Critic of the month Eulalio R. Guieb III on Filipino independent cinema

From Indio to Indie: A Redreamt Indiehood and Indiegeneity

Many are of the opinion that independent cinema will save the current state of the Filipino film industry.  However, I often lose hope as an academe-based critic in the promise offered by films that we label indie or underground or alternative cinema, or whatever category that fits into our notion of this type of films.

Independent films have undoubtedly contributed in transforming film production in the country, but this practice is only one aspect of filmmaking.  I do not discount the substantial contributions of new festivals that focus on independent films, the generous financial support by various groups for films that they want us to believe are indie films, the current rate of film output coming from individuals and groups that call themselves indies, and the recognition that indie films get from various international festivals.  Indeed, this phenomenon has paved the way for the production of new cinematic forms and aesthetics.  In my view, however, many so-called alternative filmmakers have yet to produce social discourses that confront the discourses of the unjust holders of our society’s economic and political power.

I contend that there is no significant difference in terms of offering a plurality of visions and options for just and humane social relations from the current output of either alternative or commercial cinema.  Except perhaps for the counter-discourses of the films of Kidlat Tahimik and committed filmmakers, particularly those who fought against the dictator – like Joey Clemente and Lito Tiongson – and the promise coming from a few filmmakers of the current generation, specifically Pepe Diokno, seldom do I see in the films of the present breed of independent filmmakers a clearly articulated and politically grounded social consciousness.  In other words, there is no alternative social discourse coming from so-called alternative filmmakers.  I argue that the struggle within the commercial film industry by Lino Brocka, Ishmael Bernal, Mike de Leon and Mario O’Hara made more sense – politically – to construct a ‘just alternative’ vision of social relations in Philippine society.

In recasting the experiences of the Filipino people in indie films, we – filmmakers and audiences alike – need to interrogate our place in the country’s current political and cultural struggle – and for whom, and why, we need to articulate and pursue this position.  If these films – and the framework that guides our reading of these films – if all these do not fit into the alliance of communities of knowledge and interests based on social justice, our indiehood, our indiegeneity is a misnomer.  In my view, we do not deserve our indiehood or our indiegeneity as filmmakers or film critics if our positions are no different from the discourse of the current holders of political power whose development agenda disregard social justice for the marginalized.  In this sense, our indiehood, our  indiegeneity is a negation of the nationhood of the powerless.

The power to create a just and humane world lies at the center of humanity itself – a collective of human beings that knows how to nourish life back to life.  How to get there depends on how we ground ourselves in our contemporary social life.  The possibilities of the future lie in neither a fossilized past nor in an aestheticized utopia.  The possibilities of the future are always present in the present.  How to translate this vision into economic, political and cultural terms is another struggle altogether.  Part of that struggle is to rewrite and refilm the world, to reworld the world; not to redeem the world, but perhaps – to use the phrase by Ben Okri in his novel The Famished Road – to redream the world.  In my view, that is what life and committed independent filmmaking, in general terms, are all about.

*


Mula Indio Hanggang Indie: Kakaibang Kaindiehan

Marami ang nagsasabing ang independent cinema ang magsasalba sa kasalukuyang industriya ng pelikulang Filipino.  Subalit bilang isang kritikong nagmumula sa loob ng akademya ay madalas akong mawalan ng pag-asa sa pangako ng tinatawag nating indie films o underground o alternative cinema, o ano pa mang kategorya natin sa mga ganitong uri ng pelikula.

Totoong nagpamalas ang mga sineng indie ng kapangahasan sa transformasyon ng produksiyong pampelikula, subalit ang ganitong gawain ay isang aspekto lamang ng sine.  Hindi ko rin matatawaran ang mahalagang ambag ng pagsulpot ng mga bagong festival na nakafokus sa mga indie films, ang mahalagang suportang pinansyal para sa mga pelikulang nagpapakilala bilang indie, ang pagsulpot ng maraming pelikula buhat sa mga indibidwal at grupong nagsasabing sila ay indie, at ang pagwawagi ng maraming indie films sa iba’t ibang international film festivals.  Totoong maraming pamamaraan at estetikang hinahawan ang mga penomenong ito.  Subalit sa aking pananaw, maituturing na nasa iisang hulma pa rin ang kalakhan ng mga inaakalang alternatibong kamalayang binubuo ng sineng ito – na kadalasan ay siya ring diskurso ng mga kasalukuyang may hawak ng di-makatao at di-makatarungang kapangyarihan.

Maaari kong sabihin na hindi sapat ang nagaganap na produksiyon ng pluralidad ng mga pananaw at opsyon para sa isang makatarungan at makataong ugnayang panlipunan buhat sa mga pelikulang komersyal at indie.  Liban marahil sa counter-discourse ng mga sine nina Kidlat Tahimik at ng mga committed filmmakers lalo na noong panahon ng batas militar sa bansa – tulad nina Joey Clemente at Lito Tiongson – at sa bagong pangako ng mangilan-ngilang filmmakers sa kasalukuyan, tulad ni Pepe Diokno – bihira akong makapanood ng mga indie films na may malinaw, lapat-sa-lupa at alternatibong kamalayang politikal.  Sa madaling salita, pangangahasan kong sabihing hindi alternatibo ang diskurso ng kalakhan ng mga binabansagang sineng indie.  Kung tutuusin ay tila mas makabuluhan pa ang ginawang pakikisangkot mula sa loob nina Lino Brocka, Ishmael Bernal, Mike de Leon at Mario O’Hara sa paglikha ng mga ‘makatarungang alternatibong’ pananaw sa buhay at lipunang Filipino.

Sa paglikha ng mga karanasan ng mamamayang Filipino na isinasapakete sa pelikulang indie, mahalagang tanungin ng mga manlilikha at tanungin nating mga manonood ng sine kung saang panig tayo kasangkot sa kasalukuyang pakikibakang politikal at kultural ng bansa – at para kanino, at bakit, isinusulong ang panig na ito.  Kung ang mga pelikula – maging ang ating mga pamantayan sa panunuri ng pelikula – kung hindi sumasabay at nakalapat ang mga ito sa alyansa ng mga komunidad ng kaalaman at interes na nakabatay sa katarungan, walang kabuluhan ang ating pagka-indie o ang tinatawag kong kaindiehan, ang ating indiegeneity.  Sa aking pananaw, hinding-hinding indie ang pelikulang indie, ang filmmaker na nagmamalaking siya ay indie at ang kritikong tulad ko na nagpapakaindie kung hindi lihis ang ating posisyon sa diskurso ng mga kasalukuyang nasa kapangyarihang politikal na ang agendang pangkaunlaran para sa bansa ay hindi nagtataguyod ng katarungang panlipunan para sa mga nasa laylayan ng kapangyarihan.  Kung ganito ang kalakaran, ang kaindiehan, ang ating indiegeneity ay hindi pagkabansa ng mga walang kapangyarihan.

Ang kapangyarihang lumikha ng isang makatarungan at makataong mundo ay sentral sa ating hangad na maging ganap na tao – na isang kolektibo ng mga indibidwal na gustong muling ibalik ang buhay sa buhay.  Kung paano ito magaganap ay nakasalalay sa kung paano tayo nakikisangkot sa ating mga kontemporaneong buhay.  Ang mga posibilidad ng bukas ay wala sa isang fossilized na nakaraan o sa isang romantikong kinabukasan.  Ang mga posibilidad ng kinabukasan ay lagi’t laging nasa sa kasalukuyan.  Kung paanong isasapraktika ang pananaw na ito sa mga usapin ng ekonomiya, politika at kultura ay isang panibagong pakikibaka.  Bahagi ng pakikibakang ito ay ang muling sulatin o isapelikula ang mundo, muling gawing mundo ang mundo; hindi kailangang iligtas ang mundo, ang kailangan marahil – ayon sa tinuran ni Ben Okri sa kanyang nobelang The Famished Road – ay muling mangarap ng makatuturang mundo.  Iyon, para sa akin, ang ibig sabihin ng buhay at committed independent filmmaking.

*

Eulalio R. Guieb III obtained in 2009 his Ph.D. in Anthropology from McGill University (Montreal, Quebec, Canada).  He completed his M.A. in Philippine Literature and B.A. in Broadcast Communication at the University of the Philippines-Diliman.  He has published two short story anthologies: Pamilya® (U.P. Press, 2003) and Pitada (Anvil, 1994).  His artistic works have received recognition from the Don Carlos Palanca Memorial Awards for Literature, Cultural Center of the Philippines, New York Festivals, Sony Video Competition in Japan, the Catholic Mass Media Awards, and Gantimpalang Ani.  His experimental films and video documentaries have been exhibited in Uppsala, Mannheim, Oberhausen, Torino, Osnabruck, New York, London, Montreal, Toronto, Tokyo, Jakarta and Kuala Lumpur, among others.  He teaches ethnography, development, criticism, teleplay and qualitative research at the U.P. Department of Broadcast Communication.  His research interests include political ecology; ecological, development and legal anthropology; the history of the drama in Philippine television; and the politics of representation.