The intellectualization of cultural products should most importantly be that of underlying political structures and discovering the unconscious foundations of culture.
As part of the Komedya Festival of the University of the Philippines which celebrates the centuries-old tradition of the theatrical form Komedya, Dulaang UP (DUP) presented Francisco Baltazar’s Orosman at Zafira in its 32nd theatre season. It was directed by Dexter Santos with original music by Carol Bello. The production was of reconfigured form since it utilized “modern” use of theatrical elements such as music, light, and stage craft.
The aim of this paper is to exact the core power relations represented by this play as a cultural product. Also, discuss and resolve the problematics and political implications of an existence of such a product.
The komedya, as a form, has an important albeit bitter role in the history of Philippine theater. It is a theatrical tradition whose plot revolves around the social, political, and religious conflicts between the Muslims and Christian heroes. It is usually presented in festivals with the support and patronage of the communities. This theater form has its origins in the theatrical traditions of Spain and Mexico in the 16th-18th century. It reached the Philippines through the Hispanic Christianization of the Philippines (http://www.upd.edu.ph/~updinfo/whatsup/komedya.html). This form is also a representation of the Hispanic cultural hegemony that, ironically, the University of the Philipines finds amusing and valuable arguing that “The existence of active komedya/moro-moro groups in a number of regions in the Philippines today warrants an intensified effort to assert the significance of this centuries old theater tradition.”(ibid.) The question of the value of persistence of this form over political implications on us as a nation is debatable yet it is this paper’s interest to acknowledge the latter as more important.
Claude Levi-Strauss in his own attempt to “discover the unconscious foundations of the culture of so-called primitive societies,” he investigated different ‘systems’ and one of the major interests of present cultural studies and one that is central to students of popular culture is his analysis of myth. ”He claims that beneath the vast heterogeneity of myths there can be discovered a homogeneous structure” (Storey,77). His claim also asserts that “the purpose of the myth is to make the world explicable, magically to resolve its problems and contradictions“ (Storey,78). This analysis is central in looking at the performance of DUP and komedya in general as a present-day (ironically centuries-old) myth that promises resolution and justification of current (and previous) Philippine social strata.
Interestingly, Roland Barthes in his Mythologies, thought in line with Levi-Strauss when he analyzed popular culture using the same concept of myth. It is clear that “by myth he also means ideology as understood as a body of ideas and practices which defend the prevailing structure of power by actively promoting the values and interest of the dominant groups in society” (Storey,83).
The Orosman and Zafira production was well received by the audience and critics alike. In his column in the Philippine Daily Inquirer on February 25, 2008, Gibbs Cadiz raves the performance with transparent pleasure:
“The language, spoken by a large cast of professional and student actors, is largely leeched of declamatory artifice, its picturesque power emerging with coherence and transparency.
At its simplest, ‘Orosman’ makes a persuasive case that Balagtas, a figure of bland terror to millions of students required to read his archaic poetry, can be accessible, comprehensible, when spoken right.”( http://www.gibbscadiz.blogspot.com/)
For the most part, the performance was indeed technically marvelous as it is the reputation of DUP to experiment on attack and stage craft. The use of omnipresent props as seen in the several bundles of wooden sticks that the movers strategically move around the stage to establish the spaces just shows how much they have mastered stage craft. The group also utilized Philipppine indigenous musical instruments to use as props such as the Kubing, the Tungatong, and the Bunkaka (http://www.filipinoheritage.com/arts/phil-music). They were critical in the fight scenes although I must admit that I felt for the instruments as they were beaten to death to fulfill that purpose. I wouldn’t think though that they would not be needing those same instruments to be played since they have a live band by the side of the stage playing the original music of Pinikpikan’s very own Carol Bello which was very refreshing to hear. The lights were off a couple of times since they were not perfectly queued and some actors have to adjust their blocking to the light which seemed a little awkward for it took some drama away from some scenes. The choreography was great if not for some misses in synchrony and a little overcrowding of the stage in some parts. Remembering how lengthy the original text is (I had to read it for an undergraduate class), the choreography or using dance as a basis for storytelling took care of a lot of scenes, which was pleasantly utilitarian. Generally, DUP did their thing and they were good at it.
Orosman at Zafira tackles the struggles of three kingdoms bound together by the irony of love and war. A story of love set in the period of social disarray, Orosman at Zafira presents the contradictions of emotions and logical thinking for the welfare of the many and for the benefit of personal satisfaction and happiness. In Marruecos, two pashas (a rank in the sultanate political hierarchy) struggle for power since the assassination of Mahamud, the sultan of Marruecos. Zafira, Mahamud's daughter covets to take vengeance on the death of his father from Boulasem, the grand pasha of Tendst and the newly self proclaimed sultan of Marruecos. Zafira joins forces with Zelim, the pasha of Duquela, who, on the other hand, seeks to gain the sultanate throne. Zafira and Zelim's troops have lost from the army of Boulasem led by his sons, Abdalap and Orosman. Zafira and Zelim are captured. Both Abdalap and Orosman fall for Zafira. Zafira secretly falls in love with Orosman. On the day of Boulasem's triumph over the army of Zafira and Zelim, Abdalap successfully plots a plan to obtain the trust and support of the army just so he can dethrone his father. The resulting strife of the hasty change in Marruecos' leadership has paved the way for Zelim to scheme a new course of action against Abdalap. Zafira becomes trap in choosing whether she pursues her revenge for his father or her love for Orosman. Orosman, on the other hand finds himself in the predicament whether to choose between the love for an enemy or the throne his father has been fighting for. (http://www.upd.edu.ph/~dup/)
The main point of interest of this paper is to dissect the relationships of the characters and realize the implicit and explicit meanings of each character vis-à-vis the Philippine society as we know it. The characters’ main motivation in this play is power. The main conflict is located in Boulasem’s interest to usurp Mahamud as sultan of Marruecos. While the love story of Orosman and Zafira is a major twist in the story as it brings complications to the story itself, it is born out of the political underpinnings of the play. The characters are all part of the upper class. This character of the story provides for interpolation of the subject and puts them inside the mindset of one that is outside this social sphere. This creates for a mystification of this social sphere and as it is mystified it is also untangled within the same play fashioning pleasure in the audience as it understands this complex relations that is as far as the audience can go in their own social placement.
The previously-mentioned analysis is in line with Levi-Strauss’ investigation on the myth as the play provides understanding of this specific social class therefore making acceptable the existence of such. The viewer is then diverted from questioning inequality and learns to appreciate and accept the system blindly. This play implicitly suggests that the upper class resolves its contradictions and so will other conflicts in other classes.
Consequentially, Barthes’ analysis is also true for this play. The values and interest of the dominant group is protected since it generally presents them in a nonchalant manner. Being presented as a “given” in any society, this play makes the values of greed and infidelity thrive as it rationalizes these values even though they are placed outside the morality of the characters. They are not explicitly accepted as traditionally moral yet they are discussed in a logical backdrop again giving rationalization to power grabbing which is a central conflict in the very little number that hold enormous amount of power in the Philippine society.
The importance of this play in Philippine literature and theater is invaluable and it is not in the interest of this paper to say otherwise. However, it is in its interest to provide for a rational basis of aesthetic appreciation. Orozman and Zafira, the play, is a romanticism of political relations that promote inequality and being regarded as one of the greatest written is a testament on how we never really overcame that kind of power relations as a people.
Sources:
“Structuralism and Post-Structuralism” in Storey, John. An introduction to Cultural Theory and Popular Culture. London: Prentice Hall,73-100.
http://www.upd.edu.ph/~updinfo/whatsup/komedya.html
http://www.gibbscadiz.blogspot.com/
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment