of students towards and orientation which reflects the country’s long history of foreign colonization and exploitation.

Instead of achieving sovereignty in our political life, economy and culture, education is used as a tool for perpetuating slave mentality and a social system that protect the interests of US imperialism- even if these result in the country’s economic perdition and involvement in meaningless wars. The violent and exploitative character of the current world order is masked by the rhetoric of the neoliberal globalization which is peddled as the solution to all the problems in the world.