D1 Art: The Epitome of Freedom Bloodshed. Pain. Anguish. Sorrow. Tragedy.

These are the effects of humanity unredeemed and of the battle between justice and prejudice. These are also the perturbations of withstanding the fight for freedom. One would feel the same emotions when he takes a tour to the National Museum of the Philippines and finds himself enthralled by the overwhelming and breath-taking power of the Spoliarium from across the room. The painting, produced by the Filipino artist Juan Luna in 1884, renders the gory scene of the Roman Coliseum where gladiators fight for their lives. These warriors, either dead or dying, are being dragged mercilessly to the exit room where carcasses of animals are dumped together with their mangled bodies. On the other side are the barbaric Romans cheering on the next batch of gladiators ready to commit their lives to Death. A woman with her back turned away cries in a corner, perhaps mourning for a son or a husband who has lost the fight. Coward thieves fought over weapons and armor left by the brave ones, while a sick beggar sucks the blood of a deceased gladiator. Luna characterized the plunders of the Roman Empire in his painting, but he allegorized it to the condition of his country to the Spanish Empire at that time. He was asked to produce a painting which would interpret the Philippine History as a thanksgiving gift for the pension granted to him by the Municipality of Manila. Awed by his grandeur and genius skills for painting, connoisseurs and art critics alike exalted his work which he then gave to the Exposicin Nacional de Bellas Artes in 1884, where it garnered a gold medal. Afterwards, the painting was sold to the Diputacin Provincial de Barcelona in 1886 for 20,000 pesetas. Luna lived during the time of the Reformistas who are educated Filipinos who tried to seek a change in the ruling of the Spaniards. They wanted the Filipinos to take part of the council, to create a better

perspective of their fellowmen, and to improve their standards of living in their own country, even though colonized by the Spaniards. Much about Lunas skills, what was Luna thinking when he created the painting? Did he expect an uprising of his fellow Filipinos against the Spaniards? Did he not fear for the Spaniards arresting him for his work? Did he create it just for the sake of gaining money? As a man filled with regret, anger, and resentment, Luna painted Spoliarium to signify the unfair treatment of the Spaniards to the Filipinos. It portrays the political, moral and social aspects of the lifestyle in the 19th century. The dead gladiators symbolize the Filipinos working hard for their families and yet they still get executed because of a simple act of crime. The carcasses where the dead bodies are put together show the Spaniards perspective of the Filipinos as uncivilized lowly-living humans who are in need of a religion and a government to rule them. The thieves and beggars depict the Filipinos who turned their back on their fellowmen and betrayed them to gain money from the Spaniards, thus benefitting from those wrongly-treated Filipino. Finally, the woman crying is obviously symbolizing the Inang Bayan who is depressed at the loss of her sons. It was not only Luna who stirred the emotions of his fellowmen; in fact, a lot others like Jose Rizal, Marcelo H. del Pilar, and Felix Hidalgo, communicated their apprehensions through their writings and arts. Rizal wrote his two novels, Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo, to heighten the awakening of the Filipinos in the dark. Likewise, del Pilar took his stand in the Reformistas publication, La Solidaridad. Hidalgo then painted Laguna estigia or more known as The Styx. These men regarded themselves as fighters for freedom, therefore putting themselves into jeopardy with the law. We ask ourselves, Was it right to express their feelings differently from the majority through the use of art? Anyone who is a patron of the art would know that the sake of art of to infect anyone who sees it. Based on the philosopher Richard Wollheim, there are three ways to asses the aesthetical value of art.

One is the realistic way where the quality is independent of any human view. Another is the objectivist way where it is dependent on general human experience and the last one is the relativist way where it is ultimately dependent with the varied occurrences of humanity. However, at times, the society depicts the artists masterpiece differently from what the painter really wanted to express through it. In modern times, we see examples of contemporary artists who have also expressed illustrated their emotions through their masterpiece. Although, our beliefs and opinions do not match with theirs, they still gained confidence to publish their own works of perfection. We see Dan Browns novel, The Da Vinci Code, as a blasphemy of the Roman Catholic belief that Jesus Christ is a bachelor. We also regard the Filipino artist Mideo Cruz who created a major upheaval because of his collage, Poleteismo, as a sacrilege to the images of Jesus Christ and Mary. Even Lady Gagas song Judas, which is believed to be a devil, gained a lot of angry remarks from the masses. Freedom to express oneself is in reach of everyone. However, this freedom is not absolute; there are limits as to how one can express himself. This goes for all the critics and the artists alike. We can express anything we want, be it a painting, a song, or a novel and we can make exclamations too, be it in accordance to the art or not. Going back to Lunas Spoliarium, it does not really matter whether the Spaniards agreed to his painting. What is important is that whatever opinion the majority of the society will give, whatever consequence will arise, the artist must always stand up for his own masterpiece. And that is the epitome of true art, the quest for freedom of expression.