This story
was taken from Bulatlat, the Philippines's alternative weekly
newsmagazine (www.bulatlat.com, www.bulatlat.net, www.bulatlat.org).
Vol. IV, No. 46,
December 19-25, 2004
YEARENDER: CULTURE
The
challenge that artists and cultural workers should face is very basic: the
concretization of nationalist culture through the arts, and the appreciation (by
artists and the public) of the role of artists in cultural transformation.
(Editor’s Note: The author
is the secretary-general of the Concerned Artists of the Philippines. She was
requested by Bulatlat to write this year-ender piece on culture.) “Artista lang” (Just an
artist), people are wont to say. Still, even in the political scene, artists
hogged the limelight. Year 2004 started busy for
artists as Fernando Poe, Jr. (FPJ), King of Philippine Movies, announced his
plan to vie for presidency. His friends in showbusiness were quick to support
him, forming the group Mga Artista Para kay FPJ (Artists for FPJ). Among the
lead organizers were National Artist for Cinema, filmmaker and writer Eddie
Romero, filmmakers Joel Lamangan, Carlitos Siguion-Reyna, and Mel Chionglo; and
writer Bibeth Orteza.
Artist-supporters of presidential candidate Eddie Villanueva formed Bangon
Artista. While other candidates in the national and local levels solicited the
endorsement of artists as volunteers or garnered artists’ commitments as
business contracts. Not a few sneered at the
candidacy of FPJ (“Baduy!”). Yet FPJ proved to be the candidate to beat by the
incumbent, PGMA. “Artista lang” proved to be “Artista kasi” (Because he is an
artist). The artists behind FPJ are
no ordinary artists capitalizing on their popularity. They know of arts and
culture better than those with so-called “high culture” taste. In their statement, they
declare that, “culture is not simply enlightenment and sophistication through
education and exposure to the arts… We maintain that culture is the sum
definition of the customs, practices and social behavior of a particular people,
identifying the particular place, class, or time to which they belong, as well
as their efforts to alleviate their condition.” Stating further that,
“There is imperative need to develop a genuine national culture responsive to
the contemporary needs of the Filipino people. But the development of a genuine
national culture can only be fostered by genuine love of country.” Battling
globalization In October of
this year, the same group of artists, but now together with the others of
different political loyalties, organized themselves to save the film industry
which is on the verge of collapse. They formed Nagkakaisang Manggagawa ng
Pelikulang Pilipino (NMPP or United Filipino Film Workers), and categorically
criticized globalization or trade liberalization as a main factor in the
dwindling number of local movie productions. Rightly so,
with the 400 films that were rated by the MTRCB, only 50 were local productions.
A good quality local movie would need a budget of P15-20 million (roughly
US$268,000 to US$357,000 at US$1=P56). Hollywood films’ top 10 for 2004 have a
production budget of US$50-150 million, grossing as much as US$120-400 million
per film. In 2002, Hollywood
movies world market share amounted to $63 billion or 68.7% of the total. The music industry could
not be far from this debacle. The Philippine music market is worth about US$30
million a year. This figure includes productions of local and foreign artists.
Globally, as of 2002, 75% or over $32 billion of the global music market is
controlled by five companies. The consolidation process continues this year as
two pairs of companies announced merger plans. If both mergers go through, three
companies will control 75% of the global market. The devotional
adherence of the Macapagal-Arroyo administration to globalization is a given.
The damage wrought by globalization on the country’s economic indicators is
glaring. But the damage by the imbalance of trade and opportunities in cultural
products, while quantifiable in terms of sales and income figures, goes way
beyond the numbers. Artistic
products (and productions) elicit emotional and intellectual responses that are
potent agents to the formation of a people’s culture. This is the difference
between an ordinary commodity of trade and a product with cultural content. Ignorance or
manipulation? The 2004 budget for culture
and the arts reflects how President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo prioritizes this
aspect of national concern. For the National Commission for Culture and the Arts
(NCCA), the overall coordinating and policymaking government body that
systematizes and streamlines national efforts in promoting culture and arts, the
budget for 2004 was P18 million. On the other hand, the
administration, in recognition of “tourism 's contribution to world peace,
cultural enrichment, and socio-economic development” (ibid.) endowed the
Department Of Tourism (DOT) a hefty P824 million. For 2005, DOT has an
allocation of P137 million more, while the NCCA will receive a budgetary
increase of P1.4 million. Artists are slapped a 10%
VAT in the exercise of their profession and a 20% withholding tax for every
contract. Artistic and cultural productions have to pay 10% VAT plus 15-30%
amusement tax on ticket sales. Seemingly to commensurate,
the anti-piracy Optical Media Bill was enacted to ensure the protection of the
rights of artists to their creations. At first glance, this seems advantageous.
In fact, not a few artists laud this move. But artists and the public
should view this matter in the wider context of globalization. Rich countries
have the advantage over poor countries, even in culture (thereby influence).
Adapting an anti-piracy bill without laws that promote and protect local artists
and productions and without artistic and cultural support from the government
will put artists deeper into the pit. The imbalance of trade and
opportunities described earlier presents the objective conditions of the global
commerce on cultural products. If artists concentrate on asserting the
protection of their rights through the implementation of more stringent
Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) laws, the efforts are actually spent MORE on
protecting the giant media conglomerates—simply because they dominate the
market. Moreover, actors do not
have IPRs on their audiovisual performances. Hence, IPR laws do not appropriate
the profits garnered from the implementation of the law to the actors and other
creators; it just collects more profits for the producers or capitalists. Privatizing culture The government views
culture and arts activities as service oriented rather than financially
beneficial. It thereby leaves this sector to fend for itself; to solicit
support from the corporate sector, just like the other service oriented
departments like health, education, and social welfare. Corporate support of the
arts and culture sector gives corporations control of these aspects of society.
Artists are made to feel economically insecure and inhibited if creations are
criticisms directed on corporations. Works that promote values and work ethics
that are investor friendly thus become the epitome of excellence. The Macapagal-Arroyo
administration’s incoherence regarding arts culture is not due to its ignorance
on this matter, it is just keeping in line with its main economic thrust of
globalization. As early as 2002, at the National Conference on Culture and the
Arts, Macapagal-Arroyo bared her perspective when she advised artists to "make
culture available” and “attractive to the masses." This statement is proof
that, for the president, the people are “markets,” not anymore citizens. Artists
booed her, of course. There is
hope FPJ lost in
his bid for presidency. It was not because he was an “artista lang.” In fact,
the artists behind him could have been his best assets; the trapos (derogatory
term for traditional politicians), his worst. It was due more on anomalous
election conduct and returns. As 2004 was
ending, FPJ bid his last. On Dec. 14, he died of brain haemorrhage. Thousands of
his fans and supporters grieve and mourn his death. Many flock to his wake to
express adulation to their idol and candidate; as well as to express rage over
the questionable election results. This show of support should not be dismissed
as “stupidity” of the masses. FPJ was an actor who
portrayed the protector of the oppressed; a leader who was selfless and
compassionate. His characters possessed powers who subdued greedy antagonists
reigning through deceit and harassment. The multitude of his fans and supporters
speaks well of the hopes of the masses. FPJs artistic roles vis a
vis reality show how valuable artists are to society. Artistic and cultural
productions should present hope. But equally important is presenting how “hope”
can be translated to reality. Hope in
collective actions The challenge that artists
and cultural workers should face is very basic: the concretization of
nationalist culture through the arts, and the appreciation (by artists and the
public) of the role of artists in cultural transformation. Several grassroot,
progressive, mainstream and/or alternative groups are presently actively
answering this challenge. Moreover, it is important
for the people to recognize that “culture, the arts and media are weapons of
imperialist aggression. Thus, resistance in the sphere of culture is
indispensable. Maximizing the use of creative arts and media for education and
information; concern and involvement in creative productions; encouragement,
support, and engagement in people’s culture endeavors are key ingredients for
liberation.” There is hope in collective
actions. Matters regarding arts and culture are not the concern only of artists,
it is as much the public’s. Bulatlat © 2004 Bulatlat
■
Alipato Publications Permission is granted to reprint or redistribute this article, provided its author/s and Bulatlat are properly credited and notified.
Culture and
the Arts is Everybody’s Business
BY JULIE L. PO
Bulatlat