Here Lies Love - the musical

 

Dear Paulo and Melissa,

In a conversation, at a restaurant in New York city with you guys, I claimed I would write and send you a copy of my take on Here Lies Love,” - the Filipino musical we just saw on Broadway.   I mostly did write “My Take.”  It was 4/5^th done when I lost the file.  I will not go into details but,  suffice it to say, I will no longer exclusively rely on the use of flash drives to save my files.

I will come directly to the point.  The focus of “Here Lies Love” is about the personal life of Imelda Marcos that unfolds in a historical context that does not sufficiently nor adequately establish a meaningful connection with this context. 

I have the same objection to the film “Oppenheimer.”  The Second World War, the fear of fascism and communism, “white man’s burden” and the harnessing of nuclear energy were part of the Oppenheimer historical context. 

In both cases, it is difficult for a viewer to make the connection between the main character and the historical context unless the viewer already has sufficient knowledge of those times.  The dots were there but the connections were not well-organized or meaningfully developed. 

During the detonation of the first nuclear bomb in Los Alamos (The Trinity test in 1945) a verse from the Bhagavad Gita came to Oppenheimer.  “Now I have become Death, the destroyer of worlds.”  I believe it was also during that time that he mused that the bomb could ignite the world’s atmosphere.  Evidently, this was not enough of a deterrent to Oppenheimer.  Gun powder can destroy a city block.  Nuclear power can destroy us all, including those who pull the trigger.  To quote a line from another movie; because of nuclear weapons “…our worst enemy is war itself…”

In Here Lies Love, the program brochure cites 1898 as the time when “The U.S. colonized the Philippines, having ‘liberated’ the country from Spain.”   However, during the program, the D.J. bellowed that the U.S. bought the Philippines from Spain.  The D.J. was more accurate.  In a very real sense we have been owned by – or, if you must, depended on - the U.S. to this very day.  (note the arrogance of this narrative).  To some it was a love affair.  To others it was a version of strife and suffering.  

In 1945 the Philippines was granted independence by the U.S. from the U.S. in what has been described as a transition to a neo-colonial relationship with the U.S.  The Philippines did not have independent control of its own economy, a main contributor to the lack of political independence as well.  When Marcos declared martial law, he quickly assured foreign business interests that it would be business as usual.  Marcos’ fight was with the local oligarchs.  Ninoy Aquino had no real platform other than his opposition to Marcos.  Nevertheless, Aquino was a symbol of a democratic alternative to the Marcos dictatorship.  When the Marcos left the Philippines at the end of his rule, it was an American helicopter than lifted him and Imelda to Hawaii, not to the U.S. mainland. 

To this day, local oligarchs control the Philippine government.  Their loyalists populate official government positions.  It is like the game of musical chairs on who becomes president. 

During the time of Imelda, the Philippines, like other “developing countries had an American-style neoliberal economy.   The result was an increase in the unequal distribution of wealth.  These countries have thriving urban-global economies surrounded by massive populations of poverty and near-poverty.  Since then, globalization (primarily capital and debt) has increased income inequality and migration.

Imelda was of the privileged wealthy class entangled in corruption, extravagance and intrigue.  The Marcos regime was a kleptocracy.  Imelda enjoyed celebrity status locally and internationally.  Though she wielded some political power it is dubious as to how far this influence extended.  Her program was to make the Philippines a western style showcase of affluence. 

She had little understanding or empathy for the mass of non-affluent Filipinos.  She divorced herself from and concealed her modest origins.         

“Here Lies Love” was intended for Imelda’s headstone when she passed away.  The love affair and fascination with western affluence is still very much a priority and/or a necessity to many, even though to these many, “love” lies where Imelda lies.

My Take. 

 I apologize for an overly brief and scant rendition of the historical context of Imelda and Oppenheimer.  This email is clearly an opinion, a reaction to the films rather than an explanation.  I am open to correction, clarification and further exposition.  I am sure I made mistakes, errors in punctuation and need more detail.

Here Lies Love is enjoyable.  It boasts a talented all-Philippine cast.  It employs an innovative and modern “disco” format.  It combines dance, music and audience participation in a way that sustains a level of energy for a full 90 minutes.  I am all for it.  I support the endeavor.  I never say “no” to art.

These cultural “showcase presentations” serve to maintain the status quo as most myths are wont to do.  (Examples are the story of the good Samaritan and how Washington confessing to cutting down the cherry tree illustrated the importance of not telling a lie.)  They all fall in what I refer to as the “marketplace of ideas,” more-or-less a free-for-all under the guise that one has the right to believe whatever he/she wants.  People have the power to believe anything they want but not the right to do so.  Supposition, fantasy and rationalization can easily become the basis for social reality.      

Cultural presentations helped the assimilation of Filipinos to U.S. culture to the level we are now.  The key to success is not to “rock the boat” and not be too visible.  One can dissent (to prove one’s individuality and independence) but not “rock the boat.”

In instances of real conflict however, a more considered, scientific, rational and truthful rendition is imperative if justice is to prevail, if humanness is to prevail, if we (as a species of diverse peoples) are to prevail.  In important ways, it is up to us too.  We all have to be revolutionaries in a manner.  We have to stick together.  We are not each other’s enemy.

In my opinion, one of the most significant U.S. contributions to the Philippines was the establishment of a public education system.  Literacy was prohibited by the friars and monks during the Spanish occupation for fear it would foster revolutionary thinking.  They were right.  The blacks in the U.S. had the same obstacles to literacy at one time; and, to education to this very day.  One obstacle, then another, then another, then another … have hindered Blacks from an equitable assimilation to U.S. culture. 

My Take

There is another dimension to my take on Here Lies Love.  Nora and I are cohorts.  We were both born and grew up in the Philippines.  We went to the same high school at the same time although we did not run into each other or know each other.  We both came to the U.S. at the end of the 60’s to continue our education.  We already had college degrees when we arrived.  We were adults.  We both speak Tagalog (a Philippine language) and Nora speaks Bicol (a local dialect) as well.  We both still have family in the Philippines.  We have resided in the U.S. for almost a half a century.  

We were in the U.S. when Marcos declared martial law.  We experienced the tail end of the 60’s in the U.S., the end of the Vietnam war and all the violent conflicts since then (in Asia, the Middle East, Africa, etc.), including those against peoples like the war on drugs and the war on terrorists.  In the wars against peoples, anywhere can be a battlefield. Persons are killed (or jailed or tortured or whatever) indiscriminately and wantonly.   Anyone can die.  No one is safe.  No place is safe.

Probably most of the audience of Here Lies Love were not yet born or were children when Marcos was in power.  He and Imelda are distant concerns, a fuzzy reality.

-o-o-o

About 6 years ago, Nora visited the Philippines on the occasion of the passing of her brother.  During her stay she stumbled upon and impulsively bought a 1.5 acre Island.  She made the excuse that she bought the island as a gift for my birthday, but I knew what was really going on.  She wanted to go home. 

Later we found out the island (Nora’s Island) could only be leased because it is government property and that we had to allow public access.  We subsequently bought a small beachfront property (Flores sanctuary).  We built a house there.  We will spend part of the year in the Philippines and part of the year in the U.S.  We have homes in both countries.