Nick Joaquin

Culture and History Summary

Marshall McLuhan said, the medium is the message. In the case of culture, like literature and the arts,
the message is metamorphosis. We are being shaped by the tools we shape; and culture is the way of
life being impressed on a community by its technics.
McLuhan saw the introduction of different technologies as epochs of the altering culture. The coming of
print medium for example, paved the way for a culture of literate eyes, in contrast with a culture of the
senses. This changes how people view everyday life. The point is not how we use the tool but how the
tool uses us and changes us.
The change however is not given much importance in our history since (1) the people who brought them
were already so familiar with them that they could not assess the impact of the bringing of the tools to
others and (2) that we have written a history of our own country that we do not want to admit that the
changes brought by foreign entities are part of our culture and history. All parts of a story are equally
important thus one should not be embarrassed with downgrading eras.
Shifting the focus from conventional history to the history of culture will enable us to see the Filipinos
metamorphosis through the media. From such viewpoint we can see the process of the making of the
Filipino. The tools or media range from physical tools, Christianity, and even the alien intruders.
The change is our culture should not be viewed as one of corruption of the original, pre-Hispanic culture,
but that of a development. The absence of change or development in a boy would make him a cretin,
and no mother would want his son to be a cretin. If the older society survived the tool that corrupted
it, then it is not the really innovative tool; the really innovative tool will make the existing culture
obsolete. This can be likened to the introduction of cameras. While these cameras changed the main use
of paintings, paintings still continues but for a different main purpose other than before. The disruptions
of the arrangements and uses of things in a culture by new media, produces a different culture
altogether. The pre-camera culture is then different from the culture that is borne out of the
introduction of camera.
The culture of the Philippines in the 16h and 17th century has changed with the introduction of different
media and other practices. In the end the culture did not go under, but it emerged: transformed by the
new media. The pre-Spanish economy of the Philippines was a subsistent one. Undergoing economic
transformation, we became the first world economy of modern time, trading with three continents.
Before 1521, we lacked historical sense and a sense of national community. The Western influence
begot a sense of history and national community. The plow did not corrupt, it begot the Filipino.
Just like in other groups, a solidarity is formed by mastering a tool or craft. Examples are motorcycle
spawning a sub-culture of youth, and even groups of scientists and engineers. An outsider can be
absorbed by simply mastering the craft that forms somewhat an initiation to the group.
The Tagalog and Pampango, being near the seat of power, are thus the ones who were first colonized
and then found belongingness in a community of Filipinos. This would explain the nationalistic acts and
deeds that sprung from them. The other tribes who were outside this were later on assimilated.
One can argue that the Filipino as an identity existed before the name, but that will be anti-historical. IF
this is the case then the term Filipino is irrelevant since there was the identity before the name.
Philippines can be paraphrased as horsepower; Filipino a love of horsepower or a lover of energy. It
means dynamic.

The Filipino is a tool-forged fusion of Luzon tribes, Visayan tribes, Mindanao tribes, Spanish mestizos,
etc, bound by geography to form a political unit. The Filipino cannot be traced back farther than that
fusion and form. Like a baby changes into a child, the changes do not make the person another. All
possibilities of being contrary has been extinguished from the moment of conception. Before 1521 we
could have been anything and everything but not Filipino; after 1565, we are nothing but Filipino.
The Western influence has created the Filipino and up to a point where the Filipino was created, no
invasion could change what was now a Filipino soul. The course of culture may change, but not the soul
of culture (the Filipino identity).
If it be true that we were Westernized to the expense of our Asian soul, the blame must fall on Asia.
Despite the culture and civilization of the nearby China, Japan, Malaysia and Java, they did not influence
us. Even Confucianism, Taoism, Hinduism and Buddhism did not infiltrate our country. The spread of
Islam was very limited too. We did not get the wheel from India, nor the theatre from China nor the
plow form Thailand, nor the hospital from Cambodia, nor the city culture from Malaya, nor te horse
from Japan, nor spice culture from the Indies, nor architecture from Java, nor mathematics and sciences
from the Arabs. Even if the West had not come, the rest of Asia would not have minded the Philippines.
This leads to questioning whether we truly were ship-building people in the pre-Hispanic times,
trading with other countries. Our stories show otherwise because most of the characters and stories are
about the mountains, nothing of the sea. If the Filipinos were able to go to other countries, they would
have been able to see the civilization and brought these technologies to the country. The mere
possession of porcelain from China does not mean that the Filipinos were the ones who travelled to
other countries. Also, historical accounts from other countries about the coming of Philippine ships or
boats are rare if any at all. It was only in the colonization when the Chinese began coming to the
Philippines. It then can be said that the coming of the West has caused the other Asian countries to take
cognizance of the Philippines. Philippines became part of Asia, thanks to the West.
Given this, the process of our Westernization was also our process of Asianizing.
Our problem is the history of becoming. We cannot accept that the moment we became Filipinos was
the same moment we became Asians. It is our instinct to separate our being Asian with our being
Filipino. Culture itself is history and so we cannot exclude certain aspects or portions of our past, saying
that they brought about corruption to our true identity.
Why do we feel shame or guilt over our uniqueness of being a product of both Eastern and Western
influence? Why want to be East or West or North or South when we can be our own singular self as
culture and history have shaped us? To say that we ought to be not just Filipinos but also Asians betrays
a feeling of inadequacy. Why, isnt it enough to be just Filipinos?
Whether or not we reject the part of our history when Western influence begin to enter, we cannot
discount the fact that it started both our Westernization and Asianizing, which then made us. This is the
making of the Filipino. Skipping this truth is like removing the pan de sal and adobo from the Philippine
life.