Why Filipinos are shallow: a response to F. Sionil Jose

By On September 14, 2011 · 40 Comments · In Columns

The things we read, what we learn in school and what is written by the learned tend to sediment across the decades. These truths are passed along from generation to generation to reiterate not only their facticity but their currency. And so, just in case Filipinos have forgotten that they have no written heritage and hence no penchant for reading, F. Sionil Jose reminds us we have the memory span of goldfish and are incapable of deep, deep, deep thought.

Thankfully, nearly half of the country’s urban population prefer to read their news online. Monsieur Jose can then rest assured he has an audience who will be reminded they do not read, and hence are capable only of “staring into the cosmos” as they await the fate of a possibly dying relative in hospital corridors. Unlike him, why don’t they ever think to bring along a book or a magazine?

Not content, our Palanca awardee musters more evidence. This one was probably a eureka moment. He recounts an exchange with former Senator Shahani PhD. Some years ago, they witnessed two dances, one Japanese and the other tinikling,  after which the good senator turned to Jose and asked, “Why are we so shallow?”

Indeed. In his interpretation, the PhD in Comparative Literature from La Sorbonne concluded Filipinos are shallow because of tinikling. In the social sciences we call this correlation spurious. Jose also assumes that the tinkiling takes ten minutes to learn. It takes the same amount of time to learn the rules of basketball, but I would hazard to say that it takes more than ten minutes to learn to play it well. But wait, Jose presents us with more evidence.

We are shallow because we have not properly imbibed the lessons of our colonial heritage. In the name of all that is holy, why are Filipinos not reading Greek and Latin today? Why have we not properly learned from the Christian philosophical tradition? Probably because in the olden days, it was not the job of Catholic friars to enlighten. Probably because today, it is not the job of Catholic friars to enlighten.

We are shallow, per Cheval dans L’Ordre des Arts et Lettres, because we are mayabang, ego-driven. Media personalities these days are “know-it-alls” who mistake information for wisdom. Wannabe academics bluster their way to the top. Materialistic, crass, steeped in the inanity of media spectacles produced and reproduced by our culture machine. Again spurious correlations. But Jose is not a social scientist. He is merely a multi-award-winning writer, globally renowned. Surely his kind too are entitled to their commentating.

And then Jose delivers his coup de grâce. He writes it somewhere in the middle of his essay. Probably to test our reading skills. Or attention span. You see, Filipinos are shallow, according to our National Artist, because we do not know “who we are and the limits to what we can do.”

For the kind of commentary that he has written, I’m afraid he is right.

Liberty Chee has written 18 articles on this blog.
 
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
Reddit Facebook Twitter Delicious Mixx StumbleUpon Digg
  • Restyrefuerzo

    The truth hurts.

  • http://twitter.com/cheez_miss cheezmiss

    yep — i agree with Gabby — Philippine institutions are shallow not us Pinoys http://www.cheezmiss.com/2011/09/philippine-systems-and-institutions.html

  • GabbyD

    Here’s another reason why its interesting that this thing hasnt caught on fire.

    his “shallowness” critique isnt aimed only at the poor. its EVERYONE.

    so, its interesting how the elites arent jumping out of their collective seats to give counterexamples. 

    do they FEEL they are shallow? and they’ve…. given up?

  • GabbyD

    now, compare sionil’s essay with soriano.

    why did soriano get more heat than sionil jose? 

    if u actually read soriano’s essay, his tone is less imperial. he’s talking about his personal experiences. in fact, he DOES appreciate filipino. he says, about filipino: 

    “I was proud of my proficiency with the language.”

    but what happened was –> wow, what an d-bag about filipino! it ignited an online firestorm, one daily said…

    but here is sionil-jose, who, after watching a couple of dances is ready to judge a philippine cultural dance — and yes, write off the ENTIRE FILIPINO PEOPLE, as “shallow”. 

    and no one gives a sh_t. wtf?! i dont get it.

    well, maybe people did care. but they certainly didnt criticize sionil jose to the same extent as soriano. why? they are basically, similar essays, but soriano has, in fact, a humbler, more personal tone. 

    wow. the hypocrisy leaves me gobsmacked. 

  • GabbyD

    i think i get why no one is incensed with this as i (and liberty).

    even marochim, so “disagrees” says he agrees with him that filipinos are shallow.

    so there you are. a slight against filipino culture, and no one counters, because people believe actually it. 

    • http://twitter.com/marocharim Marck Ronald Rimorin

      Hi Gabby,

      I don’t think you read enough of the post.  I agree with F. Sionil Jose in some of his criticism; we should be self-reflexive enough to at least be aware that some of our shallowness – every culture has the potential and exhibits the potential to be shallow – comes from the media.  What I disagree with is that the criticisms he make are divorced of the reality that are experienced by Filipinos, that he takes his depth without appreciation or recognition or respect for the depth of others. 

      • Anonymous

        I don’t know what percent Pinoys-in-Pinas would use these words….

        shallowness that comes from parrotting what they were told versus doing independent critical thinking  and that Pilipinas is “… in the same league as Iran, Zimbabwe, Saudi Arabia, Tanzania, India,
        Indonesia, Nigeria, Bangladesh and Morocco). Our country may not be
        called Philippinestan; and, our people may not be required to wear veils
        over their         heads, but in a cultural sense, they in fact do..

      • GabbyD

        sorry for the bad writing above. it must’ve been late. 

        i totally understand that you believe, for your own reasons, that filipinos are shallow.
        what i’m trying to understand is: where is the outrage for his lame argument?

        writers have been pilloried for much, much less.  (see my comment above on soriano)

        think about it: you say that his criticism are divorced of the reality…. etc…

        translation: he’s making shallow arguments… that filipinos are shallow. yay!

        its hypocritical. its poor logic. as liberty says, its one anecdote after another, and he concludes, without humility or doubt: filipinos are shallow.

        wow. i think we have to fight hard against shoddy thinking, esp from people who should KNOW BETTER. 

        now, as to the shallow issue: ARE filipinos shallow?

        i think the question is ill-posed. the word shallow is so vague, that its a grab-bag of all the things you think may be wrong with filipino society… 

        at worst: its an attempt to judge one’s tastes and preferences. that is, i dont like you == i think you are shallow. its name-calling in a bright suit. 

        to be clear: i dont mind he called filipinos shallow. but his arguments are BAD. his premise is BAD. 

        now: why do i think there is less outrage? ==>  because many people tend to agree with him. and they say: yes, he has poor arguments. but i agree with him that filipinos are shallow, coz of reason X. so on the whole, its ok. plus, he’s a respected writer, so its ok. 

        reply from me: NOT OK. i think we need to fight bad arguments whereever they come from, REGARDLESS  of whether they agree with us or not. 

        we esp need to fight bad arguments if they come from people who ought to KNOW BETTER.

  • J_ag

    World English Dictionary.

     

    Cognition

     

    The mental act or process by which knowledge is acquired,
    including perception, intuition and reasoning.

    The knowledge that results from such an act or process.

     

     This post is for all and not just  Gabby D. 

    For most of the 19th century most of the advanced countries peoples could not read or write. The emergence of the industrial revolution created the need for a unifying organizational structure that big business saw was necessary for their endeavors. They needed a unifying language and the need to corral workers from the rural areas into large stationary workplaces. Children used to be tied to their work stations. The state of France before the change had many dialects. Big business was responsible for the organization of the nation state. 

    This is where the need for schooling and training came about. 

    Look at the emergence of the public school system under the Americans here in the Philippines. Look at U.P. That entire system crumbled starting in the 70′s.  Compare the intellectual capacity of the past government officials to the present crop. The people deserve the type of government they get. 

    Look at the schooling system today.  The dumbing of the country started with the Marcos dictatorship. 

    How an individual looks at the world or reality depends on his individual history – his family community and his schooling and training. 

    Just look at the state of the cognitive capacity of most of the people in the country. I do not condemn them for being ignorant but  I condemn those people in power who continuously feed of the travesty of this economic system. 

    The entire planet is presently going through its once in generations evolutionary crisis due to massive technological innovation brought about by the digital revolution.

    Globalization is old news that is almost over a hundred years old.  The Philippines is a product of that globalization process and not a driver of its own history. It normal and natural evolutionary process was altered by external forces that drives its history. 

    Knowing and knowledge takes work and understanding that knowledge takes lifetimes.

    Look at the crisis facing the EU.  They are essentially racially related but their economics, politics and culture do not share a shared history. Their attempt at economic union without political union is know at the phase where to survive they have to move towards a more cohesive political union. From the basis of Kings supported by the religious establishment they moved to limited representative government.  it was only later when industrialization created a bigger share for the working class did they move towards broad based participatory government.  

    The EU at present is an artificial state that is moving towards becoming a Federal State. 

    Compare that to our problems with the MILF and the like of an Umbra Kato riding on horse with an AK- 47. 

    The Philippines today is the largest formal and informal exporter of maids due to the fact that our history of colonization by the peoples inculcated in the Judeo-Christian culture  of  Europe made us stand out in all of Asia. 

    But we remain mired in the backward stage of European medieval culture tied to an oppressive and exploitative based Catholic hierarchy that teaches us to accept poverty as a gift… 

    • GabbyD

      so you are generalizing on a people’s characteristics (and future potential!) based on this historical-political theory? evidence? (probably none, but i’d try anyway)

      “The Philippines today is the largest formal and informal exporter of maids due to the fact that our history of colonization by the peoples inculcated in the Judeo-Christian culture  of  Europe made us stand out in all of Asia. ”

      that sentence makes no sense.

  • Pingback: The Deep and the Shallow | The Marocharim Experiment

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WVJPWHNIZIOGWU2O4Z6PJTXXBM Roberto

    Who cares what F.sinil Jose says. For being a Filipino-basher  he earned his National Artist moniker, baaah.

    • GabbyD

      we should care. people listen to this guy. 

      • Bert

        who listen to this guy? oh, yes, the anti-pinoys listen to this guy. birds of a feather, so they say.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WVJPWHNIZIOGWU2O4Z6PJTXXBM Roberto

          of course the anti-pinoy will listen to this guy. f.sionil jose is their patron sanit.

  • http://iwriteasiwrite.tumblr.com Nik

    Obviously UNESCO is just talking out of their ass about education.

    • GabbyD

      really? 

      i didnt say that. 

      all i said is, clearly, there IS humanities, even in public school. i also heard from DJB, that the time spent on math and science has in fact shrunk.

      admittedly, i think social science isnt good. (my field is social science). but its there.

      i confess that i dont understand most  of what what unesco and braid wrote above, probably coz i dont know what the context of it was. 

  • GabbyD

    why arent people mad at sionil jose and shahani? 

    they just glibly bad-mouthed the tinikling. thats OK?  

    why no outrage? or at least some reproachment from the blogger community? 

    • Anonymous

       well the article just came out in the last 24 hours so maybe no outrage yet. also, while not diminishing whatever cultural importance tinikling has, frankly our dance with bamboo poles does not resonate or prick a nerve the same way as other things . . .

      • GabbyD

        uf29,

        think about it this way: remember when they printed the new money, and the tubataha reef was not in the right place? and they misprinted the scientific names?

        and there was ALOT of coverage of how stupid the BSP was? how disrespectful? remember?

        now, here’s someone who glibly dismissed our cultural dance and… NOTHING? 

        that boggles the mind. if the mistakes on money elicited such a spirited defense of philippine heritage, an actual criticism of culture (and so offhandedly made at that) ought to have SOME KIND of reproachment.

        right?

        • Anonymous

          depends on the press coverage really. they partially determine the outrage level in the blogosphere. maybe BSP fits in the narrative of evil disrespectful villain, while there is some inexplicable respect for F. Sionil Jose (i don’t know where he gets off giving social commentary, but then again maybe its coz i disagree w/ a bit of what he says).
           
          it’s a long winded way of saying, since there are several factors that can influence blogosphere outrage, i never get surprised when some issues gain traction and others don’t even if they seem to be of an equivalent offense.

          • GabbyD

            not equivalent. sionil jose’s remarks are more serious.

            remember that the BSP didnt deface anything. didnt insult anything. etc.

            at worst, they made mistakes. thats the worst!

            but sionil jose and shahani in this case, making a mistake is the LEAST couldve happened. in fact, they are the first ones to say that they didnt make a mistake. 

            they MEANT IT when they said it was shallow. he even wrote an entire COLUMN about it!

            yan ang nakakapagtaka dito. 

            here’s the kicker — even if you agree on some of the things sionil said, or like his body of work, you STILL have to concede that he was wrong about tinikling.

            yet — nothing?

          • Anonymous

            to reiterate: why nothing? i don’t know

            actually nothing? no. there’s this rejoinder. there’s you.

             

    • Anonymous

      I bet you that F Sionil Jose was not being glib,  he was quite serious (which is why he took time (and it got accepted)  to put his thoughts to print).

      AND… his message was probably “…. many many things about Pilipinas culture are shallow….  the tinikling just being one of many.”

      My suspicion :  his use of “shallow” includes two thoughts. 1) “shallow” — the culture does not respect excellence.    (2)  ”shallow” — the culture does not respect or they don’t believe that the country history has elegance, richness, depth  (hence “preserving history” is not a strong movement).    [This may be part-explanation the lack of interest in (to me an important) question --- "who masterminded the Ninoy Aquino murder?"]
        
      I suspect  quite a number of Pinoys will say that as a rule,  Pinoys (maybe not in their own households, but that they do see it all the time)  ”puwede na”   acceptance of mediocrity.

  • http://iwriteasiwrite.tumblr.com Nik

    Eh, Frankie is a cranky old coot who makes me laugh most of the time. Though, as one contemporary writer of his did point out, the fatal flaw in Frankie’s writing has always been the poor are good, the rich are bad. In other words, a little simplistic.

    However, I do think he does make a good point concerning our lack of humanities and multi-disciplinary critical thinking in education; not to mention the lack of overarching frameworks which govern much of our historical analysis. While he frequently falls into that same trap, it is a point that I hope is not lost amid his more asinine commentary.

    On the comment about the Church not enlightening people during the Spanish era, while it is a throwaway line within your piece, I would be remiss in pointing out that the Church during the early part of the Spanish era was responsible for bringing in leading intellectual thought from Europe to the Archipelago. Whether you consider that ‘enlightening’ or not is another matter. But within the context of the period, we could very well argue they were.

    • GabbyD

      “However, I do think he does make a good point concerning our lack of humanities and multi-disciplinary critical thinking in education;”…

      i dont even understand that point. in what sense is there no multi-disciplinary critical thinking in education?also, didnt u say that the marxist way of viewing history is wrong? isnt that an example of an over-arching framework governing history? 

      • http://iwriteasiwrite.tumblr.com Nik

        First, there isn’t in our education system. Humanities, liberal arts, in other words integrative social sciences are not promoted in our education system. I’ve sat in on the conferences and symposiums discussing this problem and how they are trying to address it. UNESCO Philippines came out with a policy paper prior to elections last year attempting to address problem.

        My point when it came to Marxism is that its application here is far too restrictive and perverse in interpretation and use. A point made by Zialcita in one of his essays. And also critiqued by Quibuyen. By framework, I am referring to the internal frameworks utilized by historians and writers; a clarification I should have made in my initial post.

        In that I am remarking on how some historians argue ideology in favor of forgoing research. Thus, they do utilize a logical framework within which they analyze Philippine history. In turn, they are parroting prior historians, whose research betrays logical inconsistencies. Take for example, Constantino. He argues in favor of the masses as the primary drivers; yet derides Rizal as being reformist. Even as the ‘masses’ of the 19th century were inspired by Rizal’s writings. His framework is flawed since the scholarly basis used is flawed. That is the critique I am making.

        • GabbyD

          my comment was eaten by the system, due to the link i pasted.

          i said that this comment should really be about public education, not “filipinos” in general.

          even in public school, the humanities werent abandoned, although i havent read what unesco has to say about this.

          if anything, i think humanities are overly promoted, VS science. (except medicine)

          • http://iwriteasiwrite.tumblr.com Nik

            Florangel Braid in “Educating for Needed Competencies”:

            “ Interactive tools with the use of new information technology and team learning, stimulate critical and creative thinking and complement traditional academic education which is seen as more concerned with cognitive knowledge rather than the affective domain. Beyond the 3 R’s and the current emphasis on science and mathematics, the curriculum restructuring must then focus on the design of new learning systems that are participatory, multidisciplinary and process-oriented.”

            She concludes:

            “Ultimately, the key to upgrading the competencies of our human resources lies in the restructuring of our learning system – its management, curriculum, learning processes. It is responding to poor communication and analytical skills and the lack of initiative. The latter perhaps springs from a weak sense of personal and cultural identity. It is strengthening understanding of who we are, our historical roots, and developing tolerance and inclusiveness. These are the “soft” and “hidden” aspects of development that can develop a sense of self-worth and put coherence, purpose, and meaning in our collective struggle towards national transformation.”

            Pertinent excerpt from UNACOM (UNESCO Philippines) policy recommendations:

            “…recommends that formal learning strengthen its programs to train youth and teachers in the use of critical reasoning for citizenship concerns. By officially recognizing Social Studies as the entry point for Social and Human Sciences in basic education, the government would harmonize science as recognized by the Department of Education with the Department of Science and Technology’s roster of sciences. Currently the exact, natural and physical sciences are acknowledged in basic education but not the social and human sciences. Adding the scientific viewpoint to studying and creating society would enrich Social Studies and its civic functions while assuring generational abilities in critical and creative thinking toward career mastery and social reform.”

            Additionally UNESCO also advocates for the focus on creating “Communities of Inquiry”: “…to boost the application of high-order thinking in everyday life by neighborhoods nationwide…Innovative strategies using dynamic communications technology to teach critical understanding are essential to boost neighborhood self-confidence, self-initiative, self-reliance, unity, and commitment to national and global development…”

            I doubt they’d be advocating for social sciences (humanities, liberal arts, etc) as necessary harmonizing elements in education if they were applied as such today.

  • J_ag

    Diffident and unassertive would better describe Filipinos. A culture that is more in line with simple peasant mindsets. 

    • GabbyD

      ok i’ll bite: HOW do you KNOW that?

  • http://twitter.com/billdaviswords Bill Davis

    Amazing. First of all, does he define “shallow”? Sounds as though he uses it as if it had a solid, easy-to-measure meaning.

    And seriously, speaking of shallow, judging an entire culture to be “shallow” because of a cultural dance is just about the most shallow thinking I’ve ever heard of.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_5OOZ2BLFYNOSLJ5QQYT5JTBKVA nick

      I agree. F.Sionil was talking about himself. He can’t think beyond the intricacies of the dance, much less his capacity to understand beyond what his myopic eyes can see of his own people. The guy is worth his reputation as the patron saint of the anti-pinoys. 

  • Joe America

    Not to worry. Americans are perfecting a modern version of shallow called “The sound bite intellectual” where Sarah Palin is held forth as hero. Most Filipinos I know are way deeper than that, They just have little practice at being bold.

  • http://raggster.wordpress.com raggster

    “Probably because in the olden days, it was not the job of Catholic
    friars to enlighten. Probably because today, it is not the job of
    Catholic friars to enlighten.” PWNED.

  • GabbyD

    here’s the thing: the tinikling is one of our national dances, right? its a cultural treasure.

    and here, Mr. sionil jose says (or agrees) that its “shallow”.

    now he, in some other essay, decries our lack of nationalism.

    yet, here he is now, he just called a national cultural dance “shallow”. 

    this doesnt track at all. unless, in his essay, he meant HE lacked nationalism (and erroneously generalized). that would make sense. 

  • GabbyD

    here’s the thing: the tinikling is one of our national dances, right? its a cultural treasure.

    and here, Mr. sionil jose says (or agrees) that its “shallow”.

    now he, in some other essay, decries our lack of nationalism.

    yet, here he is now, he just called a national cultural dance “shallow”. 

    this doesnt track at all. unless, in his essay, he meant HE lacked nationalism (and erroneously generalized). that would make sense. 

    • Manuelbuencamino

      indigenous taiwanese also dance the tinikling.

  • Manuelbuencamino

    F. Sionil Jose wears a beret. 

    Therefore he is an artist. 

    Therefore he has a right to call everyone shallow. 

    Including other artists. 

    F. Sionil Jose looks different without a beret. 

    He does not look like an artist. 

    He looks like a grumpy old man.

  • GabbyD

    that in fact is the weirdest assertion in the piece. after watching a japanese dance vs a filipino dance, suddenly we are shallow? why? whats is shallow about the tinikling?