Julienne Renee M.

Diona JORIZAL
ODGE8

Reflection Paper: Rizal and Bonifacio

Before taking this lesson, I viewed and understood the death of Jose Rizal as a
historical and relevant factor to the Philippine revolution. My previous professors taught
me that the cause had always been about his written novels, which are Noli Me Tangere
and El Filibusterismo. Close-minded officials, friars, and administrators of the Spanish
colony had really made an impact on the injustice and death of Jose Rizal. I also knew
about the part of the historical story where he was shot in the back, which was really
deemed unfair and inconsiderate. To be honest, you could say that I lacked enough
context with Dr. Rizal and connected historical events to his death. I wasn’t given
enough discussion points or background to his history and novels. So, it’s given me that
‘basic’ perspective that Rizal wrote his way to seek and achieve his dream for reform
and patriotism. And several factors followed, like he supported the revolution or that he
was also oppressed by a majority of conservative Spanish officials. But as I learned
more about the lessons in this subject, I’m given that bigger integrated picture on better
comprehending the historical events as a whole.

From this lesson, I’ve learned a lot of things from the given readings and
lectures. And it’s really given me a lot to think about. My realizations range from a lot of
factors, such as Rizal’s perspective on the revolution, Bonifacio only using Rizal’s name
for the ‘effective’ movement of the Katipunan, the writings of Rizal’s novels weren’t the
only reason for his execution, and so on. I also wanted to emphasize my appreciative
wonder in a lot of parts of the lesson about the liberal governors-general. A significant,
‘untold’ part of history because it really gave me the understanding that there had
always been Spanish officials who really wanted to help our native Filipinos. And as
they institute their liberal reforms in the Philippines, it’s made a significant impact and
proved to be beneficial for certain groups of Filipinos - like Governor-general De la Torre
and the Cavite Agrarian Revolt of the 1860s.

From Renato Constantino’s work, Veneration Without Understanding, I never

knew that Jose Rizal was very much opposed to the armed revolution of the Katipunan.
I also never knew before that Andres Bonifacio only used Dr. Rizal’s influential name
and figure for the betterment and fast movement of the KKK. They both sought to
reform, but they have different perspectives and aims to achieve that. I also imagined
that they knew each other very well and cooperated, but I guess by the end of the
lesson they didn’t.
 In my judgment, Andres Bonifacio’s actions for using Rizal’s name without his
consent was very much self-centered and selfish. It would have been alright if he really
knew and understood Jose Rizal’s aim and perspective towards achieving reform, or at
least consulted with him. But he didn’t. Do I ‘completely’ blame him? No, I don’t. This
could have been done by anyone from the organization because the Filipinos back then
were desperate for change. The only apparent difference I see is Bonifacio lived up to
the organization’s expectations and responsibilities. Rizal’s execution, I’m sure, had
always been set in stone by the Spanish administration because of his writings and the
La Liga Filipina. The conservative Spanish officials only found Bonifacio’s selfish actions
as another reason to add to their aim of finally getting rid of Rizal and the revolution.
However, such plans proved to be futile because it just ignited the people’s nationalism.