Conferences and Research | Traditional Arts | Links | Blogs
| GEEJAY ARRIOLA artist, cultural worker |
| NESTOR HORFILLA artist, cultural worker |
| LYNDEE PRIETO artist, cultural worker |
| MACARIO TIU, PhD writer, academic |
| JOEY AYALA artist, cultural worker |
| RUDY B. RODIL historian, peace worker |
 |
| VIEWS The Revitalization of Philippine Art and Culture in the Regions: The Philippine Constitution, cognizant of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, has enshrined the recognition our "Rights to Culture" as a basic human right. It is a fundamental right of the communities to freely participate in its cultural life—whether in process of the evolution, conservation, preservation, and/or in the enhancement of cultural heritage and artistic traditions. Yet this right is of little value unless the creative and cultural forces that shape people's lives are respected and understood by the agents of change—the policy makers, artists-educators and cultural workers, government agencies, the private sector and the non-government organizations. My colleagues and myself, who are engaged in the arena of culture and artistic work and who advocate for the recognition of our cultural rights, have long recognized that Culture has greater worth than its economic value. Our people's culture is a living force, a catalyst for individual and human growth and social development. Likewise, culture (heritage and traditions), is an ecosystem as vital to sustaining human life and the physical environment, and equally as delicate as many indigenous cultures under siege from external influences, which threaten them. The Philippine Agenda 21, which defines the framework for sustainable development of the country, aptly states that: Indeed, a new awakening of the power of creativity and culture as a force of change is taking place. There are growing efforts in the communities and in government, aimed at locating how creative cultural actions can be used to promote empowerment and participation in governance. The Medium Term Development Plan for the year 1999-2004 of the Administration has articulated its policy and strategy in looking closely at the aspects of culture in the development process. It has signified the value of integrating arts, culture, media and heritage in the planned strategic interventions in achieving its goals, to wit: Hence, our advocacy for the conservation of our natural and cultural heritage has been recognized both by the advocates and the policy-makers as an urgent concern with policy and legal basis. Moreover, the active interface of Culture and Development is more urgent in a multi-ethnic and culturally pluralistic society such as Mindanao. The policy-strategy and mechanisms for the conservation of our natural resources has been very well spelled out in the National Integrated Protected Area System Act, aptly called as the NIPAS Act of 1992. The Philippines is recognized as one of the few remaining sites in the world, that boasts of its mega bio-diversity. However, it also remains as one of the hotspots in the world where bio-diversity resources are being destroyed and depleted in a much faster pace. On the other hand, the issuance of Public Act No. 4368 created the National Historical Commission, which was tasked to identify, designate and mark historic places in the country. Subsequently, PD 374, the country's Cultural Property Act issued in 1974, has designated the National Museum to supervise, preserve, conserve and restore outstanding structures, buildings, monuments, towns and cities declared as national cultural treasures and properties. But the fact remains that there has been a continued deterioration and neglect of our cultural heritage sites. Even the conservation of our declared world heritage sites (e.g. Rice Terraces, Paoay Church, Protected landscapes and seascapes, etc.) is saddled by multifarious problems and limitations. Foremost is the low-level of awareness and appreciation as well as the limited concern, if not apathy, being exhibited by local communities in preservation and conservation efforts. To elucidate this point, let me take you to a quick tour of the identified needs of the various historical sites located in the provinces and cities of Davao. This list is a sample list that could provide a glimpse on the state of neglect that communities and perhaps of the local government as well, have given to these landmarks.
A cursory survey indicates that more than six (6) out of ten (10), or sixty percent of the total population of the city are not aware of the historical significance of these sites. A new Monument depicting the unity of the peoples of Davao was erected in the city during the centennial celebration, yet the identified historical sites were not given due recognition and attention. Moreover, these sites are not even integrated as learning content in local schools and colleges. Likewise, there is very little space in tourism-related brochures and in organized cultural events allocated to promote social consciousness on these cultural and historic sites. We can also refer to the unsustained concern over the status of the various identified cultural sites in the Sarangani region. Allow me to stress the last few points I wish to re-iterate as urgent Advocacy Issues and Concerns for the preservation and conservation of our cultural heritage. A. Lack of Monuments and/or the Abandonment of Monuments and Cultural Sites We face an ironic situation in the region: on one hand, we boast of the wealth of our cultural heritage and traditions, on the other there is a lack of cultural monuments and limited collection, preservation, and popularization of folk literature, oral history and indigenous wisdom of cultural communities, which are not considered as significant treasures of our local communities. Three factors perpetuate this situation: poverty in the region, the effects of long years of war, and the destruction of our natural resources—cultural sanctuaries of indigenous peoples, that has contributed much to the loss of our cultural monuments (material and immaterial), the desecration of cultural and spiritual landscapes and consequently, a low level of self-esteem and an impaired racial memory. B. Limited Appreciation of the Cultural Landscapes and Territories of Indigenous Communities as Heritage Sites and Cultural Symbols, and Limited Support in Integrating Cultural Communities as "Living Cultures" that Enhance Our Creative Diversities Colleagues in cultural work commonly observe that there is very limited regard and recognition of the non-material cultural symbols of indigenous peoples and inadequate protection and conservation of their sacred places as cultural sanctuaries. The pre-historic heritage sites which are still vivid in the collective memories of indigenous peoples are not given much attention. A B'laan creation myth narrates that the island was created from a small bunch of twigs and leaves that was cast by a mythical bird into the bodies of water. A Manobo folktale explains that the island is free from tremors because the Creator had propped up the island with mighty rivers that balanced the weight of the landscapes. Both the B'laan and the Ubo can vividly recall the relationships of their revered and shared ancestors—Apo and Matutum. They can pinpoint the cultural highways crossed by their ancestors to reach the homelands of both Apo and Matutum. What is even more significant is that indigenous peoples can still name and identify the exact places where their ancestors and folk-heroes had lived, and the specific sites of adventures and battles. But these sites have not been monumented, worse, destroyed, threatening into oblivion the oral history of the tribes. C. Lack of Comprehensive and Integrated Community-based Cultural Programs for the Preservation and Revitalization of Local Cultures This concern implies setting-up of facilitative structures and mechanisms to include the following: 1. Development of a massive community education program beyond mere production and dissemination of IEC materials; The conservation of our cultural resources and heritage sites is a multi-disciplinary means of safeguarding the country's historico-cultural heritage. Moreover, it involves the participation of the major stakeholders, not just the so-called "conservation experts" but most importantly, the members of the community. This is precisely what I termed as advancing the recognition of the "Participatory Filipino"—an apt cultural trait considering the terms in the local language that connotes involvement (Bisaya: pagsalmot, pakig-lambigit, pakig-uban, pag-apil, pakigsandurot, etc.) Together the various stakeholders must understand, appreciate, and inculcate in themselves the combined historical, socio-cultural, artistic, scientific significance and uniqueness of our heritage sites and cultural symbols. D. Localization of National Policies and Prioritization for Public Investments Agri-industrial sectors have massively extracted resources from the region, including the non-renewable resources, yet very limited resource has been plowed back to the region in support of the preservation, conservation, and restoration of our cultural and natural heritage. Cultural festivals are held in the guise of promoting our cultural heritage, but in most cases, the goals of these festivals are mainly to boost the culture-economy and tourism potentials generated by these events. While there have been significant strides in our advocacy efforts towards effecting national policies, there have been very few efforts done in localizing these responsive policies. We hope to see in the immediate future the realization of the Local Codes on "Culture and Development," and the establishment of Local Councils for Culture, Arts and Heritage in every barangay, municipality, city and province in the entire Mindanao and Sulu islands. Moreover, we hope that a significant portion of public spending responds not only to the basic needs of communities, but also supports their cultural rights and cultural needs. We hope local government units can find creative means of mandating resource-extractive industries and corporations to invest in culture and heritage development programs, thus plowing back the extracted resources for community cultural development. We believe that cultural action plays a vital role in the development process. Indeed, people have to be housed and fed, but the inability of the communities to creatively express themselves, to transform their situation and chart a future of their own, is as dangerous to the human condition as the lack of food and shelter. I had tried to outline the legal basis and the cultural context of the advocacy efforts towards the protection and conservation of our heritage sites. Likewise, several issues and concerns have been identified and raised. We hope that this august body can locate several action-oriented programs and mechanisms that are appropriate and viable and which can be implemented in situ. In ending, allow me to remind all of us that the impact of Development and Global Change on the diversity of our cultural heritage and symbols is akin to a two-sided blade, which can either enhance or threaten our local cultures. Hence, the urgent need to implement our action-agenda Now! A Paper on ADVOCACY FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL HERITAGE read during the Regional Tourism Council Assembly held on September 3, 1999 at General Santos City. |
|
The Revitalization of Philippine Art and Culture in the Regions by Nestor Horfilla Creative Pathways to Peace by Nestor Horfilla and Geejay Arriola |
photos: gauss obenza, maan chua, IPAG, kumbingan ensemble, geejay arriola, sining kambayoka, bobby timonera
copyright 2006 pixies and pixels