De Ocampo, Sheena Mae M. Dr. Evangeline Martin
I-12
Reflection: Veneration Without Understanding
Firstly, upon reading the title itself, ‘Veneration Without Understanding’, I already know that the article that I am going to read will be about how we, Filipinos, revere Rizal as someone of a high order without fully understanding why we do such thing. I initially thought that the author, Renato Constantino, was an anti-Rizal for writing it and for saying that we fail to understand why is Rizal our national hero. Is he just purposely trying to prop up Andres Bonifacio or other heroes above Rizal’s name? Does he have evidences with him that will prove his assertions? Well, by merely looking at the number of pages he has worked …show more content…
Bonifacio lead the bloody revolution using his bolo and revolver but he lost. Now, as for Rizal, he believed that the country was not ready for a revolution. It does not mean that he was against the revolution. In his novels Noli Me Tangere, he implicitly addressed the peaceful way of revolution while in El Filibusterismo, he implicitly told that there is no advantage in bloody fight. He stood on his principles of education. He believed that Filipinos will achieve what he dreams of for them through education. His value of education was written throughout his writing and even on his letter to his sister Trinidad, “Now that you are still young you should strive to read, read, and learn...” As his weapon, he used the pen to fight against the same tyrants the formers fought, yet he won over them. If the author asserts that other nation’s heroes were the leaders of revolutionary, then let’s say that it should be Bonifacio, but it is inevitable that one would ask, “Did he succeeded in his revolution?” The answer is a big no. He lost it just like his other 28 battles. And again, a hero fights, however, what he is fighting for should consequent into an effective result or
I-12
Reflection: Veneration Without Understanding
Firstly, upon reading the title itself, ‘Veneration Without Understanding’, I already know that the article that I am going to read will be about how we, Filipinos, revere Rizal as someone of a high order without fully understanding why we do such thing. I initially thought that the author, Renato Constantino, was an anti-Rizal for writing it and for saying that we fail to understand why is Rizal our national hero. Is he just purposely trying to prop up Andres Bonifacio or other heroes above Rizal’s name? Does he have evidences with him that will prove his assertions? Well, by merely looking at the number of pages he has worked …show more content…
Bonifacio lead the bloody revolution using his bolo and revolver but he lost. Now, as for Rizal, he believed that the country was not ready for a revolution. It does not mean that he was against the revolution. In his novels Noli Me Tangere, he implicitly addressed the peaceful way of revolution while in El Filibusterismo, he implicitly told that there is no advantage in bloody fight. He stood on his principles of education. He believed that Filipinos will achieve what he dreams of for them through education. His value of education was written throughout his writing and even on his letter to his sister Trinidad, “Now that you are still young you should strive to read, read, and learn...” As his weapon, he used the pen to fight against the same tyrants the formers fought, yet he won over them. If the author asserts that other nation’s heroes were the leaders of revolutionary, then let’s say that it should be Bonifacio, but it is inevitable that one would ask, “Did he succeeded in his revolution?” The answer is a big no. He lost it just like his other 28 battles. And again, a hero fights, however, what he is fighting for should consequent into an effective result or