The total conclusion of the entire sixty-six books of the Bible is the New Jerusalem. The ultimate consummation of all that God is and of all His work and achievements, from eternity past to eternity future, is the New Jerusalem.1 Today, as people read about the New Jerusalem, written in the book of Revelation, they interpret and say that the New Jerusalem is a physical city, mansion, and building. They said that it is where we are going to lodge for eternity. In this paper, we will see if the New Jerusalem is truly a physical mansion or is it a wonderful and mysterious corporate person. Using library research, I will take up four things. First, I will describe the New Jerusalem as literally described. Second, I will discuss the traditional teachings concerning New Jerusalem as a physical city. Third, I will point out at least six reasons why the New Jerusalem could not be a physical city. Finally, I will discuss that the New Jerusalem is a corporate person or a personal building. The importance of this paper is to let the readers know the real, biblical, scriptural, and spiritual meaning of the New Jerusalem. This will open their eyes to see the New Jerusalem not as a physical city or mansion but as a personal building.
By reading the Bible, we can see God. Although God is a mystery, the Bible reveals Him to us in a great and clear way. The Bible also shows us the source of the universe. We do not need to grope ourselves like blind men to know the source of the universe, and we do not need scientists like Darwin to tell us our beginning. When we come to the first verse of the Bible, Genesis, it tells us that God created the heavens and the earth. The Bible also tells us where man came from. Man came from God and was created by God. When we come to the Word of God, we receive or can attain much knowledge and revelation or even visions concerning God and His economy. But we are always trying to know the result, the issue, of the sixty-six books of the Bible. According to the black and white letters, we all can see that the last item of the sixty-six books of the Bible is the New Jerusalem.
In Revelation 21:2, we see that the New Jerusalem is a city. As a city, there has to be a foundation. The foundation of this city is built with precious stones.2 This foundation has twelve layers of precious stones. These precious stones have variety of colors. The first is green, the second and third are blue, the fourth is green, the fifth and sixth are red, the seventh is yellow, the eighth is bluish-green, the ninth is yellow, the tenth is apple-green, the eleventh and twelfth are purple.3 The length, the breadth, and height of this city are equal. It is twelve thousand stadia in its dimension.4 Through this measurement; we can see that the New Jerusalem is cube. This city has wall for its protection. Its wall is built with precious stones and jasper.5 It has not only wall but also gates. It has twelve gates. These gates are for the entrance to the city. Since the city is cube it has four sides. In each side, has three gates built with pearls. Each gate has an angel. As we enter the city we can see only one and unique street, built with gold, which leads us to throne of God and of the Lamb.6 In the middle of the street there is the river of life flowing. On the side and on the other side of the river has the tree of life. The city proper is gold that is why this city is called the mountain of gold. In Revelation 3:13, we can see that the city has no temple because the temple and the pillar is the God Almighty and the Lamb. In verse 23 of chapter 21, it says there that the city has no needed neither of the sun nor of the moon for its light, because the glory of God illumined it and its lamp is the Lamb. On the top of the city, we can see the throne of God. There is no problem to the throne because the unique spiral street will eventually lead the people to the top of the golden mountain with the throne.
Probably, through the description of the New Jerusalem, from the book of Revelation, many considered such as a physical and a heavenly city, mansion, and building. This is the traditional teaching concerning the New Jerusalem. All of us, however, have been somewhat influenced by the traditional teachings in Christianity.7 There was a gospel song about the New Jerusalem which told people how good heaven is. According to this song, the streets in heaven were gold, and the gates were made of pearls. According to the traditional teaching, the New Jerusalem is such as physical as it was described.8 This concept occupies our thoughts, so we believe that the Bible ended with a heavenly city. With our mentality occupied with such a concept, we would never think that the New Jerusalem is the ultimate consummation of the entire divine revelation.
The thought that we adopted was that the New Jerusalem was simply a wonderful place, and we never gave any room for another thought to come in concerning the New Jerusalem. Because of the descriptions, people translated the New Jerusalem as a physical city. The other reason for this is that of John 14 in which the Lord Jesus is talking about His going to prepare many abodes in His Father’s house. They equated this house with the New Jerusalem. This gives an idea that it is truly such a physical building because of the words written in verses such as house, abodes and prepare. According to their interpretation, the abodes that Jesus was preparing are the New Jerusalem.9 That is why most of the readers of the Bible scholars don’t spend much time in understanding the last two chapters of Revelation because they think that the New Jerusalem is the many abodes that has been prepared by Jesus for us. They believe that the Lord will bring us to that many abodes, New Jerusalem, after His second coming. Her are some traditional teachings written in books which are teaching the people that the many abodes is the New Jerusalem and is something or is truly a physical city to lodge in. “The Quest Study Bible” notes the Father’s house with heaven. “The Nelson Study Bible” emphasized that humans are longing for a secure place in heaven after Christ second coming.” Inside Heaven’s Gates” told us that our comfort consists in having a home in heaven, a place prepared for us. “Foundations of the Christian Faith” taught us that Christ prepare heaven for us. “What the Bible Reveals about the Heaven” teaches that our prepared place is in heaven. “The Gospel of John” emphasized on the human need for a prepared place. “The Theology of John” teaches every believer, each child of God, will have suite of rooms, with each suite individually designed and prepared. All those quoted phrases are titles of books that equate the Father’s house with heaven and even the New Jerusalem. They said so because they believe that the New Jerusalem is for His children to lodge and in John 14, it talks about abodes to lodge in. This seemed to be the official, traditional teaching. No matter how widespread these things are, we must know that it is altogether contrary to the divine revelation in the Scriptures and is false. So what is really the meaning of the “abodes” and “Father’s house” in John 14?
In the Father’s house—that is, God’s corporate, organic, spiritual dwelling place—there are abodes. The word “abodes” (not mansions) is the correct translation here. The same word appears in the singular in verse 23: “Jesus answered and said to him, if anyone loves Me, he will keep my word, and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make an abode with him.” An abode is a dwelling place. The many abodes in verse 2 and the abode in verse 23 are dwelling places. Taken together, verses 2 and 23 reveals that the many abodes in the Father’s house are the many believers of Christ. In the Father’s house there are many abodes, many dwelling places. The Father’s house is the Body of Christ…composed of the believers as members…and every member is an abode of the Father’s house.10
Although we may accept the teachings about what has been taught in the traditional teachings, we should not forget to give a room for the other truths that are real and significant. This proves (the quotes above) that the many abodes don’t mean the New Jerusalem because the abodes are the believer of Christ and the Father’s house is the Body of Christ. So, now we have an understanding that the “Father’s house” and the “abodes” are not the same as the New Jerusalem. But there is still a problem because if we are not going to consider John 14’s abodes and house as the New Jerusalem, there is still that would confuse the people about the description written in Revelation 21 and 22. That may be the reason for being a physical building.
Here are six reasons why the New Jerusalem could not be a physical building. At this point, let us be open-minded and open our spirits to receive this revelation.
First, we must realize that the first verse of the book of Revelation tells us how this book was written: “The revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave to Him to show to His slaves what must swiftly take place; and He made it known by signs.”11 This verse tells us that the Lord Jesus made this God-given revelation known to us by signs. The word “signs” is important here. The word “signs” is the key word to interpret the entire book of Revelation. Revelation is a book of signs. Every number in this book is a sign. The lampstands are signs. The Lamb who was slain is a sign. The lion is a sign. The seven stars, bowls, four creatures are signs. In Revelation 12:1, the universal woman crowned with twelve stars, clothed with the sun, and standing on the moon is a great sign. Also, in Revelation 12, the great red dragon is a sign. In chapter 19 we see a bride, the wife of the Lamb, who is clothed with righteousness, is still a sign. What is the last great sign in Revelation? The last sign of this book, which is made known to us by signs, is the New Jerusalem. This is a great sign. The descriptions concerning it are all signs. Now if you consider the other items in Revelation as signs and interpret it but you don’t consider the New Jerusalem as a sign, but as if as it is described, then you are not consistent and you oppose the Word of God that it is a sign. Signs are physical things and their interpretation has to be under the authority of God.
The second reason that we could not say that the New Jerusalem is a physical mansion or a physical city for God’s people to lodge in is that it is altogether not logical to say so.12 Why is it not logical? If we are going to consider each characteristic and description of this city we could not say that it is not logical or illogical. The New Jerusalem, the holy city, is a golden mountain. This mountain is twelve thousand stadia with three dimensions. The length, the breadth, and the height of the city are twelve thousand stadia. Twelve thousand stadia is about thirteen hundred and fifty miles. Such a high mountain has only one street that goes down spirally from the top of the mountain to reach all the twelve gates on the four sides of the city. If this is a real city to lodge in, we must ask how all God’s redeemed from the time of Adam to the coming generations could lodge there? The number of these people is absolutely large and huge. The space is not enough for them. The gates of the city are built up with pearls. If this is a real city, where could God take such a big pearls for the gates of the city? The city has no light because the lamb is the lamp. If this is a real city, where can God get a lamb to shine? Have you ever seen a lamb that can shine or that is used as a lamp? And this one lamb shines the whole city. How come? The street is spiral from the top of the mountain down below. If this were a real city, after the people reached the top, what would they do? Are they going down again? If they go down, what would they do? Are they going up again? Can you imagine the life being there? Hence, this city could not be a physical city because it is altogether illogical.
The third reason why the New Jerusalem could not be a physical mansion is that Revelation itself tells us that this city is the wife of the Lamb. According to the entire Bible, there is a divine romance between God the Creator, the Redeemer, who is the male, and His redeemed people who are the female.13 This is a basic thing revealed in the Bible. In the Old Testament God told His redeemed people, Israel, the He was their husband and that they were His wife such as Isaiah 54:5; Jeremiah 3:14; 31:32 and Hosea 2:19. When the Lord Jesus came, John the Baptist told his disciples that Christ was the Bridegroom coming to take the bride that is the church (John 3:29). Then Paul told us in Ephesians 5 that the wife typifies the church and the husband typifies Christ (vv. 24-25). Therefore, Christ is the husband and the church is the wife. Paul in 2 Corinthians 11:2 said that he had betrothed us as a virgin to one husband who is Christ. The wife is the aggregate of all the overcoming saints from Adam until the Lord comes back. The aggregate of all the Old Testament overcomers and the New Testament overcomers is the wife in Revelation 19:7 who will be ready for Christ’s wedding. The New Jerusalem is the consummation of God’s counterpart, the aggregate of all His redeemed and perfected people. The whole Bible reveals to us that God is the universal husband and His redeemed and perfected people are the universal counterpart to match God. If we have known this universal divine romance then this needs a consummation and the consummation is the New Jerusalem as the wife of the Savior and Redeemer, Christ. Remember, Christ cannot marry a physical mansion or a city but a corporate person.
The fourth reason that the New Jerusalem is not a physical building is that Revelation tells us that the New Jerusalem is God’s tabernacle and the temple of God.14 John said that he did not see a temple in the city for its temple was the Lord and the Lamb. The tabernacle in the Old Testament is not only the dwelling place of God but also the dwelling place of His serving priests. The serving priests who served God dwelt with God in the tabernacle. Hence, the tabernacle is both the dwelling place of God and His priests (the ones who served Him). Priests are God’s serving ones. In Revelation 22:3 we are told that the perfected believers in eternity will be God’s serving ones. Therefore, all of them dwell in the tabernacle with God. According to typology, the tabernacle was a precursor of the temple that brought in the temple. John did not see the temple because he saw that God and the Lamb was the temple, which means that God and the Lamb will become the dwelling place of His serving ones. The tabernacle is God’s dwelling place with His serving ones and this God who dwells in the tabernacle is the temple that is the dwelling place of His serving ones. Our dwelling place for eternity is God Himself. We will not dwell in a big mansion but we will dwell in God. We are His tabernacles and He is our temple. We dwell in Him, and He dwell in us; this is mutual dwelling in the New Jerusalem.15 The New Jerusalem could not be a physical city because it is God dwelling in His redeemed people and His redeemed people dwelling in God for eternity…. This is the mutual dwelling, mutual abiding and mutual habitation for eternity.
The fifth reason why the New Jerusalem could not be a physical city because it is the consummation of all God’s building.16 Can you still remember that first, God charged Noah to build the ark. Then we see that Abraham was looking for a city with a foundation to build a tabernacle. Later, the Israelites entered into the good land and built a temple. In the New Testament, the Lord said that He would build His church. He also told the Jews that if they will destroy the temple (His Body), He would raise it up in three days. Peter rebuked the Jews by saying that they, the builders, had rejected Christ as the cornerstone of God’s building. Paul told us that we are the house of God and God’s building. Paul as the wise master builder laid the foundation, and we have to build upon the foundation, taking heed not to build with wood, grass, and stubble, but with gold, silver, and precious stones. In 1 Peter 2:4-5, Peter told us that Christ is the living stone and we are the living stones to be built up into a spiritual house. The materials that are used in the New Jerusalem signify the believers and the Triune God built up as one entity. This is the consummation of all the building in the divine economy of God. The materials that are being used to form the New Jerusalem are God and His chosen and perfected ones.17
Now we must see the final reason why the New Jerusalem could not be interpreted as a physical mansion. Our God is the great Triune God—the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. The Father has an eternal plan with a marvelous economy and the Son accomplished this economy by becoming a man, by His living on this earth, by His dying on the cross, and by His entering into resurrection and ascension. The Son’s achievements were excellent, marvelous, and very meaningful. Then the Spirit came to apply all that the Son had accomplished to us. The Spirit’s work is to regenerate us and now is working within us to transform, redeem, and even make us like Christ. By all of these, the church is produced and built up and there is a kingdom for the overcomers to rule the nations with Christ for a thousand years. The great Triune God with all His achievements and workings throughout the ages surely needs a marvelous consummation. Can you imagine how God went through many processes just to be in man and for so many years He waited to be with His redeemed and perfected ones and for so may years that He waited for this New Jerusalem because this is the consummation of all that God is and His achievements, then this New Jerusalem is just a physical city? Can you imagine that the great God from eternity past to eternity future would just consummate in a physical city? The consummation of all His works and achievements has to be great, glorious, amazing, perfect, marvelous, and not even all the brains of humanity could understand this wonderful consummation. Hence, this wonderful consummation would be the New Jerusalem for eternity.18
Those are the six reasons that show us that the New Jerusalem could not be a physical mansion or a physical city for God’s redeemed people to lodge in.
If the New Jerusalem is not a physical city, then what is it? The New Jerusalem is a personal building.19 When we say physical city, it is built with physical materials such as gold, silver, and precious stones. The personal and physical buildings matters most on the materials being used in the building. When we say it is personal, we refer to the materials in the building as persons, living persons. The New Jerusalem is a personal building hence, it is built up with living persons such as the Triune God and His chosen, redeemed, transformed, and glorified people.
Now here are some proofs that the New Jerusalem is truly a personal building. Revelation 3:12 says, “He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he shall by no means go out anymore, and I will write upon him the name of My God and the name of the city of My God, the New Jerusalem, which descends out of heaven from My God, and My new name.” The point of this verse is crucial—in the coming temple of God, the pillar is a person. He who overcomes will be made a pillar in the temple of God. We have seen already in Revelation 21:22 that John the beloved, writer of the book of Revelation who has seen such a vision, told us that he saw no temple in the New Jerusalem because the temple is the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb. Here, the pillar is the person who overcomes and the temple itself is a great Person, God. Could it be that the pillar and the temple in the city is a person and not the whole city? If the person is the pillar of the city that is so big, how could this person hold the city?
The New Jerusalem, as we have seen, is the consummation of all the building in the Bible. In the Old Testament, physical matters typify the tabernacle and the temple. In the Old Testament there is a physical gold in the tabernacle. But when we come to the fulfillment of God’s building in the New Testament, there is nothing merely physical. The stones in God’s building are living persons. When Peter came to the Lord the first time, God called him Cephas, which means a stone.20 Peter then wrote in his first Epistle that the Lord Himself is a living stone and that the believers are living stones. Paul also told us that as a wise master builder he had laid the foundation of God’s building upon which we, the believers, should build with gold, silver, and precious stones. Surely the stones and the living stone here are not physical things because they typify the perfected believers and the Almighty God. These are persons confirmed by Paul’s Epistles, who are living stones. Eventually, these Persons become the New Jerusalem.
We may ask ourselves, if we are believers of Christ, if we are living stones now. It doesn’t mean that when you are a believer then you immediately become a living stone. This becoming a believer is one step to become the living stone. The Lord after He died became a life-giving Spirit.21 This gives life to us in order for us to be living in eyes of God, because fro Him we are all dead. Then what is this Spirit doing in our spirit? This Spirit is the One who will transform every believer to be worthy to be built in God’s building.22 God’s building is built with gold, silver, and precious stones. These materials typify the Triune God. Hence, we must be one of these materials for us to be built in the New Jerusalem. How can we have this? The way is to have that Spirit work in us and transform us to be precious stones. This Spirit dispenses the divine life in us. This divine life would transform our whole being to be such living stones. If we are already failed with the divine life, we become the materials for the New Jerusalem as living stones. Eventually, we are being built in the New Jerusalem and we dwell in the New Jerusalem. If we are like these, we are the overcomers. An overcomer is a person who overcomes all the trials and circumstances during his days, the one who let the Spirit of life work within him to be precious and the one who live with, by, through, and from the Triune God.23 Hence, when all of God’s believers will be transformed into precious materials, the New Jerusalem is formed wherein God and His believers are becoming one for eternity.24 This is why the New Jerusalem is a personal building.
The New Jerusalem is the bride of Christ. This means that the believers, being the New Jerusalem, will marry Christ. If the New Jerusalem is a literal city, how could God marry a physical city? The New Jerusalem has to be a corporate person, believers, because God is a great Person. The believers with the Triune God are not going to the New Jerusalem but are becoming the New Jerusalem.25
Therefore, the traditional teaching about the New Jerusalem as a physical city is false. It is false because the New Jerusalem is a sign. It has to be interpreted in such a way. If you consider it as a physical city, there is no interpretation after all. The characteristics and descriptions of the New Jerusalem made it illogical to say that it is a physical mansion. The New Jerusalem is the bride of the Lamb and a bride should not be a physical building. The New Jerusalem is the consummation of all the building work of Christ and His believers and this building is not physical but Christ being built up in His believers and His believers being built up in Him. The New Jerusalem is the consummation of the temple and tabernacle in which the believers are dwelling in the Triune God and God is dwelling in His believers. The New Jerusalem is the consummation of all that God is and all His achievements. So it has to be great not just a literal city. The New Jerusalem is a personal building. It is a personal building because the persons, God and the believers, are the building materials for the New Jerusalem. In this paper, I have shown six reasons why the New Jerusalem could not be a physical city. Therefore, the New Jerusalem is not a physical city but a Personal corporate building.
Several studies should be done. This paper can’t expose everything about the New Jerusalem. I hope that I have successfully covered everything that I want to discuss.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Heart of Darkness: A Voyage of Discovery and Self-discovery
“I’ve seen the devil of violence, and the devil of greed, and the devil of hot desire…”
Joseph Conrad, Heart of Darkness, Chapter I
Written by Conrad on 1890 and set in the jungles of African Congo, The Heart of Darkness tells the story of Marlow’s journey – a voyage of discovery and self-discovery. The actual narrator of the novel is the man who aboard the Nellie anchored at the mouth of the Thames, who hears Marlow’s story. He sits down and tells the story of Marlow. It is actually a narration in a narration.
The story centers on Marlow, an introspective sailor and a riverboat captain with the Company, and his journey up the Congo River to meet Kurtz, reputed to be an idealistic man of great abilities. While he travels to Africa and then up the Congo, he encounters widespread inefficiency and brutality in the Company’s stations – the native inhabitants of the region have been forced into the Company’s service, and they suffer terribly from overwork and ill treatment at the hands of the Company’s agents. He arrives at the Central Station, run by the general manager. As his interest in Kurtz grows, his steamboat has been wrecked. Marlow eventually gets the parts he needs to repair his ship, and he and the manager set out with a few agents (pilgrims and cannibals). Not long after, Marlow and his companions arrive at Kurtz’s Inner Station. The manager brings Kurtz, who is quite ill, aboard the steamer. As they steam back downriver, Kurtz's life slowly ebbs away. On his deathbed, he has what seems to be a moment of illumination, of complete knowledge, and he cries out, "The horror! The horror!" before he dies. Eventually, Marlow returns to Europe and goes to see Kurtz’s Intended (his fiancée who’s still mourning). She asks what his last words were, but Marlow cannot bring himself to shatter her illusions with the truth. Instead, he tells her that Kurtz’s last word was her name.
Obviously, there are white/black and light/dark in the story. Traditional interpretations of lightness and darkness tend to correlate lightness with goodness and purity, and darkness with evil and corruption. However, in Heart of Darkness, the definitions of lightness and darkness can be reversed. Darkness means truth, whiteness means falsehood. Darkness can be interpreted to stand for the purity and innocence of the natives’ lifestyle, while lightness can be seen as the corruption, greed, and exploitative ways of the white men.
The native's lifestyles are dramatically changed when their land is dominated by the overpowering white men. The whites expect the natives to follow and comply with their demands once the natives homelands were invaded because the whites considered themselves civilized and thought of the natives as savages. Color of skin is used by the whites to rationalize their actions towards the natives. In the journey, Marlow discovers massacre, turtore, cruelty, slavery, a crew of sickly African workers who have crawled away to die, he sees “a nigger [was] being beaten,” he recognizes that Kurtz, who made himself god to be worshipped, seized ivory from the Africans through violence, brutality, and intimidation, and natives are murdered, killed, and stolen of their ivory. Aside from his discoveries, we, as readers, can also discover and gather evidences and proofs about the evil colonizers. There is a dehumanization when Conrad (or Marlow) describes the native Africans as “moving around as ants.” This kind of dehumanization is harder to identify than colonial violence or open racism. While Heart of Darkness offers a powerful condemnation of the hypocritical operations of imperialism, it also presents a set of issues surrounding race that is ultimately more troubling. He is stereotyping the Africans as savage and primitive who deserve our compassion but not our respect. Also, he is underestimating the natives when he say “I don’t think a single one of them had any clear idea of time…. They still belonged to the begginings of time – had no inherited experience to them as they were.” They may not have watches or clocks but they have their own way of reading the time, days, months and years. We see the Whites completely dominate the Blacks, who were forced to work till physical exhaustion. The blacks are not given any personal traits or uniqueness unless they possess a similarity to the Whites. Even then, we see no glimpse of humanity in their characters. Thus, it is very clear that colonizers or the Whites feel superior because they are civilized, educated and their skin is light and white; and the natives are inferior because they are animal-like, black, uneducated, uncivilized and savages.
In Chapter Two, Whites think they own whaterver land they land on. “Why not? Anything – anything can be done in this country.” As Marlow met Kurtz, he heared him saying, “’My Intended, my ivory, my station, my river, my –‘ everything belonged to him.” These passages show that they, Whites, seem to own the country because, like possession, you can do anything about it. They are just colonizers, now, they think they have already owned the land? Hence, they are not only oppressing the people but also they take advantage of the situation to own and possess the ‘country’ or the ‘land’. Their so-called reason is to civilized and educate the savages. However, once they get there, they would take advantage of the situation to enjoy and possess the richness and fatness of the people and the land. European colonizers are worst types of “devils” because they are hypocritical about their own evil, perpetrating it in the name of civilization.
It is quite vivid that women or females do not play a very prominent and major role in the novel Heart of Darkness. Whenever woman is part of the conversation, they don’t totally speak (I mean no dialogue is included in the novella, kind of speechless) or if they do, they only speak a bit, only a short phrase. One main reason for this is that a steamboat plodding down the Congo River during the Imperial Age wasn't a popular place for women. Throughout the book, three women are mainly mentioned: Marlow's aunt, Kurtz's intended and Kurtz's African mistress. The mention of Marlow's Aunt came at the beginning of the book in Chapter One when she offers to help him find work on a ship. When Marlow gets the job on the steamboat, he has tea with his aunt to say goodbye. Afterwhich, his aunt comments about how Marlow will be bringing civilization to the savages. In response, Marlow is quick to correct her that "the Company was run for profit." It is here that the reader first learns of Marlow's attitude towards women. He, thus, thinks women are "out of touch with truth" and that "they live in a world of their own," a world, that if exposed to the conditions of man's world would quickly deteriorate.
Later, we notice of Kurtz's intended. Kurtz spoke of her as his Intended – his property. The view of women during this time was that they were extremely fragile creatures and needed to be protected from the dangers of the world. Also, when Kurtz is boarding the steam ship, his African mistress, heavily adorned in ivory is seen standing on the shore. Hence, it is apparent here that Kurtz viewed women as a way to showcase his wealth and success (in both societies).
Conrad's African version of womanhood and sexuality as real and potent while the Intended is a pure Victorian fantasy, a tradition of the English novel which includes such stereotypes of the fair, insipid heroine. Furthermore, by depicting the native woman as speechless, Conrad places her at the center of issues of colonialism.
It is important to take in to consideration the historical context of this book: The Victorian Era when women were viewed as sweet and naïve which is important to the overall meaning of the book, because this naivete is what justifies colonial expansion and empirical economic growth.
Marlow and Kurtz are the light and dark selves of a single person. Marlow is what Kurtz might have been, and Kurtz is what Marlow might have become. Kurtz represents what Marlow most fears about himself as he undertakes this journey into the interior of Africa. Kurtz, like Marlow,originally came to the Congo with noble intentions. Kurtz might never have revealed his evil nature if he had not been cornered and tortured by the manager. Both of these men were intrigued by mystery, by the Darkness of the Congo and both are changed from the same aspect of the vast enigma. Kurtz shows us the consequence of inadequate self-knowledge. He journeys to Africa eager to do good, and completely unaware of the dark side of his nature, the side that will respond to the call of the primitive. This is the dark side of every man. Every man has his own Heart of Darkness. It's Marlow who comes to know this side of himself. Marlow learns that he has to acknowledge his own heart of darkness, the call of the primitive in his own nature. This is the spiritual journey that he takes. He is not just journeying physically, but also spiritually – knowing and discovering his self and the darkness within him. Like him, we are on a journey and hopefully in this voyage, we can discover our self and so with our darkness. If you aren't aware of the darkness within you, you won't know how to fight it if you ever need to.
Joseph Conrad, Heart of Darkness, Chapter I
Written by Conrad on 1890 and set in the jungles of African Congo, The Heart of Darkness tells the story of Marlow’s journey – a voyage of discovery and self-discovery. The actual narrator of the novel is the man who aboard the Nellie anchored at the mouth of the Thames, who hears Marlow’s story. He sits down and tells the story of Marlow. It is actually a narration in a narration.
The story centers on Marlow, an introspective sailor and a riverboat captain with the Company, and his journey up the Congo River to meet Kurtz, reputed to be an idealistic man of great abilities. While he travels to Africa and then up the Congo, he encounters widespread inefficiency and brutality in the Company’s stations – the native inhabitants of the region have been forced into the Company’s service, and they suffer terribly from overwork and ill treatment at the hands of the Company’s agents. He arrives at the Central Station, run by the general manager. As his interest in Kurtz grows, his steamboat has been wrecked. Marlow eventually gets the parts he needs to repair his ship, and he and the manager set out with a few agents (pilgrims and cannibals). Not long after, Marlow and his companions arrive at Kurtz’s Inner Station. The manager brings Kurtz, who is quite ill, aboard the steamer. As they steam back downriver, Kurtz's life slowly ebbs away. On his deathbed, he has what seems to be a moment of illumination, of complete knowledge, and he cries out, "The horror! The horror!" before he dies. Eventually, Marlow returns to Europe and goes to see Kurtz’s Intended (his fiancée who’s still mourning). She asks what his last words were, but Marlow cannot bring himself to shatter her illusions with the truth. Instead, he tells her that Kurtz’s last word was her name.
Obviously, there are white/black and light/dark in the story. Traditional interpretations of lightness and darkness tend to correlate lightness with goodness and purity, and darkness with evil and corruption. However, in Heart of Darkness, the definitions of lightness and darkness can be reversed. Darkness means truth, whiteness means falsehood. Darkness can be interpreted to stand for the purity and innocence of the natives’ lifestyle, while lightness can be seen as the corruption, greed, and exploitative ways of the white men.
The native's lifestyles are dramatically changed when their land is dominated by the overpowering white men. The whites expect the natives to follow and comply with their demands once the natives homelands were invaded because the whites considered themselves civilized and thought of the natives as savages. Color of skin is used by the whites to rationalize their actions towards the natives. In the journey, Marlow discovers massacre, turtore, cruelty, slavery, a crew of sickly African workers who have crawled away to die, he sees “a nigger [was] being beaten,” he recognizes that Kurtz, who made himself god to be worshipped, seized ivory from the Africans through violence, brutality, and intimidation, and natives are murdered, killed, and stolen of their ivory. Aside from his discoveries, we, as readers, can also discover and gather evidences and proofs about the evil colonizers. There is a dehumanization when Conrad (or Marlow) describes the native Africans as “moving around as ants.” This kind of dehumanization is harder to identify than colonial violence or open racism. While Heart of Darkness offers a powerful condemnation of the hypocritical operations of imperialism, it also presents a set of issues surrounding race that is ultimately more troubling. He is stereotyping the Africans as savage and primitive who deserve our compassion but not our respect. Also, he is underestimating the natives when he say “I don’t think a single one of them had any clear idea of time…. They still belonged to the begginings of time – had no inherited experience to them as they were.” They may not have watches or clocks but they have their own way of reading the time, days, months and years. We see the Whites completely dominate the Blacks, who were forced to work till physical exhaustion. The blacks are not given any personal traits or uniqueness unless they possess a similarity to the Whites. Even then, we see no glimpse of humanity in their characters. Thus, it is very clear that colonizers or the Whites feel superior because they are civilized, educated and their skin is light and white; and the natives are inferior because they are animal-like, black, uneducated, uncivilized and savages.
In Chapter Two, Whites think they own whaterver land they land on. “Why not? Anything – anything can be done in this country.” As Marlow met Kurtz, he heared him saying, “’My Intended, my ivory, my station, my river, my –‘ everything belonged to him.” These passages show that they, Whites, seem to own the country because, like possession, you can do anything about it. They are just colonizers, now, they think they have already owned the land? Hence, they are not only oppressing the people but also they take advantage of the situation to own and possess the ‘country’ or the ‘land’. Their so-called reason is to civilized and educate the savages. However, once they get there, they would take advantage of the situation to enjoy and possess the richness and fatness of the people and the land. European colonizers are worst types of “devils” because they are hypocritical about their own evil, perpetrating it in the name of civilization.
It is quite vivid that women or females do not play a very prominent and major role in the novel Heart of Darkness. Whenever woman is part of the conversation, they don’t totally speak (I mean no dialogue is included in the novella, kind of speechless) or if they do, they only speak a bit, only a short phrase. One main reason for this is that a steamboat plodding down the Congo River during the Imperial Age wasn't a popular place for women. Throughout the book, three women are mainly mentioned: Marlow's aunt, Kurtz's intended and Kurtz's African mistress. The mention of Marlow's Aunt came at the beginning of the book in Chapter One when she offers to help him find work on a ship. When Marlow gets the job on the steamboat, he has tea with his aunt to say goodbye. Afterwhich, his aunt comments about how Marlow will be bringing civilization to the savages. In response, Marlow is quick to correct her that "the Company was run for profit." It is here that the reader first learns of Marlow's attitude towards women. He, thus, thinks women are "out of touch with truth" and that "they live in a world of their own," a world, that if exposed to the conditions of man's world would quickly deteriorate.
Later, we notice of Kurtz's intended. Kurtz spoke of her as his Intended – his property. The view of women during this time was that they were extremely fragile creatures and needed to be protected from the dangers of the world. Also, when Kurtz is boarding the steam ship, his African mistress, heavily adorned in ivory is seen standing on the shore. Hence, it is apparent here that Kurtz viewed women as a way to showcase his wealth and success (in both societies).
Conrad's African version of womanhood and sexuality as real and potent while the Intended is a pure Victorian fantasy, a tradition of the English novel which includes such stereotypes of the fair, insipid heroine. Furthermore, by depicting the native woman as speechless, Conrad places her at the center of issues of colonialism.
It is important to take in to consideration the historical context of this book: The Victorian Era when women were viewed as sweet and naïve which is important to the overall meaning of the book, because this naivete is what justifies colonial expansion and empirical economic growth.
Marlow and Kurtz are the light and dark selves of a single person. Marlow is what Kurtz might have been, and Kurtz is what Marlow might have become. Kurtz represents what Marlow most fears about himself as he undertakes this journey into the interior of Africa. Kurtz, like Marlow,originally came to the Congo with noble intentions. Kurtz might never have revealed his evil nature if he had not been cornered and tortured by the manager. Both of these men were intrigued by mystery, by the Darkness of the Congo and both are changed from the same aspect of the vast enigma. Kurtz shows us the consequence of inadequate self-knowledge. He journeys to Africa eager to do good, and completely unaware of the dark side of his nature, the side that will respond to the call of the primitive. This is the dark side of every man. Every man has his own Heart of Darkness. It's Marlow who comes to know this side of himself. Marlow learns that he has to acknowledge his own heart of darkness, the call of the primitive in his own nature. This is the spiritual journey that he takes. He is not just journeying physically, but also spiritually – knowing and discovering his self and the darkness within him. Like him, we are on a journey and hopefully in this voyage, we can discover our self and so with our darkness. If you aren't aware of the darkness within you, you won't know how to fight it if you ever need to.
A Midsummer Night's Dream: Experiencing Theater
William Shakespeare (1564-1616), an English playwright and poet, is recognized in much of the world as the greatest of all dramatists. Hundreds of editions of his plays have been published, including translations in all major languages. Scholars have written thousands of books and articles about his plots, characters, themes, and language. He is the most widely quoted author in history, and his plays have probably been performed more times than those of any other dramatist. Among his famous play are Romeo and Juliet, Hamlet, Macbeth, King Lear and A Midsummer Night’s Dream.
A Midsummer Night’s Dream, first performed probably in 1594 or 1595 and first published in 1600, presents a happy blend of fantasy and realism, and may have been intended for performance at an aristocratic wedding. The comedy weaves together a number of separate plots involving three different realms: one inhabited by two pairs of noble Athenian lovers; another by members of the fairy world—notably, King Oberon, Queen Titania, and the mischievous Puck; and the third by a group of bumbling and unconsciously comic townspeople who seek to produce a play for wedding celebrations. These three worlds are brought together in a series of encounters that swerve from the realistic to the magical to the absurd and back again in the space of only a few lines. In Act III, for example, Oberon plays a trick on Titania while she sleeps, employing Puck to anoint her with a potion that will cause her to fall in love with the first creature she sees on waking. As it happens, she opens her eyes to the sight of Bottom the weaver, adorned by Puck with an ass’s head. Yet the comic episode of the Queen of the Fairies “enamored of an ass” echoes the play’s more profound concerns with the nature of love and imagination.
A Midsummer Night's Dream, originally, weaves together a number of separate plots: an argument between the fairy king and queen; a royal wedding in Athens; the love affairs of four young Athenians; and the efforts of a group of common workers to produce a play for the state wedding celebrations. Act I, Scene 2, introduces the workmen as they begin their production and assemble for the distribution of parts; Bottom the weaver's desire to steal the stage and play every role contrasts comically with Snug's timidity. They meet to begin their rehearsals in Act III, Scene 1, and Shakespeare's portrayal of this early amateur dramatic society at work has charmed audiences for many years. As the summer night moves towards its conclusion, the many strands of the plot are increasingly woven together. Here Bottom is drawn into the middle of the conflict between Oberon, the fairy king, and his queen Titania. The sleeping Titania has been bewitched with a magical flower so that she will fall in love with the first man she sees on waking. Stumbling across Bottom and his companions in the forest near Titania's bed, Oberon's servant Puck decides to ensure that the queen's humiliation—and thus his master's revenge—are complete, by transforming the unwitting weaver into an ass.
Here in MSU-IIT (Mindanao State University – Iligan Institute of Technology), there’s a course that concerns with drama and plays. This course is English 145N (Dramatics and Stagecraft); its prerequisite is Introduction to Drama. Of course, students from MSU-IIT can take this course especially the Batchelor of Arts in English (AB English) students. Usually, this course is offered during the second semester of an Academic Year. As a requirement to pass this course, the class must present a play (it may be made by the class or adopted from famous dramatist). This was one of the two major reasons why the third year AB English major students presented William Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream. It was mounted on January 28, 2005 at CASS (College of Arts and Social Sciences) Rooftop. The second reason was the ABEO (AB English Organization) Week was requesting us to present. Copious students, friends, families and faculty came and watched the stunning, astonishing, splendid, comic and spectacular play. I said copious because the room was truly filled with people that others were not accommodated properly; some just stood up and various audiences stood up on top of the chairs solely to see the play.
After the show, various people came to us, shaking our hands. To me, certainly, a number of faculty, friends and people came and shook my hands. They said “Congratulations”, “Very Good”, “Nice”, “Okay”, “Grabe!”, “Stunning”, “Super!”, “Nindota Uy!”, “I like it!”, “I like your acting”, “I like your team up with Helena” and professor Ortega and Tan said “Two more shows!” Looking at their faces, I could confidently say that we did a marvelous job and no definite and exact words can explain how much the audience liked it and how amazing the show was. Even I, myself, was speechless after I heard all those comments and praises; and I said to my self “I’m in pedestal now!” I did feel great and proud later than the show. When I was on my way home, I was aware that I had a shining and smiling face. I could not help but smile and feel good.
However before those blissful moments, I with my classmates undergone or went through difficulties, dilemmas, hardships, pains, sufferings, circumstances, turmoil and injustice to the extent that we felt we couldn’t present at the targeted date. On the process, because of those chaoses, I came to a point that I decided neither to join anymore nor to show up. There are many things to say what happened during the practices and even outside the practices but some were too personal and confidential.
When Prof. Peñola told us who would be the characters of A Midsummer Night’s Dream, I was so excited because I do love acting and theatre stuffs. I was supposed to play the role of Theseus but there were some changes due to some reasons. Thus, I played Demetrius. Actually, I had not seen the movie nor read the play, hence, I had no idea about this character and personality. When I asked my classmates who’d seen the movie or read the play, they would say Demetrius is an arrogant and proud young man. They said he’s looking good however, he’s kind of antagonist in the story. When I evaluated my character I’m not that arrogant (if I am) and proud. Most of all, I don’t have the looks. In other words, I feel that I didn’t match Demetrius and I couldn’t be Demetrius. I needed a lot of work, makeover and characterization so that I could be or move and act just a little like Demetrius. I did had a hard time watching movies and trying to imitate how the antagonists deliver their lines, how they express their feelings, how they move, act, the expressions on their faces, their gestures and how they communicate to the people they like and hate. About my looks, I took care of my face, I eat the right diet and try to sleep early that I would not look tired and horrible. It’s the most that I could do for my face and my character.
After those preparations, I was then so ready to memorize my lines and deliver them. When I came to our practice, I was so excited to work with my classmates and friends. I feel comfortable because I know them. The first practice was fine but sooner, I noticed that most of the characters don’t come in time, would be absent, and during rehearsals, they are not that serious and dedicated. Because of that, I didn’t feel like becoming serious for it was useless, my classmates would just go there and be funny, laugh and play literally. In spite all those, my classmates would just tolerate and compromise, they would say “be serious” but they don’t do anything to stop those who were making funny stuffs. It was true that they would say, “Stop it” but you could see in their faces that they were not so serious in disciplining them. They would even go along with them. No matter how immoral some of the characters would do during the practice, as long as he’s/she’s their friend, its okay, perfectly fine. One time I was late because a teacher told me to do things for her. When I came in, “the group” mocked and ridiculed me for being late. They said because I was late, the practice was delayed; all characters must be in to have a practice. Actually, I was not the director and I didn’t play the character that had a lot of speaking lines. They can practice without me. In the first place, I was late for some reasonable reasons but they hated me that much. The next time I came on time, one of the members of “the group” was late with no reasons, but still we proceeded with our practice. When he/she came, they did say nothing. They even did friendly expressions and gestures. As we continue with our practice, again, a member of “the group” was making foolishness (laughed, mocked, dance and extended lines with nonsense). They laughed and compromised. Nevertheless, there was one time when a classmate of ours laughed in the middle of the practice because he mispronounced, “the group” immediately commented and scolded him for not being serious. They were angry then because, according to “the group”, we’re not doing any good to the play. Honestly, there were many proofs that “the group” was so unfair and because some members of it were on high position of the play, they made their own rules and regulations. They consider inconsiderable behaviors and inconsiderate to considerable behaviors. These things did happen until we had our final presentation. Many of us suffered but we continued for our grade and for the department.
The final day had come. We came early for decorations. All I can say to the decorations was that it was not too much and not too poor. I believe it was just enough to capture the environment the play wanted to show and depict. In doing the decorations, I could see the “props” (all women) who were so poor doing the carrying of heavy objects clean here and there. I think they did all things beyond what they should.
At 4 pm, the characters put make-up with the help of some staffs. Well, what I could say to the make-up thing was that there are only few who can do that stuff but there were many characters who needed it. To the make-up artists, they were so in a hurry that they were so harsh on our faces, it was such a painful experience especially the eyeliner thing. Another thing was that there were only few make-up kits, lipstick and foundation. During the make-up thing, it was so hot but there were only two electric fan, many would compete just to get the wind. Together with the make up session was the costume rehearsal session. I was astonished by the effect of the colors, design and style. However, we didn’t look Shakespearean. We look like we’re going to a JS Prom, the females wore gowns and the males wore Americana. It could have been, if there were a lot of money, went to the tailoring shop and made perfect and appropriate costumes for us. Well, it didn’t happen, we’re poor.
The play didn’t start exactly as we planned because some faculty members came in late (Filipino Time). We started perhaps 6:20 pm. The show started with the fairies dancing. Obviously, they didn’t act that well but I believe some of them did well and tried their very best. When it comes to acting (this is not only coming from my own observation but also from the audience) it was perfectly fine. We were good actors. Some people said that even if they didn’t hear our words, they still comprehend and understand because of our expressions, actions and gestures. Seemingly, we’re professional artists who can convincingly perform and entertain. I believe, we were able to let the audience interact and let them react what we expected.
A play isn’t that good without the technical stuffs, the lights, sounds and microphones. The sounds system wasn’t good enough because the background music wasn’t heard by the people in the back. Sometimes the sounds would produce noise and unnecessary tones. Obviously, there were also problems with the lights. There was a scene where this portion had to be lighted but the light assigned there was off. There was also a part where this portion of the stage must not have light but there was light on it. However, the light did help create scenery that was almost perfect. The blending and combinations of it produce a spectacular show. It makes the atmosphere dark, light, dim, lonely and happy. Some of the people even said that the light contributed much to the effectiveness of the show. Well, we couldn’t expect much from the technicians because we didn’t pay that much. When it comes to the microphones, we lacked. The characters passed and passed the microphones from one to another, thus delaying a bit the show. Because we lacked microphones, almost all the people didn’t hear what we said.
Those difficulties produced a sweet and colorful fruit that caused the audience to ask more, to ask for a series of shows. I think we deserved those praises and comments because we did our best in spite of all the turmoil within the class. We strived hard just to entertain the audience so that we could get a grade that matches our competence and talent. Because of that, many people were entertained. I confess that the play has changed my life a bit. More people appreciate me and my talent and more people know me. It somehow enhances and develops my skills in acting and delivering lines. I may not be the best actor but I played the role and character of the best actor. I know I will never forget this momentous experience; it’s already part of my past, my history and my moment that once I was Demetrius!
A Midsummer Night’s Dream, first performed probably in 1594 or 1595 and first published in 1600, presents a happy blend of fantasy and realism, and may have been intended for performance at an aristocratic wedding. The comedy weaves together a number of separate plots involving three different realms: one inhabited by two pairs of noble Athenian lovers; another by members of the fairy world—notably, King Oberon, Queen Titania, and the mischievous Puck; and the third by a group of bumbling and unconsciously comic townspeople who seek to produce a play for wedding celebrations. These three worlds are brought together in a series of encounters that swerve from the realistic to the magical to the absurd and back again in the space of only a few lines. In Act III, for example, Oberon plays a trick on Titania while she sleeps, employing Puck to anoint her with a potion that will cause her to fall in love with the first creature she sees on waking. As it happens, she opens her eyes to the sight of Bottom the weaver, adorned by Puck with an ass’s head. Yet the comic episode of the Queen of the Fairies “enamored of an ass” echoes the play’s more profound concerns with the nature of love and imagination.
A Midsummer Night's Dream, originally, weaves together a number of separate plots: an argument between the fairy king and queen; a royal wedding in Athens; the love affairs of four young Athenians; and the efforts of a group of common workers to produce a play for the state wedding celebrations. Act I, Scene 2, introduces the workmen as they begin their production and assemble for the distribution of parts; Bottom the weaver's desire to steal the stage and play every role contrasts comically with Snug's timidity. They meet to begin their rehearsals in Act III, Scene 1, and Shakespeare's portrayal of this early amateur dramatic society at work has charmed audiences for many years. As the summer night moves towards its conclusion, the many strands of the plot are increasingly woven together. Here Bottom is drawn into the middle of the conflict between Oberon, the fairy king, and his queen Titania. The sleeping Titania has been bewitched with a magical flower so that she will fall in love with the first man she sees on waking. Stumbling across Bottom and his companions in the forest near Titania's bed, Oberon's servant Puck decides to ensure that the queen's humiliation—and thus his master's revenge—are complete, by transforming the unwitting weaver into an ass.
Here in MSU-IIT (Mindanao State University – Iligan Institute of Technology), there’s a course that concerns with drama and plays. This course is English 145N (Dramatics and Stagecraft); its prerequisite is Introduction to Drama. Of course, students from MSU-IIT can take this course especially the Batchelor of Arts in English (AB English) students. Usually, this course is offered during the second semester of an Academic Year. As a requirement to pass this course, the class must present a play (it may be made by the class or adopted from famous dramatist). This was one of the two major reasons why the third year AB English major students presented William Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream. It was mounted on January 28, 2005 at CASS (College of Arts and Social Sciences) Rooftop. The second reason was the ABEO (AB English Organization) Week was requesting us to present. Copious students, friends, families and faculty came and watched the stunning, astonishing, splendid, comic and spectacular play. I said copious because the room was truly filled with people that others were not accommodated properly; some just stood up and various audiences stood up on top of the chairs solely to see the play.
After the show, various people came to us, shaking our hands. To me, certainly, a number of faculty, friends and people came and shook my hands. They said “Congratulations”, “Very Good”, “Nice”, “Okay”, “Grabe!”, “Stunning”, “Super!”, “Nindota Uy!”, “I like it!”, “I like your acting”, “I like your team up with Helena” and professor Ortega and Tan said “Two more shows!” Looking at their faces, I could confidently say that we did a marvelous job and no definite and exact words can explain how much the audience liked it and how amazing the show was. Even I, myself, was speechless after I heard all those comments and praises; and I said to my self “I’m in pedestal now!” I did feel great and proud later than the show. When I was on my way home, I was aware that I had a shining and smiling face. I could not help but smile and feel good.
However before those blissful moments, I with my classmates undergone or went through difficulties, dilemmas, hardships, pains, sufferings, circumstances, turmoil and injustice to the extent that we felt we couldn’t present at the targeted date. On the process, because of those chaoses, I came to a point that I decided neither to join anymore nor to show up. There are many things to say what happened during the practices and even outside the practices but some were too personal and confidential.
When Prof. Peñola told us who would be the characters of A Midsummer Night’s Dream, I was so excited because I do love acting and theatre stuffs. I was supposed to play the role of Theseus but there were some changes due to some reasons. Thus, I played Demetrius. Actually, I had not seen the movie nor read the play, hence, I had no idea about this character and personality. When I asked my classmates who’d seen the movie or read the play, they would say Demetrius is an arrogant and proud young man. They said he’s looking good however, he’s kind of antagonist in the story. When I evaluated my character I’m not that arrogant (if I am) and proud. Most of all, I don’t have the looks. In other words, I feel that I didn’t match Demetrius and I couldn’t be Demetrius. I needed a lot of work, makeover and characterization so that I could be or move and act just a little like Demetrius. I did had a hard time watching movies and trying to imitate how the antagonists deliver their lines, how they express their feelings, how they move, act, the expressions on their faces, their gestures and how they communicate to the people they like and hate. About my looks, I took care of my face, I eat the right diet and try to sleep early that I would not look tired and horrible. It’s the most that I could do for my face and my character.
After those preparations, I was then so ready to memorize my lines and deliver them. When I came to our practice, I was so excited to work with my classmates and friends. I feel comfortable because I know them. The first practice was fine but sooner, I noticed that most of the characters don’t come in time, would be absent, and during rehearsals, they are not that serious and dedicated. Because of that, I didn’t feel like becoming serious for it was useless, my classmates would just go there and be funny, laugh and play literally. In spite all those, my classmates would just tolerate and compromise, they would say “be serious” but they don’t do anything to stop those who were making funny stuffs. It was true that they would say, “Stop it” but you could see in their faces that they were not so serious in disciplining them. They would even go along with them. No matter how immoral some of the characters would do during the practice, as long as he’s/she’s their friend, its okay, perfectly fine. One time I was late because a teacher told me to do things for her. When I came in, “the group” mocked and ridiculed me for being late. They said because I was late, the practice was delayed; all characters must be in to have a practice. Actually, I was not the director and I didn’t play the character that had a lot of speaking lines. They can practice without me. In the first place, I was late for some reasonable reasons but they hated me that much. The next time I came on time, one of the members of “the group” was late with no reasons, but still we proceeded with our practice. When he/she came, they did say nothing. They even did friendly expressions and gestures. As we continue with our practice, again, a member of “the group” was making foolishness (laughed, mocked, dance and extended lines with nonsense). They laughed and compromised. Nevertheless, there was one time when a classmate of ours laughed in the middle of the practice because he mispronounced, “the group” immediately commented and scolded him for not being serious. They were angry then because, according to “the group”, we’re not doing any good to the play. Honestly, there were many proofs that “the group” was so unfair and because some members of it were on high position of the play, they made their own rules and regulations. They consider inconsiderable behaviors and inconsiderate to considerable behaviors. These things did happen until we had our final presentation. Many of us suffered but we continued for our grade and for the department.
The final day had come. We came early for decorations. All I can say to the decorations was that it was not too much and not too poor. I believe it was just enough to capture the environment the play wanted to show and depict. In doing the decorations, I could see the “props” (all women) who were so poor doing the carrying of heavy objects clean here and there. I think they did all things beyond what they should.
At 4 pm, the characters put make-up with the help of some staffs. Well, what I could say to the make-up thing was that there are only few who can do that stuff but there were many characters who needed it. To the make-up artists, they were so in a hurry that they were so harsh on our faces, it was such a painful experience especially the eyeliner thing. Another thing was that there were only few make-up kits, lipstick and foundation. During the make-up thing, it was so hot but there were only two electric fan, many would compete just to get the wind. Together with the make up session was the costume rehearsal session. I was astonished by the effect of the colors, design and style. However, we didn’t look Shakespearean. We look like we’re going to a JS Prom, the females wore gowns and the males wore Americana. It could have been, if there were a lot of money, went to the tailoring shop and made perfect and appropriate costumes for us. Well, it didn’t happen, we’re poor.
The play didn’t start exactly as we planned because some faculty members came in late (Filipino Time). We started perhaps 6:20 pm. The show started with the fairies dancing. Obviously, they didn’t act that well but I believe some of them did well and tried their very best. When it comes to acting (this is not only coming from my own observation but also from the audience) it was perfectly fine. We were good actors. Some people said that even if they didn’t hear our words, they still comprehend and understand because of our expressions, actions and gestures. Seemingly, we’re professional artists who can convincingly perform and entertain. I believe, we were able to let the audience interact and let them react what we expected.
A play isn’t that good without the technical stuffs, the lights, sounds and microphones. The sounds system wasn’t good enough because the background music wasn’t heard by the people in the back. Sometimes the sounds would produce noise and unnecessary tones. Obviously, there were also problems with the lights. There was a scene where this portion had to be lighted but the light assigned there was off. There was also a part where this portion of the stage must not have light but there was light on it. However, the light did help create scenery that was almost perfect. The blending and combinations of it produce a spectacular show. It makes the atmosphere dark, light, dim, lonely and happy. Some of the people even said that the light contributed much to the effectiveness of the show. Well, we couldn’t expect much from the technicians because we didn’t pay that much. When it comes to the microphones, we lacked. The characters passed and passed the microphones from one to another, thus delaying a bit the show. Because we lacked microphones, almost all the people didn’t hear what we said.
Those difficulties produced a sweet and colorful fruit that caused the audience to ask more, to ask for a series of shows. I think we deserved those praises and comments because we did our best in spite of all the turmoil within the class. We strived hard just to entertain the audience so that we could get a grade that matches our competence and talent. Because of that, many people were entertained. I confess that the play has changed my life a bit. More people appreciate me and my talent and more people know me. It somehow enhances and develops my skills in acting and delivering lines. I may not be the best actor but I played the role and character of the best actor. I know I will never forget this momentous experience; it’s already part of my past, my history and my moment that once I was Demetrius!
Friday, January 30, 2009
It Kills
Smiled, she gave me the grade.
I unfolded the card and there I saw
The paper was filled with red
Lines, waves, marks and points
My eyes opened wide without a blink
That the room was covered
My heart stopped pumping
I can’t breathe easy
Her pen flew nearer and closer to me
Slowly it stubbed my forehead,
My eyes, mouth, chest,
Stomach, legs and feet
On my hand was the card
It was bloody red
Gradually it flooded
Went up above my head –
I’m drowned.
I unfolded the card and there I saw
The paper was filled with red
Lines, waves, marks and points
My eyes opened wide without a blink
That the room was covered
My heart stopped pumping
I can’t breathe easy
Her pen flew nearer and closer to me
Slowly it stubbed my forehead,
My eyes, mouth, chest,
Stomach, legs and feet
On my hand was the card
It was bloody red
Gradually it flooded
Went up above my head –
I’m drowned.
Terminator
Medals, ribbons well thought-out posted;
Faulkner’s, Hemingway’s orderly filed;
Frost’s, Shakespeare’s on desk arranged;
Lights on; curtains up; windows were opened.
A paper, in core of four corners:
Anger with puckered brow, crumpled;
Stabbed by Two, blood filled lines.
With Uni pointing toward me, crawled.
Hands clasped shook betw’n legs quirkily –
Heart quivered the town furiously,
Eyes expand as Harvard University –
Dark flesh altered t’ whitest snow abruptly.
To my chest – seven times stabbed
A splash of blood traversed nations
To my eyes – Uni’s leisurely penetrated
Penetration to an eye took hours
To my hands until it left me
To my feet until it left me
Medals, ribbons, precious lost the Power
It’s a Tragedy for me to see all were over
All species and future bade goodbye forever
Faulkner’s, Hemingway’s orderly filed;
Frost’s, Shakespeare’s on desk arranged;
Lights on; curtains up; windows were opened.
A paper, in core of four corners:
Anger with puckered brow, crumpled;
Stabbed by Two, blood filled lines.
With Uni pointing toward me, crawled.
Hands clasped shook betw’n legs quirkily –
Heart quivered the town furiously,
Eyes expand as Harvard University –
Dark flesh altered t’ whitest snow abruptly.
To my chest – seven times stabbed
A splash of blood traversed nations
To my eyes – Uni’s leisurely penetrated
Penetration to an eye took hours
To my hands until it left me
To my feet until it left me
Medals, ribbons, precious lost the Power
It’s a Tragedy for me to see all were over
All species and future bade goodbye forever
Thursday, January 29, 2009
MSU-IIT Beats UP DILIMAN
What’s the number one university in the Philippines? UP Diliman? You’re so right. But don’t you know that last January 28, 2009 at FRANKahan (a debate stuff on channel ANC), MSU-IIT beats that very university? TRUE! Hail to MSU-IIT’s debaters: Mara (Judges’ choice as best debater), Rei (Texters’ choice as best debater), and Ara (another best debater). Again, what’s the number one university in the Philippines? You know the answer. Go IITians—You’re the BEST!
The Precariousness of the Human Condition as Reflected in Five Filipino Short Stories
“Uncertainty is the only certainty there is,
and knowing how to live with insecurity is the only security.”
- John Allen Paulos-
“Still no job until now,” this was the e-mail subject of one of my close friends. After graduation in college, he tried everything to look for a job. Then in his message, he wrote, “I thought I was certain that education would help me land on a job.” Just like him, man’s condition is uncertain. This is even confirmed by John Keats, a famous English poet, as he said, “The imagination of a boy is healthy, and the mature imagination of a man is healthy; but there is a space of life between, in which the soul is in a ferment, the character undecided, the way of life uncertain, the ambition thick-sighted.” Moreover, an American Baptist Minister and Civil-Rights Leader, Martin Luther King, Jr. asserted that “All progress is precarious, and the solution of one problem brings us face to face with another problem.” I believe nobody would argue on those. In fact, the only thing that makes life possible is permanent, intolerable uncertainty—not knowing what comes next. Human condition is precarious in various respects because it has no guarantee. This is reflected in five Filipino short stories.
First, in The Distance to Andromeda, man is precarious about the end of the world. A boy, named Ben, after watching a movie on a theater, is terrified. He is bothered by the horrific scenes on the screen—the last men and women on earth preparing to leave for another planet because the earth is being destroyed. These images keep on haunting him, even when he’s playing and walking around with his friends, kid around his niece, and talk to his mother. He can’t help but be afraid. Whenever he asks anyone if what happened in the movie is going to really happen, nobody seems care. The situation terrifies him even more now because he is uncertain of what will happen to him, to his friends, and to his family when the world ends. Yet at the end, he finally finds peace through the love and care of his family—he is safe and protected, no matter what will happen, by his loving family. Ben was anxious and worried because he wanted to know two things: first, is the world really going to end, and second, when and how. Yet, nobody gave him the answer. Maybe the reason was nobody cared. Or most likely it was because nobody really knew. At the end of the story, Ben was comforted. However, the fact remains: man may be bothered or not, the world is still going to end. Both the bible and science predict the coming end of the world. Still, no one can tell exactly and precisely when and how is it going to be. How? Through intensified natural calamites? Or through giant meteors? Another flood? No one can tell us how. When? Definitely, today’s situation is not a guarantee. Scientists say it will be in 300 years. What if it happens next year? Or next month? Or the next day? Man is anxious because of this certain uncertainty.
Second, that man is precarious about identity is portrayed in The Day the Dancers Came by Buenvenido Santos. Filemon “Fil” Acayan is a Filipino who is now living in America with his friend Tony. Basic to Filipino impulse abroad is being eager to socialize with his kababayans (co-Filipinos). Fil, in order for him to have moments with them, invites the Filipino dancers but he is always rejected (perhaps because of his approach, but anyway, his invitation was never accepted). This makes him feel miserable. The only thing that makes him feel better is his recorder—a record of his conversations with Filipinos and Filipino songs for the dancers. One day, this recorder was broken by his friend Tony, who has a disease which makes him awkwardly white and who doesn’t like to see Filipinos because he believes he is an American. Then, Fil realizes his full and final separation from the country and nation he loves. The story shows two people with the same origin, Philippines, and the same present location, America, yet with different struggles about their identities. Fil wants to see Filipinos because he still feels he is one of them, while Tony loves to go out with Americans because he thinks he belongs to them. Nevertheless, it is so ironic because Fil is rejected by Filipinos and so is Tony rejected by Americans. Both of them are discarded by the people they think they belong to (poor them). Identity holds no warranty for people with diverse and hybrid cultures like Filipinos. Hence, many Filipinos are uncertain about their identity. On the one hand, if he says he is a Filipino and takes a closer look to how he behaves and acts, he would sooner realize he is Western. On the other hand, if he says he’s Western and takes a look at the mirror, he would realize that he looks Filipino. Thus, whichever identity he takes, it is not an assurance that he firmly fits there. So what really is a Filipino identity? Who knows? I guess (still uncertain), nobody does.
Third, that man is precarious about emotion is illustrated in Manuel Arguilla’s Heat. Mero, a man about 19 or 20, discovers something unusual one morning as he wakes up and gets to his friend Polo’s place. He feels something strange. He can’t stop himself from looking at Meliang’s body and can’t stop thinking about her. At night, the feeling intensifies—as he close and open his eyes, still Meliang is all he sees. He goes out from the house, and then he starts to ask himself what’s the matter with him. Later that night, while he holds her around the waist, he finally had the chance to reveal to Meliang what he ought to say: “Meliang, you are so beautiful.” Throughout the story, one can neither read “love” nor “lust” (it’s not certain). What is certain is a strange feeling Mero had toward Meliang. He, however, was not certain about it—does he feel love or mere physical attraction? Or worse, lust. (Who knows? The protagonist isn’t even sure). Man’s emotion can’t ensure anything: this time he feels this, next time he feels that. In fact, one of man’s most uncertainties is emotion. Man’s emotion seems to have a life of its own; it can’t be controlled—nobody can control his feeling, that’s for sure. One day, one wakes up hating the thing he used to love; or loving what he used to hate. If one feels good today, nobody can guarantee him that he would feel the same the next day. What is he going to feel then? Nobody knows.
Then, Edilberto Tiempo’s The Grave Diggers depicts that man is precarious about survival. Agustin grows with good ethics and morality nurtured to him by his family. He is poor and his wife is sick and is absolutely dying. He apparently has no choice but to join the group of grave diggers. This job seems to be fine until he finds out that the group has no respect for the dead. He learns that after digging, they would steal precious things like necklaces. He considered this an act of immorality. Hence, he doubts if he has to join. Nicolas, one of the diggers, keeps on forcing and rationalizing him—that it’s justifiable to do it because the dead is dead and so is not going to need those precious materials anyway. Considering his status and his wife’s condition, apparently Agustin is left with no choice. At the moment, he is not certain on how he can feed his family and how he can sustain the medical needs of his dying wife. Thus he goes out with the group. One night, while doing the job, Nicolas gets a skull and drinks from it. The skull becomes a glass from which the group would drink. Agustin can not stand this insolent act, so he goes away. Life can’t assure man of survival. One day he’s alive, next day he’s dead. Food, money, accidents, diseases—these are some of the reasons for man’s death. In response to this, it has been long proven that human instinct for survival is more powerful than morality. This gives us the explanation why many people turn to be deceivers, liars, corrupt, and most of all, thieves. They all want to survive. Still, people die. But this story rejects the concept of immorality for survival sake. Agustin, after seeing that indecent act, walks out. Yes, he is able to remain righteous and morally upright. However, the fact remains: he has no money to support and sustain his family, especially his dying wife. Man may be immoral or moral, still survival is not certain.
Finally, The Cargo by Anthony Tan shows that man is precarious about circumstances, although he has nothing to do with it. Asmawil is in dilemma: if he’s going back home, he and his family (wife and children) are going to face death; and if he doesn’t, he’s not going to see his family ever again. Asmawil is uncertain if he’s going back home or not because he has already anticipated what most probably would happen (which is also uncertain), that every person in the village is going to accuse him as the primary suspect. Every man, except him, in his ship is dead. He actually did nothing. He did not even want the tragedy, nor did he even think it would happen. Although the death of men in his cargo is neither of his will nor action, still he suffers the uncertain consequence. He was just sailing with his people in the ship, and everything seemed to be perfect and peaceful; suddenly, something terrible happened—his men got killed. He did not know such tragedy would occur in his ship. And it really did. Life has no guarantee. Now may be peaceful yet a second later can be tragic. Nobody knows. Who does? Sometimes man suffers what he does not deserve. And worse: the most painful suffering is the uncertainty of what the present suffering might bring him.
Because there’s no guarantee, human condition is always precarious in different angles: about the end of the world, identity, emotion, survival, and circumstances. All these uncertainties may be present in life, but man has to realize he should not be shaken. R. I. Fitzhenry declared, “Uncertainty and mystery are energies of life. Don’t let them scare you unduly, for they keep boredom at bay and spark creativity.” Man may want to quest for certainty yet it blocks the search for meaning. He has to know that uncertainty is the very condition to impel him to unfold his powers. Vincent van Gogh, a Dutch painter, one of the greatest of the Post-Impressionists, pronounced: “For my part I know nothing with any certainty, but the sight of the stars makes me dream.”
and knowing how to live with insecurity is the only security.”
- John Allen Paulos-
“Still no job until now,” this was the e-mail subject of one of my close friends. After graduation in college, he tried everything to look for a job. Then in his message, he wrote, “I thought I was certain that education would help me land on a job.” Just like him, man’s condition is uncertain. This is even confirmed by John Keats, a famous English poet, as he said, “The imagination of a boy is healthy, and the mature imagination of a man is healthy; but there is a space of life between, in which the soul is in a ferment, the character undecided, the way of life uncertain, the ambition thick-sighted.” Moreover, an American Baptist Minister and Civil-Rights Leader, Martin Luther King, Jr. asserted that “All progress is precarious, and the solution of one problem brings us face to face with another problem.” I believe nobody would argue on those. In fact, the only thing that makes life possible is permanent, intolerable uncertainty—not knowing what comes next. Human condition is precarious in various respects because it has no guarantee. This is reflected in five Filipino short stories.
First, in The Distance to Andromeda, man is precarious about the end of the world. A boy, named Ben, after watching a movie on a theater, is terrified. He is bothered by the horrific scenes on the screen—the last men and women on earth preparing to leave for another planet because the earth is being destroyed. These images keep on haunting him, even when he’s playing and walking around with his friends, kid around his niece, and talk to his mother. He can’t help but be afraid. Whenever he asks anyone if what happened in the movie is going to really happen, nobody seems care. The situation terrifies him even more now because he is uncertain of what will happen to him, to his friends, and to his family when the world ends. Yet at the end, he finally finds peace through the love and care of his family—he is safe and protected, no matter what will happen, by his loving family. Ben was anxious and worried because he wanted to know two things: first, is the world really going to end, and second, when and how. Yet, nobody gave him the answer. Maybe the reason was nobody cared. Or most likely it was because nobody really knew. At the end of the story, Ben was comforted. However, the fact remains: man may be bothered or not, the world is still going to end. Both the bible and science predict the coming end of the world. Still, no one can tell exactly and precisely when and how is it going to be. How? Through intensified natural calamites? Or through giant meteors? Another flood? No one can tell us how. When? Definitely, today’s situation is not a guarantee. Scientists say it will be in 300 years. What if it happens next year? Or next month? Or the next day? Man is anxious because of this certain uncertainty.
Second, that man is precarious about identity is portrayed in The Day the Dancers Came by Buenvenido Santos. Filemon “Fil” Acayan is a Filipino who is now living in America with his friend Tony. Basic to Filipino impulse abroad is being eager to socialize with his kababayans (co-Filipinos). Fil, in order for him to have moments with them, invites the Filipino dancers but he is always rejected (perhaps because of his approach, but anyway, his invitation was never accepted). This makes him feel miserable. The only thing that makes him feel better is his recorder—a record of his conversations with Filipinos and Filipino songs for the dancers. One day, this recorder was broken by his friend Tony, who has a disease which makes him awkwardly white and who doesn’t like to see Filipinos because he believes he is an American. Then, Fil realizes his full and final separation from the country and nation he loves. The story shows two people with the same origin, Philippines, and the same present location, America, yet with different struggles about their identities. Fil wants to see Filipinos because he still feels he is one of them, while Tony loves to go out with Americans because he thinks he belongs to them. Nevertheless, it is so ironic because Fil is rejected by Filipinos and so is Tony rejected by Americans. Both of them are discarded by the people they think they belong to (poor them). Identity holds no warranty for people with diverse and hybrid cultures like Filipinos. Hence, many Filipinos are uncertain about their identity. On the one hand, if he says he is a Filipino and takes a closer look to how he behaves and acts, he would sooner realize he is Western. On the other hand, if he says he’s Western and takes a look at the mirror, he would realize that he looks Filipino. Thus, whichever identity he takes, it is not an assurance that he firmly fits there. So what really is a Filipino identity? Who knows? I guess (still uncertain), nobody does.
Third, that man is precarious about emotion is illustrated in Manuel Arguilla’s Heat. Mero, a man about 19 or 20, discovers something unusual one morning as he wakes up and gets to his friend Polo’s place. He feels something strange. He can’t stop himself from looking at Meliang’s body and can’t stop thinking about her. At night, the feeling intensifies—as he close and open his eyes, still Meliang is all he sees. He goes out from the house, and then he starts to ask himself what’s the matter with him. Later that night, while he holds her around the waist, he finally had the chance to reveal to Meliang what he ought to say: “Meliang, you are so beautiful.” Throughout the story, one can neither read “love” nor “lust” (it’s not certain). What is certain is a strange feeling Mero had toward Meliang. He, however, was not certain about it—does he feel love or mere physical attraction? Or worse, lust. (Who knows? The protagonist isn’t even sure). Man’s emotion can’t ensure anything: this time he feels this, next time he feels that. In fact, one of man’s most uncertainties is emotion. Man’s emotion seems to have a life of its own; it can’t be controlled—nobody can control his feeling, that’s for sure. One day, one wakes up hating the thing he used to love; or loving what he used to hate. If one feels good today, nobody can guarantee him that he would feel the same the next day. What is he going to feel then? Nobody knows.
Then, Edilberto Tiempo’s The Grave Diggers depicts that man is precarious about survival. Agustin grows with good ethics and morality nurtured to him by his family. He is poor and his wife is sick and is absolutely dying. He apparently has no choice but to join the group of grave diggers. This job seems to be fine until he finds out that the group has no respect for the dead. He learns that after digging, they would steal precious things like necklaces. He considered this an act of immorality. Hence, he doubts if he has to join. Nicolas, one of the diggers, keeps on forcing and rationalizing him—that it’s justifiable to do it because the dead is dead and so is not going to need those precious materials anyway. Considering his status and his wife’s condition, apparently Agustin is left with no choice. At the moment, he is not certain on how he can feed his family and how he can sustain the medical needs of his dying wife. Thus he goes out with the group. One night, while doing the job, Nicolas gets a skull and drinks from it. The skull becomes a glass from which the group would drink. Agustin can not stand this insolent act, so he goes away. Life can’t assure man of survival. One day he’s alive, next day he’s dead. Food, money, accidents, diseases—these are some of the reasons for man’s death. In response to this, it has been long proven that human instinct for survival is more powerful than morality. This gives us the explanation why many people turn to be deceivers, liars, corrupt, and most of all, thieves. They all want to survive. Still, people die. But this story rejects the concept of immorality for survival sake. Agustin, after seeing that indecent act, walks out. Yes, he is able to remain righteous and morally upright. However, the fact remains: he has no money to support and sustain his family, especially his dying wife. Man may be immoral or moral, still survival is not certain.
Finally, The Cargo by Anthony Tan shows that man is precarious about circumstances, although he has nothing to do with it. Asmawil is in dilemma: if he’s going back home, he and his family (wife and children) are going to face death; and if he doesn’t, he’s not going to see his family ever again. Asmawil is uncertain if he’s going back home or not because he has already anticipated what most probably would happen (which is also uncertain), that every person in the village is going to accuse him as the primary suspect. Every man, except him, in his ship is dead. He actually did nothing. He did not even want the tragedy, nor did he even think it would happen. Although the death of men in his cargo is neither of his will nor action, still he suffers the uncertain consequence. He was just sailing with his people in the ship, and everything seemed to be perfect and peaceful; suddenly, something terrible happened—his men got killed. He did not know such tragedy would occur in his ship. And it really did. Life has no guarantee. Now may be peaceful yet a second later can be tragic. Nobody knows. Who does? Sometimes man suffers what he does not deserve. And worse: the most painful suffering is the uncertainty of what the present suffering might bring him.
Because there’s no guarantee, human condition is always precarious in different angles: about the end of the world, identity, emotion, survival, and circumstances. All these uncertainties may be present in life, but man has to realize he should not be shaken. R. I. Fitzhenry declared, “Uncertainty and mystery are energies of life. Don’t let them scare you unduly, for they keep boredom at bay and spark creativity.” Man may want to quest for certainty yet it blocks the search for meaning. He has to know that uncertainty is the very condition to impel him to unfold his powers. Vincent van Gogh, a Dutch painter, one of the greatest of the Post-Impressionists, pronounced: “For my part I know nothing with any certainty, but the sight of the stars makes me dream.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
