As an ex-pat retracing old haunts in the old homeland, one inexorably finds the issue of emigration not only as a hot-button issue, but takes on front and center when discussion centers on the current politics and economic prognoses of this islands nation.
No question that emigration has been a familiar resident to the typical psyche of the Filipino for a long time, maybe dating back to pre-history. And the several migration waves to the US mainland during the 40 odd years of the American regime readily and unquestionably comes to mind. History is wont to point to the start of the 60's as yet another watershed in this migration to American soil, this time made up mostly of professionals since the earlier ones were deigned as composed of menial workers, or sacadas, collectively recruited for the plantations and other agricultural endeavors in the mainland.
And for decades, emigration in the Philippines had always been discussed in this context, that when one decides to leave the country, whether for economic reasons or otherwise, the most likely destination would be the fabled land of milk and honey, the United States. Europe and other more progressive Asian nations may have also figured as likely destinations, but definitely in very insignificant numbers.
Even in the Western Hemisphere, Canada and the Central and South American countries did not figure prominently. Only the United States. And there was a justifiably good reason for this. The US was most liberal and open to migration coming from most nations of the world, while other recipient nations were not as hospitable and accommodating. And this continues to be the norm to this day.
Other countries today may balk at this assessment and point to their more liberalized policies on migration. Countries like Canada, Australia, and maybe even, tiny New Zealand, may unfurl and glowingly advertise their welcome mat to the hordes of actual and potential immigrants from the far corners of Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and maybe even from parts of the old Eastern Europe, but the proof of the pudding still is in the eating.
Simply dissect and examine the compositions of these countries' populations and the scores of immigration applications received and continue to be received by them. This should undoubtedly paint the true picture of how their words have been translated to action. It is one thing to advertise a country's desire to be open-handed in extending its blessings to the "the tired and huddled masses" but quite another to gauge the actions it has taken to bring it about.
The US lives this, and then some, when one considers the millions of illegals that continue trekking through its northern and southern borders, many of them from origins sometimes unknown. Not to mention those who enter the legal way but extend their stays illegally.
Though at the present time, there is a gathering school of thought on the need to stem this almost unrestricted tide of migrants, the collective conscience of the American people is quite conflicted since many of them also can point to their own past of illegal entries and initial stays. Even securing its wide borders has blossomed into a very delicate contentious issue, a common fodder during election cycles.
No doubt some of these countries, such as Canada and maybe Australia, and some European nations, may already show noticeable and/or significant shifts in their populations' breakdowns as a result of the world-wide clamor for affluent nations to open their doors to migrants, or at least temporary workers, from more distressed areas. But as far as I know, it is still only the US that can boast to this day that its population is made up essentially of immigrants from across the far reaches of the world - from Ethiopia, Somalia, to Burma, New Guinea; from France to Ukraine; from the Philippines to Indonesia; you name it, and they have it.
I am quite amused to relate that tiny Norway of almost 5 million population can still say that its population is largely homogeneous; but oh, there is a steady stream of migrants, though mostly from neighboring countries such as Holland and Finland. Any wonder then that this postage-stamp country continues to be adjudged by international groups such as the UN as the "best" country to live in, scoring high in most categories such as low crime rates, good schools, etc. The US usually gets the cellar places among more developed affluent nations.
In spite of all these, telltale conditions and immigration policies that conventional wisdom would readily judge as negatively impacting on one nation's health and continued prosperity, the US nonetheless continues to post figures and stats that buck this bit of folklore. The US economy continues to be the most vibrant and brisk among all the developed nations. While most European nations are content to point to an anemic GDP growth in the 1's and 2's, this lumbering behemoth, the US, unerringly continues to post high 3's and 4's. Mighty Canada's economic health is quite dependent on its next-door neighbor if the trade figures are to be believed. As a matter of fact, defense of Canada and the entire continent is made secure no thanks to American steel and willpower. It is noted that New York City has as many police officers as Canada's entire military.
And Mexico, on the southern border? Needless to say, the underground economy provided by its citizens illegally in the US provides the life jacket to keep its own lop-sided economy, occasioned by extreme poverty brought about by an inept and corrupt government, afloat and on even keel.
It thus greatly saddens me to notice some voices in the old homeland, voices emanating mostly from the "educated" elite (in the Philippine context, as compared to the affluent elite), gratuitously putting down the US not only with uncalled-for comments but derogatory statements usually attributed to dubious or partial sources or those sources with personal axes to grind against it.
Legitimate disagreement should always be welcomed and not stifled for it enhances discussions and brings about more brainstorming ideas into the table. But hateful or incendiary rhetoric, not addressing issues or those founded on unexamined premises or biases, should be avoided. As the good book of a' Kempis states, if one must talk, talk about things that edify. Avoid superfluous rhetoric. What possible good could come out of those? What defiles a man is not what is outside of him, but those that come out from his own mouth, the good book chimes in.
To unequivocally declare that Philippine professionals who are caught in menial jobs in their adopted country in their earnest search for a better life are considered "lucky", is at best cruel and unfounded. FilAm and Filipino professionals can be found in many US companies, appointive or elective positions in government, and even as entrepreneurs.
And another, for one to declare that one other country provides a voice to the ordinary citizen while the US does not, is at least grossly misinformed, or worse, intellectually dishonest. First amendment rights are almost sacrosanct in the US, to the point of being considered licentious.
True, that universal health care rains on every citizen the many benefits of medicine and its many leading edge technologies, but realities give those sponsoring it justifiable causes to re-examine it in the areas of sustainability, and even on fairness and equity. Socialized medicine has not yet come to the US, not because it is a greedy and unmindful society, but because it constantly worries about the unintended repercussions that could impact on its long-term sustainability.
Most of Europe, and yes, Canada, too, do practice socialized medicine but one would be remiss not to mention that their continued practice has been noted to expose the sponsoring countries to its vulnerabilities - in the areas of exorbitant tax rates impacting on individual entrepreneurship, the incipient inabilities to render efficient and fast medical services under government-sponsored and/or -dictated programs, and others.
At many times, learning from the experiences of other countries may be the better part of wisdom in a country's conduct.
Sunday, July 10, 2005
Friday, July 08, 2005
Country Woes
I am an expat who is on a three-month sojourn to the old homeland. Motivated by a personal agenda, all intended to improve and enhance my personal capabilities to indulge in the avowed task of being able to help others and myself in the country where I was born, educated, and I worked for a time.
And after already a month into the trimester, I have tallied that I have garnered some modest successes in some predetermined areas, such as financially incrementing my holdings in our fast-growing credit union; enhancing the values of my real estate holdings by making cosmetic repairs and value-adding improvements; and initiating plans to invest more in our commercial building endeavors with the end in view of generating more rental income; and other similar investments/expenditures designed to position us both to earn more and thus, improve the overall value of our estate, and help those less unfortunate.
In fine, I could say that things are looking up and the future is quite rosy. I find myself not having any plausible or discernible reason to think that being in this country would be a big disadvantage for me, taking into account the fact that I have spent the last 26 years of my life and that of my family in the United States.
Granted that my initial reason was not because of purely economic imperatives, however, part of the reason for leaving was to try to live and work abroad with the scheming notion that exerting the same amount of passion, sweat, and dedication focused to the then current job, I could earn more working in the US. The fact that the wife was an American citizen made it easier to decide to try something different.
Admittedly, also factored into the decision to migrate were the frustrations and cynicism then experienced in the job. Idealistic pursuits, honed and inebriated by years of study under the Jesuit motto, man/woman for others, that could not find place and fulfillment in work. Still, I left the old country as a member of its working class, solely dependent on livelihood to support family and myself. Though contented with the material benefits accorded by work, it was then thoroughly threshed out and decided that living and working for a while in the US would be a welcomed and personally advantageous change.
And so it was. And now, 26 years later, I am back in the old country thinking and acting much like the way it was, though now sporting a foreign citizenship. Getting re-acclimatized to the humid weather. Being indifferent to the silly and at times, abhorrent, politics of the country. But experiencing a lot of countrified goodness, downright humility, unspoiled simplicity, spontaneous helpfulness, etc., in the locals I have reacquainted with. Of course, abject poverty and most dire deprivation daily stare one in the face most everywhere one goes, heightened and made more pronounced by the life experienced in the first world. Definitely, many things are a lot worse than when I left the country. There are also more people in the same places that used to be populated by very much less. Worse, talks of citizens leaving the country for greener pastures abroad fill and electrify the air.
Still, I am of the mind that Filipinos belong to the Philippines. It is their only proper place, however messy and unrecognizable it may now seem and look. In most countries where Filipinos gravitate, my experiences and studies suggest to me that many find it difficult to assimilate because their innate desires and qualities to continue to be Filipinos make that task that much harder. They want to remain Filipinos and will only give up their Filipino-ness in areas where they really have to to survive. For the most part, they want to remain and be identified as Filipino. Most continue to adamantly pine that someday they will be back in the old homeland. Such irony, if you ask the natives in those countries, who assume that migrating to their respective countries presupposes that the immigrant desires to give up the old culture to assume a new one.
That long premise done with, though I would say in a rather long-winded and ineffectual way, I now say that I was taken aback by a blog entry I read in the Sassy Lawyer, where the author opened herself up and poured out the seeming initial dilemma in her family regarding the husband's desire to migrate to another country.
Having read her blogs and many of her most loyal following for at least a year, one couldn't find a more cohesive pack of Filipinos, standing tall and proud for Filipino-ness, warts and all, in peace and turmoil, the country against the world, especially against the perceived arrogance and indifference of a number of first world countries and their bungling leaders.
But why the abrupt change in heart? It is not for me to get involved, of course. But I am curious. As expressed, the desire to migrate for one thing, stems from the goals of providing a more secure and opportunity-laden future for the kids and for their own golden years. As theorized, migrating to another country, most probably to a first world one, would considerably improve the chances of attaining these goals.
In my most humble estimation, this seeming dilemma can be resolved if one examines how each individual person perceives the "journey of life". How one defines the purposes and goals of life and living in general determines to a great extent how one views or adapts to one's immediate environs, and on a broader context, to one's country. Country, not just as a political construct and/or as an abstraction, but as one where one thrives and interacts with people and environment, and everything else in between.
Is the journey of life perceived as a smooth sail on a most hospitable sea caressed by friendly winds, or is it one done amidst treacherous waters where danger lurks at every turn or change of winds? Stated differently, is life one big test and trial that will incessantly stretch one's indomitability? Or is it one where one expects a yeoman's share of peace, tranquillity, prosperity, goodness, etc. to settle on and bless one's family before one departs to the great beyond?
Is the actual attainment of the goals, rather than the manifold but resolute and continued attempts at accomplishing the goals, the greater and more important measure of one's life here on earth?
Where is the "eye" to one's intentions?
And after already a month into the trimester, I have tallied that I have garnered some modest successes in some predetermined areas, such as financially incrementing my holdings in our fast-growing credit union; enhancing the values of my real estate holdings by making cosmetic repairs and value-adding improvements; and initiating plans to invest more in our commercial building endeavors with the end in view of generating more rental income; and other similar investments/expenditures designed to position us both to earn more and thus, improve the overall value of our estate, and help those less unfortunate.
In fine, I could say that things are looking up and the future is quite rosy. I find myself not having any plausible or discernible reason to think that being in this country would be a big disadvantage for me, taking into account the fact that I have spent the last 26 years of my life and that of my family in the United States.
Granted that my initial reason was not because of purely economic imperatives, however, part of the reason for leaving was to try to live and work abroad with the scheming notion that exerting the same amount of passion, sweat, and dedication focused to the then current job, I could earn more working in the US. The fact that the wife was an American citizen made it easier to decide to try something different.
Admittedly, also factored into the decision to migrate were the frustrations and cynicism then experienced in the job. Idealistic pursuits, honed and inebriated by years of study under the Jesuit motto, man/woman for others, that could not find place and fulfillment in work. Still, I left the old country as a member of its working class, solely dependent on livelihood to support family and myself. Though contented with the material benefits accorded by work, it was then thoroughly threshed out and decided that living and working for a while in the US would be a welcomed and personally advantageous change.
And so it was. And now, 26 years later, I am back in the old country thinking and acting much like the way it was, though now sporting a foreign citizenship. Getting re-acclimatized to the humid weather. Being indifferent to the silly and at times, abhorrent, politics of the country. But experiencing a lot of countrified goodness, downright humility, unspoiled simplicity, spontaneous helpfulness, etc., in the locals I have reacquainted with. Of course, abject poverty and most dire deprivation daily stare one in the face most everywhere one goes, heightened and made more pronounced by the life experienced in the first world. Definitely, many things are a lot worse than when I left the country. There are also more people in the same places that used to be populated by very much less. Worse, talks of citizens leaving the country for greener pastures abroad fill and electrify the air.
Still, I am of the mind that Filipinos belong to the Philippines. It is their only proper place, however messy and unrecognizable it may now seem and look. In most countries where Filipinos gravitate, my experiences and studies suggest to me that many find it difficult to assimilate because their innate desires and qualities to continue to be Filipinos make that task that much harder. They want to remain Filipinos and will only give up their Filipino-ness in areas where they really have to to survive. For the most part, they want to remain and be identified as Filipino. Most continue to adamantly pine that someday they will be back in the old homeland. Such irony, if you ask the natives in those countries, who assume that migrating to their respective countries presupposes that the immigrant desires to give up the old culture to assume a new one.
That long premise done with, though I would say in a rather long-winded and ineffectual way, I now say that I was taken aback by a blog entry I read in the Sassy Lawyer, where the author opened herself up and poured out the seeming initial dilemma in her family regarding the husband's desire to migrate to another country.
Having read her blogs and many of her most loyal following for at least a year, one couldn't find a more cohesive pack of Filipinos, standing tall and proud for Filipino-ness, warts and all, in peace and turmoil, the country against the world, especially against the perceived arrogance and indifference of a number of first world countries and their bungling leaders.
But why the abrupt change in heart? It is not for me to get involved, of course. But I am curious. As expressed, the desire to migrate for one thing, stems from the goals of providing a more secure and opportunity-laden future for the kids and for their own golden years. As theorized, migrating to another country, most probably to a first world one, would considerably improve the chances of attaining these goals.
In my most humble estimation, this seeming dilemma can be resolved if one examines how each individual person perceives the "journey of life". How one defines the purposes and goals of life and living in general determines to a great extent how one views or adapts to one's immediate environs, and on a broader context, to one's country. Country, not just as a political construct and/or as an abstraction, but as one where one thrives and interacts with people and environment, and everything else in between.
Is the journey of life perceived as a smooth sail on a most hospitable sea caressed by friendly winds, or is it one done amidst treacherous waters where danger lurks at every turn or change of winds? Stated differently, is life one big test and trial that will incessantly stretch one's indomitability? Or is it one where one expects a yeoman's share of peace, tranquillity, prosperity, goodness, etc. to settle on and bless one's family before one departs to the great beyond?
Is the actual attainment of the goals, rather than the manifold but resolute and continued attempts at accomplishing the goals, the greater and more important measure of one's life here on earth?
Where is the "eye" to one's intentions?
Wednesday, July 06, 2005
Your obligatory blog on Recipes of the Old Homeland
Any cursory reading of blogs authored by compatriots, whether still domiciled in the old homeland or abroad, will either provide snippets of time-worn recipes longingly remembered from a storied past where food played such a focal role in either growing up or simply in living and interacting with other people, or for others who are more knowledgeable, passionate and thorough, allocate a formal venue for detailing varied recipes, complete with pictures of the finished creative products. No doubt, food and its partaking play a central theme in any social life, or simply as a means of breaking the ice in social settings, not much different with the subject of the weather as a safe intro to any initial conversation with any new acquaintance.
Maybe as a result of the islands very diverse peoples and local cultures, isolated from each other by wide expanse of water or rough terrain, the corresponding local cuisine are just as varied, exotic, and reflective of the local cultures.
I am of the mind that sites that do either regularly or sporadically feature such recipes usually fail to attribute the geographical origins of such specific recipes. While the dish itself maybe universally known as such, specific recipes are indigenous to the specific localities that they originate. Thus, a dish in Luzon may be prepared with specified ingredients in a specific way, while the same dish may be prepared differently in different areas in Mindanao, with their own specific ingredients not necessarily the same as the one in Luzon. Needless to state, the dish will be known in the distinct dialects of the unique areas. To illustrate, Dinugo-an is known as Sampayna in Mindanao.
This then is an attempt to provide proper attribution to the recipes. Full credit and origination are given to the Food and Nutrition Institute of the National Science Development Board, whose main concern is food and nutrition. And the attribution of such recipes was then based on studies made by the above body.
And to start off, and the choice was easy, recipes from our beloved Northern Mindanao Region X. Later blogs will detail other recipes distinct to the other regions of the archipelago.
TANGKONG - LINAMBONAN
3 cups of tangkong stems and leaves, cut into 2" lengths
1/2 cup sliced tomatoes
1 tablespoon sliced onion
1 teaspoon chopped ginger
1 cup fresh alamang
3/4 cup coconut milk (1st extraction)
2 tablespoons kalamansi juice
2-1/2 teaspoons salt
6 pieces banana leaves, wilted
Wash and cut tangkong stems and leaves into 2-inch lengths.
Add the rest of the ingredients.
Wrap mixture in 2 layers of banana leaves, securing all edges with string of banana stalk.
Cook over live charcoal for 10 minutes. 5 minutes on each side.
Serve hot. Six servings.
BAS-UY
1/2 cup sliced pork liver
1/2 cup sliced pork, medium fat
3 cups water
1-1/2 teaspoons salt
1 teaspoon garlic
1 cup sliced upo
1 cup sliced patola
2 tablespoons sliced onion
1/4 cup sliced tomatoes
1 teaspoon sliced ginger
1 small ginger leaf
1 stalk tanglad leaves`
Place liver and pork in a saucepan.
Add water, salt, and garlic and bring to a boil.
When meat is tender, add upo, patola, onion, tomatoes and ginger.
Cook for 5 minutes.
Add ginger leaf and tanglad and cook for another 5 minutes.
Serve hot. Six servings.
LINAT-AN
6 slices pork chops
6 cups rice washings
2 medium gabi tubers, quartered
2-1/2 teaspoons salt
1/4 cup sliced tomatoes
3 cups cut sitaw (2" lengths)
1 tablespoon sliced sweet pepper
1 tanglad leaf
1 sprig yerba buena
1/4 cup green onions
Boil meat in rice washing for 40 minutes.
Add gabi tubers and salt.
Cook 5 minutes.
Add sitaw and pepper.
Cook 3 minutes.
Add herbs, tomatoes, and green onions.
Cook 3 minutes longer.
Serve hot. Six servings.
HUMBA NA NANGKA
10 tanglad leaves
2-1/2 cups cut young nangka, (2" x 1" wedges)
2 cups coconut milk, 2nd extraction
3 tablespoons sliced onion
1 tablespoon crushed ginger
1 tablespoon crushed tumeric
2 tablespoons bagoong-sauce
3 teaspoon ona (whole fermented fish)
1 cup coconut milk, 1st extraction
1/2 cup sliced tomatoes
1 small tumeric leaf
1 leaf oregano
1 sprig yerba buena
Line bottom of a pan with tanglad leaves.
Arrange nangka in pan and add 2nd extraction of coconut milk, onion, ginger and tumeric.
Cook 20 minutes.
Season with fish sauce and whole fish of fermented bagoong.
Add the rest of the ingredients.
Cook 2 minutes longer.
Serve hot. Six servings.
SAMPAYNA
1 cup cut pork's small intestines (cleaned, boiled and cut crosswise, 1cm lengths)
1 cup cut pork's lung (cleaned, boiled and cut into small cubes)
2 tablespoons cooking fat
1 teaspoon crushed garlic
2 teaspoons sliced onions
1 teaspoon sliced ginger
2 tablespoons sliced tomatoes
1/2 cup cut pork liver (cubes)
3 cups sliced banana heart
1 cup vinegar mixed with 2 cups pork's blood
2-1/2teaspoons salt
1/2 cup olasiman stems and leaves
Boil intestines and lungs until tender or for about 30 minutes.
Sauté garlic, onion, ginger and tomatoes
Add intestines, lungs, liver and banana heart.
Add well-mixed vinegar-blood mixture and bring to a boil without stirring for about 15 minutes.
Add salt, stir and add olasiman.
Cook 5 minutes longer.
Serve hot. Six servings.
BINAKI
1/2 cup sugar
1/4 cup powdered milk
1 teaspoon baking powder
4 ears young corn, grated and ground
- enough water to cover for boiling
Combine sugar, powdered milk and baking powder.
Add corn and mix thoroughly.
Pile 2 cornhusks and put in 2 tablespoons of the mixture.
Wrap and tie.
Repeat the same procedure with the rest of the mixture.
Arrange in a saucepan and add just enough water for boiling.
Cook for 35 minutes
Six servings, 2 pieces per serving.
Maybe as a result of the islands very diverse peoples and local cultures, isolated from each other by wide expanse of water or rough terrain, the corresponding local cuisine are just as varied, exotic, and reflective of the local cultures.
I am of the mind that sites that do either regularly or sporadically feature such recipes usually fail to attribute the geographical origins of such specific recipes. While the dish itself maybe universally known as such, specific recipes are indigenous to the specific localities that they originate. Thus, a dish in Luzon may be prepared with specified ingredients in a specific way, while the same dish may be prepared differently in different areas in Mindanao, with their own specific ingredients not necessarily the same as the one in Luzon. Needless to state, the dish will be known in the distinct dialects of the unique areas. To illustrate, Dinugo-an is known as Sampayna in Mindanao.
This then is an attempt to provide proper attribution to the recipes. Full credit and origination are given to the Food and Nutrition Institute of the National Science Development Board, whose main concern is food and nutrition. And the attribution of such recipes was then based on studies made by the above body.
And to start off, and the choice was easy, recipes from our beloved Northern Mindanao Region X. Later blogs will detail other recipes distinct to the other regions of the archipelago.
TANGKONG - LINAMBONAN
3 cups of tangkong stems and leaves, cut into 2" lengths
1/2 cup sliced tomatoes
1 tablespoon sliced onion
1 teaspoon chopped ginger
1 cup fresh alamang
3/4 cup coconut milk (1st extraction)
2 tablespoons kalamansi juice
2-1/2 teaspoons salt
6 pieces banana leaves, wilted
Wash and cut tangkong stems and leaves into 2-inch lengths.
Add the rest of the ingredients.
Wrap mixture in 2 layers of banana leaves, securing all edges with string of banana stalk.
Cook over live charcoal for 10 minutes. 5 minutes on each side.
Serve hot. Six servings.
BAS-UY
1/2 cup sliced pork liver
1/2 cup sliced pork, medium fat
3 cups water
1-1/2 teaspoons salt
1 teaspoon garlic
1 cup sliced upo
1 cup sliced patola
2 tablespoons sliced onion
1/4 cup sliced tomatoes
1 teaspoon sliced ginger
1 small ginger leaf
1 stalk tanglad leaves`
Place liver and pork in a saucepan.
Add water, salt, and garlic and bring to a boil.
When meat is tender, add upo, patola, onion, tomatoes and ginger.
Cook for 5 minutes.
Add ginger leaf and tanglad and cook for another 5 minutes.
Serve hot. Six servings.
LINAT-AN
6 slices pork chops
6 cups rice washings
2 medium gabi tubers, quartered
2-1/2 teaspoons salt
1/4 cup sliced tomatoes
3 cups cut sitaw (2" lengths)
1 tablespoon sliced sweet pepper
1 tanglad leaf
1 sprig yerba buena
1/4 cup green onions
Boil meat in rice washing for 40 minutes.
Add gabi tubers and salt.
Cook 5 minutes.
Add sitaw and pepper.
Cook 3 minutes.
Add herbs, tomatoes, and green onions.
Cook 3 minutes longer.
Serve hot. Six servings.
HUMBA NA NANGKA
10 tanglad leaves
2-1/2 cups cut young nangka, (2" x 1" wedges)
2 cups coconut milk, 2nd extraction
3 tablespoons sliced onion
1 tablespoon crushed ginger
1 tablespoon crushed tumeric
2 tablespoons bagoong-sauce
3 teaspoon ona (whole fermented fish)
1 cup coconut milk, 1st extraction
1/2 cup sliced tomatoes
1 small tumeric leaf
1 leaf oregano
1 sprig yerba buena
Line bottom of a pan with tanglad leaves.
Arrange nangka in pan and add 2nd extraction of coconut milk, onion, ginger and tumeric.
Cook 20 minutes.
Season with fish sauce and whole fish of fermented bagoong.
Add the rest of the ingredients.
Cook 2 minutes longer.
Serve hot. Six servings.
SAMPAYNA
1 cup cut pork's small intestines (cleaned, boiled and cut crosswise, 1cm lengths)
1 cup cut pork's lung (cleaned, boiled and cut into small cubes)
2 tablespoons cooking fat
1 teaspoon crushed garlic
2 teaspoons sliced onions
1 teaspoon sliced ginger
2 tablespoons sliced tomatoes
1/2 cup cut pork liver (cubes)
3 cups sliced banana heart
1 cup vinegar mixed with 2 cups pork's blood
2-1/2teaspoons salt
1/2 cup olasiman stems and leaves
Boil intestines and lungs until tender or for about 30 minutes.
Sauté garlic, onion, ginger and tomatoes
Add intestines, lungs, liver and banana heart.
Add well-mixed vinegar-blood mixture and bring to a boil without stirring for about 15 minutes.
Add salt, stir and add olasiman.
Cook 5 minutes longer.
Serve hot. Six servings.
BINAKI
1/2 cup sugar
1/4 cup powdered milk
1 teaspoon baking powder
4 ears young corn, grated and ground
- enough water to cover for boiling
Combine sugar, powdered milk and baking powder.
Add corn and mix thoroughly.
Pile 2 cornhusks and put in 2 tablespoons of the mixture.
Wrap and tie.
Repeat the same procedure with the rest of the mixture.
Arrange in a saucepan and add just enough water for boiling.
Cook for 35 minutes
Six servings, 2 pieces per serving.
Thursday, June 23, 2005
A Major Makeover When Visiting the Old Homeland: The Philippines
Any visit to the old homeland regardless of its frequency or reason is not the same as actually living in the old homeland. Really living life in the exact same way as when that expat experienced life before his/her departure. While it may be easy for one to be lulled or even deluded into thinking that both are one and the same, in reality they are two distinct experiences quite apart from and unlike each other.
For one, the now inhospitable humid climate serves to incessantly remind one that being in the old homeland is not the same as before. The physical body now needs some time to re-acclimatize to the once bearable humidity. Time usually not expendable to the harried visitor trying to squeeze into a tight and limited visit schedule.
Additionally, a collective luggage of new prejudices and expectations neatly culled from living in a new land will undoubtedly also remind one that one is now immersed in a very different social and political environment, which at times can be at odds with one's current conditions.
The unwary traveler/returnee appears wont, though not necessarily with malice or condescension, or even afterthought, to be quite vocal in his/her criticisms about most any local conditions that do not meet his new and revised expectations, defined and made pronounced by the extended stay abroad. For their part, the locals are understandably quite unforgiving about those stray unkind comments coming from the lips of those suddenly impatient and critical returnees.
The weather is too hot! The traffic is atrocious; I could never live here again! Squatters are everywhere! The cities are dirty! The air appears stale and noxious the minute one alights from the air transport! Defiance of the law, whether petty or grand larceny is ubiquitous! Politicians are all too crooked and clueless, so unmindful of their very constituents! The Filipinos are quite preoccupied and too focused on outside events around the globe, and yet too stingy in marshalling time and effort addressing local problems. And even, why are those TV/Radio persons in a constant aggravated state of yelling or shouting at their audiences, as if everybody is deaf and dumb? It is all too irritating and quite an assault on the ears! These and more are the typical fare of observations and commentaries emanating from the once compliant members of the same pack.
At the risk of being labeled an uncouth hypocrite, or worse a treacherous turncoat, one in such a situation has to exercise great thoughtful restraint and exhibit a liberal dose of patience and understanding.
As a visitor, for that is now how most of your former compatriots would regard us, it is incumbent upon us to exercise great restraint especially when pointing out the negative and seedy aspects of life in the islands. While before, any such comments from you may have be taken lightly and simply made to pass from one ear to another, this time the times and the circumstances have changed. From one of our own to once our own. From one of us to foreigner.
Thus, the unmitigated pride of even the hapless Pinoy will instantly recoil at such criticisms, whether justified or not. It is best then to simply stay on the safe and benign topics, unless expressly asked or invited to render an honest and unvarnished opinion on such matters.
The country collectively has gone through many and prolonged vicissitudes from the time most of us long-time expats had left. It is not much of a stretch to surmise that individually, the typical Filipino over time has been asked to give much of himself to keep his/her equanimity and sanity intact. Aside from physical and mental deprivations, much of hope, confidence, and even unbridled optimism, have also been excruciating demanded from him. While despair and frustrations may stare at him daily, as gleaned from media, from both his patent and latent protests, and from his general outlook on life, again it may not be much of a stretch to surmise that at the opposite spectrum of those same emotions, such traits as perseverance, long suffering, love for country or fealty to anything Filipino may have been just as equally sharpened and elevated. And in such heightened states, gratuitous criticisms may not be taken that tolerantly .
It is best and the better part of discretion to exercise extra caution then when delving on the buffeting stresses that characterize Philippine national and individual life.
And one last seemingly ironic observation about current Philippine society is the popularity and proliferation of over-sized malls around most urbanized areas, but most especially in the Metro Manila areas. Most of these malls and similar places are almost always crowded with patrons giving the false impression that hardships are quite afar from ordinary Philippine life. Restaurants of varying sizes and clientele, are sites of endless crowds seemingly oblivious to anything partaking of hardships. Movie houses are similarly patronized. Faces in the crowd show no traces of any present or impending financial difficulties. Make no mistake about it there are lots of rich affluent families in the country with disposable income to equal any first world country.
Unfortunately, their numbers (or percentage) are quite miniscule compared to the national figures, giving the illusion that there are very many of them since most of them congregate around urbanized areas, especially areas around Metro Manila. But this picture is markedly contrasted as one leaves the comfy confines of the malls, the modern business centers, the gated communities, etc., and as on communes with the majority and sees the harsh realities of poverty and deprivation - in both the urban areas and in the provinces, most especially those lying farther away from Metro Manila.
One final note to this paradox, for truly it is (extreme love of country, optimism, etc. have not translated to meaningful reforms and amelioration of the country's myriad of economic and political woes), is why collectively the country cannot lift itself up with its bootstraps and gear resolutely toward progress on the many fronts.
To the detached observer, there appears to be no abatement in sight. Not much diminution of some of the emaciating miseries. No meaningful curtailment of the pernicious corruption in its political affairs. No significant dent to the wantonly undisciplined manner both the people and the authorities have shown whether on issues of traffic or respect for the law both petty and grand. Jaywalking. Running red lights. Absent road courtesy. Incessant and irritating blowing of horns. Illegally full-tinted car windows. And so on.
Making this trite and old cliché quite relevant: Big crooks never ever see jail time.
For one, the now inhospitable humid climate serves to incessantly remind one that being in the old homeland is not the same as before. The physical body now needs some time to re-acclimatize to the once bearable humidity. Time usually not expendable to the harried visitor trying to squeeze into a tight and limited visit schedule.
Additionally, a collective luggage of new prejudices and expectations neatly culled from living in a new land will undoubtedly also remind one that one is now immersed in a very different social and political environment, which at times can be at odds with one's current conditions.
The unwary traveler/returnee appears wont, though not necessarily with malice or condescension, or even afterthought, to be quite vocal in his/her criticisms about most any local conditions that do not meet his new and revised expectations, defined and made pronounced by the extended stay abroad. For their part, the locals are understandably quite unforgiving about those stray unkind comments coming from the lips of those suddenly impatient and critical returnees.
The weather is too hot! The traffic is atrocious; I could never live here again! Squatters are everywhere! The cities are dirty! The air appears stale and noxious the minute one alights from the air transport! Defiance of the law, whether petty or grand larceny is ubiquitous! Politicians are all too crooked and clueless, so unmindful of their very constituents! The Filipinos are quite preoccupied and too focused on outside events around the globe, and yet too stingy in marshalling time and effort addressing local problems. And even, why are those TV/Radio persons in a constant aggravated state of yelling or shouting at their audiences, as if everybody is deaf and dumb? It is all too irritating and quite an assault on the ears! These and more are the typical fare of observations and commentaries emanating from the once compliant members of the same pack.
At the risk of being labeled an uncouth hypocrite, or worse a treacherous turncoat, one in such a situation has to exercise great thoughtful restraint and exhibit a liberal dose of patience and understanding.
As a visitor, for that is now how most of your former compatriots would regard us, it is incumbent upon us to exercise great restraint especially when pointing out the negative and seedy aspects of life in the islands. While before, any such comments from you may have be taken lightly and simply made to pass from one ear to another, this time the times and the circumstances have changed. From one of our own to once our own. From one of us to foreigner.
Thus, the unmitigated pride of even the hapless Pinoy will instantly recoil at such criticisms, whether justified or not. It is best then to simply stay on the safe and benign topics, unless expressly asked or invited to render an honest and unvarnished opinion on such matters.
The country collectively has gone through many and prolonged vicissitudes from the time most of us long-time expats had left. It is not much of a stretch to surmise that individually, the typical Filipino over time has been asked to give much of himself to keep his/her equanimity and sanity intact. Aside from physical and mental deprivations, much of hope, confidence, and even unbridled optimism, have also been excruciating demanded from him. While despair and frustrations may stare at him daily, as gleaned from media, from both his patent and latent protests, and from his general outlook on life, again it may not be much of a stretch to surmise that at the opposite spectrum of those same emotions, such traits as perseverance, long suffering, love for country or fealty to anything Filipino may have been just as equally sharpened and elevated. And in such heightened states, gratuitous criticisms may not be taken that tolerantly .
It is best and the better part of discretion to exercise extra caution then when delving on the buffeting stresses that characterize Philippine national and individual life.
And one last seemingly ironic observation about current Philippine society is the popularity and proliferation of over-sized malls around most urbanized areas, but most especially in the Metro Manila areas. Most of these malls and similar places are almost always crowded with patrons giving the false impression that hardships are quite afar from ordinary Philippine life. Restaurants of varying sizes and clientele, are sites of endless crowds seemingly oblivious to anything partaking of hardships. Movie houses are similarly patronized. Faces in the crowd show no traces of any present or impending financial difficulties. Make no mistake about it there are lots of rich affluent families in the country with disposable income to equal any first world country.
Unfortunately, their numbers (or percentage) are quite miniscule compared to the national figures, giving the illusion that there are very many of them since most of them congregate around urbanized areas, especially areas around Metro Manila. But this picture is markedly contrasted as one leaves the comfy confines of the malls, the modern business centers, the gated communities, etc., and as on communes with the majority and sees the harsh realities of poverty and deprivation - in both the urban areas and in the provinces, most especially those lying farther away from Metro Manila.
One final note to this paradox, for truly it is (extreme love of country, optimism, etc. have not translated to meaningful reforms and amelioration of the country's myriad of economic and political woes), is why collectively the country cannot lift itself up with its bootstraps and gear resolutely toward progress on the many fronts.
To the detached observer, there appears to be no abatement in sight. Not much diminution of some of the emaciating miseries. No meaningful curtailment of the pernicious corruption in its political affairs. No significant dent to the wantonly undisciplined manner both the people and the authorities have shown whether on issues of traffic or respect for the law both petty and grand. Jaywalking. Running red lights. Absent road courtesy. Incessant and irritating blowing of horns. Illegally full-tinted car windows. And so on.
Making this trite and old cliché quite relevant: Big crooks never ever see jail time.
Sunday, May 29, 2005
Do You Have An Accent?
Last night, while my wearied mind was struggling between wakefulness and sleep, a few straggling thoughts stubbornly resisted in taking their rightful place, which was oblivion, during such a difficult but important phase of the daily routine. A few nasty thoughts refused to be shaken off and continued floating carelessly across my consciousness. Part of the problem was because one thought was particularly both amusing and mind-gnawing given the circumstances surrounding it.
It came from a regular reading of the dozen or two email groups that I am a member of, though inactive in most of them. I would be your typical lurker, or fly on the wall, or cyberspace voyeur, casually fishing for any thing interesting from these different sources. And given that these groups are quite a motley combination of members coming from varied ethnicities and delving on different subject matters, they do at times provide a lot of interesting insights on the intellectual workings-on, including idiosyncrasies, of the diverse membership. Some funny, some amusing, at times ludicrous or shallow, or at times just plain petty and therefore a plain waste of time and effort on both reader and writer.
The thought was triggered by a reading of a short barrage of contentious exchanges between several members on the issue of one very high government official being criticized as having a bad accent. The incendiary exchanges would have been not unusual for this considerably large group which has had a few similar attractions in the not too distant past. But it was the subject matter that got my mind whirling.
It was the issue of accent in the speaking of English. The snappy criticism was just as rapidly responded with an equally tart retort, coming from the party who had initially heaped some mighty praises on the same individual.
From the outset, one got the feeling that the response to the short critique was fired off simply to fight fire with fire, rather than go the tactful route of a dispassionate and serious excavation and dissertation into the issue of accent. What is accent and who speaks an accent?
I would go about it this way. And mind you, it would essentially be my personal assessment and nothing more. Thus, no need to flog me if one disagrees.
If one is in the United States, one is said to be speaking with an accent if one’s speech betrays its not being similar or the same as the many native speakers of the place. Native speakers can both be foreign born or those who grew up in the place as a young kid, or simply one who acquired or adapted the same speech patterns as most of the population. In this case, even a Brit, possessor of the King’s English and coming from a country where the language originated, would be considered as having an accent, and we say, a British accent. Of course, in England, his home country, everybody else except him and those who speak like him, would be considered as having an accent. In that milieu, the native American speaker would be said to have an American accent.
Now in my estimation, the problem lies, especially with a good many of my Filipino compatriots, in that we tend to lump everything that separates our speech from the native speakers as simply a question of accent, when in many or most instances they are something else. For example, we tend to consider the mispronunciation of words as simply a matter of accent and not a problem of proper enunciation of the words of the language. When we pronounce all the f sounds as p sounds, that is mispronunciation, not accent.
When we miss the th sounds that is not accent, that is enunciating the words improperly. When our speech cannot sufficiently differentiate between the short vowel sounds and the long vowel sounds that would not be because of accent, but again because we are not enunciating the words properly.
Furthermore, if we cannot be discriminate enough to know where the proper stress/accent of a multi-syllabic word lies, or in our speech intonation, we do not put emphasis on the action word of a sentence which is the verb but rather on either the subject or object, then we simply are not speaking English the way it is taught.
So these and more of the nuanced exceptions that English is littered with, if they are missed, tripped over, or omitted, are not attributable to accent, but simply a failure to speak English properly.
Our present immigrant California governor may be a so-so analogy. We may find a bit of humor in his accent when he pronounces his state of governance, California, with his short ah sound and his rolling or slurring of the r sound, but in my judgment, his pronunciation is passable. It would really be bad, if he misses the f sound and instead allows a p sound to come out in the same word.
While still in the old country, I had often wondered at the way the colegialas and the favored few who were able to go to those high-priced exclusive private schools in Metro Manila, pronounce the word student, as “stoodent". The native American speaker could normally pronounce the word with the u sound or maybe the short o sound, but never as stoodent.
The only way to avoid scrutiny about accent is to simply write everything down instead of speaking. Writing provides the level playing field, where accent plays absolutely no role. Yours will read like one coming from any good Brit or American.
So, who has the accent? Or, who has the bad accent?
Your call.
It came from a regular reading of the dozen or two email groups that I am a member of, though inactive in most of them. I would be your typical lurker, or fly on the wall, or cyberspace voyeur, casually fishing for any thing interesting from these different sources. And given that these groups are quite a motley combination of members coming from varied ethnicities and delving on different subject matters, they do at times provide a lot of interesting insights on the intellectual workings-on, including idiosyncrasies, of the diverse membership. Some funny, some amusing, at times ludicrous or shallow, or at times just plain petty and therefore a plain waste of time and effort on both reader and writer.
The thought was triggered by a reading of a short barrage of contentious exchanges between several members on the issue of one very high government official being criticized as having a bad accent. The incendiary exchanges would have been not unusual for this considerably large group which has had a few similar attractions in the not too distant past. But it was the subject matter that got my mind whirling.
It was the issue of accent in the speaking of English. The snappy criticism was just as rapidly responded with an equally tart retort, coming from the party who had initially heaped some mighty praises on the same individual.
From the outset, one got the feeling that the response to the short critique was fired off simply to fight fire with fire, rather than go the tactful route of a dispassionate and serious excavation and dissertation into the issue of accent. What is accent and who speaks an accent?
I would go about it this way. And mind you, it would essentially be my personal assessment and nothing more. Thus, no need to flog me if one disagrees.
If one is in the United States, one is said to be speaking with an accent if one’s speech betrays its not being similar or the same as the many native speakers of the place. Native speakers can both be foreign born or those who grew up in the place as a young kid, or simply one who acquired or adapted the same speech patterns as most of the population. In this case, even a Brit, possessor of the King’s English and coming from a country where the language originated, would be considered as having an accent, and we say, a British accent. Of course, in England, his home country, everybody else except him and those who speak like him, would be considered as having an accent. In that milieu, the native American speaker would be said to have an American accent.
Now in my estimation, the problem lies, especially with a good many of my Filipino compatriots, in that we tend to lump everything that separates our speech from the native speakers as simply a question of accent, when in many or most instances they are something else. For example, we tend to consider the mispronunciation of words as simply a matter of accent and not a problem of proper enunciation of the words of the language. When we pronounce all the f sounds as p sounds, that is mispronunciation, not accent.
When we miss the th sounds that is not accent, that is enunciating the words improperly. When our speech cannot sufficiently differentiate between the short vowel sounds and the long vowel sounds that would not be because of accent, but again because we are not enunciating the words properly.
Furthermore, if we cannot be discriminate enough to know where the proper stress/accent of a multi-syllabic word lies, or in our speech intonation, we do not put emphasis on the action word of a sentence which is the verb but rather on either the subject or object, then we simply are not speaking English the way it is taught.
So these and more of the nuanced exceptions that English is littered with, if they are missed, tripped over, or omitted, are not attributable to accent, but simply a failure to speak English properly.
Our present immigrant California governor may be a so-so analogy. We may find a bit of humor in his accent when he pronounces his state of governance, California, with his short ah sound and his rolling or slurring of the r sound, but in my judgment, his pronunciation is passable. It would really be bad, if he misses the f sound and instead allows a p sound to come out in the same word.
While still in the old country, I had often wondered at the way the colegialas and the favored few who were able to go to those high-priced exclusive private schools in Metro Manila, pronounce the word student, as “stoodent". The native American speaker could normally pronounce the word with the u sound or maybe the short o sound, but never as stoodent.
The only way to avoid scrutiny about accent is to simply write everything down instead of speaking. Writing provides the level playing field, where accent plays absolutely no role. Yours will read like one coming from any good Brit or American.
So, who has the accent? Or, who has the bad accent?
Your call.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)