Updated CV of E. San Juan, Jr.


Curriculum Vitae

Dr. E. SAN JUAN, Jr.
3900A Watson Place NW Apt. 4 D/E
Washington, DC 20016, USA

1958 A.B. magna cum laude University of the Philippines
1962 A.M. Harvard University
1965 Ph.D. Harvard University

Academic Positions

1965-66 Assistant Professor, University of California, Davis
1966-67 Associate Professor of English and Comparative Literature, University of the Philippines
1967-79 Associate Professor of English, The University of Connecticut, Storrs
1978-80 Professor of Comparative Literature, Brooklyn College of the City University of New York
1987-88 Fulbright Professor of American Literature and Criticism, University of the Philippines and Ateneo de Manila University
1979-1994 Professor of English and Comparative Literature, The University of Connecticut, Storrs
1994-1998 Professor of Ethnic Studies, Bowling Green State University, Ohio
1998-2001 Professor and Chair, Department of Comparative American Cultures,
Washington State University, Pullman
2001- Director, Philippines Cultural Studies Center, Connecticut
2002 Fellow, Center for the Humanities, and Visiting Professor of English, Wesleyan University
2003 Fulbright Professor of American Studies, Leuven University, Belgium
2004 National Science Council Fellow, National Tsing Hua University, Republic of China (Taiwan)
2006 Fellow, Rockefeller Foundation Bellagio Center Study (Fall 2006)
2008 (Spring) Visiting Professor of English & Comparative Literature, University of the Philippines
2009 (Spring) Fellow, W.E.B. Du Bois Institute, Harvard University
2012-2013 Fellow, Harry Ransom Center, University of Texas, Austin
2015-16 Professorial Lecturer, Polytechnic University of the Philippines, Manila

1960-63 Fulbright-Smith Mundt Fellowship
1961-63 Teaching Fellow, Harvard University
1964 Comparative Literature Prize, Harvard University
1965 Howard Mumford Jones Award for Best Work in English, Harvard University
1963-65 Rockefeller Foundation Fellowship
1987-88 Fulbright Lectureship in the Philippines
Fellow, The Institute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities, University of
Edinburgh, Scotland
1993 1993 National Book Award, Association for Asian American Studies
1993 Distinguished Book Award given by Gustavus Myers Human Rights Center
1994 Nominated for the Citizens’ Chair, University of Hawaii
1994 Katherine Newman Award, Society for the Study of Multi-Ethnic Literatures of the United States
1995 Visiting Professor of English, University of Trento, Italy
Scholar in Residence, Institute for the Study of Culture, Society, and Human
Values, Bowling Green State University
Centennial Award for Achievement in Literature, Philippine Cultural Center,
Republic of the Philippines
Visiting Chair Professor, Graduate School, Tamkang University, Taiwan
Keynote Speaker, College English Association (CEA) 2002 Annual Convention
Invited Speaker, American Studies Institute, Dartmouth College, June 2002
Invited Participant, Workshop on Cultural Nationalism, University of Victoria, Canada; Keynote
Speaker, 12th International Symposium on English Teaching, English Teachers Association, Republic of China, Nov. 7-9, Taipeh, Taiwan; Keynote Speaker, Ninth Quadrennial International Conference on Comparative Literature, National Taiwan University, 19 June 2004
Keynote Lecturer, Open University, Arbeiterbildungszentrum, Gelsenkirche, Germany, Oct. 2, 2004
2004 Invited lecturer at 7 universities in Taiwan: Tsing Hua University, Chiaotung University,
Kaohsiung Normal University, Sun-Yat Sen University, National Kaohsiung University, National ChungHsing University, National Normal University, Taipeh
2007 Keynote Speaker, “Gramsci Now”: International Gramsci Conference, Michigan State
University, 9-11 November
SELECTED PUBLICATIONS (excluding reviews and creative works)


1. The Art of Oscar Wilde. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1967; reprinted 1978 by Greenwood Press, Inc. Chapter V reprinted in Harold Bloom, ed., Oscar Wilde Modern Critical Views (New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1988), 45-76. The chapter on “The Ballad of Reading Gaol” reprinted in Wege der Forschung–Oscar Wilde, ed. Norbert Kohl (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftlichen Buchgesellschaft, 1985). The chapter on The Importance of Being Earnest translated into German in Interpretationen, ed. Willy Erzgraber. Frankfurt: Fischer Bucherei, 1969.

2. Rice Grains: Selected Poems of Amado V. Hernandez. Translated from the original Tagalog. New York: International Publishers, 1966.

3. Balagtas: Art and Revolution (A Critical Study of Florante at Laura). Quezon City: Manlapaz, 1969. Reprinted in Patricia Cruz and A. Chua, eds., Himalay (Manila: Cultural Center of the Philippines, l988).

4. A Casebook of T. S. Eliot’s Gerontion. Columbus, Ohio: Merrill, 1970.

5. The Radical Tradition in Philippine Literature. Quezon City: Manlapaz, 1970.

6. Critics on Ezra Pound. Coral Gables: Miami University Press, 1971.

7. James Joyce and the Craft of Fiction. New Jersey: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1972.

8. Marxism and Human Liberation: Selected Essays by Georg Lukacs. New York: Dell, 1972.

9. Carlos Bulosan and the Imagination of the Class Struggle. Quezon City: University of the Philippines, 1972; reprinted by Oriole Editions, New York, 1975.

10. Preface to Pilipino Literature. Quezon City: Phoenix, 1972.

11. Introduction to Modern Pilipino Literature. Boston: Twayne, 1974.

12. Poetics: The Imitation of Action. Cranbury, N.J.: Associated University Press, 1978.

13. Balagtas: Florante/Laura. Translated from the original Tagalog. Manila: Art Multiples, Inc., 1978.

14. Bulosan: An Introduction with Selections. Manila: National Book Store, 1983.

15. Toward a People’s Literature: Essays in the Dialectics of Praxis and Contradiction in Philippine Writing. Quezon City: U.P. Press, 1984. Winner of the Catholic Mass Media Award, 1985; and the National Book Award given by the Manila Critics Circle, 1985.

16. Crisis in the Philippines: The Making of a Revolution. South Hadley, Mass.:Bergin and Garvey, 1986. Chapter III reprinted in Tricontinental (Habana, Cuba) No. 129 (May-June 1990): 46-57.

17. Subversions of Desire: Prolegomena to Nick Joaquin. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1988; Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 1988. “Preface” reprinted as “Preface to the Nick Joaquin Project,” Southeast Asia Journal 17.2 (1988-89): 8-13.

18. Transcending the Hero / Reinventing the Heroic: An Essay on Andre Gide’s Theater. New York & London: University Press of America, 1988.

19. Ruptures, Schisms, Interventions: Cultural Revolution in the Third World. Manila: De La Salle University Press, 1988.

20. Only by Struggle: Reflections on Philippine Culture, Society and History in a Time of Civil War. Manila: Kalikasan Press, 1989. Reissued in an expanded form: Only by Struggle: Reflections on Philippine Culture, Politics and Society. Quezon City, Philippines: Giraffe Books, 2002.

21. From People to Nation: Essays in Cultural Politics. Manila: Asian Social Institute, Inc., 1990.

22. Text Context Society and Critical Theory. Occasional Monograph 1. Manila, Philippines: Asian Social Institute, Inc., 1990.

23. Writing and National Liberation: Selected Essays 1970-90. Quezon City: University of the Philippines Press, 1991.

24. Racial Formation/Critical Transformations: Articulations of Power in Ethnic and Racial Studies in the U. S. New Jersey: Humanities Press, 1992. Winner of the 1993 National Book Award from Association for Asian American Studies; 1993 Distinguished Book Award, Gustavus Myers Center for Human Rights.

25. Reading the West/Writing the East: Studies in Comparative Literature and Culture. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc., 1992.

26. From the Masses, to the Masses: Third World Literature and Revolution. Minneapolis: MEP Press, 1994.

27. The Smile of the Medusa and Other Fictions. Quezon City: Anvil Publishing Co., 1994.

28. Allegories of Resistance. Quezon City: University of the Philippines Press, 1994.

29. On Becoming Filipino: Selected Writings by Carlos Bulosan. With an introduction. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1995.

30. The Cry and the Dedication by Carlos Bulosan. With an introduction. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1995.

31. Hegemony and Strategies of Transgression: Essays in Cultural Studies and Comparative Literature. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press, 1995.

31. The Philippine Temptation: Dialectics of Philippines-U.S. Literary Relations. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1996.

32. Mediations: From a Filipino Perspective. Quezon City, Philippines: Anvil Publishing, 1996.

33. History and Form: Selected Essays. Quezon City, Philippines: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 1996.

34. Rizal: A Re-Interpretation. Quezon City: Anvil Publishing, Inc., 1997.

35. From Exile to Diaspora: Versions of the Filipino Experience in the United States. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press/HarperCollins, 1998.

36. Beyond Postcolonial Theory. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1998.

37. Filipina Insurgency: Writing Against Patriarchy in the Philippines. Quezon City: Giraffe Books, 1999.

38. Alay Sa Paglikha ng Bukang-Liwayway [Collected poems in Filipino/Pilipino]. Quezon City, Philippines: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 2000.

38. After Postcolonialism: Remapping Philippines-United States Confrontation. Boulder, CO: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Co., 2000.

39. Racism and Cultural Studies: Critiques of Multiculturalist Ideology and the Politics of Difference. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2002.

40. Spinoza and the Terror of Racism. UK: Sheffield Hallam University Press, 2002. A revised version appeared as “Spinoza, Marx and the Terror of Racism,” Nature, Society, and Thought 16.2 (2003), 193-230.

41. Working through the Contradictions: From Cultural Theory to Critical Practice. Lewisburg, PA: Bucknell University Press, 2004.

42. Filipinos Everywhere. Quezon City: IBON, 2006,

43. In the Wake of Terror: Class, Race, Nation, Ethnicity in the PostModern World. Maryland: Lexington Books, 2007.

44. U.S. Imperialism and Revolution in the Philippines. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.

45. BALIKBAYANG MAHAL: Passages from Exile. North Carolina: LuLu.com, 2007.

45. BALIKBAYANG SINTA: An E. San Juan Reader. Quezon City, Philippines: Ateneo de Manila Universiyy Press, 2008.

City: University of the Philippines Press, 2008.

47. Toward Filipino Self-Determination. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2009.

48. Critique and Social Transformation: Learning from Gramsci, Bakhtin and Williams. New York: The Edwin Mellen Press, 2009.

49. Critical Interventions: From Joyce and Ibsen to Peirce and Kingston. Saarbrucken, Germany: Lambert Acadermic Publishing Co., 2010.

50. Between Empire and Insurgency: The Philippines in the New Millennium. Quezon City: University of the Philippines Press, 2014.

51. Sisa’s Vengeance: Rizal / Women / Revolution. CT: Philippines Cultural Studies Center, 2011.

52. Lupang Hinirang, Lupang Tinubuan: Mga Sanaysay sa Kritika, Kasaysayan, at Politikang Pangkultura.Manila: De La Salle University Publishing House, 2015.

53. Learning from the Filipino Diaspora. Manila: University of Santo Tomas Publishing House, 2016.

54. Filipinas Everywhere. Manila: De La Salle University Publishing House, 2016.
ARTICLES (Selected, excluding creative writing)

1. “Vision and Reality: A Reconsideration of Sherwood Anderson’s Winesburg, Ohio,” American Literature, XXXV (May 1963), 137-155; reprinted in Winesburg, Ohio, ed. John Ferres (New York: Viking, 1967).

2. “Matthew Arnold and the Poetics of Belief: Some Implications of Literature and Dogma,” The Harvard Theological Review, 57 (April 1964), 97-118.

3. “Material versus Totality of Literary Devices,” Discourse, VII (Summer 1964), 295-302.

4. “James’s The Ambassadors: The Trajectory of the Climax,” The Midwest Quarterly, V (July 1964), 293-310.

5. “William James as Prose Writer,” The Centennial Review, VIII (Summer 1964), 323-336.

6. “Toward a Definition of Victorian Activism,” Studies in English Literature, IV (Autumn 1964), 583-600; Reprinted in Victorian Literature: Recent Revaluations, ed. S. Kumar. New York: New York UP, 1968.

7. “The Question of Values in Victorian Activism,” The Personalist, XLV (Winter 1964), 41-59.

8. “The Actual and the Ideal in Dr. Johnson’s Dictionary,” University of Toronto Quarterly, XXXIV (Jan. 1965), 146-158. Included in Critical Perspectives, Volume V, edited by Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea Books, 1987.

9. “What is Balagtas’ ‘To Celia’ All About? An Experiment in Interpretation,” University College Journal, VII (1964-65), 48-63.

10. “Gosse and Gibbon: Two Witnesses of Interior Reality,” Discourse, VII (Autumn 1964), 399-403.

11. “The Significance of Andre Gide’s Oedipus,” Modern Drama, VII (Feb. 1965), 422-430; reprinted in Oedipus: Myth and Dramatic Form, ed. J. Sanderson and E. Zimmerman. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1968.

12. “Samuel Johnson as Lyric Poet,” The Diliman Review, XIII (Jan. 1965), 55-65.

13. “Proud: Anatomy of a Complex Word,” Philippine Social Science and Humanities Review, XXX (March 1965), 183-193.

14. “Ben Jonson’s Bartholomew Fair and the Renaissance Crisis,” The Diliman Review, XIII (April 1965), 183-193.

15. “Spatial Orientation in American Romanticism,” The East-West Review, II (Spring-Summer 1965), 33-55.

16. “The Anti-Poetry of Jonathan Swift,” The Philological Quarterly, XLIV (July 1965), 387-396. Reprinted in David Vieth, ed. Essential Articles for the Study of Jonathan Swift’s Poetry. CT: Archon Books, 1985, 21-32.

17. “Social Consciousness and Revolt in Modern Philippine Poetry,” Books Abroad (Autumn 1965), 394-399.

18. “Pattern and Significance in Two Plays of Andre Gide,” Discourse, VIII (Autumn 1965), 350-369.

19. “The World of Abadilla,” Introduction to Alejandro G. Abadilla, Mga Piling Tula [Collected Poems]. Manila: Panitikan, 1965, 1-14.

20. “The Idea of Andre Gide’s Theater,” American Educational Theatre Journal, XVII (October 1965), 220-224.

21. “Integrity of Composition in the Poems of Hemingway,” The University Review (Fall 1965), 51-58.

22. “The Natural Context of Spiritual Renewal in Milton’s Samson Agonistes,” Ball State University Forum, VI (Autumn 1965), 55-59.

23. “Cultural Resurgence in Philippine Literature: In Tagalog,” Literature East and West (Winter 1965), 16-26.

24. “Wordsworth and Political Commitment,” The Dalhousie Review, 45 (November 1965), 299-306.

25. “Keats’s ‘Ode to a Nightingale,'” Saint Louis University Quarterly, III (September 1965), 343-362.

26. “Explication of Emerson’s ‘Each and All,'” Emerson Society Quarterly: A Journal of the American Renaissance, 43 (2nd Quarter, 1966), 106-109.

27. “Similarity and Contiguity in Some Poems of Gongora,” Kentucky Foreign Language Quarterly, XLIII (First Quarter 1966), 43-50. Winner of the Susan B. Anthony Prize for Comparative Literature, Harvard University, May 1964.

28. “Tradition and Individuality in the Poems of Andrew Marvell,” Centro Escolar University Faculty and Graduate Journal (First Semester, 1966-67), 1-20.

29. “Symbolic Significance in the Poems of Emerson,” Saint Louis Quarterly, IV (March 1966), 37-54.

30. “Translation and Philippine Poetics,” The East-West Review, II (Spring-Summer 1966), 279-290.

31. “Panitikan: A Critical Introduction to Tagalog Literature,” Asian Studies, IV (December 1966), 412-429.

32. “The Structure of Narrative Fiction,” Saint Louis Quarterly, IV (December 1966), 485-502.

33. “The Form of Experience in Literature,” University of the East College Journal (First Semester 1966), 103-117.

34. “Orientations of Max Weber’s Concept of Charisma,” The Centennial Review, XI (Spring 1967), 270-285.

35. “Coleridge’s ‘The Eolian Harp’ as Lyric Paradigm,” The Personalist, XLVIII (January 1967), 77-88.

36. “Criticism as Elucidation,” The Scholar [Centro Escolar University, Manila] (Feb.-March 1967), 23-25, 27.

37. “The Form of Experience in Edgar Allan Poe’s Poetry,” Georgia Review (Spring 1967), 65-80.

38. “Ruskin and Exuberance/Control in Literature,” Orbis Litterarum, XXIII (December 1968), 257-264.

39. “Scientific Objectivity and Style: Notes on the Prose of Darwin and Faraday,” The Researcher 1 (May 1968), 87-92.

40. “Notes Toward a Clarification of Organizing Principles and Genre Theory,” Genre, I (October 1968), 257-268.

41. “Antaeus: Reality and the American Imagination,” Exchange: USIS Philippines, 40 (1968), 1-10.

42. “On the Motif of Incongruence in Samson Agonistes,” Orbis Litterarum, XXIII (October 1968), 221-224.

43. “Style and World Outlook in Pilipino Poetics,” The Researcher, I,3 (November 1968), 271-282.

44. “Rizal: Existence and the Dialectic of Reason,” The Researcher, I (Feb. 1969), 403-424; reprint of “Rizal and the Human Condition: Some Preliminary Notes,” University College Journal, VII (1964-65), 135-154.

45. “‘Eveline’: Joyce’s Affirmation of Ireland,” Eire-Ireland, IV (Winter 1969), 46-52.

46. “Joyce’s ‘The Boarding House’: The Plot of Character,” The University Review, XXXV (March 1969), 229-236.

47. “Transformations of the Feminine Psyche in Vanity Fair,” The Researcher, II (1969), 293-312.

48. “From Contingency to Probability: Joyce’s ‘A Painful Case,'” Research Studies, 37 (June 1969), 139-144.

49. “Epilogue” to Amado V. Hernandez, Mga Ibong Mandaragit [Birds of Prey]. Quezon City: Graphics, 1969.

50. “Carlos Bulosan: The Poetics and the Necessity of Revolution,” The Researcher, II (August 1969), 113-125.

51. “The Form and Meaning of T. S. Eliot’s ‘Gerontion,'” Renascence, XXII (Winter 1970), 115-126.

52. “Prolegomena to Philippine Poetics,” Comparative Literature Studies, VII (Summer 1970), 179-194.

53. “Introduction” to La Loba Negra. Quezon City: Malaya, 1970, vi-xxx.

54. “Theme Versus Imitation: D.H. Lawrence’s ‘The Rocking-Horse Winner,'” The D.H.Lawrence Review, III (Summer 1970), 136-140, included in Thomas L. Erskine and Gerald R. Barrett, eds., From Fiction to Film: D.H. Lawrence’s The Rocking Horse Winner (Encino, California, 1974).

55. “Form and Meaning in Joyce’s ‘Ivy Day in the Committee Room,'” Archiv fur das Studium der Neueren Sprachen und Literaturen, 207 (1970), 185-91.

56. “Reflections on The Hounds of the Baskervilles,” The Baker Street Journal, XX (September 1970), 137-139.

57. “Method and Meaning in Joyce’s ‘The Sisters,'” Die Neueren Sprachen, IV (Winter 1971), 490-496.

58. “The Problem of Continuity in Literary Form,” Southeast Asian Quarterly, V, 3-4 (1971), 25-28.

59. “Yeats’s ‘Sailing to Byzantium’ and the Limits of Modern Literary Criticism,” Revue des Langues Vivantes, XXXVIII (1972), 492-507. Included in Twentieth Century Literary Criticism, Vol. 116, ed. Linda Pavlovski (Thompsonville, MI: Gale Group, 2002).

60. “Reactionary Ideology in Philippine Culture,”Journal of Contemporary Asia, 3.4 (Winter 1973), 414-426.

61. “Marxism and the Poetics of Georg Lukacs,” Queens Quarterly, LXXX (Winter 1973), 547-555.

62. “The Process of Self-Knowledge in William Wordsworth’s ‘Ode: Intimations of Immortality,” Revue des Langues Vivantes, XLI (1975), 60-67. Reprint of “Wordsworth’s Immortality Ode and the Dialectic of the Imagination,’ The Researcher, III, 1 (Jan.-March 1971), 25-34.

63. “The Artist in the Philippine National Democratic Revolution,” Third World Forum (May-June 1975), 3-18; another version in “Art, Literature and Revolution in the Philippines,” The Palestine Review (Jan.-Feb. 1981), 6-10.

64. “Art Against Imperialism” in The Weapons of Criticism, ed. Norman Rudich (Palo Alto: Ramparts, 1975), 147-160. Reprinted from Journal of Contemporary Asia, 4.3 (1974), 297 -307. Shorter versions in: Praxis 1 (Spring 1975) and Arts in Society, XII (Summer-Fall 1975), 222-225.

65. “In the Belly of the Monster: The Filipino Revolt in the U.S.,” Praxis 3 (Winter/Spring 1976-77), 60-66.

66. “Introduction” to The Philippines is in the Heart: Selected Stories by Carlos Bulosan. Edited by E. San Juan. Quezon City: New Day Press, 1978, vi-x.

67. “Literature and Revolution in the Third World,” Social Praxis (Toronto/The Hague), VI (1979), 19-34.

68. “Red Star Over Kansas?” Main Trend (Winter 1979), 22-23.

69. “Introduction” [Special issue: Writings of Carlos Bulosan. Edited by E. San Juan], AmerAsia Journal (May 1979), 3-29.

70. “Blueprint for Disaster,” Science for the People (Jan.-Feb., 1980), 23-26. Reprinted in Alternative Papers, ed. Elliott Shore, Pat Case and Laura Daly. Philadelphia: Temple UP, 1982.

71. “For Whom Are We Writing?” in Two Perspectives on Philippine Literature and Society. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Center for Philippine Studies, 1981.

72. “Out of the Heart of Darkness, An Explosion: On the Kenyan Novelist Ngugi’s Petals of Blood,” Theoretical Review (Sept.-October 1981), 31-33.

73. “From Intramuros to the Liberated City: Salvaging the Aesthetics of the Polis,” Philippine Social Sciences and Humanities Review, XLVI, 3-4 (July-Dec. 1982), 249-274. Revised versions in: “The Poetics of the Metropolis in Philippine Literature,” Jadavpur Journal of Comparative Literature (1984), 34-58; “Encircle the Cities by the Countryside: The City in Philippine Writing,” Journal of South Asian Literature 25.1 (Winter/Spring 1990): 189-213.

74. “Amiri Baraka, Revolutionary Playwright,” Amiri Baraka: The Kaleidoscopic Torch, ed. James Gwynne (New York: 1985), 151-156.

75. “Overthrowing U.S. Hegemony: Dialectics of U.S.-Philippines Literary Relations,” Minnesota Review (Spring 1986), 61-82.

76. “Toward a Verdict on Nick Joaquin,” The New Progressive Review (Dec.1985-Jan.1986), 13-20.

77. “Pacifying the Boondocks: U.S. Cultural Imperialism in the Philippines,” Diliman Review (1987), 35-46, translated into German: “Die Befriedung der ‘boondocks’: US Kulturimperialismus auf den Philippinen,” Peripherie, 29 (Jan. 1988), 24-44.

78. “Textual Production in D.H. Lawrence’s ‘The Horse Dealer’s Daughter,'” De La Salle University Graduate Journal, XXII, 2 (1987), 223-230.

79. “Nature, History and the Organizing Principle of Wuthering Heights,” De La Salle Graduate Journal, XIII, 1 (1988), 67-82.

80. “Reflections on Philippines-U.S. Literary Relations,” Ang Makatao [Asian Institute, Manila] VII, 1 (Jan.-June 1988), 43-54.

81. “Ideology, Text, History: A Contextual Interpretation and Critique of Fiction by Filipino Writers,” Kultura, I (1988), 7-17.

82. “Towards A Poetics of National Liberation: Reflections of A Third World Cultural Activist,” Left Curve, 13 (1988-89), 61-66.

83. “Die Gewehre der Frau Carrar: Brecht’s Exemplum for the Third World?” Communications [International Brecht Society], 18 (1989), 27-33.

84. “Approaching Third World Cultural Revolution: The Philippine Conjuncture,” Solidaridad II (July-Dec. 1988), 55-58.

85. “Strategies of Reading: Sexual Politics in Aida Rivera-Ford’s ‘Love in the Cornhusks’,” Southeast Asia Journal 17 (1988-89), 15-24.

86. “Preface to the Nick Joaquin Project,” Southeast Asia Journal 17.2 (1988-89): 8-14.

87. “Ideology, Form, Desire: Toward a New Marxist Perspective on Hemingway’s For Whom the Bell Tolls,” Left Curve 14 (1990), 75-77.

88. “Western Sociological Literary Theory: An Introduction,” Philippine Sociological Review 35:3-4 (July-December 1987), 42-54.

89. “Problems in the Marxist Project of Theorizing Race.” Rethinking Marxism 2:2 (Summer 1989), 58-80.

90. “The Devil’s Advocate Prophesies the Advent of Deconstruction,” Diliman Review 37.3 (1989), 8-10. Reprinted as “The Power of Writing and the Question of Truth,” Southeast Asia Journal 18.2 (1989-90), 11-16.

91. “Race and Literary Theory: From Difference to Contradiction,” Proteus 7:1 (Spring 1990), 32-36; also in Southeast Asia Journal 18.1 (1989-90): 2-9.

92. “From Class to People and Nation: On the December Coup, Hegemonic Crisis, and the Strategy for National Liberation,” Diliman Review 37.4 (1989): 1-10; also in Midweek (31 January 1990): 13-19.

93. “Images of the Filipino in the United States.” Prisoners of Image: Ethnic and Gender Stereotypes. New York City: Alternative Museum, 1989.

94. “Farewell, You whose homeland is forever arriving as I embark,” Kultura 3:1 (August 1990), 34-41.

95. “Literature and Nationalism,” Tenggara 27 (1990): 50-59.

96. “From Lukacs to Brecht and Gramsci: The Moment of Practice in Critical Theory,” Nature, Society, and Thought 4.1/2 (January-April 1991): 81-102; an early version is “The Politics of Aesthetics: Praxis in Marxist Critical Theory,” Praxis 2:2 (June 1988): 64-83.

97. “The Sexual Fix in Rizal’s “Memorias de Un Estudiante de Manila por P. Jacinto,” The DLSU Graduate Journal, 15:1 (1990): 85-95.

98. “Articulating the Filipino Otherness: Reflections on Philippine-U.S. Literary Relations,” Philippine-American Journal 1:4 (Summer-Fall 1990): 6-10.

99. “The Political Economy of the Psyche in the Text of Stevan Javellana’s Without Seeing the Dawn (1947),” Kinaalam 3.1 (1989-90): 1-9.

100. “History, Textuality, Revolution: Sergio Ramirez’s To Bury Our Fathers,” Likha 11.2 (1989-90): 48-62.

101. “From Bakhtin to Gramsci: Intertextuality, Praxis, Hegemony,” New Orleans Review (Spring 1991): 75-85.

102. “Mapping the Boundaries: The Filipino Writer in the U.S.A.,” The Journal of Ethnic Studies 19:1 (Spring 1991): 117-31.

103. “The Cult of Ethnicity and the Fetish of Pluralism: A Counterhegemonic Critique,” Cultural Critique 18 (Spring 1991): 215-229; another version appeared as “Race, Ethnicity and Literary Culture in the United States,” Philippine American Studies Journal III (1991): 21-35.

104. “Symbolisierung des Widerstands auf den Philippinen,” Das Argument [Berlin], No. 187 (1991): 409-420. Also in Philippine Resource Center Monitor 9 (November 1990): 1, 3-5, 8, 11-12; another version in Chapter III of From People to Nation (see #25, book list).

105. “To Read What Was Never Written: From Deconstruction to the Poetics of Redemption,” Orbis Litterarum 46 (Fall 1991): 205-221. A revised version: “Criticism, Language, Hermeneutics,” Revue de litterature comparee 4 (Oct-Dec. 1991): 397-408.

106. “Beyond Identity Politics: The Predicament of the Asian American Writer in Late Capitalism,” American Literary History 3.3 (Fall 1991): 542-565.

107. “Theorizing Anti-Racist Struggle,” Against the Current, 6.4 (September-October 1991): 27-33.

108. “Cultural Pluralism versus Hegemony: Ethnic Studies in the Twenty First Century,” The Massachusetts Review, 32.3 (Fall 1991): 467-78. A shortened version is “Racism, Ideology, Resistance,” Forward Motion 10.3 (September 1991): 35-42.

109. “Post-Colonial Syncretism versus Art of National Liberation,” ARIEL 22.4 (October 1991): 69-88.

110. “Who’s Afraid of Mikhail Bakhtin?” The Arkansas Quarterly 1.4 (October 1992): 344-48.

111. “Semiotics and Fiction,” U.P. Visayas Journal 1.1 (August 1992): 67-75.

112. “Ideological Form, Symbolic Exchange, Textual Production: A Symptomatic Reading of Hemingway’s For Whom the Bell Tolls,” North Dakota Quarterly (Spring 1992): 119-143.

113. “From Development to Liberation–The Third World in the ‘New World Order.'” In Kenneth Bauzon, ed., Development and Democratization in the Third World. Washington DC: Crane Russak, 1992. 297-310.

114. “Documenting the Struggle for Democratic Culture,” Works and Days 20 (Fall 1992): 119-124; also in The St. Louis Journalism Review (March 1993), 15.

115. “Symbolizing the Asian Diaspora in the United States: A Return to the Primal Scene of Deracination.” Border/Lines 24/25 (1992): 23-29. Revised version: “Migration, Ethnicity, Racism: Narrative Strategies in Asian American Writing,” Migration Themes (1979), 189-216.

116. “Toward Marx and Beyond,” Polygraph 6/7 (Winter 1993), 72-86.

117. “In Search of Filipino Writing: Reclaiming Whose America?” in The Ethnic Canon. Ed. David Palumbo-Liu. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1994. A shortened version found in Philippine Studies 41 (1993): 141-66. Reprinted in Asian American Studies: A Reader edited by Jean Yu-wen Shen Wu and Min Song (Rutgers University Press, 2000), 443-466.

118. “Reconstituting the “American Nation”: The Politics of Racism and Nationalism in the United States,” Nature, Society and Thought, 5.4 (Spring 1993): 307-19.

119. “Can’t We Get Along? The Politics of Racial Difference in an Age of Hegemonic Pluralism,” The Arkansas Quarterly 2.3 (July 1993): 168-176.

120. “The Resistance to Postcolonial Transnationalism: Allegorizing Nation/People in Philippine Writing,” Parenthesis 1.2 (Fall 1993): 25-32; also in The Discourse of Vision: The Meeting Point of Popular Culture and Art. Ed. Tsuneo Kenachi, Shoichi Maeda, and Yuichi Midzunoe. Tokyo, 1994. 43-61.
Revised versions appeared as: “From Postcolonial to Alter/native National Allegory: Dialectics of Nation/People and World System in Philippine Writing, Journal of English Studies 1.2 (December 1993): 28-42; “Von der postkolonialen zur alter/nativen nationalen Allegorie,” Weg und Ziel 5 (November 1993): 52-58; and in Nationalism vs. Internationalism. Eds. Wolfgang Zach and Ken L. Goodwin, eds. Stauffenburg, Germany: Stauffenburg Verlag, 1996, pp. 569-577.

121. “The Predicament of Filipinos in the United States,” The State of Asian America. Ed. Karin A. San Juan. Boston: South End Press, 1994. 205-18. A shorter version: “Filipinos in the United States at the Threshold of the Twenty-first Century,” Heritage 6.3 (September 1992): 6-8; 6.4 (December 1992): 6-8.

122. “Producing the Text: A Symptomatic Reading of D. H. Lawrence’s ‘Odour of Chrysanthemums,'” The Arkansas Review 3.1 (May 1994): 47-62.

123. “Problematizing Multiculturalism and the ‘Common Culture,’ MELUS 19.2 (Summer 1994): 59-84.

124. “Configuring the Filipino Diaspora in the United States,” Diaspora 3.2 (Fall 1994): 117-133. Reprinted in Race and Ethnic Relations 96/97. Ed. John A. Kromkowski. 5th edition. Guilford, Ct: Dushkin Publishing Group, 1996, pp. 139-145.

125. “Hugh MacDiarmid: Sketch of a Materialist Poetics,” Nature, Society, and Thought 6.4 (October 1993; issued 1995): 411-36.

126. “Bulosan: Writing for World Revolution, for People’s Liberation, ” Diliman Review 41, 3-4 (1993): 9-13. Another version appeared as: “Carlos Bulosan” in The American Radical . Ed. Mari Jo Buhle, Paul Buhle, and Harvey Kaye. New York: Routledge, 1994, pp. 253-260.

127. “James Baldwin’s Allegory of Black Self-Determination,” The Discourse of Multiplicity. Ed. Tsuneo Kunachi, Shoichi Maeda, and Yuichi Midzunoe. Tokyo, Japan: Taga-shuppan, 1995., pp. 5-35.

128. “From the ‘Boondocks’ to the ‘Belly of the Beast’: What We Can Learn from the Life-History of a Filipino Worker-Intellectual,” Mediations 19.1 (Spring 1995): 76-91.

129. “On the Limits of Postcolonial Theory: Trespassing Letters from the Third World,” ARIEL (August 1995): 89-115. Translated into German by Joachim Eggers: “Uber die Grenzen ‘postkolonialer’ Theorie: Kassiber aus der ‘Dritten Welte,’ ” Das Argument 215 (1996): 361-372.

130 “From National Allegory to the Performance of the Joyful Subject: Reconstituting Philip Vera Cruz’s Life,” Amerasia Journal 21.3 (1995-1996): 137-54.

131. “Postcolonial Theory Versus Philippine Reality: Regrounding the Diasporic Psyche in History and Praxis.” Working Papers in Asian/Pacific Studies . Durham, North Carolina: Duke University, Asian Pacific Studies Institute, 1996. Another version appeared as: “Postcolonial Theory and Philippine Reality: The Challenge of a Third World Culture to Global Capitalism,” Left Curve 20 (1996): 87-102.

132. “Articulations of Sexuality, Race, and Nationalism in Contemporary United States.” In Nationalism and Sexuality: Crises of Identity. Ed. Yiorgos Kalogeras and Domna Pastourmatzi. Thessaloniki, Greece: Hellenic Association of American Studies, 1996, pp. 199-214. French translation: “Articulations entre sexualite et nationalisme aux Etats-Unis,” L’Homme et la Societe (Paris: Editions L’Harmattan, 1996): 67-83.

133. “Foreword,” Inside Ethnic America: An Ethnic Studies Reader. Ed. R. Perry and L. Eason. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt, 1996.

134. Selections in Returning a Borrowed Tongue. Ed. Nick Carbo. Minneapolis: Coffee House Press, 1995.

135. “Beyond Postcolonial Theory: The Mass Line in C.L.R. James’s Imagination,” The Journal of Commonwealth Literature (August 1996): 25-44.

136. “The Revolutionary Aesthetics of Friedrich Engels,” Nature, Society and Thought 8.4 (1995): 405-32.
German translation: “Was wir aus Engels’ revolutionarer Asthetik lernen konnen,” Zwischen Utopia und Kritik, edited by Theodor Bergmann et al (Hamburg: Verlag Hamburg, 1996): 68-94.

137. “Against Post-Colonial Theory: The Challenge of the Philippine Revolution,” Diliman Review 43: 3/4 (1995): 55-67.

138. “Rizal’s Novels: Ideology, Class Consciousness, History,” Diliman Review 44.2 (1996): 10-22.

139. “The Challenge of U.S. Asians in the Year 2000,” Philippine News (Jan. 22-28, 1997: B1; (Jan. 29-Feb. 1997): B1. Shortened version in: Asian Week (Jan. 3-9): 7.

140. “Asian American Literary Studies and Its Discontents: From the ‘Melting Pot” into the Fires of Los Angeles,” Left Curve 21 (1997): 98-107. A revised version appeared as “Commodity Fetishism and the Value Forms of Ethnic Discourse,” Tenggara 39 (1997): 109-126. A Chinese version appeared in Taipeh, Taiwan, translated by Pei-chen Wu: “Ya Yi Mei Guo Ren Zai Mei Guo Kung Jian Li Hsun Zhao Wei Chih,” Con-Temporary Monthly January 2001): 122-133.

141. “Culture Wars: Truces, Stalemates, Negotiations,” CEA Critic 59.3 (Spring-Summer 1997): 1-18.

142. “Antonio Gramsci on Surrealism and the Avantgarde” (in German), Weg und Ziel [Vienna, Austria] 2 (1997): 4-10.

143. “Bakhtin and Philippine Writing in English.” World Literature Today 71.3 (Summer 1997): 541-44.

144. “Fragments from a Filipino Exile’s Journal,” Amerasia Journal 23.2 (1997): 1-25.

“Toward a Critique of Orthodox Ethnic Studies” Explorations in Ethnic Studies 18.2
(July 1995): 131-144.

146. “Ethnicity” (entry for Volume 2, Historisch-Kritisches Worterbuch des Marxismus, edited by Wolfgang Fritz Haug published by Argument, Berlin and Hamburg, Germany, 1997): 915-925.

147. “Narrativizing U.S.-Philippines ‘Postcolonial’ Relations: Gender, Identity Politics, Nation in the Novels of Jessica Hagedorn,” Gramma 5 (1997): 165-182. Shorter version: “In Pursuit of The Gangster of Love,” Philippine Studies 46 (First Quarter 1998): 111-121. Revised version: “Transforming Identity in Postcolonial Narrative: An Approach to the Novels of Jessica Hagedorn,” PostIdentity 1.2 (Summer 1998): 5-28.

148. “Migration, Ethnicity, Racism: Narrative Strategies in Asian American Writing,” Migration Themes/Migracijske teme [Zagreb, Croatia] 13 (1997): 189-216.

149. “Dialectics and History: Power, Knowledge, Agency in Rizal’s Discourses,” Diliman Review, 45.2-3 (1997): 60-75.

150. “Raymond Williams on Cultural Revolution,” Left Curve No. 22 (1998): 88-98. Reprinted as: “Raymond Williams and the Radical Project of Cultural Studies,” Danyag 1.2 (December 1996): 118-137.

151. “One Hundred Years of Producing and Reproducing the ‘Filipino,’ Amerasia Journal 24.2 (Summer 1998): 1-34.

152. “Kidlat Tahimik: Cinema of the ‘Naïve’ Subaltern in the Shadow of Global Capitalism,” Communal/Plural: Journal of Transnational and Crosscultural Studies 6.2 (October 1998): 171-187. A revised version appeared in Geopolitics of the Visible edited by Roland Tolentino (Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 2001).

153. “The Discourse of Edward Said,” Against the Current 77 (November-December 1998): 28-32.

154. “Gramsci, Cesaire, Benjamin: Tracking Surrealism Across Multi-Critical Boundaries,” Compar(a)ison II (1997; appeared Dec. 1998): 129-156.

155. “Filipinos.” In Encyclopedia of the American Left. Ed. Mari Jo Buhle, Paul Buhle, and Dan Georgakas. 2nd edition. New York: Oxford University Press. 224-226.

156. “Interview with Joon Park: E. San Juan Lives Dangerously through ‘Commitment,’ “ The Asian Pacific American Journal 7.1 (Spring-Summer 1998): 100-109.

157. “The Symbolic Economy of Gender, Class and Nationality in Filipina Migrant Workers’ Narratives,” Lila: Asia-Pacific Women’s Studies Journal 7 (1998): 20-41.

158. “Multiculturalism or Emancipation,” Against the Current 78 (January-February 1999): 22-25. Revised version: “The Question of Race in the 21st Century,” Dialogue and Initiative (Spring 1999): 31-34.

159. “The Multiculturalist Problematic in the Age of Globalized Capitalism,” Left Curve 23 (1999): 60-64. A longer and revised version appeared in Discourse on Multilingual Cultures, ed. Yuichi Midzunoe (Tokyo, Japan: Taga Shuppan, 1999): 557-578.

160. “From the Immigrant Paradigm to the Praxis of Transformative Critique” in Race, Ethnicity, and Nationality in the United States: Toward the Twenty-first Century, edited by Paul Wong (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1999): 34-54.

161. “Fanon: An Intervention into Cultural Studies,” FranFanon: Critical Perspectives, ed. Anthony Alessandri (New York: Routledge, 1999): 126-145.

162. “Raymond Williams and Idea of Cultural Revolution,” College Literature 26.2 (Spring 1999): 118-136.

163. “Who speaks now? For whom? For what purpose?” The Asian Reporter 9.18 (May 4-10, 1999): 6. Reprinted in Panay News xxix, 100 (July 11, 1999): 4, 11.

164. “De-Centering Ethnicity: The Situation of Asian Americans in Contemporary Global Capitalism,” Gramma 6 (1998): 135-150.

165. “Postcolonialism and Uneven Development,” Danyag 3.1 (June 1998): 57-68.

166. “The Limits of Postcolonial Theory and the Cultural Politics of Raymond Williams,” Mediations (Spring 1999): 30-36.

167. “Reflections on Philippine Society and Culture at the End of the Century,” Pacific Enterprise 2, 1 (Winter 1999): 14-15, 23-25, 32. Reprinted in: Diliman Review 46.3-4 (1998): 84-90; and in Philippine Graphic (July 12, 1999): 28-31.

168. “The Question of Race in the 21st Century,” Dialogue and Initiative (Spring 1999): 31-34.

169. “Thinking Beyond Postcolonialism: An Interview with Epifanio San Juan, Jr.” by Ping-hui Liao,” Tamkang Review xxix.4 (Summer 1999): 139-147. Translated into Chinese by Shu-hui tsai, “Chao yue hou zhi min lun shu de si wei: fang wen Epifanio San Juan, Jr.,” Con-temporary Monthly 12.1 (1999): 88-95.

170. “The Filipino Diaspora and the Centenary of the Philippine Revolution,” in Journey of 100 Years. Ed. Cecilia Manguerra Brainard and Edmundo Litton (Santa Monica, CA: Philippine American Women Writers and Artists, 1999): 135-158.

171. “Menchu/Silko Interrogates Postmodernism,” Pretexts 8.1 (July 1999): 51-58.

172. “Bakhtin: Uttering the ‘(Into)Nation’ of the Nation/People,” Bakhtin and the Nation edited by Donald Wesling et al (Lewisburg, PA: Bucknell University Press, 2000): 118-133.

173. “Establishment Postcolonialism and Its Alter/Native Others,” in Dislocating Postcoloniality: Essays on American Culture edited by C. Richard King (Urbana & Chicago: University of Illinois Press 2000): 171-200. An Italian translation is “Postcolonialismo e sviluppo ineguale,” Marxismo oggi XII. 3 (Settembre-Diciembre, 1999): 35-46.

174. “From Chinatown to Gunga Din Highway,” Left Curve No. 24 (Spring 2000): 58-68.

175. “The Multiculturalist Problematic in the Age of Globalized Capitalism,” Social Justice 27.1 (Spring 2000): 61-75.

176. “The Limits of Ethnicity and the Horizon of Historical Materialism” in Asian American Studies edited by Esther Ghymn (New York: Peter Lang, 2000): 9-34. A revised version has been translated into Chinese by Lisa Wu, National Tsing Hua University, under the title: “Ya yi mei guo ren zai mei guo kung jian li hsun zhao wei chih,” Chung-Wai Literary Monthly (Taiwan: 2000).

177. “The Limits of Contemporary Cultural Studies,”Connecticut Review xxii.2 (Fall 2000): 35-45. Reprinted in The Lyceum Review [Manila, Philippines] Millenium Series, No. 1 (2000): 33-38.

178. “Postcolonialism y desarollo desigual,” Casa de las Americas 219 (April-June 2000), 26-34. Italian version (see #172)

179. “Reconfiguring the History of Filipinos in the United States,” BLU Magazine 8: 55. Other versions appeared in The Asian Reporter (October 2000) and in Filipino American Bulletin (Jan-Feb. 2000).

180. “Aime Cesaire’s Poetics of Fugitive Intervention,” Third Text 53 (Winter 2000-01), 3-18. German translation: “Aime Cesaire Poetik des Augstands,” Das Argument 252 (2003), 668-682. A revised version appeared as “Aime Cesaire and Surrealism,” Working Papers Series on Historical Systems, Peoples, and Cultures (Bowling Green State University, Ohio); and in a longer version as “Surrealism and Revolution,” a special issue of Working Papers in Cultural Studies (Pullman, WA: Washington State University, Department of Comparative American Cultures, 2000). French translation by Alice Boheme, in the WEB page on surrealism sponsored by Prof. Henri Behar of the Sorbonne <http://www.cavi.univ-paris3.fr/Rech_sur&gt;

181. “Trajectories of the Filipino Diaspora,” Ethnic Studies Report xviii.2 (July 2000), 229-244. A revised version appeared as “The Filipino Diaspora,” Philippine Studies 49 (Second Quarter 2001), 255-264. A
shorter version appeared as “Filipinizing Diasporic Re/turns,” DisOrient 9 (2001), 45-55.

182. “Cultural Studies—A Reformist or Revolutionary Force for Social Change?” Tamkang Review 31.2 (Winter 2000): 1-29. A revised version appeared in the on-line journal Kritika Kultura 1.1 (February 2002) sponsored by the English Department, Ateneo University <http://www.ateneo.edu/dpts/english/kk&gt;

183. “Toward Cultural Revolution: A Critique of Contemporary Cultural Studies,” Special issue of Working Papers in Cultural Studies (Washington State University, Pullman, WA: Department of Comparative American Cultures, 2001). Partial translation into French: “Politique des Cultural Studies contemporaines,” L’Homme et la Societe, 149 (2003), 105-124. See also, for another version, “From Birmingham to Angkor Watt: Demarcations of Cultural Studies,” the WEB page of Kritika Kultura <www.ateneo.edu/kritika kultura>

184. “Diyalektika at Materyalismong Pangkasaysayan sa Diskurso ni Rizal,” Malay [Manila, Philippines] xvi.1 (Agosto 2001): 1-18.

185. “Interrogating the Postcolonial Alibi: A Testimony from the Filipino Diaspora,” New Literatures Review 37 (Summer 2000): 85-112.

186. “From Chinatown to Gunga Din Highway,” Ethnic Studies Review 24.1-3 (2001): 1-28. A shorter version appeared as “From Fantasy to Strategy: Frank Chin’s Cultural Revolution,” Tamkang Review 31.3 (Spring 2001): 1-14.

187. “Culture and Freedom in People’s Liberation Struggles,” Dialogue and Initiative (Fall-Winter 2001): 21-24.

188. “Symbolic Violence and the Fetishism of the Sublime: a metacommentary on David Hwang’s M. Butterfly,” Journal of Intercultural Studies 23.1 (2002): 33-46.

189. “Post-Colonialism and the Question of Nation-State Violence,” Denver University Law Review 78.4 (2001): 887-905. A revised version is: “Nationalism, the Postcolonial State and Violence,” Left Curve 26 (2002): 36-44. Reprinted as “Postcolonialism and the Question of Nation-State Violence in the Age of Late Capitalism,” Lyceum Review [Manila, Philippines], Millennium Series, No. 2 (2001): 16-32.

190. “Cultural Studies Amongs the Sharks: The Struggle Over Hawaii,” Third Text 16.1 (2002): 71-78.

191. “Interrogating Transmigrancy, Remapping Diaspora: The Globalization of Laboring Filipinos/as,” Discourse 23.3 (Fall 2001): 52-74. A revised version appeared as “Postcolonial Discourse, Diasporic Critique: Filipina Migrant Narratives in the Shadow of Globalization,” Journal of Asian-Pacific Affairs 4.1 (2002): 19-48. Reprinted as “Interrogating Transnationalism: The Case of the Filipino Diaspora in the Age of Globalized Capitalism,” Diliman Review 51.1-2 (2003), 5-22.

192. “Postcolonialism and the Problematic of Uneven Development” in Marxism, Modernity and Postcolonial Studies, ed. Crystal Bartolovich and Neil Lazarus (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2002): 221-239.

193. “The Poverty of Postcolonialism,” Pretexts (Summer 2002): 57-74.

194. “Nation-State, Postcolonial Thought, and Global Violence,” Social Analysis 46.2 (Summer 2002), 11-32.

195. “Antonio Gramsci on Surrealism and the Avant-garde,” The Journal of Aesthetic Education 37.2 (Summer 2003), 31-45.

196. “Spinoza and the War of Racial Terrorism, Left Curve, No. 27, 62-72.

197. “Fundamentals of Cultural Studies: Extrapolations from Selected Texts of Raymond Williams,” Keywords: A Journal of Cultural Materialism 4 (2003), 78-93.

198. “The Imperialist War on Terrorism and the Responsibility of Cultural Studies,” Arena Journal 20 (2002-2003), 45-56. A revised version: “U.S. Imperial Terror, cultural studies, and the national liberation struggle in the Philippines,” Inter-Asia Cultural Studies 4-3 (2003), 516-523. Reprined in Diliman Review 50.4 (2003), 39-46. A shorter version: “U.S. War on Terrorism and the Filipino Struggle for National Liberation,” Dialogue and Initiative (Fall 2003), 2-6. An expanded version appeared as: “Imperialist War Against Terrorism and Revolution in the Philippines,” Left Curve 28 (2004), 40-56.

199. “Challenging Contemporary American Studies,” The Review of Education, Pedagogy and Cultural Studies 25.4 (October-December 2003), 303-333

200. “Marxism and the Race/Class Problematic: A Rearticulation,” Cultural Logic (2003) <http://eserver.org/clogic/2003/sanjuan.html&gt; Reprinted in Diliman Review 51.3 (2004), 6-15.

201. “Aime Cesaire’s Insurrectionary Poetics,” in Surrealism, Politics and Culture,edited by Raymond Spiteri and Donald LaCoss (Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2003), 226-245.

202. “On the Filipino Diaspora and the Crisis in the Philippines,” St. John’s University Humanities Review 2.1 (Fall 2003), 81-99.

203. “ ‘Filipino’ Speech-Acts—Weapons for Self-Determination of the Filipino Nationality in the U.S.,” Danyag 7.1 (June 2002; published 2003): 29-46. Reprinted in Diliman Review 50.4 (2003), 3-12; also in . KritikaKultura 5 (Dec. 2004): 70-86 <http://www.ateneo.edu/kritikakultura&gt; A longer version appeared as: “Inventing Vernacular Speech-Acts: Articulating Filipino Self-Determination in the United States,” Socialism and Democracy 19.1 (March 2005), 136-154.

204. “Knowledge, Representation, Truth: Learning from Charles Sanders Peirce’s Semiotics,” St. John’s University Humanities Review 2.2 (May 2004), 15-37.

“The Field of English in the Cartography of Globalization,” Philippine Studies 52.1 (2004), 94-118.

“Postcolonial Dialogics: Between Edward Said and Antonio Gramsci,” Journal of Commonwealth and Postcolonial Studies 11,1-2 (2004), 56-74.

“From Race to Class Struggle: Re-problematizing Critical Race Theory,” Michigan Journal of Race and Law 11.1 (Fall 2005), 75-98.

208. “Preparing for the Time of Reparation: Du Bois, G. Jackson, Abu Jamal,” Souls 7.2 (2005), 63-74.

“Toward a Decolonizing Indigenous Psychology in the Philippines: Introducing Sikolohiyang Pilipino,” Journal for Cultural Research 10.1 (Jan. 2006), 47-67.

“Edward Said’s Affiliations: Secular humanism and Marxism,” Atlantic Studies 3.1 (April
2006), 43-60.

“Ethnic Identity and Popular Sovereignty: Notes on the Moro Struggle in the Philippines,” Ethnicities 6.3 (Sept. 2006), 391-422.

211. “Carlos Bulosan, Filipino Writer-Activist,” New Centennial Review 8.1 (Winter 2008), 103-

212. “Internationalizing the U.S. Ethnic Canon: Revisiting Carlos Bulosan,” Comparative
American Studies (June 2008): 123-143.

213. “Joyce/Ibsen: Dialectics of Aesthetic Modernism,” Orbis Litterarum 63.4 (2008): 267-284.

214. ”Antonio Gramsci’s Theory of the ‘National-Popular” and Socialist Revolution in the Philippines,” In Gramsci Now, ed. Joseph Francese. New York: Routledge, 2009. 163-185.

215. “Literary Studies in the Age of the Empire’s Collapse,” Danyag 14.1 (June 2009): 5-12.

216. “From Genealogy to Inventory: The Situation of Asian American Studies in the Age of the Crisis of Global Finance Capital,” International Journal of Asia-Pacific Studies 6.1 (Jan. 2010): 47-76.

217. “Overseas Filipino Workers: The Making of an Asian-Pacific Diaspora,” Global South 3.2 (Winter 2010), 99-129.

218. “Jose Garcia Villa—Critique of a Subaltern Poetics, EurAmerica 40.1 (March 2010): 3-27.

219. “Toward Radicalizing Cultural Studies,” Left Curve 36 (2012): 74-82. Revised version appeared in the e-journal JOMEC Journal (2012) with the title: “Speculative Notes by a Subaltern Amateur in Cultural Studies.” <http://www.Cardiff.ac.uk/jomec/jomecjournal/1-June2012/sanjuan.subaltern.pdf&gt;

220. “Dialectics of Aesthetics and Politics in Maxine Hong Kingston’s The Fifth Book of Peace” Criticism 51.2 (2010):.181-209.

221. “Leading Filipino Writers in the U.S.: Fin-de-Siecle Notes on Carlos Bulosan, Jose Garcia Villa, Jessica Hagedorn, and Bienvenido Santos.” Left Curve 35 (2011): 73-82.

222. “Revisiting Imperial Cultural Studies and Ethnic Writing,” HUMANITIES DILIMAN 9.1 (January-June 2012),: 1-27.

223. “Peirce/Marx; Project for a Dialogue between Pragmatism and Marxism.” Left Curve 37 (2013): 110-112.

224. “War in the Filipino Imagination,” War and Literature (2014). Web.

225. “On Photography in Late Capitalism: Reflections on the Vicissitudes of the Image from a Filipino Perspective,” Kritika Kultura 21/22 (2013=2014): Web.

226. “Reflections on Academic Cultural Studies and the Problem of Indigenization in the Philippines,” TOPIA (2014): 155-175.

227. “In Lieu of Saussure: A Prologue to Charles Sanders Peirce’s Theory of Signs,”
Cultural Logic, 2014. Web.

228. “Panitikan, Ideolohiya, Rebolusyon: Edukasyon at Pedagohiya sa Pagbasa ng Nobelang Desaparesidos ni Lualhati Bautista.” SWF Daluyan (2015): 218-226.

229. “Reading the Stigmata: Filipino Bodies Performing for the U.S. Empire.” countercurrents.org., 25 April 2015. Web.

230. “Tracking the Spoors of Imperialism and Neocolonialism in the Philippines: Sketch of a Synoptic Reconnaissance.” Black Commentator, 22 January 2015. Web. Posted in Portside, 2 Feb. 2015). Web.

231. “Pagsubok sa Pagbuo ng Isang Kritikang Radikal ng Neokolonyalistang Orden” / Hypothesis Toward Synthesizing a Radical Critique of the Neocolonial Order.” Malay 27.2 (April 2015): 1-16.

232. ‘Kasaysayan, Sining, Lipunan: Ang Politika ng Panitikan sa Makabagong Panahon.”
Kritika Kultura 24 (2015): 239-247.

233. “Lagda ni Andres Bonifacio: Paghamon sa tadhana, himagsikan, at pagtupad sa kapalaran ng sambayanang Pilipino,” Social Science Diliman 12: 1 (January-June 2016): 48-77.

234. “Paghahanap at Pagtuklas sa Panitik ni Cirio Panganiban / Reconaissance and
Discovery of Cirio Panganiban’s Writing.” Malay 28.2 (2016): 29-42.


Editorial Activities: Editor, Working Papers in Race, Ethnicity and Cultural Studies Series (Dept of Comparative American Cultures, Washington State University, 1998-2001); Editorial Board, Atlantic Studies, AmerAsia Journal, Left Curve, Kultura Kritika, Cultural Logic, and Nature, Society, and Thought.


Editorial Activities: Editor, Working Papers in Race, Ethnicity and Cultural Studies Series (Dept of Comparative American Cultures, Washington State University, 1998-2001); Editorial Board, Left Curve, Kultura Kritika, Cultural Logic, and Nature, Society, and Thought.






The Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) today said the New People’s Army (NPA) must further expand use of command-detonated explosives (CDX) in launching tactical offensives against the reactionary armed forces, police and all its attached paramilitaries.
“The CPP and NPA reject the baseless demand of GRP President Rodrigo Duterte for the NPA to stop using CDX landmines which are legitimate weapons of war and are allowed under the Geneva Conventions and the Ottawa Treaty on Landmines.”

According to Duterte, he has long repeatedly told the NPA in Mindanao to stop using landmines which he claims are banned under international conventions. “Perhaps, he has not been closely listening to explanations about landmine conventions and distinctions made about different types of landmines.”

“The aim of the Ottawa Treaty banning anti-personnel landmines is to protect civilians from accidental explosions,” pointed out the CPP. The Treaty defines anti-personnel mines as those designed to be exploded by “the presence, proximity or contact of a person.”

“The explosives and landmines used by NPA are command-detonated or blasted manually, some with a battery-powered electronic trigger held by a Red fighter,” added the CPP. “CDX landmines, which NPA ordnance units manufacture carefully, will not explode simply if it is stepped on, tripped upon or kicked around.”

“Furthermore, CDX landmines are not laid out indiscriminately and are always manned or within the immediate proximity of the NPA unit that emplaced them,” pointed out the CPP. “There has yet to be an incident where a CDX landmine laid by the NPA was accidentally exploded by a civilian.”

“The NPA is very careful about using weapons that may accidentally hurt or injure civilians,” said the CPP. “Even indigenous booby traps such as punji sticks are used with discrimination and are not left unmanned.”

“Contrary to Duterte’s demand for the NPA to stop using its CDX landmines, the NPA and the people’s militias must further expand the use of such weapons,” said the CPP.

It added: “CDX landmines are a poor man’s weapon. These are mass-produced by people who have no recourse to the expensive rockets and howitzers of state-funded armies. It is a weapon than can only be effectively used by those who have mastery of terrain. It must continue to be effectively and widely employed in waging mass guerrilla warfare. The mass movement to manufacture CDX landmines must be stepped-up. Every unit of the NPA, including all units of the people’s militias, must have their own supply of CDX landmines, and must have the skill and plan to employ these as defensive and offensive weapons against the enemy.”

“CDX landmines have been proven to be highly effective weapons at thwarting the frenzied military offensives of the AFP,” said the CPP. “This is the reason why the AFP has been so adamant in its demand for the NPA to stop using CDX landmines to the point of mindlessly citing international prohibitions even without a comprehensive and clear understanding of those.”

August 8, 2016
Communist Party of the Philippines


Two books by E.San Juan, Jr.

San Juan double flyer

Image | Posted on by

On E. San Juan’s BALIKBAYANG MAHAL by Charmaine Bramida

E. San Juan Jr.’s

A Critique Paper by Charmaine Bramida
October, 2013


E. San Juan’s poetry collection, “Balikbayang Mahal: Passages from Exile”, as suggested by the title, was birthed through the many travels of the poet. This work is a collection of old and new poems and also includes a long essay on exile and diaspora entitled “Sa Loob at Labas ng Bayan Kong Sawi: Emergency Signals from a Filipino Exile.” It gives the impression of a travelling journal of some sort, especially with some of his poems entitled like a journal entry (Tag-sibol sa Den Haag, Nederland, 25 Marso 2007; Biyernes ng Hapon, Oktubre 1, 2005).

The author’s sweeping knowledge of geography, history, politics, religion, and literature blossoms in this poetry collection. Most of San Juan’s work, including his poetry, is political and looks outward upon the world (most evident probably in his poem “Spring in Den Haag, Nederland, 25 March 2007”, among others).

As you go along, page by page, his poems are explicitly and implicitly suggesting different places. The poet, in his exile, somehow finds himself in these places and comes to an almost nostalgic state of his homeland’s history. Wherever he goes, his country seems to follow him. It almost appears like it pays (an ironic) homage to the Greek epic, Illiad, where Oddyseus sailed for a homeward journey yet ends up in a twenty-year exile. But, instead of being lost on his way home, the poet, in his exile, meets his homeland somewhere along in his consciousness.

The diversity of language used in translation of the poet’s poems in this collection emphasizes not only the journey he is going or have gone through but also reflects him as a person. Someone who speaks an array of foreign languages impresses us that this person must have done a lot of travelling in his lifetime, or have lived in different places, or is simply well-versed as product of a privileged education. The poet is in fact all of the aforementioned. However, the bevy use of language does not exactly celebrate the multilingualism of the poet in exile. The variety of language may as well serve as a mapping device as to the whereabouts of the poet. However, it may primarily be that, although the majority of the poems in the collection were written in Filipino, but their translation into English, Chinese, Russian, German, Italian, and French underscores the universal dimension of the struggle in the homeland of the poet. The poet might have intended to have his poems translated and transformed, to make the vernacular international, not particularly language wise, but the things addressed by his poems, the content–-his motherland. The poet wants the world to experience whatever it is that his motherland is going through, and this want makes him consciously or subconsciously think of the Philippines wherever he goes.

Travel, Diaspora, and Double Consciousness

The first poem of the collection, entitled “Voyages”, is very fitting as an opening for this collection. It conditions our sensibilities that we are about to set sail on a journey across lands through the pages, a poem steeped in classical mythology which starts in a memorable line: “To exile I ride on the bountiful surf. And foam-flowers/ of her dreams gather to waylay my anchors.”

The form of the poem at a distance mimics the waves through its enjambments and indentations. The image of the poem is relaxed and it gives us the experience of being in the middle of a sea on board a moving ship. Although travelling is the first thing that may come to mind once the first poem is read, the collective work is not necessarily a travel literature, but focuses more on the history and the going-ons of the poet’s motherland.

As one reads though most of the poems, you can encounter conflict between locations. W.E.B. Du Bois coined the term double consciousness, which is defined as the two-ness of a person’s identity. Double consciousness describes the individual sensation of feeling as though your identity is divided into several parts, making it difficult or impossible to have one unified identity (the conflict of being African and European/American discussed in Dub Bois’s book, “The Souls of Black Folk”, written in 1903). The Oxford English Dictionary defines the term as the removal or conveyance from one person, place, or condition to another.

The poet, with the juxtaposition of his thoughts, most evidently found in his poem, “Balikbayang Mahal” (which could be identified as the main piece of his collection), we come to this idea that the poet is not really from that place but comes from or lives elsewhere and is very nostalgic and is internally coping with his chronic travels from one place to another. The epigraph chosen by the poet for this poem is from Dante Alighieri’s reputable, “Paradiso”: “You will leave everything you love; this is the arrow first released by the bow of your exile….” Excerpts from the first part of the poem shows the idea of this epigraph: “You’ve flown to Rome and London…You’ve flown to Riyadh and Qatar…You’ve flown to Toronto and New York…You’ve flown to Chicago and San Francisco…You’ve flown to Hong Kong and Tokyo…You’ve flown to Sydney and Taipeh…” The lines under these statements of the (seemingly) itinerary of the poet expresses a sense of longing for what he is about to leave behind at that moment: “You’ve flown to Rome and London/ Anxiously looking back to clouds loaded with dreams wandering/ Sunk in memories of tomorrow slowly drowning” … “You’ve flown to Hong Kong and Tokyo/ “I’ll never forget you”—the temptation of a farewell unclenched/ soars”.

One of the concluding lines of the first part confirms that feeling of nostalgia of the speaker: “You’ve flown, O beloved sweetheart, but on whose bosom/ will you land?” Wherever the poet is headed or has been, he feels that he have been set free, that he has the freedom of being a citizen of the world through the power of travel and is able to pursue his ambitions, but this question connects us to his feeling of uncertainty as to where he will end up at the last league of his worldwide journey. The last line of the first part shows how the poet have invested himself into every place he has ever been: “My soul cut up and scattered to all the corners of the planet”.

The above mentioned excerpts come from the first part of the poem. Obviously, it speaks of departure. However, in the second part of the piece, it offers a parallel, yet opposite and contrasting situation, thus, the double consciousness that is being shown in this piece. The lines directly show a mirror of the first part of the poem, that instead of departing, someone is: “Late, they said everything is late. It’s gone, that train loaded with/ memories and dreams,” … “Late, we’ve been left behind by the airplane headed for Tokyo/ and Los Angeles”, … “Already departed/ So distant now is the ship sailing toward Hong/ Kong and Singapore”. Throughout the second part of the poem, the speaker is expressing his feelings of regret over lost time, “Taking a chance that the telegram will reach—what a pity, no/ kidding, a terrible waste”.

Apparently, the poet is addressing someone which is confirmed in the line: “You’re late—your promises rotting with anxiety and doubts…/ Finished!” The unnamed persona that the poet is addressing in these statements is confusing. Is he addressing himself? Is he speaking for a wider demography? His countrymen, maybe? The proceeding lines of the poem presents us the image of the persona that the poet is addressing: “Wilder than desire struggling to escape—where did you come/ from? Where are you going?/ Hoarse, exhausted, starved, elbows and knees bruised, crawling/ on all fours from the abyss…” These lines seem to give us an image of the struggle of what the Filipinos underwent through the different colonizers and how they battled for freedom. Yet, with this freedom, the poet continues to question where they are headed.
Basically, the most evident issue that the poet is embodying in his poems in this collection is his homeland. Despite him being in other places, or in “exile”, he cannot tear away from the reality of where he come from. However, one may also think that the poet is addressing the colonization of the Philippines. The line, “My soul cut up and scattered to all the corners of the planet,” also seems to suggest that the Filipino identity has become a mixture of the different countries that have colonized the Philippines, or rather, it gives us the idea of the Filipino people inhabiting (almost) all places in the world.

The concluding line of the poem enlightens us and confirms as to who is the addressee of the second part of the poem, “Beloved foreigner, let’s catch what’s left inside, waiting for joy in/ abeyance, nothing ahead or behind, endless….” As confusing as it may seem, but the persona that the poet named as a “Beloved foreigner” may refer to his countrymen, the Filipinos. The contrasting idea given through this label shows us the reality of the Filipino lifestyle. We travel. We migrate. We build our homes not in the lands of our mother country. The Filipinos have become citizens of the world. The home of Filipinos have become “endless”, so to speak.

The above excerpts embodies diaspora. Diaspora in the Philippines is very much palpable. His essay that concludes the collection ratifies that fact. This may be the reason for his double consciousness because of bilocation.

Allusion and Free Verse in a socially driven poetry

The most consistent features of the poet’s poems are the use of free verse and allusion. Some of his poems heavily use allusion as a device. The poetry reminds one of T.S. Eliot in its overflow of allusions. This could be expected since his theme is very historical and political. An example of this is his poem “Spring In Den Haag, Nederland, 25 March 2007”, where the poet alludes to Arroyo and the socio-political happenings in his country. It commemorates the Permanent People’s Tribunal’s verdict of “’Guilty!’ for the U.S.-Arroyo regime”. The poem also mockingly contrasts the peacefulness of the Dutch city of The Hague with the “murders and abuses”, still found in the Philippines despite the findings of the Permanent People’s Tribunal, the subtle point being that the sense of satisfaction the speaker receives from the verdict does not translate into action in his homeland — the verdict does not stop the suffering half a world away. Although, the poem ends with hope: through continued and renewed struggle, justice will be found: “Your lips breaking apart the chains binding the morning’s/ sunburst —”, suggesting that The Arroyo regime will be defeated, and peace will prevail.

This poem, once again, shows evidence of double consciousness as most of his politically themed poems are. Such as the discussed poem above, it is springtime in The Hague and the poet thinks of political detainees in Muntinlupa. Or again, as dusk descends, for instance, on the Italian town of “Punta Spartivento” (the title of the poem), the poet-exile is haunted by names of the dead — Juvy Magsino, Benjaline Hernandez, Eden Marcellana, Rafael Bangit, Alyce Claver, as shown by the following lines: “Souvenirs of the future—/ what tidings are trumpeted by the turbulent winds?/ They killed Juvy Magsino, Benjaline Hernandez, Eden Marcellana,/ Rafael Bangit, Alyce Claver…./ On the shores of Punta Spartivento, the waves encounter each other/ and separate—/ right or left, here and there—as if without any/ decision, pushed to the right/ or pulled to the left/ divided by fate or fortune?” His bilocation between where he is physically and his consciousness straying towards his motherland is shown. The poet-exile remembers the Moslem insurgency in Mindanao as night falls in the land of the Pequot Indians in his poem “Friday Afternoon, October 1, 2005, In Willimantic, Connecticut, USA” with the lines: “My cigarette stubb I interred beside the Bridge of Frogs while the/ traffic procession headed for the Foxboro Casino now owned by the/ Pequots./ But why does the Abu Sayyaf sneak into the mind”.
In his poem “Megamall in Metro Manila” (Megamall sa Metromanila), with the use of statements, it becomes evident that the poet is addressing the different problems of the Philippines; from commoditization: “Your vision is shrouded by Stateside goods galore even though you/ don’t know the signification of commodity fetishism.”; to politics: “No more barricades even though crocodiles continue to scavenge the/ shores./ The odor of Pasig River snakes its way up to the boudoir of/ Malacanang Palace”; to the Westernization of his countrymen: “We watch on the movie screen the fantastic rumbles of/ Schwarzenegger, James Bond, Bruce Lee and Sigourney Weaver.” The poem somehow exploits how dense the Filipinos have become, “Your dreams are now on motorcycles.”

In the same way, his poem “Wanderlust in Makat”i (Lagalag sa Makati) touches on the socio-political issues looming over his country, specifically, poverty. The poem set at the darker side of the streets of Makati–-the great metropolitan city of Manila, which is “Whirling in the maniacal traffic”. The person addressed by the speaker of the poem explains to us the situation: “…you’re still jobless and traipsing/ here and there./ Counting posts and stars, you arrive at “nirvana”/…” The persona of the poem is a representation of the many jobless Filipinos in the country, a country ran by “the machinations of capitalist society”, as the poet puts it. Jobless. No stable path. Hungry. The last line of the poem offers no hope. As in its original Filipino version – “kumapit na lang sa patalim.”

The poet’s poem also touches the subject of industrialization where he alludes to Valdimir Mayakovsky. Valdimir Vladimirovich Mayakovsky was a Russian and Soviet poet, playwright, artist and stage and film actor. He is among the foremost representatives of early-20th century Russian Futurism. As it appears, Mayakovsky, being a futurist, adores and worships the age of technology and the speed, efficiency and noise that comes with it, which is evident in the poem, “Vicissitudes of The Love and Death of Valdimir Mayakovsky”. The poet uses strong images that creates the idea of the noise and chaos brought about by these advancements and the fascination of Mayakovsky towards these things. Even the form of the poem imitates disarray. It also appears the poet creates a fusion of the physicality of Mayakovsky together with a machine in order to heighten Mayakovsky’s regard for technology: “Your torso rocketed beyond the Eiffel Tower/ Now your lobster-red tongue spits Pentecostal vodka… / But neon x-rays from your submarine catacombs/ kicked them in the loins—…”

The poet’s use of statements

According to the principles of poetic content, a poetic idea is best expressed through the use of special images and situations that dramatize the idea. The poet, clearly, with his use of free verse and allusions, used statements in most of his poems in this collection. However, these direct statements were not used merely literal facts and assertions, but were used to embody the idea of the poem. His poems include situations, details, and characters that satisfies the conclusion (see: Wanderlust in Makati, Vicissitudes of the Love and Death Of
Valdimir Mayakovsky, Punta Spartivento, among others).

Lyrical poems

Although the poet’s poems in this collection is more evident of free verse and allusion, his poems such as Voyages, The Three Temptations, The Way Things Are, and Hail and Farewell, and others, show a lyrical side. Perhaps the most lyrical poem is “The Way Things Are,” which is made of five quatrains with images of birds hovering in old buildings; yet even here “We wait for miracles / With daggers to console / Us,” and a metaphor for circling birds — of angel droppings that “May nourish the exchange / We are possessed of and by” — suggests a vision to console “Every animal that dies.”

As discussed earlier, the poems begin on a lyric called “Voyages”, with the line, “To exile I ride on the bountiful surf”. The same as the collection is introduced, the poetry ends on a lyric called “Hail and Farewell,” with a closing quatrain still alluding to Mayakovsky: “But Mayakovsky is our kin — / We also reek / Of incense / And formalin.” wherein the poet sanctions the attitude of the Filipinos towards industrialization, Westernization, and the technology of the new age as he suggests that we are in the same fascinated consciousness to that of Mayakovsky.

Away from the political outlooks and looking inwards

Although most of the work is heavily political and looks outward upon the world, “Mask of the Poet” is one of the few poems in this collection that looks inward. The poet speaks of solitude: “No self, none at all; I exist alone”. The voice of the poem is the poetic inspiration itself. It’s paradoxical and metaphysical message being that in randomness and aloneness, we find ourselves connected to the world: “In one’s vision and hearing/ In the soul and love of every creature/ Moves and dances every organic being.”

Conclusion: Essay on Exile

The collection ends with an almost twelve-thousand-word essay entitled, “Sa Loob at Labas ng Bayan Kong Sawi: Emergency Signals from a Filipino Exile”. This essay addresses aspects of many types of exile and many diasporas, but it begins and ends with the complexities and consequences of what it means to be a Filipino far from home. In this sense, the diaspora of the Filipino race, which usually tends to gear towards the West, is an evidence of Orientalism (Edward Said, 1978). It may seem that Filipinos are still, hypothetically, colonized by the Westerners through political forces. Filipinos, being Orientals, are, in a way, seen as people who exist for the West. However, on the contrary on the thought that the diaspora of Filipinos towards these parts of the globe embodies a different kind of colonization, yet still a colonization in that sense, these migrations actually is a liberating moment for the Filipinos, that this time, they get to be the colonizers.

The poems and the concluding essay confront injustice—the ways, for instance, in which oppressors colonize even time and space. From labourers to domestic helpers, caregivers, entertainers, and professionals around the planet today, the Filipino, as a subject, shares the history of slaves, refugees, detainees, war veterans, and immigrants. These are the communities in motion that the poet-exile is addressing on behalf of Filipinos everywhere–-the kinship.

It seems that this collection of San Juan marks an important break in the Filipino literary tradition. From Francisco Balagtas to Jose Rizal, the homeland has been imagined as a bounded territory where people cannot go beyond their motherlands.

In this work of the poet-exile, a new conception of homeland is heralded. The poet may be dreaming of returning to Manila (as suggested by his poem Balikbayang Mahal), but the place is not a final destination for him. Instead, it is a portal to other places where homeland is without boundaries: “endless”. It is not an essential place, but a set of kinships that Filipinos everywhere and other people with similar fates can embrace and connect. The poet presents us that the planet has become the homeland of the Filipinos.

The poems in “Balikbayang Mahal: Passages from Exile” are mostly about the sorrows of migration and exile and the history and struggles of the poet-exile’s homeland, to be sure, but they are also about the hope of connections and with this, the poet-exile, E. San Juan Jr., of Balikbayang Mahal is, in the best sense of the word, the translator of the many Filipinos in the different corners of the world.R E F E R E N C E S
Bruce, Dickson D. Jr. (June, 1992). W. E. B. Du Bois and the Idea of Double Consciousness. American Literature. Vol. 64, No. 2. pp. 299-309: University Press

Du Bois, W. E. B. The Souls of Black Folk. (1903). New York, Avenel, NJ: Gramercy Books; 1994

Brown, E. J. (1973). Mayakovsky: a poet in the revolution. Princeton Univ. Press

Oxford English Dictionary. (1989). Second Edition.

San Juan, E. Jr. (2007). Balikbayang Mahal: Passages from Exile. Morrisville, North
Carolina: Lulu Enterprices, Inc.

Said, Edward. (1978). Orientalism. Post-colonial studies at Emory. 2012. http://postcolonialstudies.emory.edu/orientalism/


E. San Juan’s TOWARD FILIPINO SELF-DETERMINATION–review by Michael Viola

Toward Filipino Self-Determination: Beyond Transnational Globalization. By Epifanio San Juan Jr. (Albany, New York: State University of New York Press, 2009. 184 pp. hardcover, $65).

Reviewed by Michael Viola, University of California, Los Angeles

The term globalization has several definitions associated with the accelerated social, economic, and political shifts in late 20th century capitalism. In a United Nations report, globalization has winners and losers. This report explains, “A rising tide of wealth is supposed to lift all boats, but some are more seaworthy than others. The yachts and ocean liners are rising in response to new opportunities, but many rafts and rowboats are taking on water – and some are sinking” (United Nations Report, 1997). While the definition of globalization is often debated, for the majority of people in the Philippines the process of globalization can be more accurately described as “gobble-ization” (McLaren and Farahmandpur, 2001).

Similar to the mass destruction caused at the wake of Hurricane Ondoy, the mechanisms of corporate globalization has enabled an international ruling class to pillage the resources of the Philippines leaving behind an entire populations submerged in the swollen overflows of structural adjustment, debt, and privatization. The rule of the high water is the doctrine of neoliberalism where every layer of the nation’s social fabric is a site of looting, as the market has become the organizing logic of an entire social sphere. Global conditions set in motion by the tides of production have influenced the domains of culture for Filipinos in a global diaspora.

In his latest book, Toward Filipino Self-Determination: Beyond Transnational Globalization, Epifanio San Juan Jr. uncovers the concealed operations of power and the underlying social relations that have impacted social life (language, culture, work, and identity) for Filipinos in an age of global crisis and contradiction.

This book, a compilation of essays written after 9/11 serves as a sequel to his influential writings, in particular, From Exile to Diaspoa (1998) and After Postcolonialism (2000). Much like these earlier works, E. San Juan’s methodology is a method of dissent that captures the complex social relations and constant motion of the Philippine Diaspora. With such a method, tension is present throughout his analysis engaging more commonly accepted theoretical frames promoted by postcolonial, postmodern, and post-Marxist scholars.

For those familiar with E. San Juan’s important earlier works, there is recognizable overlap in the astute critiques that he makes, however, for a reader not exposed to the conditions and history of the Philippines or to Marxist social theory, E. San Juan’s reiterations are valuable as they help clarify arguments that are complicated and theoretically rigorous.

The chapters “Imperial Terror in the Homeland” and “In the Belly of the Beast” are invaluable historical supplements for youth involved in organizing the very popular Philippine Culture Nights (PCN); scholars of Ethnic and Asian American Studies; as well as community organizers interested in furthering political projects that counter the injustices of racism, patriarchy, and other social injustices.

Throughout these chapters E. San Juan shows how seemingly disconnected events are in fact connected through a systemic logic of exploitation and an international division of labor necessitated by the current global economic order. Such writings serve as a constant reminder that ecological disasters, racist anti-immigrant sentiments, and the escalating violence against women (delegated “the servants of globalization”) are intimately linked to the motions of capitalist development.

San Juan’s essay titled “Subaltern Silence” is especially invigorating for university students as they witness the privatization of their public education, the exorbitant increases in tuition fees, and the reduction of courses offered in the humanities and languages. Even though Filipinos have become one the largest groups in the Asian American ethnic category the languages of Filipinos in the academy is sparse.

E. San Juan argues that the struggle over language in our schools is a struggle over Filipino identity – an identity that must be rooted in the ideas of liberation, democracy, and justice for Filipinos throughout the world. He states, “literacy must be based on the reality of the subaltern life if it is to be effective in any strategy of real empowerment, in the decolonization of schooling for a start” (50).

However, the struggle for Filipino languages cannot be confined solely within institutions of higher learning. E. San Juan argues, the struggle for Filipino languages “cannot be achieved except as part of the collective democratic struggles of other people of color and the vast majority of working citizens oppressed by a class-divided, racialized, and gendered order” (51).

It is this social order that Carlos Bulosan confronted in his books of literature and work as a labor organizer at the beginning of the 20th century. The influential writings of Carlos Bulosan are widely available due in large part to the research of E. San Juan. More significantly, the author builds upon Bulosan’s analysis in an assessment of the irrational conditions that continue to plague Filipinos in America. In the chapter titled, “Revisiting Carlos Bulosan” E. San Juan requests that the reader not examine Bulosan’s writing as a sacred or finished text.

Rather, he invites us to resume the unfinished project of Bulosan and the countless “others” who have worked to understand the challenges that confront racialized and subjugated peoples of America in order to prepare for a more humane and just tomorrow. The examination of Bulosan’s life and legacy is a dialectical endeavor. The author highlights Bulosan’s life experiences that undoubtedly has influenced many, however the author reminds us that individuals do not impose such an influence alone but by generations building on the labor of those who come before.

The last chapter, “Tracking the Exile’s Flight: Mapping a Rendezvous” E. San Juan reproduces a speech he delivered to alumni of the Philippine Studies Program, a program that enabled university students from around the United States to gain college credit for their summer studies in the Philippines. E. San Juan maintains that through critical travel experiences or “exposure trips” one can gain a critical standpoint of neoliberal globalization not provided by corporate media and mainstream academic textbooks.

The author argues that these personal experience can provide critical points of analysis especially when widened beyond the personal to problematize conditions that entire groups of people (Filipinos) are situated. Throughout this chapter, E. San Juan’s use of historical materialism provides the reader with an important lens to examine the social contradictions of the Philippine Diaspora in connection with the underlying social forces of class struggle and racist as well as gendered oppression.

Toward Filipino Self-Determination maintains that Filipinos throughout the diapsora have passed on a rich legacy dedicated to the projects of democracy, justice, and self-determination. A new generation of culture workers, scholars, activists, and radical feminists is emerging with their own adapted strategies to bring forth a new society from the vestiges of the old.

Throughout this book E. San Juan reminds us that, “we are faced with a new arena of battle, one between humanity and barbarism, between oppressed third world peoples fighting for survival and the rule of a dehumanized global capital” (166). He is astute in his analysis that in this new arena of battle new ideas, imaginations, and strategies are needed that enables us to transform the world we live. Such transformation takes place with proper understanding and such understanding is furnished with theory.


INTERVIEW: E. SAN JUAN, Jr. on the advent of the Duterte presidency

DSC_0405 [Desktop Resolution]Scholar: ‘Feudal-authoritarian’ mindset led to Duterte win

By: Marvin Bionat
INQUIRER.net U.S. Bureau
12:34 AM May 17th, 2016
PORTSMOUTH, New Hampshire –E. San Juan, Jr., a prolific Filipino intellectual, has written close to 60 books on various topics, including race, social class, post-colonialism and the Filipino diaspora. In this interview with INQUIRER.net he shares his analysis of president-elect Rodrigo Duterte’s victory and what awaits the Philippines.

In 1999, San Juan was given the Centennial Award for Achievement in Literature from the Cultural Center of the Philippines for his contributions to Filipino and Filipino-American studies. His more recent books include U.S. Imperialism and Revolution in the Philippines (Palgrave), Racism and Cultural Studies (Duke University Press), and Between Empire and Insurgency (UP Press).

A lifetime academic, San Juan was formerly a fellow of the W. E. B. Du Bois Research Institute at Harvard University and an emeritus professor of English, Comparative Literature, and Ethnic Studies at Washington State University. He is currently a professorial lecturer at Polytechnic University of the Philippines.

Marvin Bionat (MB): What do you think were the key factors that made Duterte win?

San Juan, Jr. (ESJ): Key factors include the citizenry’s deep and widespread disappointment at “daang matuwid’s” neoliberal policies, corrupt raiding of people’s money, waste of resources (including degradation of habitats due to predatory mining), utter neglect of victims of natural disasters, inept management of crises (kidnapping, Mamapasano, Kidapawan, etc.), brutal culture of impunity (extrajudicial killings, torture), Hacienda Luisita massacres, deterioration of public services (health, transportation, public education), worsening plight of overseas Filipino workers—in short, immiseration of workers, peasants, and middle strata all around, despite erratic growth of foreign investments, GNP, etc.

MB: Why did people vote for him despite his extrajudicial approach to curbing crime and his open contempt for due process in Davao City?
ESJ: The feudal authoritarian mindset of most people prefers peace and security imposed from above, if they don’t threaten their private interests. If Davao suddenly became crime-free, well and good, since the victims are from the poor, lumpen classes who are not organized, or are manipulated by politicians and big-moneyed syndicates. But those are petty crimes, not the scandalous theft instanced by the Napoles disclosures, the Arroyo scams, etc.

Elements of the middle sectors admired the early result of Marcos’ martial law, so long as the victims were hidden. And commodities are accessible to most wage earners. The mass media, as well as religious institutions, sanction law and order as long as it’s good for business, market operations, consumerism, preservation of the status quo. Meanwhile, the big criminals in government and civil society are enjoying their holiday. And Davao is not exactly a microcosm of the whole neocolonial network of complex institutions and habitual practices. To be sure, Davao is not Metro Manila or even like Binay’s Makati.

MB: What does his emergence as the country’s leader tell us about our society?

ESJ: Well, it’s a manipulated neocolony where information, public discussion, open criticism, and formation of dissenting parties are tightly regulated and administered, so public consciousness or sensibility—bored by the usual bribery-cum-palabas—welcomes spectacles like Pacquiao, as they welcomed Estrada, etc.

Du30 was a new face on the electoral scene, dominated by trapos and has-beens, so the audience/public was attracted and excited, especially by someone with a foul mouth, mimicking the contrived TV/movie image of a daredevil gangbuster who somehow miraculously climbed up from the unwashed class and succeeded in acquiring the aura of a populist messiah of sorts. This is not a judgment on the person, but a comment on the ideological atmosphere of the last few months.

The Du30 phenomenon, like Erap’s popularity, will prove circumstantial, context-bound, and will go the way of previous presidencies, given the cast of genteel advisers, run-of-the-mill cabinet appointees, etc. Magsaysay was quite popular, but who in this generation of post-martial-law babies remember him now?

So it’s not the whole 100-plus million Filipinos who are responsible for Du30. It’s a socio-historical phenomenon brought about by diverse trends in society, symptomatic of legacies of colonialism, tributary habits, patriarchal sexist dispositions, image-saturated fantasies, etc. Du30 is like a basketball star or TV spectacle, cheered today, gone tomorrow.

MB: Some have pointed to a global trend that favors strong, nationalistic, fascistic leaders. Is Duterte’s victory part of that phenomenon?

ESJ: Whether Du30 is fascistic or nationalistic as president remains to be seen. It’s not a trend worldwide. Iceland, for example, threw out the corrupt elite. Then there’s Bolivia’s Evo Morales or Myanmar’s Lady Heroine. But the trend is more common in dependent or neocolonial formations (as in Latin America or Africa) where socio-economic pressures heighten class, ethnic, and religious divisions, so that the military or Bonapartist solution becomes an alternative.

Overall, global capitalism favors the theater of democratic procedures (parliaments, elections) and predictable laws, because they hide the violence of the truly unequal distribution of power and resources. Where the class war cannot be negotiated via dialogue in the public sphere and constitutional processes, force becomes a temporary way out, as in the U.S. war on terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Haiti, etc. It can last long, but not forever. The people, not dictators, make history, as the saying goes.

MB: What scenarios (both positive and negative) do you see happening under a Duterte presidency?

ESJ: Possible scenarios: if a more nationalist posture is adopted (limiting U.S. access to bases, allowing NDF/NPA to have input into local or national affairs), banning corporate mining, etc., the U.S.-supervised AFP and PNP will surely intervene.
If Du30 adopts the Davao style of prohibiting mass agitation (allowing torture, detention, and killing of opponents) and the economy worsens, mass anger and petty bourgeois desperation will drive many to the hills.

If Du30 steers a “middle course” (quite improbable in the midst of the global financial crisis, and tensions between China and the U.S.), more open in-fighting among the oligarchs will erupt into the open. Remember, Bongbong Marcos is deeply chagrined, and his camp will not sit quietly in the sidelines. He surely has a following in Ilocandia, both at home and abroad (among OFWs), so as long as the majority have not understood the cruelty of the Marcos dictatorship, and the oligarchic class-identity of the Marcos dynasty (majority have no memory or democratic-nationalist consciousness), Bongbong and his class will continue to exert influence, same as with the Cojuangco-Aquino and the landlord/comprador elite.

Factor in this brew the resurgence of Moro violence (the Abu Sayyaf may metamorphose into a populist Islamic/ISIS-type formation, as well as local dissidence in various provinces) and this will stir up the whole country into a situation favorable for revolutionary transformation, provided the progressive forces (and their intelligent collective spirits) are able to gain hegemony (moral and intellectual leadership) and win the support of the broad masses against the oligarchs, the military, police, and their main sponsor, the Washington-Pentagon bloc. This means that the national-democratic forces need to mobilize international support from more than 10 million Filipinos abroad, as well as kindred nationalities, in the diaspora.

Events—reality, in general—exceed the grasp of anyone’s intellect, so we need the whole community to reflect on the crucial questions that you raised and connect them to the feelings, needs, hopes, and demands of the masses as they organize, discuss, agitate, and solve daily problems, in light of the historical past and future of the whole Philippines. This long durable chronicle of resistance, not elections every six years, is what will decide the fate of the Du30 regime, as well as those to come.
Read more: http://globalnation.inquirer.net/139443/139443#ixzz48y6gLD2U
Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook

<philcsc@gmail.com> <philcsc@sbcglobal.net>Between Empire

Posted in DISCOURSES ON CONTRADICTIONS | Tagged , , , , , , , ,


Metakomentaryo sa Pagkakataon ng Kolokyum Ukol sa “The Places of E. San Juan, Jr.”

E. San Juan, Jr.
Polytechnic University of the Philippines

In a provisional synthesis of his lifework, E. San Juan, Jr. surveys the issues and aporias that define his critical oeuvre. He warns at the outset against the narcissism of autobiographical acts, or what he calls the selfie mode. In locating himself, San Juan uses instead the historicizing lens. In this metacommentary, San Juan locates his life project between his birth in 1938, which saw the defeat of the Republican forces in Spain and the rise of fascism in Germany and Italy, and the new millennium marked by 9/11 and imperialist terrorism. He begins with the class background of his parents and moves on to discuss his years as an undergraduate at the University of the Philippines-Diliman; his graduate education at Harvard; his collaboration with Tagalog writers; his radicalization as a professor at the University of California-Davis, and at the University of Connecticut, Storrs, in the midst of the nationalist movements, the Vietnam War, and the Civil Rights era; and his late engagement with the question of racism. San Juan also names the sources of his radical politics as well as the aporias in his thinking, including his oversight of the historical genealogy of local cultures in Philippine vernacular literature, folklore, ecology, and mass media. He ends by reiterating the need to develop the discourse of critique in the hope of re-inscribing the ideal kingdom of the Categorical Imperative into the immanent adventure of humanity in its reflexive history.

critical theory, cultural studies, E. San Juan, Jr., metacommentary, Philippine literature and criticism, race and ethnicity, radicalization
About the Author

Kilalang kritiko at manlilikha sa larangang internasyonal, si E. San Juan, Jr. kamakailan ay fellow ng Harry Ransom Center, University of Texas; at ng W.E.B. Du Bois Institute, Harvard University. Tubong Maynila at lalawigang Rizal, siya ay nag-aral sa Jose Abad Santos High School, Unibersidad ng Pilipinas, at Harvard University. Emeritus professor ng English, Comparative Literature at Ethnic Studies, siya ay nakapagturo sa maraming pamantasan, kabilang na ang University of the Philippines (Diliman), Ateneo de Manila University, Leuven University (Belgium), Tamkang University (Taiwan), University of Trento (Italy), University of Connecticut, Washington State University, Wesleyan University, at ngayon ay Professorial Lecturer sa Polytechnic University of the Philippines. Namuno sa U.P. Writers Club at lumahok sa pagbangon ng makabayang kilusang ibinandila nina Claro Recto at Lorenzo Tanada noong dekada 50–60, si San Juan ay naging katulong ni Amado V. Hernandez (sa Ang Masa) at ni Alejandro G. Abadilla (sa Panitikan) kung saan nailunsad ang modernistang diskurso’t panitikan kaagapay ng rebolusyong kultural sa buong mundo. Kabilang sa mga unang aklat niya ang Maliwalu, 1 Mayo at iba pang tula, Pagbabalikwas, at Kung Ikaw ay Inaapi, na nilagom sa koleksyong Alay sa Paglikha ng Bukang-Liwayway. Sumunod ang Himagsik: Tungo sa Mapagpalayang Kultura, Sapagkat Iniibig Kita, Salud Algabre at iba pang tula, Sutrang Kayumanggi, Bukas Luwalhating Kay Ganda, Ulikba, at Mendiola Masaker. Sa kasalukuyang kalipunan, Kundiman sa Gitna ng Karimlan, matatagpuan ang pinakaunang pagsubok sa tulang neokonseptuwal sa wikang Filipino. Bukod sa From Globalization to National Liberation, inilathala rin ng U.P. Press ang naunang mga libro niya: Carlos Bulosan and the Imagination of the Class Struggle, Toward a People’s Literature, Writing and National Liberation, Allegories of Resistance, at Between Empire and Insurgency: The Philippines in the New Millennium. Inilathala noong 2015 ng De La Salle Publishing House ang kanyang librong Lupang Hinirang, Lupang Tinubuan.
Labinlimang minutong kabantugan? Namangha ako nang unang banggitin ni Charlie Samuya Veric na may plano siyang magbuo ng isang forum tungkol sa akin—hindi pa ako patay o naghihingalo, sa pakiwari ko. Sabi nga ni Mark Twain: “The report of my death was an exaggeration.” Bagamat laktaw na ako sa hanggahang tradisyonal—ilan na bang kapanahon ang sumakabilang-buhay na (magugunita sina Pete Daroy at mga kapanahon, kamakailan lamang si Joe Endriga).
Bagamat labis na sa taning, magiliw na pasasalamat ang ipinaaabot ko sa mga katulong sa Kritika Kultura, bukod kay Charlie kina Ma. Luisa “Lulu” Torres-Reyes, Vincenz Serrano, Francis Sollano at iba pang kasama, sa kanilang walang sawang pagtangkilik. At sa lahat ng mga kolega’t kabalikat na gumanap sa pakikibahagi ng kanilang mga kuro-kuro’t hinuha tungkol sa ilang akdang nilagdaan ni “E. San Juan, Jr.”

Sambit ni Heidegger, ang paborito ng mga teologo rito: “Ang tao ay nilikhang-pa-kamatayan,” laging balisa. Nagbibiro ba lamang tayo? Sa pasumalang ito, taglay pa rin natin ang pag-asam na makukumpleto ang ilang proyekto bago sumapit sa ika-walumpung taning. Deo volens, wika nga ng mga paganong Romano, tumitingala sa iba’t ibang musa, bathala o espiritu ng kalikasan. Sino nga ba itong awtor? Di ba patay na ang awtor, ayon kay Roland Barthes? Gayunman, tila nakasalamuha o nakabangga ng mga nagsalita ang aninong may ganoong etiketa o bansag, na kahawig ng pangalan ng santong buminyag sa Mesiyas, o iyong Ebanghelyo ng Bagong Tipan.
Patakara’t hilig kong umiwas sa anumang okasyong itatampok ang sarili sa makasariling kapakanan, tinaguring “pagbubuhat ng sariling bangko.” Ayaw ko nang modong selfie. O anumang makatatawag-pansin sa “Cogito” na unang nahinuha ni Rene Descartes at naging saligang prinsipyo ng Kaliwanagan (Enlightenment) at siyentipikong rebolusyon sa Kanluran noong Siglo Labing-Walo. Mahirap ipatotohanan na may “Cogito” ngang walang bahid ng walang-malay (unconscious) na siyang sumisira ng anumang afirmasyong maihahapag dito. Huwag nating kaligtaan ang matalas na sumbat ni Walter Benjamin sa kanyang sanaysay tungkol sa suryalismo: “Walang matapang na narkotikong ating sinisipsip kapag tayo’y sawi o malungkot kundi ang ating sarili mismo.” Kailangan ba natin ng opyong kawangki ng relihiyon o mas matindi pa roon?
Pangalawang babala kung bakit kalabisan o kabaliwan ang pumaksa sa sarili. Payo ni Charles Sanders Peirce, fundador ng pragmatisismo, tungkol sa ego/identidad: Iyon ay “error,” ilusyon, isang kamalian o kawalan, kahungkagan—anong senyas o tanda ang makatutukoy sa kamalayan sa sarili, sa ideolohiyang kaakibat nito? Kumbiksyon ko na ang “sarili” nga ay lunan/lugar ng kawalang-muwang, ignoransya, at pagkakamali. Samakatwid, puwedeng punan at wastuhin ng kapaligiran, ng kasaysayan, ng kolektibong pagsikhay at pagpupunyagi. Sanhi sa klasikong materyalismong minana sa tradisyon, sadyang hindi gaanong nasaliksik ang pormasyon ng subheto, o sabjek-posisyon, sa mga diskurso ko na nito lamang huling dekada nadulutan ng masinop na pagsisiyasat.
I-braket natin ito muna. Kung sakaling nailugar man ang awtor, makatutulong din sa mga susunod na imbestigador o mag-aaral ang pagmapa ng panahong sumaksi sa ebolusyon ng mga akdang natukoy. Payo nina Marx at Engels na ang mga kaisipan ay walang naratibo na hiwalay sa modo ng produksiyon ng lipunan—sa Zeitgeist ng ekonomiyang pampolitika nito. Kaya dapat isakonteksto sa kasaysayan ng taumbayan—“Always historicize!” Ang metodong ito’y dapat ilapat sa anumang ideya o paniniwala, tulad ng sumusunod, bagay na maiging naipunla sa internasyonalismong perspektiba ni Veric.

Bakas ng Paghahanap sa Landas
Sapagkat mahabang istorya iyon, ilang pangyayari’t tauhan lamang ang maiuulat ko rito. Bakit nga ba nakarating dito’t sa iba’t ibang lugar ang marungis na musmos mula sa Blumentritt, Sta. Cruz, Maynila? Di ko lubos maisip na nakaabot ang uhuging paslit sa sangandaang ito. Utang ito sa magkasalabit na takbo ng sirkumstansya at hangarin.
Tila pakikipagsapalaran ba lahat? Malamang. Hindi nasa bituin ang tadhana kundi sa kontradiksiyon ng saloobin at kasaysayan. Kaya dapat ilugar ang mga pangyayari sa tiyak na panahong 1938, na sinaksihan ng pagkagapi ng mga Republikanong puwersa sa Espanya at pagbulas ng rehimeng pasista sa Alemanya at Italya, hanggang sa epoka ng Cold War (1947–1989), sa diktaduryang U.S.-Marcos (1972–1986), at bagong milenyong pinasinayaan ng 9/11 at imperyalistang terorismo hanggang sa ngayon. Pinakamalalang krisis ito ng kapitalismong global sa loob at labas ng neokolonyang sistema sa Pilipinas.
Bago ko malimutan, nais kong banggitin ang unang pagsipat sa mga unang kritika ko ni Soledad Reyes noong 1972 sa isang artikulo sa Philippine Studies, at sa isang interbyu ni Maria Luisa Torres-Reyes sa Diliman Review noong 1987–88, nang aming inihahanda ang nabuking pagdalaw ni Fredric Jameson dito sa atin—isang interbensiyong sana’y nakapukaw sa mga postkolonyalista’t postmodernistang naligaw sa bayang sawi. Sayang at hindi nakasama sa publikasyon ang puna ni Tomas Talledo sa limitasyon ni Reyes at sa dinamikong saklaw ng mga tula ko noon.
Supling ako ng dalawang gurong graduweyt sa U.P. noong dekada 1930–35. Taga-Montalban, Rizal ang ama kong pesanteng uri ang pinagmulan; samakatwid, kabilang sa gitnang-saray, hindi ilustrado. Sandaling naging kalihim ang ama ko ni “Amang” Rodriguez, kilalang patnugot ng Partido Nasyonalista noong panahon ni Quezon. Kaklase ng mga magulang ko si Loreto Paras-Sulit sa U.P. at unang libro kong nabasa sa aklatan namin ay unang edisyon ng Footnote to Youth ni Jose Garcia Villa. Nang ako’y nasa Jose Abad Santos High School, nakilala ko sina Manuel Viray at Sylvia Camu, tanyag na mga dalubhasa, at nabasa ang mga awtor sa Philippine Collegian at Literary Apprentice—mabisang kakintalang nakaamuki sa landas na tinahak.

Naanod ng Sigwa sa Diliman
Ilang piling impresyon lang ang mababanggit ko rito. Ang unang guro ko sa Ingles sa U.P. (1954) ay si Dr. Elmer Ordoñez na unang gumabay sa amin sa masusing pagbasa’t pagkilatis sa panitikan. Sumunod sina Franz Arcellana at NVM Gonzalez. Si Franz ang siyang naghikayat sa aking sumulat ng isang rebyu ng Signatures, magasing pinamatnugutan nina Alex Hufana at Rony Diaz. Kamuntik na akong idemanda ni Oscar de Zuniga dahil doon.
Malaki ang utang-na-loob ko kay Franz, bagamat sa kanya ring tenure nasuspinde ako sa paggamit ng salitang “fuck” sa isang tula ko sa Collegian noong 1956 o 1957. Kumpisal sa akin ni Franz na siya raw ay naging biktima ng administratibong panggigipit. Kasapi sa mga taong kumondena sa pulubing estudyante ay sina Amador Daguio at Ramon Tapales; kalaunan, si Ricaredo Demetillo ang siyang umakusa sa Maoistang awtor sa magasing Solidarity ni F. Sionil Jose.
Dalawang pangyayari ang namumukod sa gunita ko noong estudyante ako. Minsan niyaya kami ni NVM na dumalo sa isang sesyon ng trial ni Estrella Alfon sa Manila City Hall dahil sa kuwentong “Fairy Tale of the City.” Doon ko namalas na kasangkot pala ang panulat sa mga debateng maapoy sa lipunan. Dumanas din kami ng madugong kontrobersya tungkol sa sektaryanismo-versus-sekularismo sa U.P. noon, sa usapin ng Rizal Bill, at nakilahok sa kampanya nina Recto at Tanada noong 1957–58 sa untag ni Mario Alcantara.
Ang pangalawang pangyayari ay kasangkot sa parangal kay Nick Joaquin na nanalo ng unang premyo ni Stonehill sa kanyang nobelang The Woman Who Had Two Navels. Sa okasyong iyon, una kong nakita si Ka Amado V. Hernandez na masiglang nanumbat kung bakit isinaisantabi ang mga manunulat sa Tagalog at katutubong wika at laging ginagantimpalaan ang mga nagsusulat sa Ingles. Humanga ako kay Ka Amado sa maikling talumpating binigkas niya noon.
Kakatwa na ang kritika kong Subversions of Desire (1987) tungkol kay Nick Joaquin ay binati ng batikos mula sa kaliwa at simangot mula sa kanan—marahil, hihintayin pa ang henerasyong susunod upang mabuksan muli ang usaping ito. Makabuluhan ang pagtunghay ni Ka Efren Abueg sa milyu ng mga estudyante sa Maynila noon, na oryentasyon sa ugat at tunguhin ng dalumat at danas ng mga henerasyon namin.
Nasa Cambridge, Massachusetts na ako nang magkasulatan kami ni Ka Amado noong 1960–65. Naging kontribyutor ako sa kanyang pinamatnugutang Ang Masa. Naisalin ko rin ang ilang tula niya mula sa Isang Dipang Langit, sa munting librong Rice Grains. Noong 1966–67, nagkakilala kami ni Alejandro Abadilla at tumulong ako sa paglalathala ng magasing Panitikan.
Noong panahon ding yaon nakausap ko ang maraming peryodista’t manunulat na nag-istambay sa Soler at Florentino Torres, sa Surian, at sa mga kolehiyo sa Azcarraga, Mendiola, Legarda, Morayta, at España. Marahil nakabunggo ko rin si Ka Efren sa tanggapan ng Liwayway kung saan nakilala ko sina Pedro Ricarte at iba pang alagad ng establisimiyentong iyon. Natukoy ko ito sa libro kong Lupang Hinirang, Lupang Tinubuan (2015) mula sa De La Salle University Publishing House na tila naligaw na karugtong nito ang mga aklat kong Ang Sining ng Tula (1971) at Preface to Pilipino Literature (1972).

Tagpuan sa Pagpapaubaya’t Pagpapasiya
Nais kong dumako sa engkuwentro ko sa panulat ni Bulosan na siyang tagapamansag ng orihinal na “pantayong pananaw” (sa pagtaya nina Michael Pante at Leo Angelo Nery). Una kong nabasa ang kuwentong “As Long As the Grass Shall Grow” ngunit mababaw ang dating. Nang ako’y magturo sa University of California sa Davis, nagkaroon ako ng pagkakataong makatagpo ang ilang “oldtimers” sa California; at tuloy nadiskubre ang mga libro ni Bulosan sa Bancroft Library ng UC Berkeley. Muntik nang madamay ang Carlos Bulosan and the Imagination of the Class Struggle na inilabas ng UP Press ilang araw bago ideklara ni Marcos ang “martial law.” Nakatulong ang suporta ni President Salvador Lopez, na ininterbyu ko noong 1987–88 nang ako’y magturo muli sa U.P. at Ateneo.
Masasabing ang pagtuklas at pagpapahalaga sa halimbawa ni Bulosan ng mga Filipino sa Amerika ng pangatlong henerasyon (mga anak ng beterano o bagong-saltang propesyonal) ay utang sa pagsibol ng kilusang makabayan doon noong 1969–1970. Bumugso ito sa gitna ng pakikibakang anti-Vietnam War at civil rights struggles noong dekada 1960, hanggang sa kilusang peminista’t kabataan at mga etnikong grupo noong dekada 1970. Sa kabila ng makatas na pagsubaybay nina Rachel Peterson at Joel Wendland sa alingawngaw ng mga pagsubok ko sa “cultural studies” at analisis ng ideolohiyang rasismo, lingid sa kanilang kaalaman ang pakikilahok ko sa kilusang anti-Marcos noong 1967–1986. Mahusay na nasuyod ito ni Michael Viola. Suwerte, nakasama rito ang masaklaw na komentaryo ni Dr. Kenneth Bauzon sa mga saliksik at pag-aaral ko tungkol sa etnisidad, rasismo, at kapitalismong global.
Sa huling dako ng siglong nakaraan naibuhos ko ang lakas at panahon sa analisis ng problema ng rasismo sa Amerika. Ang paksang ito’y hindi nabigyan ng karampatang pag-aaral at pagdalumat ng mga klasikong Marxista, kaya nito na lamang ilang huling dekada napagtuunan ng pansin ang sitwasyon ng Moro, mga kababaihan, at Lumad sa ating bayan. Kaakibat nito, sumigasig ang imbestigasyon ko sa teorya ng signos/senyal ni Peirce at lohika ng pagtatanong nina Dewey, Bakhtin, Gramsci, Lukacs, atbp. (Pasintabi: ang 1972 edisyon ko ng kritika ni Georg Lukacs, Marxism and Human Liberation, ay isang makasaysayang interbensiyon sa pakikibakang ideolohikal dito noong madugong panahong iyon.) Mababanggit din ang inspirasyon ng mga kasama sa CONTEND at Pingkian na laging aktibo sa usaping panlipunan at pagsulong ng demokrasyang pambansa.
Ang masa lamang ang tunay na bayani sa larangan ng progresibong pagsisikap. Sa huling pagtutuos, o marahil sa unang pagtimbang, ang inisyatiba ng isang indibidwal ay walang saysay kung hindi katugma o nakaangkop sa panahon at lugar na kanyang ginagalawan. Sa ibang salita, ang anumang katha o akda ninuman ay hindi produkto ng personal na pagpapasiya lamang kundi, sa malaking bahagdan, bunga ng mga sirkumstansyang humubog sa kapasiyahan ng indibidwal at nagbigay-kaganapan dito. Walang bisa ang indibidwal kung hindi nakatutok sa pagsalikop ng tiyak na panahon at lugar.
Gayunpaman, dapat idiin na ang bisa ng indibidwal ay katumbas ng totalidad ng relasyong panlipunan, alinsunod sa balangkas ng “combined and uneven development.” Ang pasumala ay kabilang mukha ng katiyakan. Kamangmangan at kamalian nga ang laman ng sarili kung di umaayon sa riyalidad. Maidadagdag pa na ang daloy ng mga pangyayari ay hindi diretso o linyado kundi maligoy at liko-liko, kaya kailangan ng diyalektikong pagkilates at pagtaya upang matanto’t masakyan ang trajektori ng kasaysayan sa ating buhay at ng kapwa.

Singularidad ng Pananagutan
Uminog ang daigdig, sinabi mo. Saan nagmula? Nasaan tayo ngayon? Saan tayo patutungo? Ano ang alam natin? Ano ang pinapangarap natin? Paano mag-iisip? Paano kikilos? Anong uri ng pamumuhay ang dapat ugitan at isakatuparan?
Walang pasubali, utang ko ang anumang ambag sa arkibo ng kaalamang progresibo sa kilusan ng sambayanan (laban sa diktaduryang Marcos at rehimeng humalili), sa ilang piling miyembro ng KM at SDK na nagpunla ng binhing Marxista sa U.S. na nagsilbing batayan ng anti-martial law koalisyon, KDP, Ugnayan at iba pang samahan sa Estados Unidos. Malaki rin ang tulong pang-edukasyon ng mga sinulat nina Claro Recto, Lorenzo Tanada, Renato Constantino, Amado Hernandez, Teodoro Agoncillo, Jose Diokno, Jose Maria Sison, Maria Lorena Barros, at lalo na ang mga aktibistang naghandog ng kanilang buhay sa ikatatagumpay ng katarungang sosyal, pambansang demokrasya, at awtentikong kasarinlan.
At utang naman ito sa paglago’t pagtindi ng feministang kilusan kaagapay ng anti-rasistang mobilisasyon ng mga Amerikano-Afrikanong rebolusyonaryo, ng mga Chicano’t Katutubong Amerikano, pati na rin ang impluwensiya ng rebolusyon sa Cuba, Algeria, Vietnam, Mozambique at, natural, sa Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution sa Tsina. Samakatwid, nagtataglay ng halaga ang anumang gawain o likhain kung ito’y ilulugar sa larangan ng pagtatagisan ng mga uri sa lipunan, ng kontradiksyon ng taumbayan (manggagawa, magbubukid) at hegemonya ng imperyalismo’t oligarkong kasabwat nito. At may tiyak na panahon at takdang hangganan ang pagsulong ng mga kontradiksyong lumulukob sa karanasan ng bawat tao sa lipunan.
Sa partikular, ang halaga ng anumang kaisipan o praktika ay nakasalalay sa masalimuot na lugar ng kasaysayan. Nakasalig ito lalo na sa kasaysayan ng ating pakikibaka tungo sa tunay na kasarinlan at pambansang demokrasya mula pa noong rebolusyong 1896 hanggang sa rebelyon ng Bangsamoro laban sa teroristang lakas ng Estados Unidos at mga kapitalismong global na patuloy na naghahari sa neokolonyang bansa. Sosyalismo o barbarismo—alin ang mananaig?
Kalkulahin natin ang burador ng pangarap at naisakatuparan. Dahil sa malaking panahong iniukol sa kilusan laban sa diktaduryang Marcos at sa paglaban sa rasismong salot na sumasagwil sa pansarariling determinasyon ng mga Filipino sa U.S., hindi ko naibuhos ang sapat na lakas sa pagsusuri’t pagsisiyasat ng kulturang katutubo, lalo na ang kritika sa panitikang Pilipino. Hindi rin nabigyan ng karampatang pansin ang poklor o katutubong ekspresyon ng mga Lumad, Moro, atbp; ang isyu ng kapaligiran, ang papel ng midyang pangmadla (pelikula, dula, musika), atbp.
Dahil sa pagkalubog ko sa literaturang Ingles at sa oryentasyong New Criticism at saliksik-tradisyonal na sinipsip sa mga guro sa UP English Dept at Harvard University, superpisyal ang interes ko noon sa panitikang vernacular, sa komiks o pelikulang tatak lokal. Kumpara sa Ingles at Kastila, ang panitikang Tagalog, Hiligaynon, Cebuano, atbp. ay maituturing na bahagi ng kulturang popular. Ang Liwayway at mga kamag-anak nito ay organo ng diskursong kultural popular, bago pa ang megmall at penomenang sinipat ni Roland Tolentino, na siyang pinaka-avantgarde na manunuri ngayon sa buong bansa. Nabanggit ko nga na noon lamang magkasulatan kami ni Ka Amado noong 1960-65 sumigla ang nasa kong ibaling ang panahon at lakas sa pag-aaral ng literatura’t kulturang nakasulat sa Filipino. Malaki ang tulong sa akin noon nina Rogelio Mangahas, Ben Medina Jr,, Alejandro Abadilla, at Delfin Manlapaz sa hilig na ito.
Pundamental ang pagtaya ni Roland na pinakamahalaga ang world-view o paradigm na panukat sa anumang pag-aaral ng kultura. Ito ang turo ng “cultural studies” nina Raymond Williams at ni Stuart Hall sa UK na kapwa umamin ng mga ideyang hinango mula kay Antonio Gramsci. Nabatid ito ni Roland hindi sa pagpasok sa Bowling Green State University, sentro ng pagsusuri sa “popular culture” sa Estados Unidos, kundi sa paglagom ng kanyang mayamang karanasan bilang aktibista simula dekada 1980-1990 hanggang sa ngayon. Sa Bowling Green ko na lang siya nakatagpo, hindi ko na maalala ang pagkakataon sa Diliman na nabanggit niya. Ngunit hindi multo ako noong magkasama kaming dumalaw minsan kay Sanora Babb, matalik na kaibigan ni Carlos Bulosan, nang nag-aaral na si Roland sa University of Southern California sa Los Angeles. At hindi rin multo sa maraming pagkakataong makasali ako sa mga forum at lektura sa U.P. nitong dalawang dekada (1990-2010) kung saan si Roland ay mabisang gabay ng mga estudyante sa UP bilang Dekano ng College of Mass Communications. Tanggap na sopistikado na ang diskursong kultural popular sa akademya, ngunit (sa palagay ko) mahina pa’t pasapyaw ang dating nito sa mass media sa TV, radyo, at peryodiko. At bagamat malaki na rin ang transpormasyon sa indy pelikula, kailangan pang kumita ng prestihiyo sina Brillante Mendoza, Lav Diaz, at iba pang direktor sa Europa upang mabigyan ng panibagong pagtingin sa atin. Sintomas ito ng maselang sitwasyon ng kritiko ng araling kultural, popular man o elitista, na hindi maibubukod sa dekadensiya ng naghaharing uri’t dayuhang puwersa, laluna ang Estados Unidos at Europa, sa pagkontrol sa ekonomya’t negosyong OFW ng bansa. Sintomas din kaya ito ng pagkabulok ng hegemonya nila? Hinihintay ng mobilisadong madla ang opinyon nina Roland at mga mataray na kapanalig na espesyalista sa diskursong kultura popular.
Nais kong ihandog ang nalalabing taon ko sa pagsisiyasat sa mga usaping ito kaugnay ng krisis ng globalisasyon. Kabilang na rito ang kalipunan ng mga bagong sanaysay ko sa nabanggit kong Lupang Hinirang, Lupang Tinubuan. Meron akong inihahandang pag-aaral sa klasikong nobela nina Faustino Aguilar, Lope K. Santos, Valeriano Hernandez Peña, Lazaro Francisco, Iñigo Ed. Regalado, hanggang kina Genoveva Edroza Matute’t Liwayway Arceo. Nais ko rin sanang maipagpatuloy ang palitang-kuro namin ng nasirang Alex Remollino tungkol sa tula ko hinggil sa sitwasyon ni Rebelyn Pitao (kalakip sa koleksiyon kong Sutrang Kayumanggi) na sinensor ng Bulatlat nang paslangin ng pasistang Estado ang anak ni Kumander Parago circa 2010.

Pandayin ang Sandata ng Kaluluwa
Patuloy na nagbabago ang mundo, nag-iiba ang kapaligiran at kalakaran. Hindi mapipigil ito. Pinuputol at pinapatid ang repetisyon ng karaniwang araw sa paulit-ulit na krisis ng kapitalismong orden. Ikinukubli ng repetisyon sa araw-araw ang naratibo ng kasaysayang sinidlan ng pangarap, hinubog ng panaginip, at pinatingkad ng pag-aasam. Katungkulan nating palayain iyon, ang mga pagnanasang ibinaon, mga tinig na binusalan, sa mapagpasiya’t mapagligtas ng Ngayon na nagbubuklod ng Katotohanan at Kabutihan.
Ngayon ang pagtutuos, Ngayon ang pagsasakatuparan at kaganapan. Responsibilidad ito ng panaginip upang pukawin at mobilisahin ang diwang sinikil ng mga panginoong dayuhan at kakutsabang lokal. Ang lugar dito at sa abrod ng OFW ay larangan ng paglutas sa mga kontradisiyong salaghati sa ating buhay bilang bansang iniluluwal pa lamang. Kung hindi ngayon, kailan pa?

Mensaheng Ipinalaot sa Kawalan
Sinabi mo, nadinig ko. Sa pangwakas, nais kong sipiin ang makahulugang obserbasyon ni Benjamin tungkol sa temang naturol dito, ang halaga ng personal na pagsisikap laban sa batas ng tadhana o hatol ng kapalaran. Puna ni Benjamin: Ang anumang obrang kultural ay sabayang dokumento ng barbarismo’t dokumento ng sibilisasyon. Nawa’y magsilbing kasangkapan ito tungo sa bagong uri ng kabihasnan at hindi kagamitan upang mapanitili ang barbarismong nais nating supilin at wakasan. Sa okasyon ng bagong edisyong ito ng Kritika Kultura, muli nating ilunsad at pag-ibayuhin ang diskurso’t pagtatanong upang makapiling ang katotohanan sa nasugpong birtud ng sangkatauhan.
Maraming salamat sa lahat ng kolaboreytor at partisano sa itinaguyod na proyektong sinalihan nating lahat. Partikular na kilalanin ko rito ang tulong at payo ni Delia Aguilar, na kadalasa’y nagwasto’t nagpayaman sa mga ideyang nailahad dito. Sana’y magkatagpo muli tayo dito o sa kabilang pampang ng ilog. Mabuhay ang sakripisyo’t pakikipagsapalaran ng masang naghihimagsik! Ipagpatuloy ang laban!

7 Marso 2015, Ateneo de Manila University, Quezon City–
22 Disyembre 2015, Storrs, CT; 19 Pebrero 2016, Washington DC, USA
MALIGAYANG PAGBATI mula sa “sikmura ng halimaw”
[Sa okasyon ng paglunsad ng Kritika Kultura 26, 4/25/2016]

—E. San Juan, Jr.

Masilakbong pagbati sa lahat ng staff ng KK, kabilang sina Charlie Veric, Francis Sollano, Vinz Serrano, Lulu Torres-Reyes at marami pang kabalikat, sa pagkakataong naidaos sa pagpupulong ng ilang iskolar at manunulat sa symposium tungkol sa mga lugar ng awtor na may mapahiwatig na pangalan.

Isang munting paunawa. Ang lugar ni “E. San Juan” ay hindi pag-aari o angkin ng isang taong may ganoong pangalan. Ang regulasyon ng pagpapangalan sa partikular na indibidwal ay ipinasok sa Imperyong Romano dahil sa batas ng pagbubuwis at pagkontrol sa masa. Sa Bibliya, maraming Maria o John na ipinaghihiwalay lamang sa pagkabit ng kung saan sila unang kinilala—Hesus ng Nazareth, ang Samaritano, atbp. Ganoon din sina Zeno ng Elea o William ng Ockham. Kaugnay iyon ng ekonomyang pampulitikang umiiral noon. Tumawid tayo mula sa necesidad ng imperyong mapang-uri.

Gumawi tayo sa ibang dalampasigan. Ang paksain dito ay sari-saring pook o lunan ng mga ideya’t hiwatig sa gitna ng engkuwentro ng mga komunidad ng mga nag-uusap sa iba’t ibang lupalop, sa iba’t ibang panahon. Isang kolokyum o pagpapalitan/forum ang lugar natin. Walang pag-aangkin o pag-aari ng kaisipan, at iyon naman ay inilagom mula sa buhay ng ibat ibang wika at kultura ng samutsaring komunidad sa daigdig ng penomenang isinalin sa isip, dalumat, budhi, kamalayan—ang “noosphere” ni Padre Teilhard de Chardin.

Sa isang balik-tanaw, napulot lamang ang “Epifanio” sa kalendaryo, at ang pamilyang “San Juan” ay hiram din naman sa Talaan ng Buwis sa Espanya, kung saan pinagbasehan ang pagbibinyag sa mga Indyo noong panahon ng kolonyalismong nagdaan. Gayunpaman, nawa’y di maging “tinig sa kagubatan,” a “voice in the wilderness” ang isyu ng KK. Marahil, wala namang Salomeng magdedemanda ng ulo ng taga-binyag. Baka ang nangyaring “bomb threat” ay senyas ng sukdulang darating?

Di na dapat ulitin na ang pagsisikap ng KK ay napakahalaga sa pag-unlad at paglawak ng ating kultura, ng ating sining at panitikan, na ngayo’y nakadawit sa daloy ng globalisasyon. Kaugnay ang pagsisikap na ito sa hominization ng “noosphere” ni Padre de Chardin patungong Omega. Isang makabuluhang pagsisikap sapagkat—buksan na lang ang FACEBOOK at iba pang Website sa inyong I-pad o I-phone— nakalambong pa rin ang hegemonya ng Kanluraning kabihasnan, ang “consumerist lifetyle” na dominante sa globalizasyong nagaganap. Para sa mga kaibigan dito, siguro, Filipinization ng Internet ang kanilang maipangangakatwiran at hindi pag-gagad o imitasyon sa banyaga.

Naipaliwanag na nina Rizal, Fanon, Che Guevarra, Aime Cesaire, Cabral, atbp. na ang intelektuwal ng kilusang mapagpalaya sa sinakop na bansa ay kabilang sa mapagpasiyang hanay ng mobilisadong taumbayan, Mabisa ang mga guro’t estudyante—mga “iskolar ng bayan”— sa mapagpalayang kampanya ng bayang Pilipino sa harap ng malubhang krisis ng imperyalismo sa panahon ng “global war on terrorism.” Mungkahi kong subukan natin ang ganitong punto-de-bista para sa ating komunidad imbes na iyong galing sa World-Bank IMF, MLA, UN, o anupamang grupong internasyonal.

Salungat sa cliche, huwag akalaing nasa-ivory tower tayo—walang sulok na hindi kasangkot o kaugnay sa tunggalian ng ideolohiya, ng praktika ng paniniwala, ugali, damdamin, pangarap, sa ating neokolonya. {Natural, kung kayong nahihimbing at nananaginip, wala kayong pakialam sa ganitong palagay, at patuloy kayong humimlay.}

Laging mapangahas at mapanlikha, kayo’y mga bayani, “unaknowledged legislators,” sa lumang taguri. Nawa’y maipagpatuloy ang ulirang praktika ng KK sa paglinang ng katutubong kultura—aksyon sa paraan ng interpretasyon—na siyang ambag natin sa kumpleksipikasyon ng Omega ni de Chardin, o iyong singularidad/hacceitas ni Duns Scotus, na kailangang sangkap sa paghinog ng unibersalisyong adhikain ng santinakpan! Samakatwid, bukod sa isip, kasangkot ang pagnanais, paghahangad, mithiin ng bawat isa sa loob at labas ng komunidad.

Mabuhay ang pamumukadkad ng isanlibong bulaklak! Mabuhay kayong lahat na dumalo sa makasaysayang interbensyong ipinagdiriwang ngayon ng KK sa pagtangkilik ng Ateneo de Manila University!

—Sonny San Juan
Cathedral Heights,
Washington DC, 8 Abril 2016