In this certain portrayal of Rizal and his life, writings, and even relations, the two

movie makers, who are the main characters of the film. try to find who Rizal truly is—that is,

the Rizal that they are trying to portray. The movie (and the two movie makers) is trying to

answer and build an image of Rizal that which is factual and, to a degree, an image of the

National Hero as a whole. While they are struggling to come up with ideas for their movie,

the two movie makers explore the areas of Rizal and the person that he is envisioned to be.

Upon doing so, they have also uncovered certain questions that revolve around Rizal, both as

a person and a National Hero. Among these questions which historians, other Rizal

enthusiasts, and scholars are trying to unravel and are considered as issues that surround

Rizal are the validity of his Retraction, whether he had actually married Josephine Bracken

(and possibly had a child with her), and whether he was against or for the 1896 Revolution

that had begun in the Katagalugan, headed by the Katipunan under Andres Bonifacio.

Rizal’s Retraction refers to a document which was supposedly written and signed by

Rizal on December 29, 1986, before he was executed. It the document, Rizal renounced his

denouncement of the Catholic Faith as well as his connections to the Masonry which was

believed to be against the teachings of the Catholic Church, wishing to “live and die” as a

Christian. Father Balaguer, a proclaimed witness to the event, was featured as a character in

the movie. The Jesuit priest recounted his version of the event, According to Fatehr Balaguer,

Rizal asked for several confessions of his sins and attended Mass. Rizal’s mother, Dona

Teodora, went to visit Rizal for the final time, where Pepe had asked his mother for

forgiveness. Both had cried, especially Jose, and held hands. After writing his Retraction,

Father Balaguer maintained that he married Jose Rizal and Josephine Bracken. Then, Rizal

slept.

However, Rizal’s family held a different version of the story. According to the family,

Rizal had neither cried nor asked for forgiveness; instead, he was placid and requested that
they ask for his body after the execution so that they may bury it with dignity. He also

whispered to Trinidad, one of his sisters, to look at his lamp for papers (that contained the

poem “Adios, Patria Adorada” or “My Last Farewell”) and under his shoe, which was not

found.

Others also doubt the validity of the Retraction document. Some say that the

document was forged, especially in terms of Rizal’s signature and the date on which it was

signed. Adding to the doubts of the document’s authenticity was release of said paper, which

was only revealed for public viewing on May 13, 1935 (Uckung, 2021).

In connection to Balaguer’s memory of Rizal’s Retraction, Josephine Bracken and her

marriage to Rizal (which was apparently in the last minute) was also a well visited part of

Rizal’s life, especially at the event of his death. Bracken, in accordance with the Jesuit

priest’s accounts prior to Rizal’s execution, stated that she and Rizal had been married in

secret with only the priests as witnesses. Bracken was supposedly held in spite by Rizal’s

family, revealing that she was said to have lied about her life and identity before meeting

Rizal. There was a question raised as to who Josephine Bracken truly was, including the

alleged assault of her by her stepfather George Taufer. Bracken’s relationship, and in

hindsight, marriage to Rizal, was something that the Rizal family did not approve of, as

Bracken was seen as a slut. In some parts of the movie, Bracken repeated that only Rizal’s

sister, Narcissa, was kind to her. The rest of Rizal’s family, especially Rizal’s sisters and

mother, disapproved of her for Rizal. Moreover, Rizal’s Retraction was also said to have

happened in order for Rizal to be able to marry Josephine before he died. Josephine allegedly

also had a child a child with Rizal, but like her marriage, it was not confirmed.

The lack of documents supporting this claim of Bracken to being Rizal’s wife prior to

the latter’s death is one of the major reasons why it is held lightly. While there is Balaguer’s
account to back it up, there are no other evidence to support Bracken’s claim. It was words of

a woman and several alleged witnesses, versus a whole route of Rizal enthusiasts and

scholars who can neither prove nor disprove such event in Rizal’s life.

With Rizal having been executed after being accused of inciting insurrection against

the Spanish government, it was also brought to question whether Rizal was pro or against the

1896 Revolution. While his novels, the Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo, were

certainly pushing for change, it was ultimately unclear whether or not Rizal would have

agreed to the Revolution against Spain.

In some of his letters, Rizal had pointed out that the rebolusyonaryos barely had any

artillery to stand a chance against the Spanish armada. However, the character Crisostomo

Ibarra, later Simoun, did opt for a physical revolution against the Spanish oppressors. While

it was not Rizal himself who had outright said the words, his writings had often revealed his

stand on certain issues, like equal access to education for both sexes in his letter to the

women of Malolos (Palafox, 2012).

Like any person of fame, Rizal, in all the roles that he had played in his short life, is

riddled with controversies. Some are quite personal and interesting; others can be quite vulgar

and scandalous. Whatever are these controversies (and even facts) that revolve around Rizal,

it is undeniable that despite his fame, he is still an enigma to a people who names him as their

“national hero.”

The movie depicts this quite well. The title, which states, “Bayaning Third World”

(Third World Hero) is exactly how Rizal remains as an image, a representation, an icon: like

his vulnerable, impressionable Patria Adorada, Rizal is fragile. The slightest tipping of

certain facts and intriguing scoops about him when he was alive, the circumstances of his

death, his genius, and how he was treated after it all, has made him both celebrated and
questioned, in manners that leave us in the gray. The movie stands on this. Rizal is neither

black nor white; he is gray, because of all that we have known of him, he remains liminal.

What he is truly, as he stands today, is what we see him as. Rizal can be who we want him to

be: a genius, a well-educated man, a traveler— even a palikero who had left a trail of broken

hearts in his wake.

With his Retraction, perhaps to say that he did so because he wanted to die a Christian

is something that the Jesuit priests had made up to save themselves from bringing up a

learned man like Rizal in the Jesuit practice of seeking for knowledge (Uckung, 2012). But

seeing Rizal doing it for his love of Bracken is not an idea too far fetched to imagine. After

all, Rizal was a romantic from head to toe. He had the soul of a courtier, as shown in his

words of poetry, his love letters, his gentlemanly manner—Rizal was a hopeless romantic

(Sagadal, 2019). His marriage to Bracken may have also been done in the same manner—out

of extreme love—yet beyond this, no one could offer a definite answer, only speculations.

But there is a high possibility that Rizal may actually do so, not just for love, but also because

of his high sense of dignity and sense of responsibility.

With regards to his view on the Katipunan, sadly, there can be no definite proof that

Rizal would have agreed with it completely. While he does not disregard the idea, the ending

of El Filibusterismo provides a glimpse as to his perception of a revolution: while it could be

done and is actually achievable, at that time, he felt that it was not the right time to do so,

hence Simoun’s explosive gets thrown in the river. An explosion is only good if it is done in

a place where it’s effects can be carried away towards the ocean— that is, the ocean of

change and better horizons. Rizal was, as said by the Rizal of the movie, a segurista. He was

meticulous and often seen as a perfectionist—hence, he would have preferred to do

everything in timing.
 However, it should be constantly reminded that that with all the issues surrounding

Rizal, no matter how we try to unearth everything and try to uncover the man that he was and

the man that he could have been, all we are left with are speculations. The Rizal that we

conjure in our individual minds and in our collective memory as a people will most likely

veer away from the man that he must have been. Again, Rizal is a Third World hero: he is

vulnerable, in that he is prone to impression. He is fragile, not because he was as a person,

but because how portrayals are as we imagine him to be. He is, to a degree, a jaded figure of

history, a history that we are still piecing together. To say when will we be able to complete

Rizal only until there is no more fragment to piece together. With a future as uncertain as

ours, with a nation that, by itself, is in fragments, perhaps the definitive will always be yet to

come.
Sources:

Palafox, Q. A. September 4, 2012. “Girl Power: The Women of Malolos”. National

Historical Commission of the Philippines. Accessed form nhcp.gov.ph/girl-power-the-

women-of-malolos/ on September 8, 2021.

Sagadal, D. October 14, 2019. “Your Local Lover Boy – Jose Rizal’s long list of

lovers”. Accessed from https://medium.com@sagadal.rossadrei3/local-lover-boy-

98a52e568eb4 on September 8, 2021.

Uckung, P. J. September 19, 2012. “The Rizal Retraction and other cases”. National

Historical Commission of the Philippines. Accessed form nhcp.gov.ph/the-rizal-retraction-

and-ther-cases/ on September 8, 2021.