Events: The Video Documentary PUREZA: Preparation or Propaganda? (2)
NDB writer Gil Severino discusses with GMA TV Bacolod’s Adrian Bobe the sociological hypochondria that ails the sugar industry since the Spanish period. Listening to the interview was the creator of PUREZA himself, J. Abello (contributed photo)
The concluding portion of J. Abello’s PUREZA made an excellent connection with what my other respondent Ambassador Edouard Garcia passionately expressed in an interview, “Why are they not hollering that something is wrong, somewhere and everywhere…Is there something wrong with the way they owned their haciendas? With the way they pay their workers the minimum wage?”
In fact, in a post interview with the Ambassador, he felt disgusted that no one “boooed” Roberto Benedicto when the Philippine Government cleared him of his social atrocities. He said until the sugar planters unite, “I would rather become French.” This is pregnant.
The pregnancy of Edouard’s expression became unfathomable in his words, “Is there something wrong with the way they owned their haciendas?” He obviously was referring to major players, dead or alive, who must vomit what they wrongly acquired. Monsgr. Gregorio Gaston’s allusion last September 25, 2011, to the same social sinfulness added, “The serious knowledge of local history is like a car repair. It will not run until it is fixed. It cannot be fixed if the mechanic does not understand the motor.”
Readers have the right to question the validity of the Ambassador and the Monsignor’s perception but the time will come when documented historical facts must follow what J. Abello started. There are “Negrense sugar mafia” who must publicly vomit and the Negrenses in general must come together and correct. This correction should have been started since the Spaniards left the province.
Meantime, it was very distinct in the film that one character challenged “show me an oppressive haciendero”. I blame no one, I am a student of market economics but it is a fact that there are hacienderos who sacrifice to pay their workers the minimum wage and PUREZA apparently is skewed towards the massive industry violation of the law. I agree.
I cannot agree however to the selection of characters-respondents. Is it a coincidence that Mrs. Gina Martin took almost center stage above all the rest? Then we feasted over the words of the “Gamboas, Ledesmas, an Alonso, a P. Henares daughter, understandably the Abellos, then supporting roles of a Lacson, a Cosculluela, veteran journalists”. Which paradigm do these characters belong?
Then enemies were highlighted – Marcos, Marcos crony Roberto Benedicto, the litany of the three decades old havoc caused by Cory Aquino’s Comprehensive Agrarian Reformed Program and I cannot predict whether the ignorance of the “Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries (ARBs) is an enemy, too. Why were these enemies “created” by PUREZA? Are they really the enemies? What I feared most are the enemies that are within us. A PUREZA II, perhaps?
While Mr. J. has the grasp, gall and balls to say what is sociologically wrong, “none of his characters stood up and say I AM WRONG, I CAUSED THE WRONG and that restitution we once blabbered IS ME, SHOULD HAVE BEEN ME, MUST START FROM ME and let me face our social problem with my repentance.”
I like a full elaboration of the cameo role given to Edouard Garcia, Dr. Cecilia Locsin-Nava and Monsignor Gregorio Gaston. They have the intelligence and experience unmatched by any of those characters.
PUREZA ended with an impressive humor about the “queridas and cocks” but I see it as a propaganda to let people know that J. Abello’s characters had the grasp of the social problem. Why was there no CATEGORICAL admission of who are to blame? I admire the artistic handling of humor but lurking loud and clear is the subtle drawing of sympathy, “Baw, kaluuyan ta man ang haciendero”.
Let those who knew much lead the lackadaisical preparation then for 2015. Are they credible?
(Next: Have we quantified the competitive advantage of sugar?)
