Matthew Uriel B.

Aplaca

BSEd English 1-2

BRIEF THE COMPETENCE ORIGIN

ORIGIN OF
OF THE
THE DATE
DATE OF
OF THE
THE
SOURCE BRIEF THE COMPETENCE
SOURCE DESCRIPTION OF OF THE AUTHOR INFORMATION INFORMATION AND
INFORMATION
DESCRIPTION OF OF THE AUTHOR NARRATED AND MILIEU
THE SOURCE NARRATED MILLIEU
THE SOURCE

KATIPUNAN AND -The text formally -The source, being an - it came from a The memoirs begin on
THE
KATIPUNAN AND discussed the events that account from the event personal perspective and March 25, 1896 when
REVOLUTION
THE :
REVOLUTION: happened during the that took place, has a experience. More than both factions of the
MEMOIRS OF A Tejeros Convention strong place for that, it came from a revolutionary
GENERAL under the experience credibility. Add the fact former Revolutionary government;
and the perspective of a that the story was General who was on Magdiwang and
Former General of the narrated, not the view of Magdiwang’s side of the Magdalo, chose to join

THE REVOLT OF Revolutionary one side versus the other politics. together and create one
THE MASSES: THE Government of the but narration for a supplemental
STORY OF
Magdiwang faction. The generalized reader. government in order to
BONIFACIO AND
THE KATIPUNAN focus of the story However, the idea that defeat the Spaniards.
centered on what keeps on interfering is This time is also the first
happened circling the the source’s ties with election for the
convention, however one side on the event government in San
this is based off of a that took place. This fact Francisco de Malabon, a
 personal perspective and weakens the strong territory of the
from one side of the unbiased of the account. Magdiwang.
spectrum. The account was also
told very lightly.
-Although the story -the author’s credibility - it came from deducted -the book was originally
THE REVOLT OF have mentioned the is somehow at a low information of sources published on 1956 by
THE MASSES: THE Tejeros event, the story since he is neither on in which he produced the University of the
STORY OF did not center on that, during the event nor he his own and ideas and Philippines Press. The
BONIFACIO AND neither the point of view was told directly of added his personal view publication year was
THE KATIPUNAN of narration of the someone from the event. as I perceive the story years after we have
convention. It centered He based his more entertaining that reclaimed independence
more on the events that transcription on sources informing. from Spain and
took place before, that were pre-written America.
during and after the prior to his study.
convention and what Meaning, this version
things have led the could have another
people to continue on view, a twisted view
the convention and what with own and personal
causes did the people perspective.
sought to go after the
convention.
Furthermore, It also
curtails on the
Katipunan being more
than a rebel.

PERSONS
INVOLVED IN THE
EVENT
 SIMILARITIES AND
BRIEF THE COMPETENCE ORIGIN OFTHE
THE DIFFERENCE
DATE OF THE WITH
BIASES OF
SOURCE OBJECTIVES OF OTHER
SOURCE DESCRIPTION OF OF THE AUTHOR AUTHOR
INFORMATION INFORMATION
THE EVENT INDEPENDENT AND
THE SOURCE NARRATED TESTIMONIES
MILLIEU

-The main objectives of -Andres Bonifacio, -As for my Both told about the
KATIPUNAN AND the text were Supremo comprehension, I didn’t Tejeros Convention
THE REVOLUTION: contextually told in the - Emilio Aguinaldo, seemed to understand if however, this memoir
MEMOIRS OF A way the story is leader of Magdalo, there were any biases of tries to distort more on
GENERAL
KATIPUNAN AND narrated. It was elected President. the narration other than the bad side of the
THE produced to tell ‘what the author being a Magdiwang but focused
- Santiago Alvarez
REVOLUTION : happened’ per se about member of a on the things that
- Daniel Tirona
MEMOIRS OF A the Tejeros Convention Magdiwang so he’s affected them from the
- Jacinto Lumbreras
GENERAL from the idea and views are maybe only event. Also, the dates
- Severino de las Alas,
perspective of someone from a different and information are
- Artemio Ricarte,
who was there It was perspective or form the more precise and
- Mariano Alvarez
told to show how the Magdiwang side specific other than the
Magdalo faction and however, he have told other one.
their leader being the story in a way that
unsolicited for all events the general and reader’s
in the revolution. of today would
understand. I could also
 feel the story being
written by that of
everyone through the
eyes of Alvarez.
Through and through,
the story was still on the
side of the Magdiwang,
making Bonifacio an
unsolicited hero.
Making the story
verisimilitude to the
truth.
-The objectives was to - Andres Bonifacio, - The author is more -Although this story also
THE REVOLT OF ‘creatively’ re-tell the Supremo focused on showing tells about the
THE MASSES: THE story. It was full of - Emilio Aguinaldo, how severe and how convention it focused
THE REVOLT OF
STORY OF
THE MASSES: THE adjectives so I thought leader of Magdalo, intricate the Magdiwang more on what events
STORY OF
BONIFACIO AND the goal was to make the elected President. faction has done for the that had led to the
BONIFACIO AND
THE KATIPUNAN other side look and feel revolution and reduced convention, what events
THE KATIPUNAN - Santiago Alvarez
good of the things that the severity of the happened during and
- Daniel Tirona
they have committed. actions made by the what led the convention
- Jacinto Lumbreras
Furthermore, I think that Magdalo. It also into a tragic event.
- Severino de las Alas,
the author was to tell the distorted facts on the Furthermore, there are a
- Artemio Ricarte,
story on a ‘light- specific information and lot of differences from
manner’ telling that - Mariano Alvarez date on the events that the latter source.
what the Magdalo has happened, for example Agoncillo told that the
done was not too bad, the convention was told convention occurred the
nor too good. It is more that it happened on same time it was
nationalistic. March 22, it did not Emilio’s birthday,
talked about the Tanza March 22, it focused
Parish, there were no more on events that
details about the second heated the tension
convention, and it also between the two
said that no one told factions. It didn’t talk
Bonifacio of the ballots about the Tanza parish,
being pre-written the second convention.
whereas it was Diego
Mojica who told
Bonifacio that the
ballots were being
distorted according to
Alvarez’ book.
Furthermore, the
verisimilitude of the
story was weak as there
was so many use of
adjectives.