Friday, 11 September 2015

Tradition over "tradition"

Tradition over "tradition"

Or Ramblings after seeing anything rootless yet "tolerated"
And those that are relevant yet disregarded if not censored

Some people wanted to revive traditions. But what kind of tradition has to be emphasised? Is it the revolutionary traditions emanating from works of asserting an ideal or the "traditions" in which the system has trying to keep for generations? It may deemed confusing, especially that these two are oftentimes similar yet different in its interpretation when it comes to certain terms and acts, be it those of change or for means to keep in order.  And that behind every painting, sculpture, music, to those of protest action, decree lies a tradition that emphasises not just making a new yet rooted order, but a means to grow and bear fruit, and that fruit is capable of bringing change in which the system tries to control its growth if not nipping it off from the bud.

Sounds radical isn't it? That in pursuit of reclaiming traditions requires asserting an ideal different from those of the system's, and making it closer to the people in order to understand its relevance, particularly those of the realities in which the system chose to disregard if not belittle such inconvent existence. That to those who afforded to say that art, be it in its various forms like painting, sculpture, literature, cinema, or even new and mixed media as "for the people" are trying to find the relevance of, if not putting a desire for having a tradition different from what is regularly shown that is diluted, since they wanted an adulterated one that for sure lies inconveniences on the system's behalf, knowing that in it harms their interests as such. 
If not mistaken, most of the art that reflects realities are likely to be branded as "indie", of being praised by international critics and academicians, hidden beneath the comedic skits and language, or even banned simply because of its incorrect message according to censors that made some resorting to some dilutions. Yet despite the remarks, people afforded to appreciate knowing that it afforded to show what goes behind what the system tries to show on. That from the novels like Ibong Mandaragit, GapĂ´, and Sky Rose; Movies like Dukot, Orapronobis, Bayan Ko Kapit sa Patalim, Manila by Night, Himala, Sakay, Jose Rizal, Heneral Luna, Sigwa, Gagay Prinsesa ng Brownout; to the Artworks of Fernando Amorsolo, Victorio Edades, and Orlando Castillo, these works did reflect the inconvenient reality ranging from frequent brownouts, enforced disappearances, poverty and all the inconvenient likes, if not a desire for change idealised by some, if not most.

And these desires are imbued by traditions. These can be describe as a tradition of hope, a tradition of justice, or even a tradition of liberation in a way those who struggled for it really cherished those traditions for decades, if not centuries. Call it misunderstood patriotism or misunderstood idea of virtue and enlightenment, but that tradition has been watered by the blood of those who really fought and died for it, and being immoralised by the works of well-known individuals whose imagination was based from such truths. Of what are the artworks, paperworks, and even protests if not because of that tradition? Not just the realities that drives them to be aware and roll their sleeves to continue a centuries-old epic. If not mistaken, even the works of Balagtas has almost invoke the aspirations of the PhilHellenes in which Lord Byron has participated with all its passages reflecting those of justice and freedom if not those of love, that the sculptures of Tolentino has invoked as same as Arno Bekker's in showing a new being full of vigour and youth; call it misunderstood given their expressions far from the typical, but compared to what is regularly shown that is watered-down theirs is rich and full, bittersweet if it tasted or felt, yet satisfying those aspirations knowing that there lies the truth and it needs justice through its fulfillment.

As time goes by, the tradition that is revolutionary has anything to do with putting justice, equity, freedom over those of the system's, in a country where expressing beyond parameters, of seeking truth from facts is almost being abhorred while tolerating those of consumption and apathy all for chrissakes, the word tradition or revolution is limited to those of rhetorics and showcases featured for tourists if not for children studying culture for higher grades. But in reality, the modern society everyone enjoys is a distorted version of what the past aspired for: that they lean towards the illusions the "civilisation" has offered than the spirit what comes from its own has provided. For sure detractors would afford to say "then how come the revolutionary tradition has also carries a greater strain from the west?" But at least, that strain tries to make it as its own, particularly those of the virtues it tries to be shown. The west did tried to cultivate better things same as those from the east, but, did the west really tried to adhere on their messages? Of being serious in its so-called benevolence? Right was Julius Evola that the west created everying contrarian in its actually existing form, far from its messages being babbled for generations:

“America ... has created a 'civilization' that represents an exact contradiction of the ancient European tradition. It has introduced the religion of praxis and productivity; it has put the quest for profit, great industrial production, and mechanical, visible, and quantitative achievements over any other interest. It has generated a soulless greatness of a purely technological and collective nature, lacking any background of transcendence, inner light, and true spirituality. America has [built a society where] man becomes a mere instrument of production and material productivity within a conformist social conglomerate.”

Sorry to quote Evola, but as their illusion continues to creep, of diluting peoples aspirations to make their interest predominate, isn't it obvious that their quest is really existing true than their messages? This person may have quoted the example of the west, of America and other "developed countries" preying on those of the developing, that somehow followed suit by its respective vassals whom consistent in using their messages, trying to make it popular by using the native tounge and its simplistic form enough to understand; in order to evade everyone from seeking the truth, of making everyone conform than to oppose, the shit that has been made from then till the present. 
Admittingly speaking, no wonder why the revolt has been remain unfinished, that those who are aware afforded to revolt against the bullshits the system has turned into "traditions" particularly those of putting self-interest above the law. 

After all, the rule of law has becoming a codified rule of men, particularly those who think that they can evade the truth by distrorting or diluting just to keep their "tradition".