UGLY AMERICANS AND LITTLE BROWN BROTHERS: SPECTACLES OF IDENTITY IN CONTEMPORARY PHILIPPINE DRAMA

JUDY CELINE ICK

An overtly historical turn characterizes much of the literary production in the in the late twentieth century. Just as the end of the millennium provoked existential angst on all fronts, the same period seemed to evoke in Filipino writers a historical turning back to another century’s turn. Spurred in part by official commemorations of a series of historically significant events culminating in the celebration of the Philippine Centennial in 1998, Filipino writers likewise asked existential questions, albeit of a more national temper. Late twentieth-century Philippine literature seems to have been preoccupied with the Filipino nation – where it had been, where it was going, and even more fundamentally, what it was in the first place. The drama of the late Eighties through the Nineties and, arguably, even to the present day, was one such genre that participated in this project of imagining the nation by seeking to represent it and re-tell its stories. This introspective national soul-searching was already noted by theatre historian and critic, Doreen Fernandez, as characteristic of the playbill after the fall of the Marcos dictatorship.1 No longer primarily concerned with protest, Philippine theatre worked to take stock of the ravages of a century of colonialism, war, and dictatorship. The development of a national culture by forging a strong sense of the Filipino cultural identity was perceived as the main task of the Cultural Center of the Philippines under its then artistic director,

1 Doreen Fernandez, Palabas: Essays on Philippine Theater History, Quezon City: Ateneo de University Press, 1996, 138-52. 218 Judy Celine Ick

Nicanor Tiongson.2 Indeed, “the quest for the elusive self” was identified by theatre critic, Catherine Diamond, as the main motif of Philippine theatre in the Nineties: “During a two-week visit to Manila in February 1994, I was struck by the number of performances that dealt with the concepts of nationhood and cultural identity, and the conscious effort of several troupes to make a contribution toward strengthening Filipino identity.”3 The quest for nationhood, however, is not alien or new to Philippine theatre. In the first decade of the twentieth century, for example, “seditious” plays were already championing the cause of the fledgling Filipino nation. These highly politically charged allegorical dramas – labelled “seditious” by the colonial American government – roused Filipino audiences against the American invaders. Aside from keeping the resistance to American rule alive, these plays also often worked to define a Filipino nation for Filipino audiences. At the other end of the spectrum and of the same historical period are quasi- theatrical representations of the Filipino nation put on by the American colonial power, most notably in fairs, exhibits, and expositions meant to highlight the products and achievements of colonial rule. Meticulously organized to justify the American colonial enterprise in the Philippines, these exhibits showcased Philippine products for the world market alongside exhibits of the beneficial effects of colonialism (for example, model schools with “civilized” English-speaking natives) and a good number of exotic “savages” thrown in as an argument for the absolute need for continued occupation. Perhaps the most famous example of such exhibitions is the Philippine Reservation set up as part of the St Louis World’s Fair in Missouri in 1904. These historical phenomena yoking together drama and national definition are central elements in two important Philippine plays of recent vintage – Chris Millado’s scenes from an unfinished country and Floy Quintos’ … And St. Louis Loves Dem . Both plays are in a sense recuperated histories of events significant to early twentieth-century Philippines retold from the vantage point of the late twentieth-century United States. Millado’s scenes from an unfinished

2 Catherine Diamond, “Quest for the Elusive Self: The Role of Contemporary Philippine Theatre in the Formation of Cultural Identity”, The Drama Review, XL/1 (Spring 1996), 145-46. 3 Ibid., 148.