See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/274641110

Filipino luho and Manila's Metropolitan Theatre

Article · December 2011

CITATIONS READS

0 1,846

2 authors, including:

Annette Condello
Curtin University
22 PUBLICATIONS   11 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Lina Bo Bardi's Adaptive Reuse Projects View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Annette Condello on 08 April 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

110 es pa syo
Filipino Luho and
Manila’s Metropolitan Theater
ANNETTE CONDELLO
Annette Condello teaches architecture and culture, design,
and research methods at Curtin University, Australia. She
holds a PhD in Architecture from the University of Western
Australia. She has worked as a researcher at the National
University of Mexico (UNAM). Her interests include the
transformation of luxury in Europe, Australasia and the
Americas, cuisine and sloth.
ABSTRACT
The Philippine’s Metropolitan Theatre is rarely
discussed through the lens of luxury.Filipino
architect Juan Arellano designed Manila’s
Metropolitan Theatre (1931), an important Art
Deco building, but no one has considered this as
an important example of luxury in architecture.
What constitutes Filipino luxury? This paper
interprets Arellano’s theatre as a luxurious
building, including its original and exotic setting.
What once constituted luxury in the past informed
the site of the Manila’s theatre and its garden and
it argues that a distinctly Filipino luho design
trend emergedthrough its ornament in advance
of the preferred public taste of Art Deco.
INTRODUCTION
When one mentions luxury in Manila, beach
resorts, Makati’s expansive shopping malls and
the elite suburban enclave at Forbes Park, for
instance, readily come to mind1. Luxury, however,
is rarely considered within the context of urban
design and architecture.2 The Oxford English
Dictionary defines “luxury” as the “habitual use of,
or indulgence in what is choice or costly, whether
food, dress, furniture, or appliances of any kind” and
“sumptuous and exquisite food or surroundings.”3
Historically, luxury was not confined to objects
or particular surroundings. It was also expressed
architecturally. Drawing on historical inquiry, the
paper first identifies the origins of the Filipino
concept of luho4and unravels a view of Spanish
colonial fantasy preferential to ornate buildings.
It speculates that this fantasy led the Spanish
to select the Jardin Botanico (known as Mehan
Garden during American rule and now a neglected
luxurious venue) as the ideal setting for a theatre.
Then, the paper traces the architectural expression
of luxury during Spanish occupation and its later
JOURNAL ARCHITECTURE AND ALLIED ARTS IN THE PHILIPPINES
manifestation during American colonial regime. It
interprets Juan Arellano’s Metropolitan Theatre of
Manila (1931) design in the garden as a luxurious
theatre in Manila.
Filipino luho
In this paper “luho” connotes the natural tropical
setting and the introduction of exotic plants from
Europe and the New World to the Philippines.
Amongst Las Islas Filipinas flora and fauna were
luxuriant in their diversity and abundance, far in
excess of any European measure. The Philippines
archipelago, its luxuriant bamboo groves,
mango trees and other tropical plants attracted
the imagination of sixteenth century Spanish
conquistadors, especially the nobles. Presumably,
they dreamt of living luxuriously: by resorting to
silvered cathedrae (thrones) extracted from the
land itself. This dream partly came into a reality
with the construction of ornate buildings such
as the Catholic churches in the Walled City of
Intramuros at Manila, previously known as Maynila
– the “place of water lilies.”5 In this case the term
luho would also connote the rare qualities of local/
imported materials and the creation of decorative
leitmotifs such as mangoes. What is significant
about Maynila was that it was named after a plant
and the physical luxuriancy of its natural setting
influenced the future placement of the theatre
within the Jardin Botanico, outside of Intramuros.
Manila’s flora and fauna express the “Filipino luho.”
Filipino luho is therefore useful when interpreting
the strategic location of the botanical garden and
the indigenous layers within Arellano’s theatre
design.
The emergence of luxury in Manila
Imagining infinite luxuries for the Spanish
monarchy, the conquistador Miguel Lopez de
2011 111
 Legazpi (1565-1572) sailed east from its colony in
Mexico across the Pacific Ocean and encountered a
new luxuriant archipelago in 15646. First settling in
Cebu and then Panay, they would have experienced
for the first time luxuriant bamboo groves, striking
constructions of elevated huts with thatched
roofs. They entered the grove in search of spices.
“Although small quantities of cinnamon and gold
were acquired, it became apparent that there were
no large stores of easily exploitable wealth such
as Incan gold or Moluccan cloves.”7At the time
Legazpi heard from the locals that there was a
bustling barangay concentrated along the Laguna
de Bay and Pasig River. In due course, Legazpi
and his entourage of men introduced a form of
European luxury to the Tagalogs of Maynila - a
fortress filled with sumptuous buildings, meaning
their interiors were lined with costly materials
finishes. Despite not finding their luxuries,
they nonetheless changed the archipelago’s
architectural destiny and made their presence
known to the Philippines’ indigenous inhabitants.
In changing the archipelago’s architectural destiny,
they destroyed the barangay (or boat settlement)
and instructed hybridized New Spanish structures.
About five centuries later bamboo groves would
be resurrected as an architectural form – within
the Metropolitan Theatre’s ornamental details,
such as the bamboo stalks. Though the abundance
of bamboo groves and translucent capiz shells
were necessities than luxuries for the indigenous
people, in the eyes of the future Spaniards from
New Spain the groves and the seashore became
the place establish their permanent towns.
In 1571 the port of Maynila became a Spanish town
- Manila. The colony’s first markings, ruled by the
Spanish king through the viceroyalty of Mexico,
enlarged Maynila’s port and settlement along the
Pasig River to be planned similar to a New Spanish
city (figure 1). “Hispanic colonial settlements
in Mexico and later in the Philippines tended to
Figure 1 Maynila’sluxurious port and settlement (ca.1571) Oil paint-
ing on the inside of a wooden chest (ca. 1640-50) Museo de Arte
Jose Luis bello, Puebla, Mexico
112 es pa syo
take on a recurring form”8 of the grid, main plaza
and church and other buildings. “Eventually this
pattern was formalized in the Law of the Indies”9.
The New Spaniards created their Intramuros,
which “was one the best fortified Oriental cities”10.
Manila’s Intramuros comprised of a central street
grid with “expensive private homes”11 in lavish
surroundings of tropical gardens. Outside the
Intramuros to the north-east was a Chinese
market district sited in a marsh, which between
in 1581 and 1582 became the Parian, or market,
dotted with shops12.To the rest of the world the
port of Manila became known, metaphorically, as
the “Pearl of the Orient Sea,”13a complimentary
position connoting the luxuriant archipelago.
As far as Manila’s buildings on the Pasig riverbanks
are concerned, it is not precisely known if they
were constructed with luxurious materials at
the time (figure 2). Yet it was described in the
annals of the period that “many pleasure houses
were built along the riverbanks by the Spaniards
wishing the escape the stifling summer heat
within the city.”14 There were some churches in
the vicinity of Intramuros that were considered
luxurious by Antonio de Morga. In his Sucesos de
las Islas Filipinas (Events in the Philippine Isles,
1609) de Morga provided a glimpse of the church’s
Figure 2 2 Pasig Riverbank (Chavanne’sRiviere Passig, 1836) in Manila.
luxuriousness and described the interiorsas being
“sumptuous.”15 By the 1620s, people flocked
to Manila as it was a thriving commercial hub;
“it grew rapidly to become a cosmopolitan and
multi-ethnic colonial capital of over 40, 000”16.
People from the other islands as well as other
Asian countries settled in the city - outside the
Intramuros district since the location on Luzon
Island was set on the commercial route to the
Americas17. Not only were there sumptuous
churches in Luzon but also other isles as well, such
as the ones located in Iloilo, Panay - the interior
embellishments of Baroque churches, especially
the Miagao Catholic Church (1797), with its gold-
plated retablo. Soon different types of local and Figure 3 Plan of Intramuros (1785), Tomas Sanz AGI North Carolina
imported luxury materials were applied in private Digital History (6.2. The Spanish-American War)
buildings in Manila, for instance, the Casa Manila’s
(ca. 1850) with its carved timber screens to allow
ventilation within its interiors, was considered a
luxury at the time.

The Intramuros fortress, specifically the area

opposite the Parian Gate, is an interesting case
of a luxurious setting. Notwithstanding that it
was originally a “Chinese ghetto,”18but the Parian
area along Intramuros’ moat became the north-
east border of alignment of Asia’s oldest botanical
garden at the end of the nineteenth century.
The vast tropical and luscious area also became
the site for observing native plants, spices and
recreation (figures 3, 4 and 5). Recognized as
Asia’s first Botanical Garden comprising eight
thousand square metres, it was Sebastian Vidal
“who went to the Philippines as the ‘Inspector
General de Montes’ (General Inspector of Forestry)
in 1871. From 1876, he was the Chief of the Forestry
Commission, and later became the Director of the Figure 4 Manila’s luscious botanical garden
Manila Botanical Garden (1878-1889)”19. Jose
Rizal in his novel Noli Me Tangere (1887) describes
the garden in “Memories” and writes:

The sight of the botanical garden drove away [Ibarra’s]

gay reminiscences: the devil of comparisons placed
him before the botanical gardens of Europe, in the
countries where much effort and much gold are need-
ed to make a leaf bloom or a bud open; and even more,
to those of the colonies, rich and well-tended, and all
open to the public. Ibarra removed his gaze, looked
right, and there saw old Manila, still surrounded by its
walls and moats, like an anaemic young woman in ad-
dress from her grandmother’s best times.20

The aforementioned quotation alludes to the

process of deterioration, or rather the “tarnishing,”
of the Spanish imperial presence of not only
the district of Parian but also in the Philippines
as a whole. At the time, the botanical garden
would have been a globally-important luxury
garden filled with exotic plants because of its
initial size and unusual location. Following many

Figure 5 Manila’s botanical garden gates

JOURNAL ARCHITECTURE AND ALLIED ARTS IN THE PHILIPPINES 2011 113

 changes to the plan of Manila between Spanish
and American occupation, the area adjacent to
the moat developed into Mehan Garden in the
early twentieth century, a popular meeting place
for Manileños. Intriguingly enough, many if not
all the trees within the garden were edible. The
botanical garden is then a cultivated landscape -
it was exotic and had economic benefit - features
represented in Manila’s Art Deco theatre.
The Americanization of luho
Though the Parian area was a “Chinese ghetto” and
was located in a marsh, the place must have been
a bustling center. People purchased imported
luxury goods in the center due to archaeological
evidence: “luxury personal effects such as an
ivory fan, tortoise shell comb and beads” were
excavated by archaeologists in the 1970s and
1980sand “there were wide brick pathways and
adobe floors.”21 When archaeologists excavated
the place, some believe it was a market-place,
however, it is assumed herein that a palace must
have occupied the site.
Judging by the plan of the City of Manila created
by the Spanish colonists in 1898 and American
planners from that time onwards, one striking
aspect is the gardens’ original extent. Yet the
garden’s area began to shrink (figure 6) because
a theatre was planned for the garden near
Lawton Plaza (adjacent to the Metropolitan
Theatre’s arcaded pavilions). Manila’s botanical
garden stunned American architect and planner
Daniel Burnham – it would soon prove to be
a place fostering a congregational area in his
plan for Manila – one that conveys a sense of
Figure 6 Plan of Manila showing the botanical garden (1898)
114 es pa syo
Filipino luho. Burnham reported that outside the
Intramuros the grouping radiating streets should
be “fan-shaped”22 - a natural tropical feature in the
botanical garden, such as splayed palm fronds.
Manila’s footprint at the time “was changing
quickly; the city was expanding. America was
now promising independence. There was much
to do, and even more to look forward to”23 (figures
7 and 8). Colonised twice by Spain and then the
United States, Filipino architects developed luho
with both indigenous and foreign influences.
The foreign aspect of the fan-shaped streets
Burnham had designed or the naturally splayed
palm fronds, for example, would inform Arellano’s
future plan of the Metropolitan Theatre. Before the
implementation of the theatre though, carnivals
were held at the botanical garden, many of which
were designed by Arellano himself.
In the early 1900s, with the rising of the
entertainment venue constructions and annual
carnivals that emerged in the City of Manila,
it was both sides of the Pasig River where the
Americanization of luxury appeared. Rua Escolta,
for instance, “became the premier shopping
centre famous for its two luxury stores, La Estrella
del Norte and La Puerta del Sole”24. The “theatre
and restaurant row” in Calle Azcarraga (now Claro
M. Recto Avenue) and San Lazaro with its Manila
Opera House (1902, burned down in 1943) were
considered as prominent “landmarks.”25 Manila in
the 1920s, “witnessed the construction of cinema
palaces…showing only American movies. Escolta
and Rizal Avenue were a movie buff’s seventh
heaven.”26
 Figure 7 Plan of Manila showing the theatre in the garden
In 1922 the preeminent Filipino architect Juan (ca.1930s)
Arellano (1888-1960), who was chief architect of
the Manila Carnival, primarily created Neoclassical
edifices, promoted international tourism27.
Such entertainment venues, however, catered
exclusively to the Ilustrados and expats. It was only
in the early 20th century that cinemas, imitating
the ones built in the United States, emerged in
the northern part of Manila. At least five of these
entertainment structures were lavishly appointed
with exotic motifs. This is especially the case with
Arellano’s Art Deco Metropolitan Theatre design.

Luho Manileños at the Metropolitan Theatre

By the 1920s many Art Deco cinemas were built,
localizing the style in Manila. Art Deco was a
“luxurious and decorative style”28. The Art Deco
type of luxury would inevitably impact not only
spatial forms in the United States but also other
nations. While Arellano studied architecture
in the United States, he was an advent was a
Figure 8 Aerial photograph of Manila’s Metropolitan Theatre
follower of the Beaux-Arts and was swooned by a
wave of the new Art Deco aesthetic.

The Metropolitan Theatre was planned as the

most luxurious theatre in the Philippines. In the
Annual Report of the Governor General of the
Philippine Islands (1928), the Secretary of Interior
noted the action of the mayor of Manila:
Tomas Earnshaw appointed a committee which took
charge of the organisation and incorporation of the
“Metropolitan Theatre Company.” With the approval
of the municipal board, the City of Manila transferred
a portion of the land in the former botanical garden as
the site for the future national theatre.29
It appears that the former botanical site was
selected because there were no other options at
the time, but presumably there were other reasons.
The fact that the theatre was to be positioned in a
prominent garden suggests how the project was a
luxurious architectural feat. By 1930, the “standard
of living in the Philippines was much higher than its
Asian neighbours, with government revenue used
more efficiently to benefit the Filipino people”30,
especially to fuel their luxurious lifestyles. It is

JOURNAL ARCHITECTURE AND ALLIED ARTS IN THE PHILIPPINES 2011 115

 unknown how Arellano obtained the commission the signature of the building – “Metropolitan”
to design the theatre. Supposedly, Arellano was (figures 9 and 10).The plan of the Metropolitan
already commissioned to design the Post Office Theatre, according to Edson Cabalfin, shows
building and so the next logical place for a building Beaux Arts tendency in its planning, whereas
of this size that he would design is a grand theatre the façade is contradictory – in the “Art Deco
and cinema complex on Padre Burgos Avenue Moderne style”34. The architectural expression
boarded by Lawton Plaza, as part of Manila’s urban here is “zigzag modern” in its ornamentation35.
implementation. The experience Arellano leant What is fascinating about the theatre’s design
while studying in the United States, specifically is not so much that the zigzag modern style was
Philadelphia and New York, enabled him to further implemented but that the design was exotic to
his career as a Filipino architect.31 Asia, meaning the identification of unusual motifs,
such as the fan-shape, was Japanese in origin and
Argued herein as emitting a luxurious Filipino not in the Philippines. The fan-shape, would be
style, with a street facade that imitates a porous- exotic to a foreign country like the United States
looking marble like Parian (Grecian or mock- as well.
Victorian) marble – in contrast to the Neoclassical
Beaux-Arts Post Office – the theatre is visually
rich and stunningly beautiful in the vicinity.
Constructed out of steel structure and concrete
walls, it resides in the built up site of the botanical
garden. Exotic spaces embellished with Italianate
sculptures, were chosen so that the spaces would
provide a continuation of a tropical environment
that was lost along the Pasig River. The site was
transformed into an environment replenished
with Filipino luho. “Occupying the forefront of
the Art Deco style in the Philippines”, Arellano’s
Metropolitan Theatre motifs were, according to
Gerard Lico, “stylized from Philippine vegetation
and wildlife.”32 These motifs enabled the architect
to produce modern luxury buildings in Manila than
any previously constructed.

What makes the Metropolitan Theatre luxurious is

its choice of indigenous and imported materials,
ornament, and its lighting. Materially, the two-
storey base of the theatre complex, clad in
polychromatic tiles, Batik-looking patterns -
brilliant gold- and silver-tongued rays, mottled
pink and white textured-stucco, is pierced by two
Art Deco-arched colonnades with shops, flanking
the main façade33. Above the main entrance,
the building has installed a stained glass curtain
punctuated with colourful sun-burst raysand
Figure 10 Metropolitan Theatre‘s front facade

Figure 9 Stained glass curtain wall above the theatre’s entrance

116 es pa syo
Figure 11 Postcard of a bamboo church organ
Other than the fan-shape there are other
association of luxury between the theatre and
the church. Animating Burnham’s fan-shaped
streets, he also noted that Spanish churches
in the Philippines were curious structures
“that could form as prototype styles for future
structures”36, especially church constructions
inspired by Mexican designs .At first glance the
theatre does resemble a Mexican-styled church
not for god as such but for one’s own body for
sustenance. Referring to an interview published
in Excelsior in January 1930, Arellano thought
the theatre’s “harmonious lines would symbolize
an organ or a cathedral”37 (figure 11).Additionally,
architect and Benedictine monk Bernardo Perez
noted that Arellano’s design was a “romantic
work”38,presumably since its composition was
frivolous. Considering the New World motifs
of the Miagao Church’s façade (figure 12)in the
Iloilo province, Arellano must have thought the
church would be a suitable prototype for his
theatre design; he modernised the prototype by
appropriating the bastion towers by converting
them into rising stone pillars.
The Miagao Church is an example worth pointing
out as its form and façade symbolises luxury
found in the Metropolitan Theatre of Manila. The
“earthquake Baroque-styled” church comprises
the structure trimmed on either side with
two bastion towers. Its ornate façade which
JOURNAL ARCHITECTURE AND ALLIED ARTS IN THE PHILIPPINES
Figure 12 Photograph of the Miagao Church facade
“epitomizes the Filipino transfiguration of western
decorative elements, with the figure of Saint
Christopher on the pediment dressed in native
clothes, carrying the Christ child on his back, and
holding on to coconut palm for support”39. The
pediment’s relief sculpture resembles an exterior
theatrical backdrop, displaying “all tropical flora
of the New World provenance, with papayas
and guavas predominating. Directly below this
tableau is a six-lobed and volute niche containing
the figure of Saint Thomas of Villanova and two
mendicants”40. This example is significant as
its overall “stocky-formed” composition and
radical decorative elements underlies the work
of Arellano, specifically in the theatre’s façade
and use of tropical flora, considered here as
symbolizing exotically luxurious details.
Similar to the edible botanical plants on the
pre-existing site, where the theatre now rests, it
appears that Arellano introduced edible details,
which appear to be luxurious: sampaguita fruits
(mangoes, bananas and guavas) are embedded into
the building’s interior surfaces as well as vegetable
details – bamboo, palms, ferns and anahaw – all
for the purpose of public entertainment (figure
13). These edible-type of luxurious surfaces are
a sensual feast. Observing the theatre, it seems
that it resembles familiar Filipino objects – even
an upturned indigenous stilt-house could come to
mind.
2011 117
 The interior of the building is a visual feast as
no internal surfaces are spared from indulgent
concoction of luxury: the ceiling in the auditorium
(designed by Arellano’s brother41) is interspersed
with bunches of mangoes and hands of bananas
with wriggles (zigzag-basket weave) of hemp rope/
trellises that are in full bloom (figure 14). Dark
Philippine hardwood embellished parts of the walls
and these are highlighted with murals painted by
Fernando Amorsolo, which illustrate a lavish display
of indigenous Filipino architecture, an elaborate
stilt-platform. “Both sides of the proscenium,” as
Lico has observed, are ornamented with “jewel-
like plaques.”42 Additionally, “long, tapering tubes
of translucent white glass resembling bamboo
stalks, which functioned as lamps, served to
break the monotony of the bare longitudinal
walls of the auditorium. The auditorium ceiling
was enriched with rows of stylised tropical leaves,
bananas and mangoes in deep-relief”43. The
description of the “bamboo stalks” illustrates the
theatre’s connection with the origins of luho in the
Philippines. Bamboo stalks recall the “prevalent
creation myth that man and woman emerge from
bamboo at the same time”44, a myth that not
only saw men and women on an equal standing
but also an engrained “Filipino”mark on the land.
Then there are other Filipino marks enhancing
the structure’s luho. According to Lourdes R
Montinola, “The ornamentation on the walls of the
inner auditorium would be sober, but the series of
Figure 13 Detail of the bamboo architraves of the Metropolitan Theatre
118 es pa syo
gradually lowered arches on the ceiling would be
of rich and fragrant Philippine wood, embellished
with panels bearing motifs in brilliant tones.”45
The lobby, instead, recounts the story genesis from
the Christian doctrine with a pair of freestanding
bronze cast figures of Adam and Eve by Francesco
Riccardo Monti, presumably a deliberate attempt
to captivate the attention of visitors (especially
the Catholics) entering the theatre.
Arellano was a forward-thinking architect and
Francesco Riccardo Monti was instrumental
in delivering a type of Filipino luho within
architecture. Apart from Francesco Riccardo
Monti’s Italianate Adam and Eve sculpture, he also
designed “Orientalist” sculptures, figures in exotic
robes cast out of concrete, representing Siamese
dancers (figure 15)46. Arellano in particular
brought the indigenous and foreign influences
together by imbuing the spaces with luxurious
tendencies for both Filipinos and foreigners. The
building was inaugurated on December 10 in
1931 and its seating capacity is 1,670 47.“Opulence
and grandiosity,” according to Calbafin, “is
invoked by the Metropolitan Theatre through
the juxtaposition of low-relief sculptures, mosaic,
tile-work, textured surfaces and exuberant colour
schemes as it was intended to be a grand cultural
focal point for Manila”48. Ultimately the theatre
is culturally significant as exemplifying the first
modern feat of Filipino luho.As a result of his
Figure 14 Visual flora-diary of the theatre’s ceiling
Metropolitan Theatre of Manila design, Arellano
delved into designing other luxurious edifices in
the Philippines and urban layout for the City of
Manila.49
Conclusion
The concept of Filipino luho conveyed how natural
and exotic settings were used to encourage the
popularity of entertainment venues and form new
architectural interventions in the city, informed
by its Spanish and American architectural
backgrounds. Connections between luxury in the
Philippines and the rest of the world suggested
how it was implemented into architecture,
different from Europe. New Spanish palaces and
churches merged with the Philippines’ flora and
Figure 16 Francesco Riccardo Monti’s Siamese Dancer
Figure 16 Aerial view of Manila’s Metropolitan Theatre (early 1960s
postcard).
JOURNAL ARCHITECTURE AND ALLIED ARTS IN THE PHILIPPINES
fauna and new types of materials were thought
of as being luxurious, primarily the bamboo
stalks. Tracing the European notion about luxury
revealed how the planning of Manila’s botanical
garden changed, which informed Burnham’s whole
plan. The garden is thus insightful in three ways:
it is scenic because the theatre is there, it is
important because the flora inspired the theatre’s
ornamentation, and it is a common meeting place
for all Manileños outside Intramuros, on their way
to someplace else.
With its preceding cultural impacts, the Art Deco-
inspired building - Manila’s Metropolitan Theatre
in its luscious locale - had expanded from an
entertainment venue to become the nation’s first
luxurious theatre/cinema complex. Its Filipino luho
details and botanical garden location can be set
apart from the other sequence of cinemas in the
capital city (figure 16). Damaged during the World
War II Battle for Liberation, the theatre bombshell
became a ruined multi-complex – a “boxing
arena, cheap motel and gay bar, a basketball
court and squatter area”50. It was later “restored
in 1978 by Otillo Arellano”51, under the direction
of the First Lady Imelda Marcos. The interior was
furnished with European imported goods, such as
the excessive chandelier in the ballroom52. The
restoration of Manila’s Metropolitan Theatre under
Marcos’ direction in the post-independence period
combined Filipino luxury style with American
Art Deco characteristics, but these were not
consistently synchronized, as there were dispersals
of Italianate distinctions as well. Fortunately,
to commemorate the Philippines 100th year of
Independence in 1998 the Australian government
offered to restore Carlos Vander Tolosa’s film Giliw
Ko (1939) for the silver screen, originally premiered
at Manila’s Metropolitan Theatre.53
Today Manila’s historical gardens are diminishing.
Its buildings are slowly deteriorating to a point
where developers, and the like, disregard the
historical significance of luxurious entertainment
venues. Filipino architects today have yet to come
to terms with other indigenous trends that set
the international tone to the rest of Asia. This is
pertinent in respecting what Manila had to offer
at the time, and still has to offer, architecturally,
in the future. Other than Manila, perhaps
thesurroundings of Mount Luho in Boracay might
reveal other forms of Filipino luxuriance that is
worth studying to disclose new insights into its
existing or unfound indigenous traces.
2011 119
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Many thanks to Gerard Lico and Christopher Vernon.
ENDNOTES
1 Manila’s Makati shopping malls are mentioned in
Chadha, Radha and Husband, Paul. The Cult of the Luxury Brand:
Inside Asia’s Love Affair with Luxury, London, Boston: Nicholas
Brealey International, 2006.
2 In his book The Idea of Luxury: A Conceptual and
Historical Investigation (1994), Christopher Berry identifies the
four categories of luxury in the Western World: sustenance, lei-
sure, apparel and shelter. Berry discusses how the goods within
these categories have changed society’s value, but he does not
discuss architecture in any detail.For a discussion on the idea
of luxury see Christopher Berry, The Idea of Luxury: A Concep-
tual and Historical Investigation, 1994, p.58.
3 The Oxford English Dictionary,2005, <http://www.
oed.com> Etymologically, luxury is associated with lust or las-
civiousness, one of the seven deadly sins.
4 For the Tagalog term “luho” see http://www.bansa.
org/dictionaries/tgl/?type=search&data=datg+ko+luho ac-
cessed 30 August 2011.
5 Luis H. Francia, A History of the Philippines: From
Indios Bravos to Filipinos, New York: The Overlook Press, 2010,
p.31.
6 Luis H. Francia, A History of the Philippines: From
Indios Bravos to Filipinos, New York: The Overlook Press, 2010,
p.57.
7 Daniel F. Doeppers, ‘The Development of Philippine
Cities Before 1900,’ in The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol.31,
No.4 (Aug., 1972): 771.
8 Daniel F. Doeppers, ‘The Development of Philippine
Cities Before 1900,’ in The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol.31, No.4
(Aug., 1972): 776.
9 Daniel F. Doeppers, ‘The Development of Philippine
Cities Before 1900,’ in The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol.31, No.4
(Aug., 1972): 776.
10 See Robert R Reed, Colonial Manila: The context of
Hispanic Urbanism and process of morphogenesis, Berkeley, Los
Angeles, London: University of California Press, 1978, p.28.
Jose Rizal, Noli Me Tangere, trans. M S Lacson-Locsin, ed. Raul
L Locsin, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1996, p. 427.
11 Daniel F. Doeppers, ‘The Development of Philippine
Cities Before 1900,’ in The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol.31,
No.4 (Aug., 1972): 776.
12 Daniel F. Doeppers, ‘The Development of Philippine
Cities Before 1900,’ in The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol.31,
No.4 (Aug., 1972): 778.
13 Jose Rizal, Noli Me Tangere, trans. M S Lacson-
Locsin, ed. Raul L Locsin, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press,
1996, p. 428.
14 Quoted in Gere bankoff, 2007,420-21
15 Quoted in Gere bankoff, 2007,414-5
16 Gere bankoff, 2007,413.
17 And by 1789, the colonial government declared Ma-
nila as a free and open port. Luis H. Francia, A History of the
Philippines: From Indios Bravos to Filipinos, New York: The Over-
look Press, 2010, p.78.
18 ‘The Parian was virtually a “Chinese ghetto,” which
evolved into the present concept of Chinatown.’ Rosario Cruz
Lucero, Nation Beyond Manila, Ateneo de Manila University
Press, 2007, p.135.
19 Graciela M Calabrese and Mauricio Velayos, ‘Type
specimens in the Vidal Herbarium at the Real Jardin Botanico,
Madrid,’ in Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 2009, 159,
p.292.
20 Jose Rizal, Noli Me Tangere, trans. Ma. Soledad Lac-
son-Locsin, ed. L. Locsin, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press,
1997, 51.
21 Joy Belmonte, Nida Cuevas and Clyde Jago-On, ‘Who
lived at the Mehan Garden site?’, The Philippine Star, 29 August,
2001, http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=131786,
120 es pa syo
accessed 30 August, 2011.
22 Cristina Evangelista Torres, The Americanization of
Manila, 1898-1921, Diliman, Quezon City: The University of the
Philippines Press, 2010, pp.61-62.
23 Agusto F. Villalon, ‘Filipino moderne’ in Lourdes R
Montinola ed., Art Deco in the Philippines, ArtPostAsia Pte Ltd.,
2010, p.13.
24 Cristina Evangelista Torres, The Americanization of
Manila, 1898-1921, Diliman, Quezon City: The University of the
Philippines Press, 2010, pp.173-175.
25 Cristina Evangelista Torres, The Americanization of
Manila, 1898-1921, Diliman, Quezon City: The University of the
Philippines Press, 2010, pp.173-175.
26 Gerard Lico, ‘Tickets to Dreamscapes and the
Evolution of the Filipino Space of Spectatorship,’ Archi[types
text], Manila: National Commission for Culture and the Arts,
2009, p.17.
27 www.manilacarnivals.blogspot.com, accessed
14/07/2011.
28 Edson Roy Gregorio Cabalfin, Art Deco Filipino:
Power, politics and ideology in Philippine Art Deco Architectures
(1928-1941), unpublished Master of Science Thesis, University
of Cincinnati, USA, 2003, p.45.
29 Norma I Alarcon, The Imperial Tapestry: American
Colonial Architecture in the Philippines, Manila: University of
Santo Tomas Publishing House, 2008, pp.136-137. Also see
Cristina Evangelista Torres, The Americanization of Manila,
1898-1921, Diliman, Quezon City: The University of the
Philippines Press, 2010, pp.61-62.
30 www.manilacarnivals.blogspot.com, accessed
14/07/2011.
31 Gerard Lico, Arkitekturang Filipino: A history of archi-
tecture and urbanism in the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon City:
The University of the Philippines Press, 2008, pp.308, 336.
32 Gerard Lico, Arkitekturang Filipino: A history of ar-
chitecture and urbanism in the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon
City: The University of the Philippines Press, 2008, p.336.
33 Refer to Gerard Lico, Arkitekturang Filipino: A his-
tory of architecture and urbanism in the Philippines, Diliman,
Quezon City: The University of the Philippines Press, 2008,
pp.336-337, and Lourdes R Montinola ed., Art Deco in the Phil-
ippines, ArtPostAsia Pte Ltd., 2010, pp 82-103.
34 Edson Roy Gregorio Cabalfin, Art Deco Filipino:
Power, politics and ideology in Philippine Art Deco Architectures
(1928-1941), unpublished Master of Science Thesis, University
of Cincinnati, USA, 2003, p.155
35 Edson Roy Gregorio Cabalfin, Art Deco Filipino:
Power, politics and ideology in Philippine Art Deco Architectures
(1928-1941), unpublished Master of Science Thesis, University
of Cincinnati, USA, 2003, p.188.
36 See Cristina Evangelista Torres, The Americaniza-
tion of Manila, 1898-1921, Diliman, Quezon City: The University
of the Philippines Press, 2010, p.64.
37 See Lourdes R Montinola ed., Art Deco in the Philip-
pines, ArtPostAsia Pte Ltd., 2010, p 88.
38 Lourdes R Montinola ed., Art Deco in the Philippines,
ArtPostAsia Pte Ltd., 2010, p 83.
39 ‘Baroqe churches of the Philippines,’ UNESCO
World Heritage Centre, http://whc.unesco.org, accessed
28/07/2011.
40 Eugene Jamerlain, ‘Migao Church and Earthquake
Architecture,’ in Bluprint, Vol.3, 2011, p.
41 Gerard Lico, Arkitekturang Filipino: A history of archi-
tecture and urbanism in the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon City:
The University of the Philippines Press, 2008, p.336.
42 Gerard Lico, Arkitekturang Filipino: A history of archi-
tecture and urbanism in the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon City:
The University of the Philippines Press, 2008, p.337.
43 Gerard Lico, Arkitekturang Filipino: A history of
architecture and urbanism in the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon
City: The University of the Philippines Press, 2008, pp.337-
338.
44 Luis H. Francia, A History of the Philippines: From
 Indios Bravos to Filipinos, New York: The Overlook Press, 2010,
pp.42-43.
45 Lourdes R Montinola ed., Art Deco in the Philippines,
ArtPostAsia Pte Ltd., 2010, p 89.
46 Maria Victoria T Herrera, Francesco Riccardo Monti
in the Philippines, Manila: Ambascaiata d’Italia, 2005, p.14
47 Lourdes R Montinola ed., Art Deco in the Philippines,
ArtPostAsia Pte Ltd., 2010, p 83.
48 Edson Roy Gregorio Cabalfin, Art Deco Filipino:
Power, politics and ideology in Philippine Art Deco Architectures
(1928-1941), unpublished Master of Science Thesis, University
of Cincinnati, USA, 2003, p.170.
49 Arellano “prepared a landscape master plan for
Manila based on the 1933 ‘zonification’ plan for the city that
was an update of the 1905 Burnham plan.” Gerard Lico ed.,
‘Philippine landscape architecture and urban planning: A brief
history’, Archi[types text], Manila: National Commission for
Culture and the Arts, 2010, p.79.
50 Lourdes R Montinola ed., Art Deco in the Philippines,
ArtPostAsia Pte Ltd., 2010, p.91.
51 Gerard Lico, Arkitekturang Filipino: A history of ar-
chitecture and urbanism in the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon
City: The University of the Philippines Press, 2008, p.338.
52 Gemma Cruz-Araneta, ‘A People’s Theatre,’ The
Manila Times, Friday February 6, 2009.
53 See http://www.kabayancentral.com, accessed 16
August 2011.

JOURNAL ARCHITECTURE AND ALLIED ARTS IN THE PHILIPPINES 2011 121

View publication stats