A Nation Aborted: Rizal, American Hegemony, and Philippine Nationalism

by Floro C. Quibuyen

A work about recovering a lost history and vision, an invitation to reread Rizal, rethink his project, and revision Philippine nationalism. It traces the trajectory of the Philippine nationalist movement from its inception in the late 19th century to its deformation and co-optation by US imperialism in the early years of the twentieth century.

Genres: History

437 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1999

Reviews

[Reynald Trillana · Rating 4 out of 5]

Eloquent rebuttal of the dominant leftist discourse on Rizal. Quibuyen addresses head on the question of Rizal's controversial and often misread position on the 1896 Revolution by explaining the Philippine national hero's idea of a national community

[Albert Rejas · Rating 4 out of 5]

In reading this book, it is advisable to first read Agoncillo's "Revolt of the Masses" and Constantino's "Veneration Without Understanding" to be able to contextualize where Quibuyen is coming from. Even a summary would be enough. This two landmark book/essay served as Quibuyen's main reference point in rectifying Rizal's controversial and often misread history that turns into a misconception, that are still popular in the Filipino's historical consciousness.


Floro Quibuyen comprehensively debunks the hegemonic narratives of Agoncillo, Constantino, Retana, and other post-colonial 'nationalist' or "leftist" historians of the 20th century regarding Rizal. He also tackles how the American hegemony authorized these narratives and tracks the transformation of Philippine nationalism to further prove his points; and in the end provide a compelling overview of Rizal's nationalism and heroism.

The book started with how Rizal and his position in the Philippine Revolution of 1896 is viewed by prominent historians such as Constantino and Agoncillo. They have said that objectively, Rizal is against the Revolution of 1896, died as a 'reformist', and only achieved pedestal heroism through American sponsorship. Contrary to this, Quibuyen presented that Rizal was not entirely against the Revolution but rather to its unpreparedness. Rizal aimed to a more visionary revolution where it includes not only the overthrown of the Spanish government/frailocracy and seizure of state power, but also moral revolution, social justice, and self-determination towards the end goal of building an independent nation governed by Filipinos (there is also a chapter where Quibuyen discussed Rizal's concept of "Filipino"). Through the short-lived La Liga Filipina, Quibuyen comprehensively constructs a new image of Rizal and dismantle Rizal and Philippine nationalism's set of dichotomies (e.g. Ibarra vs. Elias, Rizal vs. Bonifacio, ilustrado vs. the masses) propagandized by Agoncillo and Constantino. Quibuyen explicitly explained that the Revolution were not ilustrado vs. the masses, but instead a movement composed of integration of all social classes. Further, he viewed that Rizal and Bonifacio, or ilustrado and the masses do not see each other as counterparts (only the historians do!), but coadjacents to a shared vision.

There are too much insights worth noting in this book and I barely touch its richness. Quibuyen provides an organized timeline of events not only on Rizal's time, but after his death as well, and how Philippine nationalism transforms through different colonial interventions (Spain, America, and Japan). He also explores multi-nationally by dissecting Benedict Anderson's concept of nationalism and reading of Rizal; different Rizal's biographies from Spanish scholars such as Retana to Guerrero; back to his critique of Filipino scholars such as Agoncillo, Constantino, and Ileto. He also situates how the integration of classes interacts and includes perspectives of the Revolution in the lens of the ilustrados and the masses. Thus, I can say that this book is an outstanding starting point to learn from our history.

Fortunately, I end this book with a more informed perspective in our history. I do not end up hating Agoncillo nor Constantino, nor treat them as a dichotomy of Quibuyen. The book showcased the richness of our history, brought by our historians' perseverance in offering new historical interpretations and methodologies in situating certain persona/events of our history.

[Michael Nelmida · Rating 2 out of 5]

This audaciously book to make Rizal at niche in verge of pedestal , debunking Constantino's argument and provided by his lamely - well articulated contradiction.