May iniisip ka?
Oo.
Ano?
Ayaw kong sabihin. Baka magkatotoo.
Dahil makulit ka
Kilala kita. Oo, ikaw 'yun: Nagkasalubong na tayo minsan, sa LRT, sa Gotohan, sa kanto ng Aurora at Katipunan. Nagkatinginan tayo. Hindi mo ako kinausap, pero alam ko, nakilala mo rin ako. Kaya ka narito, di ba? Para sabihing, Oo, oo, ikaw nga 'yun. Naaalala kita.
na, mula noong 24 Enero, 2006, ang nakitambay dito
the art of eating biscochos, or, sucking adam's cock
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Adam here wrote a very enlightening response to my previous post, and I am now eating biscochos, m&m's, and a good-sized serving of humble pie. Yes, I might have opened my mouth too early and betrayed my own ignorance, and yes, contrary to previous claims, I have not yet learned to shut up about things I don't understand.
I've never held any illusions of being part of some counter-culture movement. And I've also spent maybe enough time in the academe (as a once-teacher and as a once-masteral student) to be considered part of the establishment. But, truth to say, I've also been a bit of a renegade when it came to institutions trying to colonize thought. There's a certain in-betweenness about where I am in this polarity of "academic" and "non-academic," if there is such a polarity, or if I for one moment allow myself to think in terms of binaries. I guess this time I just found myself smack on one side of that binary-- the academic, colonizing, epistemically violent side-- without realizing it, while in fact brandishing myself as a, yes, some sort of renegade. Sorry.
So. Back to biscochos for me? I guess. But it wouldn't be fair if I just said "sorry, o nga 'no, mali ako" without trying to explain a bit about where I came from when I wrote that, or without at least trying to answer-- within my limited capacity-- some of the questions Adam raised.
Or not. The questions Adam raised, he'd already answered. And I do agree with him. You should just read his entry, really. So let me just tell you where I was coming from.
There should be, I think, always, a searching for spaces of resistance. Within any work. It doesn't matter where that space is: from inside the definitions and ideas spoon-fed to us by the academe, from outside of it, in-between, from your toilet seat, we shouldn't care, really. Because without resistance, art-- in any form-- will crystallize and break. It will stagnate. Kapag sinubo lang natin nang sinubo ang sinasabi sa ating tama nang hindi sinasabing, teka, bakit, pinagtitibay natin ang institusyong nagdidikta ng tama-- at kinocolonize lang din natin ang lahat ng boses dun sa malawak na plurality nang kung ano ang "tama." O kung ano ang "tamang paraan ng pagsusulat." O kung ano ang "maganda." Kahit ano-- katarungan, pag-ibig, katahimikan-- kasya diyan. Kapag nagkaroon ng colonization of thought, kapag pinakitid ang plurality, nawawala ang play, ang differance-- na ugat, sa tingin ko, ng pagkaart ng art. (Mukhang hindi magkakasya sa iisang post ang lahat nang gusto kong sabihin.)
And this resistance's twin is uncertainty. Sa questioning nangyayari ang resistance, obviously. There should be uncertainty, always, about our own poetics. There should be an awareness that the way we see and write our works changes, will change, whether we like it or not. Why? Because the only way to pursue affect (more on this, affect, in later posts, and I do promise to post about it)-- no, not the only way, but the way I pursue it-- is through situating your own poetics in the larger narrative of history, your own, and your horizon's. What I mean to say is kaya mo lang magsulat galing sa sarili mong karanasan. What I mean to say is kasali pa rin ang karanasan na yun sa pagbuo mo ng sariling poetika.
And what does all of this have to do with my brain-fart about "speculative" fiction? It just seemed to me that the resistance was (is?) half-baked. That the resistance was not a matter of form or poetics-- and I'm not sure if there was an awareness of resistance at all. Again, I've not read all that's been said by and about the "speculative" fiction proponents-- I just feel the need to respond to Adam now-- but the naming, the so-called movement, seems too rushed, too unaware of the implications of the naming itself.
And, deeper into that unawareness: the fact that there are no Tagalog, Bisaya, or regional writers who are part of this movement, the fact that there are no visible moves to correct this, the idea that maybe just maybe the proponents are unaware of the implications of these in terms of marginalization and the colonization of thought-- parang may mali, e. A so-called movement must situate itself within the context of larger narratives, larger than the institutions it would like to set itself apart from, larger than the book-publishing world; to be unaware of the violence it does to other voices in the plurality, to be unaware of the othering they perform by merely naming themselves, well, I see that as a betrayal of their own purposes. For some reason I am reminded of freedom fighters who burn down farms and villages.
But. Still. Adam's point when he said that:
What’s been happening is that more and more new writers – writers who have been writing scifi and fantasy and crime fiction and erotica, etc etc - are getting published in Story Philippines, in the Free Press, in Philippine Genre Stories, because of the pervasive presence and aggro PR campaign of the term. How can you worry about fiction as a form as a plurality is threatened by “speculative fiction” when “speculative fiction” actually showed a lot of people – a lot of people inside and outside of the usual mode of literary production, ie the Academe – that fiction as a form as a plurality is really broader and thicker than what we are initially shown and taught?
Yeah, tama nga. Regardless of their intentions and their politics and their seeming unawareness of the vast implications of their "movement"-- they are achieving something. That, for one, is a feat. And I am happy for that, and happy that Adam made me aware of this and my own personal biases against certain... entities. I will shut up now and suck Adam's cock.
PS. I do not mean to disparage homosexuals in any manner by using "suck Adam's cock" as a term of endearment and intellectual admiration. If Adam were a girl and we were sufficiently close I would have said "go down on her" or "lick her cunt."
in the middle of speechwriting i write a post about this thing called "speculative fiction"
Monday, September 29, 2008
1.
First of all, I know so little about fiction-writing that I find myself half-ashamed of saying anything about it. I was out with a friend the other day, though-- nagpunta kami sa burol ng erpats ng tropa, at nagpagpag kami nang kaunti sa que rico-- and we ended up talking about, among other things, a recent panel discussion involving "spec-fic" writers. And from what I've gathered-- hmm. Ewan. O sabi nga ng mga kaibigan kong bisaya, ambot.
Sige, kaunting paliwanag at latag ng ilang argumento, at tanong.
2.
Really: I don't understand the term "speculative" fiction. But from what I do understand, I can say this-- and this has been mentioned by others before: All fiction, by definition, is speculative. Even realist fiction-- this sphere that the discourse on "speculative" fiction wishes to set itself apart from-- is speculative. Realist fiction is speculative fiction, because it speculates on what might, or could be, or should be, or actually is (albeit sometimes with the author unconscious of this is-ness) within the bounds of reality. (You see, even that is problematic: what is real, really?)
Now I do know what "speculative" fictionists purport their works to be, or under what genres these fall in. But still. To use the term "speculative fiction" as an umbrella term for genres whose only thread is-- well, what exactly? A willing and presupposed suspension of disbelief? Di ba lahat ng fiction ganu'n din?-- to use it as merely a term, without a clear delineation in form or even intention from the rest of other fictions-- seems, to me, moot.
Moot, because, because, because: nauuwi sa problematic ng publication ang usapan. Just another way to sell books. Which could be problematic, really, since it inserts the market into a discourse of form. When readers look for only those books which fall under "speculative" fiction, when shelves in bookstores are dedicated to this hodgepodge of genres and marketed with posters that say "come, buy me, speculative ako!"-- fiction, as a form, as a plurality, suffers. Because when market forces are put into the equation, and writers begin to fall into the trap of writing just to get published.... You get what I mean.
Thing is, I don't really care if a group of writers who are passionate about their work band together and push for this "movement." Go go go. Gawin ang lahat nang kayang gawin sa pinakamahusay na paraang kayang gawin. This is all well and good.
Except that unintentionally (I guess,) it pigeonholes all the other forms that don't fall inside that umbrella term. The problematic, to me, lies in "speculative" fiction's exclusivity. If a decent argument can be made, though, regarding "speculative" fiction's (exclusive) speculativeness-- or, at least, if it can delineate itself as a form in itself, then, ayun. I will say sorry and go back to eating biscochos.
3.
I've been reflecting on folk stories-- the diwatas and tikbalangs and lamang-lupas of lore-- and how they're set apart from today's "speculative" fiction. I guess now these stories are merely that-- stories-- whereas back then, they were real. Or as real as fear can be. Or dreams.
See, I was looking for a way to insert today's interest in "speculative" fiction into the wider narrative of our nation's history. (Ayun! Nation! Teka baka matisod ako, lumalalim na itong usapin na ito, a, tapos dadagdagan pa ng nation.) Why? Naisip ko lang na kung sa diskurso lang ng pagiging fiction iaaangkla ang usapin ng "speculative" fiction, magiging manipis at mauuwi lang ito sa propagation ng Western thought. Which is what, I think, this fidelity to formalism (or the way it's been [mis?]understood in our country) in poetry (ay potah panibagong diskurso at mga kaaway na naman ito!) has led to. Epistemic violence, all over again. The colonization of thought. Native forms and methes (shit, methes! Ang pretentious! Saan ko ba narinig ito?) set aside, forgotten in favor of foreign constructs. Masakit 'yun, di ba.
3.
'Yun lang naman. Pag-usapan pa natin ito, a? Sabi nga ng isang kaibigan, random brain-fart lang. Ikatutuwa ko kung may makadiskurso pa ukol dito-- pero medyo busy pa, e. Baka mamaya. Sa ngayon, babalik na ako sa pagsusulat ukol sa mga double-insertion sa Senado at sa napipintong pag-uwi ni Joc-joc Bolante.
Rakenrol, bok.
4.
Teka: Happy Mondays mamaya sa mag:net Katipunan. Nood ka. Tutugtog din kami. Sana kung maligaw kayo at naagapan ng timbreng ito, makasilip ka.
