"More than just looking at the Silos: Notes after Barrio Ugong"
It's been few years since this person tackled about ContemporAntiquity. Perhaps because he was fascinated with things past yet significant in this modern era, ContemporAntiquity bridges the values of both past and present in pursuit of creating a future that one may describe as "ideal", or even "utopian".
For after once sought the standing flour silos at Barrio Ugong, of unornamented but classical edifices made for San Miguel Brewery in Manila, to those of retromodernist structures in Makati and in Ortigas, these seemed to invoke a future that emphasises progress, industry, innovation, and solidarity amongst those longing enough to see a better nation.
This post should have been focused on architecture and design, given this person's initial interest, but it turned out to be more than just looking at the structure and admire its beauty, but getting to know the drivel behind those structures.
For after once sought the standing flour silos at Barrio Ugong, of unornamented but classical edifices made for San Miguel Brewery in Manila, to those of retromodernist structures in Makati and in Ortigas, these seemed to invoke a future that emphasises progress, industry, innovation, and solidarity amongst those longing enough to see a better nation.
This post should have been focused on architecture and design, given this person's initial interest, but it turned out to be more than just looking at the structure and admire its beauty, but getting to know the drivel behind those structures.
At one time, this person had a brief recall on the buildings of San Miguel in Manila. Of course, the company showed rather San Miguel's earliest structures which were remnants of Hispanic-period architecture from it's website and its commercials showcasing it's heritage.
However, this person find it much interesting the modern but rooted style of the early American period, wherein architecture of these San Miguel Brewery and its affiliates such as the former Magnolia Ice Cream Plant in Echague, Manila; the Coca Cola Bottling Plant in Otis, Paco, Manila; the Glass Factory at Farola in Tondo, Manila; and the San Miguel Brewery Administrative Building in San Miguel, Manila smacks of class, dignity, despite making it closer to then-futuristic setting; they are so similar of course, and perhaps it is possible that they were designed by one architect.
For as according to the page "Arquitectura Manila", one of the architects who designed several buildings for then-Soriano owned San Miguel during the American occupation was the German architect, Arthur Gabler-Gumbert, who started his practice in the Philippines in 1912. His style smacks of class-meets-industry in a form of "Stripped Classicism", which involves a less ornamental form of classical architecture as well as the use of concrete as a building material.
At some point in time these structures were eventually reused for another purpose if not being demolished or even threatened. The former Magnolia plant was taken over by the Iglesia Ni Cristo and became the first campus of New Era University; while the Administrative Building was then became the "New Executive Building" by Malacañang, after the latter taketh over the complex and demolished some of Gabler-Gumbet's structures. The Coca-Cola plant in Otis continues to be contested by heritage groups, whom advocated adaptive reuse as an alternative to an unjust demolition.
With this example this person would say that if not for those who clamour for preserving it for the present and for the future these would end rather seen in pictures or in this page as these actual edifices may end under the wrecking ball after years, if not decades of deterioration (and therefore awaiting to be destroyed for a new "forchrissakes" kind of structure). These structures, in fairness tend to bridge some artistry and industry as the company showed off decades ago- worthy to be described as ContemporAntiquitarian.
However, there is more than just in retaining old structures and adapting it in today's settings, in an era wherein development, sufficiency, ingenuity, and self-reliance as keywords, the need to revive industry is part of a country's renaissance, just like the past wherein reviving long lost values lies in the return to the soil, then so is the revival of long-lost industrial strength what a supposed "country of ideals" is.
Sadly, this kind of idea is treated as any other rhetoric. To revive industry, so is to revive agriculture, was and is nothing but a waste of time and effort if not insisting that venture as costly unlike those of depending on international capital and limiting itself to the production of consumer goods and sources of raw materials meant to be extracted for the developed countries. Those who insist "not to pursue" would even tell everyone that the idea, no matter how "ambitious", rather benefits the oligarchs and the like; while their "alternative" is in fact involves multinational lenders making a country at the mercy of the former. Is nationalism has to be reduced into a facade in a form of national costume, old houses and churches, boxing and basketball feats, and to some extent: so-called achievements in science and technology while agriculture and industry remains behind?
From this, it seems that China's Lin Biao was right that the Philippines, as any other developing and underdeveloped countries constitutes the "world's countryside" depending at the mercy of the "world city" that is, the developed "first world."
Sadly, this kind of idea is treated as any other rhetoric. To revive industry, so is to revive agriculture, was and is nothing but a waste of time and effort if not insisting that venture as costly unlike those of depending on international capital and limiting itself to the production of consumer goods and sources of raw materials meant to be extracted for the developed countries. Those who insist "not to pursue" would even tell everyone that the idea, no matter how "ambitious", rather benefits the oligarchs and the like; while their "alternative" is in fact involves multinational lenders making a country at the mercy of the former. Is nationalism has to be reduced into a facade in a form of national costume, old houses and churches, boxing and basketball feats, and to some extent: so-called achievements in science and technology while agriculture and industry remains behind?
From this, it seems that China's Lin Biao was right that the Philippines, as any other developing and underdeveloped countries constitutes the "world's countryside" depending at the mercy of the "world city" that is, the developed "first world."
Quite concerning although the Philippines hath afforded to recognise its feats in science and technology: the launching of its microsatellite few years ago hath made the system praise its intern-scientists whom assembled from another country, it did also appreciated its engineers from the government's research bureau who afforded to make modern agricultural machineries meant to lessen the burden of farmers and farmworkers, as well as biotechnologists for its desire to improve agriculture outputs using native and organically-based inputs; so is its gunsmiths whom trying to create guns and a variety of modern-day weaponry.
But why is it still concerning? That same system, was and is the same system who chose to be subservient. In a country whom chose to be the cheap source of raw material and manpower, these feats are nothing but gimmicks enough to tell its subjects that the country as progressive; yet, there are still major matters that meant to address: the need for an integrated steel industry would have helped these scientists, engineers in making their "dreams" possible, of a national food production program supported with Genuine Agrarian Reform and Rural Industrialisation that would maximise biotechnologists and farmers to make the country self-sufficient; these may be the usual promises of each and every politician, but, did they afford to push through as they swore to upheld a rotten status quo? That status quo rather make profit from it, if not choosing not to pursue for it is contrary to what multinationals imposed on them; the once populist turns out to be neoliberal, the self-proclaimed patriot turns out to be favoring globalisation, and the so-called "concerned" whom afforded to say "this is for the country's good" cried wolves out of those who truly asserted economic nationalism, self-reliance, and national will.
And because of this, it makes a concerned patriot blame the order, its politicians, the so-called planners whom in fact interest-seekers who offered plans which in fact benefited the few on the pretense that it will uplift the many; and so are those who assume to be for the country yet in regards to the economy they started to babble words like foreign investments, competition, and the like "just to counter oligarchs and big businesses"; so will this kind of "development" leads to a renaissance heroes dreamed of?
And because of this, it makes a concerned patriot blame the order, its politicians, the so-called planners whom in fact interest-seekers who offered plans which in fact benefited the few on the pretense that it will uplift the many; and so are those who assume to be for the country yet in regards to the economy they started to babble words like foreign investments, competition, and the like "just to counter oligarchs and big businesses"; so will this kind of "development" leads to a renaissance heroes dreamed of?
From these this reminded of a verse from "Istiklal Marsi" as it said:
Garbın afakını sarmışsa çelik zırhlı duvar,
Benim iman dolu göğsüm gibi serhaddim var.
Ulusun, korkma! Nasıl böyle bir imanı boğar,
“Medeniyet” dediğin tek dişi kalmış canavar?
The horizons of the West may be bound with walls of steel,
But my borders are guarded by the mighty bosom of a believer.
Bellow out: do not be afraid! And think: how can this fiery faith ever be extinguished,
By that battered, single-fanged monster you call "civilization"?
This verse, no matter how Turkish it is, would have ringed out the ears of the concerned as their country wishes to break its shackles, for when was the time it tried to stood on its own: was it the time of the Barangays when Panday Pira made his cannons? The age of Bonifacio? The era of Quezon and Laurel? The protests of 64 to 72? That civilisation imposed on the folk hinders as it limits a country's yearning for growth. True that the country did experienced the wonders of the present, but that wonder is limited to the city nor enjoyed by the people, for most of the farms remain trodded by Carabao and reaped by the scythe, what more that the farm is still owned by an haciendero who's willing to make partners with the multinational! Is this development? Then damn that development if this doesn't uplift the have-not from what him still stood today!
Anyway, this note, although initially deals about revisiting old architecture or the need for a national technological program (via industrialisation of course), hath made yours truly think that there is more than cherishing or asserting. Actually, what a concerned sought is a sad paradox, and one about which this writer is acutely aware in this note, that most Filipinos has failed to face: the end of the cold war with China eschewing Maoist principles for almost-Social Democratic-cum-Neoliberal and Conservative policies, the decline of political Manicheanism (East versus West) and the replacement of nations with markets, the mere promotion of foreign investment-driven progress over those of production-driven, and even the decline of nationalism as a relevant socio-political alternative to liberalism despite the relevance of populism in politics with politicians self-proclaiming as nationalists- and that includes Duterte himself. The so-called "Pinoy Pride" hath increasingly becoming cringy as well, yet most Filipinos chose not to think of it as a problem.
Sorry if to paraphrase Guillaume Faye, but like the latter, this person offers a number of explications for this failure. They can be summarized as a lack of media “savvy”, the reductionism of nationalism to "just aesthetics", minimization of catastrophe by the authorities, cultural relativism and a lack of understanding of and worse, interest in, (neoliberal) economics.
Perhaps men like Recto, Araneta, Tañada, Diokno, would have shared the thought of a country that chose to steer in its course, that neither those from Washington, Beijing, Tokyo, Berlin, or Moscow would impose its policies on them; sadly, these personages are already dead whilst those whom assuming to be patriotic are actually tolerating a view that is contrary to their supposed "patriotism" the way neoliberal economics been taught at schools, and trickle-down economics been assumed as "truths" while socialism be deemed falsehoods. And although true that there are Revolutionaries whom afforded to look at Marx, Lenin, Mao as examples, they also looked at the examples of Rizal, Bonifacio, Luna, as persons to revere given their desire to liberate the country and to emancipate the people; in fact, Rizal did looked at the examples of the enlightenment, if not Bonifacio from the lives of the American presidents, but these personages desired for a country traversing its road to its own utopia, to its desired future.
Sorry if to paraphrase Guillaume Faye, but like the latter, this person offers a number of explications for this failure. They can be summarized as a lack of media “savvy”, the reductionism of nationalism to "just aesthetics", minimization of catastrophe by the authorities, cultural relativism and a lack of understanding of and worse, interest in, (neoliberal) economics.
Perhaps men like Recto, Araneta, Tañada, Diokno, would have shared the thought of a country that chose to steer in its course, that neither those from Washington, Beijing, Tokyo, Berlin, or Moscow would impose its policies on them; sadly, these personages are already dead whilst those whom assuming to be patriotic are actually tolerating a view that is contrary to their supposed "patriotism" the way neoliberal economics been taught at schools, and trickle-down economics been assumed as "truths" while socialism be deemed falsehoods. And although true that there are Revolutionaries whom afforded to look at Marx, Lenin, Mao as examples, they also looked at the examples of Rizal, Bonifacio, Luna, as persons to revere given their desire to liberate the country and to emancipate the people; in fact, Rizal did looked at the examples of the enlightenment, if not Bonifacio from the lives of the American presidents, but these personages desired for a country traversing its road to its own utopia, to its desired future.
And Because of this, there lies a synthesis of thoughts, amplifying the strengths and restraining its excesses, of recognising class struggles and the redemption of their nations, the need for direct participation of the people and of the need to emphasise labor and knowledge in community-building, of restoring the traditions of the pasts and of calling for new social and technological innovations, like the factories of San Miguel and of the flour silos of Pasig, a concerned would hath express this: ContemporAntiquity.