asi 8 Mares yes and Pascual the importance of local languages as a cultural '2 Tagalog grammar, and produce a ary of Philippine languages He also considered writing a treatise on ‘scatetics, In his reply to Bareantes in 1890, he sad incessant |histories of Philippine national of vera thorough study of matters like Tagalog art and cewhen brighter days reign. Then we shall talk of purely native [puramente indi uc presentations, which f them are the exotic ones [exotica] brought by the Spaniards; the combination of both {producto de esta utstanding of all, etc an simultaneously already prefigured in another 1880, days" when he would writeatreatise on Filipino aest for Rizal. Literary discussions were driven racism and domninat detwenting national literature, the fat snow is tory, and identity. fo assert difference was to disengage from a dominant Tpdeted one voiceless and invisible carve out autonomous space, and ay one’s own resources for creative production. It involved claimsate, cnerpce sn RIZAL appr recited hats people history dene ef eae ‘ecohdand inci Dapitan, we jan authors. (question of fore i he gould, but the horizon towards which he moved was Says that of is country. uzal recognized that a country’s literary capital is not just wing discourse. Literature — to borrow the sreis not created by asingleauthor but this sense, he spoke frequently of the this sense of acollective ‘an anthology of essays 10 ia Spain, and "groundwork in 1889 for launching an Assocation Internationale rests in Pars, While both projects did not materialize itis clearUt. He was inte intellectual. t ‘Tagalogs to whom the work is dedicat they may be the ones who nee third novel in Tagalog but the from Hong Kong on 20 Apr -acing, pethaps cks against his the camments on these novels by Barantes, Rizal and Antonia Lan na pa to wheter the novels sceded the novels on literary grounds, Rizal tionalizing” mode of the Propaganda) expectations tahatever language he chose to write it in, Comparison with novels written elsewhere in the world.. ae : i yom ann Jone Hizal and the inventica of & ation arate Rizal's third motis ive was to wrt now withthe usages, virtues and defects ofthe Tagg ot that Rizal and his WHERE are we no in te work a not occ ma space init. Ethics was vigor i ete fe: ‘with the usages: reo fae ipinos, there will be only two Spaniards: “ tae tenant of the civil guard! As Rizal had turned to writ ragalogs in their own language, Ri (again one surmises) meant to write of Tagalog society in its owt ti integral and autonomous, rather than a reflex of the colonial encoun at Ral had in mind when he am sorry I cannot write tin Spanish, beautiful theme?) . ‘Asitturned out, Rizal was stymied not only by the problem of but the challenge of representing something that did form amenable for treatment asa realist novel pastoral, or myth. How does one what seems a reprise ofthe Nol. When Rizal abandoned his third novel, he may have thought that was a novel to be writ her time and perhaps by writers ot ‘of how literature — its writing, in history. He said as much when ot be judged, because its effects st ‘i see ues et bo SPrcmationling” ‘ eager beng absorbed 3 aa theater hand the 3 Liberal reforms; finally, when al of us have died and with us ou! vanity, and our petty passions, then Spaniards and Filipinos bar Sao nto dwar work wonton wre, te radon, language, artistry, and form are problems Chauenge Five rier. Ara tine when Rizal's Nol and Somumentaeed i is one of bistorys fine sereniite ‘end, Rizal left us a novel that is unfinished — which is what the nat iterature must bray be,