Veneration with or without understanding free essay sample

One of the most debatable issues of today is Dr. Jose Rizal’s legitimacy as the Philippines’ National Hero. Renato Constantino pointed out facts contradicting Rizal’s appointment in his article Veneration without Understanding. The main argument being that since Rizal did not lead the 1986 revolution, he is not worthy enough to be the national hero. Constantino pointed out that almost all national hero of the world are revolutionary heroes and if you did not lead a revolution, your chances of becoming as the national hero is very little. While it is true that Rizal did not want a revolution as proven when he said â€Å"I cannot do less than condemn this uprising†¦ which dishonours us Filipinos, and discredits those that could plead our cause†¦Ã¢â‚¬  he did have countless achievements of his own that rightly qualifies him as the national hero. Armando Malay refuted Constantino’s claims in his article Veneration with Understanding where he said, â€Å"A man becomes a hero, or a national hero, not because he leads a revolution – but because he is admired for his achievements and noble qualities, and considered a model or ideal. Rizal was a novelist, poet, ophthalmologist, journalist and sculptor, among any others. He has had far too many achievements that the Filipino people greatly admired him for, to the point that the need to put him into a higher regard arose. His myriad achievements standing out among others made him into what an admirable icon he is today. Constantino limited the criteria of becoming the national hero to just being a revolutionary one. It is true that Rizal did not want any part in the revolution because he wanted a less harmful way in gaining Philippine Independence. Moreover, to rule him out of the national hero position due to this reason is unacceptable. The American-made One of Constantino’s main points in his article is the fact that Rizal is an American-sponsored National Hero. In Theodore Friend’s book Between Two Empires, Taft â€Å"chose Rizal over the too militant Aguinaldo, too radical Bonifacio and unregenerate Mabini†. The Americans easily accepted Rizal’s proclamation, as they knew he could not oppress the American government that time. And upon his dramatic exile and martyrdom, he instantly became the symbol of the Spanish oppression. In return, the focus on him being the national hero would also divert the American oppression to the Spanish oppression, which he symbolizes. In Malay’s defense, though, the Philippine revolutionary government already honored Rizal when Aguinaldo declared the day of his death as a day of mourning. In addition, Rizal was the honorary president of the Katipunan wherein he is already regarded as a hero. Prior to Rizal’s proclamation, Filipinos already had a high regard for him even if he was not part of the revolution. The Elitist Rizal was a part of the Ilustrados or the enlightened ones. He was part of the Filipino educated class during the Spanish colonial period. Constantino cited that Rizal, as an Ilustrado, condemned the Revolution because he underestimated the power of the people. Constantino also pointed out that Rizal’s idea of liberty was demanding the right of freedom not because it is a national right but because it is something deserved by the Filipinos. It is wrong for Constantino to assume that Rizal, being one of the elites, had a sub-conscious disrespect for the Filipinos’ ability to enunciate their own demands. In a way, Rizal helped in bridging the gap between the educated and the non-educated ones. In his novels Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo, Rizal exposed the injustices of the Spanish catholic priests and the government. The effect of his writings is still evident until today as the Filipinos strived hard to gain the independence they are experiencing at the present. Another of Constantino’s points is that Rizal â€Å"chose Spain as the arena of their struggle instead of working among their own people, educating them, helping them realize their own condition, and in articulating their own aspirations. † This is another one of Constantino’s unjust criterion in being a national hero. National heroes need not to work among his own people in order for him to be referred as one. As Malay had rebutted this out, â€Å"There is a difference between the main characters in a novel and those whom the author would set up as a model for emulation. The heroes in Rizal’s novels were not Ibarra, Maria Clara or Fray Damaso and Fray Salvi. In contradistinction, Rizal gave us Elias, a man of the masses; Father Florentino, a Filipino priest; Juli and Sisa, and many other, who all sprang from the masses. † Rizal may have brought up in a better community where he was fortunate enough to receive the right to education, but he is still part of the masses. He did so by addressing the concerns of the Filipinos the best way he know how and that is through his writing. The Ilustrados certainly did not worked in Spain to isolate themselves from the masses of the country, but they did so to get ideas for reforms firsthand. It is true that the Filipinos were poorly represented out during the National Hero selection, but Rizal is still as qualified, if not more, as the other candidates. If Rizal were alive today, though, it would not be so much of an issue to him whether he is the national hero or not. After all, the Filipinos already gained the Independence they once all longed for.