Summer of Discontent

(This piece by the author, an award-winning and published part-time writer, was written a year ago. The sentiments in this piece still remain.)

It had been quite a long time, almost ten years. Although I had returned once in a while, all those homecomings may, at best, be described as sporadic, intermittent, and brief. This is the first time I had spent a month-long summer vacation (summer of 2006) in my home city since I first left to pursue college and then law school in Manila.

In my four years in college, I had gone home only twice---two Christmas vacations which were all too brief. Most of the time I was (of course) busy with regular classes and summer classes. Every Christmas vacation, I would grapple with the dilemma of going home or not. The prohibitive cost of transport (air transportation, because I don’t like riding in our dignified floating coffins, I mean, marine vessels) contributed to this. Most of the time, economics prevail. Now that I have recently graduated from law school (which took me six years), I can recall that during that span of time I went home also only twice--- for two quick Christmas vacations. In all those times that I had been home, I naturally spent them with my family since Christmas is said to be primarily for the family. I never had the chance to rediscover our city, and only a very limited time to catch up with old friends.

This is the first time that I had spent my summer in my home city. This is the first time, too, that I had spent it for an extended amount of time.

I had a hard time describing my experience. I felt like a stranger in a familiar place. It is . . . disorienting.

Where have all my friends, classmates, and schoolmates gone? What is that----a mall? Wow, our city now has a mall! What is that wide strip of cement called--- Boulevard or Baywalk (similar to the one in Manila)? Hmmm, this red and orange building looks pretty familiar (translation: Jollibee). Great, we now have a fast food chain; at least were not that behind.

When I was in high school I could fondly recall that whenever I stroll around our city, I see a familiar face every few minutes or so. As such, my face would go sore from constantly grinning. Or, my hand would always be ready to make a quick wave at an incoming acquaintance. Now, it would be very rare (yet a total delight) to see an old familiar face after several blocks or so. (I have two reactions to this “development”: it makes me sad that fewer people now know me and there are now fewer people I know----having lots of acquaintances in my home city makes me feel safe, secure, and---oh well, popular; simultaneously, knowing less and less people could mean that there are now more people in our place, that is, our city is “expanding” or growing/developing.)

I believe the situation I had experienced was not at all unique to me. I can just imagine that the same feeling was experienced, at one point or another, by people who, just like me, have to go to presumably “better” places in order to study or get an education. For some other people, though, it would mean going to presumably “better” places to get a job, to seek better opportunities and greener pasture, or to experience a better environment. (I could only ventilate the sentiments of people, i.e. students, like me. Those balikbayans, OFWs would probably experience the same thing, perhaps of deeper magnitude.) Students who had to study to far-flung places usually grapple with the reality that whenever they go back to their hometowns or home cities after a prolonged absence, they would feel like total strangers. Everything would be different. They would have to re-orient themselves about the location of certain streets, the grocery store, their favorite bakeshop, their favorite parlor/barber shop and favorite hairdresser/barber, the look of their neighbors, the addresses and location of their friends’ houses, etc. (I certainly experienced all these when I went back.)

It is quite sad that there are those, like me, who have to leave the localities in which they were born and probably the only ones they have known for most of their lives either to get an education, a job, or just to experience better standards of living. Most people in the provinces have to go to presumably “better” places, the hegemonic centers (in the Philippines, Manila or Cebu) since it is in the latter places where good schools and better job opportunities abound. Not to mention that these so-called hegemonic centers are also the centers of culture, arts, entertainment, industry, commerce, etc. Extrapolate this inference further and one can see the continuing picture of diaspora and discontent: people in the far-flung places or provinces going to the big cities; people (students and workers like nurses, doctors, engineers, and health professionals) in poor countries going to the industrialized “First World” nations to seek the same things: better opportunities, professional development, better education, or better standards of living.

It is not too presumptuous to conclude that people would have no need to seek “better” things in other places and to make great sacrifices in the process (in terms of family life, finances, adjustments, well-being, sadness) if only wealth were better distributed and people (almost) everywhere would have equal access to opportunities---be they in the provinces or big cities, in quote-unquote Third world countries or quote-unquote First world countries. (To digress a little: There are academicians who spurn the use of the discriminatory Third World/First World dichotomy which is a Western invention.) The reality of the situation, of course, is otherwise.

Oftentimes it is so heart-breaking to see so much inequality and imbalance in society. While certain places (or countries for that matter) would enjoy relative prosperity, others would forever remain in the backwaters of development. (I am not saying that my hometown/home city is such; but we are definitely a far cry from the so-called “hegemonic” centers.) While some places have become more advanced and relatively industrialized, others have remained sleepy, bucolic, and rustic. As such, inhabitants in these latter places are impelled to seek the “better” things elsewhere other than in their own. One cannot even begin to pinpoint the cause or causes. Should our government and its programs/policies be to blame? Should we point accusing fingers at the powers-that-be in the national (or world) stage? Or should we just accept the fact that it is an immutable economic principle and a fact of life that there will always be inequality and imbalance in society and the world?

Tough questions with no unequivocal answers.

For the time being though, my (and I believe, for many others out there) amorphous discontent remains.

 

www.philstar.com Confessions of a Third-world celebrity

Unbroken

(This piece by the author, a part-time writer and whose essays have appeared in the Philippine Star, The Philippine Daily Inquirer and the Manila Bulletin, was written a year ago. He found it in his compilations and decided to put it in his blog.)

Movies dealing with the sporadically talked-about subject of homosexuality are getting more numerous: “Ang Pagdadalaga ni (The Blossoming of) Maximo Oliveros,” “Beautiful Boxer,” “Brokeback Mountain.” I have seen them all.

These movies are all multi-awarded and, based on news reports, are making good money at the box-office.

By all accounts, this development seems to augur positively for a highly discriminated segment of the population (the LGBTs) since a more expansive group of audience are learning to appreciate and look into their lives and stories.

Having watched all those movies, I still haven’t come to the conclusion that gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgenders are already accepted with open arms in society; tolerated, yes but accepted, not yet. They still would have a long way to go before they could ostentatiously wave their boa feathers.

Instead, my epiphany is that all these films about the third sex would seem to be a higher manifestation of how many people and society traditionally view people of the third gender; that is, for “entertainment value.”

This manifestation could be summed up by a Woody Allen line. When Allen was asked what fame had brought him, his retort was: “I get to be rejected by a higher class of women. Just the same with these gay movies, the “for entertainment value” is still there, but only in a more sophisticated way.

Whereas before pedestrians would ogle at transgenders and transsexuals catwalking in the streets and be amused in the process, they (the pedestrians) need not go out in the streets to see these human spectacles. They could now see these very same people in CDs and DVDs. Whereas gay beauty contests used to amuse a majority of the population, the latter could now also go to the movies and be amused and fascinated but not necessarily be changed in terms of shaking off their prejudices and bigotry.

I had a first-hand experience of the above assertion (that is, that the films dealing on homosexuality are still “for entertainment”) while watching “Brokeback Mountain” at a theater. In those particularly squeamish scenes where the two protagonists had anal sex, viewers at my back and front would either giggle or hoot. In one particular scene where the two protagonists kiss each other hungrily, a woman in the audience shouted “Yikes!” while the rest of the audience reacted in laughter.

Even Hollywood, after the 78th Oscars, was not above the suspicion of homophobia when it awarded the Best Director trophy to Ang Lee but rejected his movie for the Best Picture plum. Talk about approving of the creator but not his work or creation.

Of course, no one should fault these filmmakers who tackle gay themes. At least they made this once-taboo subject fodder for discussion, whether intellectual or otherwise.

But unless the movies are specifically aimed at promoting acceptance of the third sex and not just to chronicle their lives or to tell their stories, the GLBTs would still be occasionally viewed for their “entertainment value,” to amuse and fascinate. Unless and until there would be a paradigm-shift in the majority of the population, the third sex would still continue to experience bigotry, marginalization, and discrimination. Most importantly, unless and until there are laws (such as HB 643, the Anti-Discrimination Law) and a system in place to protect them, people of the third sex would still have a long, long way to go in terms of being totally accepted in society.

All this is not so gloomy though. At least, something has got to start somewhere. 

 

www.thestandard.com.hk Blossoming with joy (a film review of Maximo Oliveros by Jessica Zafra)

AGORAPHOBIA

A lesson in etymology:agoraphobia is literally defined as the fear of open spaces. Clinical psychologists,however, have extended this term to mean the fear of coming out from one's comfort zone. (I've learned this expanded definition while viewing the Ellen Degeneres Show one day.)

I think I have agoraphobia---perhaps a mild form of it. You see, I have been quite afraid to venture out of my comfort zone lately. I am not just referring to my physical comfort zone but to my mental/psychological and emotional comfort zone as well. Truth to tell, we all have comfort zones. I sure do have mine. For somebody who has faced so much rejection (whether real or imaginary) almost his entire life, i have developed a built-in system where i feel most secure and to a certain extent invincible.

Psychologically, I feel invincible when I am talking about academic stuff. This extends to my being in the company of nerds, geeks, bookworms and people who gets their self-worth from being mental. I seldom want to be in the company of other types of people. The rare times I had been comfortable with non-mental types are when I know for sure that I am intellectually and academically superior to them and they know that I am that. This means the company of old friends, acquaintances, and former classmates who have longed acknowledged my superiority in that aspect (the mental aspect, that is).

Physically-speaking, I am comfortable inside the classroom, in my room and in our house. I am a homebody. I hate travelling, that's a no-brainer. I also hate going to various places or transferring from one place to another. There are people who can't stay on one place; I am the exact opposite. I am happy staying in one location unless I go to specifically hop from one place to another such as bar hopping, etc.

Emotionally, I seldom acknowledge my true emotions. Acknowledging my real emotions seems so painful to me. I fear the epiphany that comes with being true to my emotions. What I'm good at rationalizing. I've heard somewhere that rationalizing has something to do with one's ego. The bigger the ego, the more a person is prone to rationalize. It has something to do with grandiosity:the presumptuous feeling that something could not happen to me because I am above it; or that what happens to the other person could not happen to me because I am special or different or both.

I am glad that I am acknowledging this fear of coming out of my comfort zone. It is the beginning of wisdom. But I still don't know what to do about it, or how to go about it, or much more important, how to cure it.

Hmmm, drugs kaya. I mean, medication. I have read of a drug which cures the blues. This drug gives an effect of lifting the moods. But I doubt if it is available in the Philippines. I have read about it in an Australian magazine. Anyway, I'll research about. And I'll find substitutes if there are.

For now I am banking on prayer, meditation and a little bit of Yoga. Among these, I believe prayer is the best drug there is.Being addicted to God is not such a bad thing. Not bad at all.

Agoraphobic celebrities

Sharonian

I don't know about YU (hint!), er, you, but me I am a Sharonian!

Nooooooh, I don't mean that kind of Sharonian. I could care less about local showbiz lest i'll be called cheapangga. I really don't give a frigging hoot about local showbiz. Hollywood, yes; local showbiz, no. . . .

Anyway, what I mean about Sharonian: i am one of Sharon's fans, or more appropriately, friend! And I am quite proud to say that.

The Sharon I'm referring to ladies and gents is not Kiko's consort and KC's mom but my high school friend Sharon.

Through the years I have learned to appreciate Sharon's friendship. Not that i am this cold-blooded, full-blooded SOB, although I concede to being a bitchy, naughty, yet brainy me (ehem!). You see, although I am quite adept at the academics department, I am a total moron when it comes to the relational department. Truth to tell, I tend to leave friendship and friends by the wayside. Hell, I DO tend to take people for granted.

But my friend Sharon has been a good friend since way back when. She is this unobtrusive friend, a shadow in the background yet her presence as a friend is both felt and appreciated. She has this amazing talent of being always there for YU(hint again!), er, you yet does not take the spotlight from you. Neither does she a straight-in-your face friend who wants to be recognized for every good deed she does . She does her stuff, as any good friend does, but lets you be.

I have been a blessed recipient to many of Sharon's goodness and kindness, and I would be really hard pressed to repay them all (So help me God!). There was this one time when i was at one of the darkest and lowest moments in my life, and she gave me a gift which really helped me see myself through that lousy period. (Sharon knows this! If any reader is clueless, go read Sharon's blog.) I was so touched by her gesture. (Thanks again, Sha!) There are many, many more such similar acts which have again and again made me realized how good and wonderful a friend Sharon is. I hope my friendship with Sharon gets stronger through the years.

Truly, I'm a Sharonian. And that's no mere showbiz tsika. 

Sharon Cuneta.com