A couple of months ago, I was taking photos of the sunrise at the breakwater behind the Sampaguita Gardens Resort in Aklan when a small group of maya birds alighted on the ground. I was several feet away and I was able to photograph them using a telephoto lens. A few days ago, I was about to post the best maya bird photo in my photo Web log when I decided to do a little research to find out what its English name is. One thing led to another and I was hooked in the controversy over replacing the maya with the monkey-eating eagle as the national bird of the Philippines.
(Note: I finally posted the photo of the maya birds last night.)
The maya was the country’s national bird until then Pres. Fidel Ramos issued Proclamation No. 615 on July 4, 1995 naming the monkey-eating eagle as the national bird and thereby officially changing its name to the Philippine eagle. Some lament the change while others feel that since the eagle is more endemic to the Philippines, it is more apt to call it our national bird.
I found a reference to a legend, however, in a Web log I had never seen until a few days ago, that says putting the maya in the cage shortens its life: “These freedom loving birds was compared to the freedom loving spirit of Filipinos who, even though weak and small in size, were able to gain and sustain their freedom though their history.”
The legend, like the maya, is not unique to the Philippines. It is a legend attached to sparrows in general.
Now, that makes me think. In terms of psychology and culture, is the Philippine eagle, proud and beautiful and unique as it may be, a better symbol for the country and its people considering that it is almost extinct? Or is it the effort of saving the eagle from extinction that makes the symbolism more meaningful?
Does the commonness of the humble maya, or the house sparrow, make it less appealing as a national symbol? It may be common but it is a resilient specie and is able to make a home wherever food and shelter are available.
Asians love symbols and symbolisms and Filipinos are no exception. I thought about our national symbols and I became less and less enamored with the idea that they are as important as many people make them out to be.
Think of the Philippine eagle — kingly and ferocious. Wikipedia describes its morphology as follows: “The Philippine Eagle’s head is adorned with long brown feathers. These feathers give it the appearance of a lion’s mane, which in turn resembles the mythical gryphon.”
Clearly, there is an element of machismo involved in the choice of the Philippine eagle as the national bird. This becomes even more evident when we consider the characteristics of the sampaguita, our national flower — small, pure, white, fragrant and delicate. I don’t think I need to spell out the obvious associations. In most cultures, including ours, the flower is considered a feminine symbol while the bird is a masculine symbol.
The sampaguita has been the Philippines’ national flower since 1934 and no President or administration has ever seen any reason to change it. Despite some thoughts that the waling-waling should replace the sampaguita, for almost three quarters of a century, the feminine symbol has been, and remains to be, something sweet and decorative, and not even endemic to the Philippines.
When we consider the ways in which the sampaguita flower is used in our culture, the psychological damage becomes more severe. Sampaguita flowers are plucked and strewn into garlands that are placed on the necks of visiting dignitaries as a welcome gesture, and on religious statues as a symbol of piety. Is that what Filipino women are — a welcome gift to foreigners and an offering to the gods?
And when we consider the many legends associated with the sampaguita, the symbolism becomes more hair-raising. A web site called Asean Citizens narrates: ‘There are also legends surrounding Sampaguita, the most popular is about Lakambini and Lakam Galing. Lakam Galing is a warrior, and before he went into battle, they pledge their love for each other by saying “Sumpa kita” (roughly in English as “(I) Oath (myself to) You”). Lakam Galing died, and Lakambini mourned his death ‘till her death. Soon, white flowers grew on her grave symbolizing her loyalty, love, and purity (of heart).’
Mourned his death ‘till her death? Oh. My. Goodness.
Meanwhile, the humble maya having been dethroned by the monkey-eating eagle, the masculine symbol is a bird that is characterized by its large size, strength, power, dominance and war-like character.
Smells strongly of testosterone doesn’t it? And it makes Independence Day celebrations even less meaningless. Just how independent can a people be when they remain prisoners of their own culture?
By the way, today is the birth anniversary of Jose Rizal, the man hand-picked by the Americans to be the Philippine national hero.
Our culture is too damn full of ironies.
References:
Digital Format: Maya birds, Philippine national bird
Petredear: Maya bird
Wikipedia: House Sparrow
Wikipedia: Philippine Eagle
Asean Citizens: Philippine national flower
{ 19 comments… read them below or add one }
chris 06.19.08 at 10:00 am
If only the regal eagle had the maya’s proclivity for procreation. Heh. =)
Kotsengkuba 06.19.08 at 11:30 am
Since I started schooling, I always knew that Maya is the national bird. I only realized during my high school years that it has been replaced with the eagle. My reaction then was to question myself the necessity to change a national symbol just because someone thought they no longer fit the title and it only mean the national hero could also be replaced when someone emerged more ‘heroic’ than Dr. Jose Rizal. And yes, just like the constitution could be changed because it doesn’t anymore fit the current administration (or administrator).
Maybe someone thought the maya should be replaced because it has already been used as the title for one of Voltes V’s ending theme. Hehehe
Anyway, do we have a national president already? LOL
bertN 06.19.08 at 11:56 am
I agree with you, our culture is so full of ironies. Since my high school days. I keep wondering why Rizal was our national hero. I have nothing against him, in fact, I admired his intellectual prowess and his ability to have as many girlfriends as he did. But what did he really do for the country?
In my humble opinion, I think Bonifacio deserved the title more than Rizal does. The poor guy started the revolution that eventually liberated the country but Aguinaldo and his cohorts took the the fame, the glory, and his life. Isn’t this the mother of all ironies LOL.
edgar V. 06.19.08 at 2:04 pm
I wonder what Jose Rizal doing in Luneta wearing coat and tie on a hot humid weather of Manila.Could it be that it symbolizes our love of anything american. Well anyway it is the americans who hand picked him to be our national hero so be it.
Connie Veneracion 06.19.08 at 7:33 pm
Chris, what a thought! LOL
Kotsengkuba, what about a national oppositionist? You know, when Cory became president, I actually thought she would declare Ninoy as the national hero. You know how politicians are — changing names of hospitals, schools and streets to those of their relatives.
bertN, AND Aguinaldo is even considered a hero for all that he’s done including consorting with the Americans who double crossed him.
Edgar V., LOL I never attached much significance to his attire until you mentioned it. Makes him a non-symbol of the Filipino people even more.
ormocanon 06.20.08 at 7:51 am
Ask any rice farmer and he’ll tell you the maya is definitely a pest.
We wouldn’t want to be associated with pests, would we?
Maybe it’s one of the reasons why the maya got booted out as the national bird and replaced with the monkey-eating eagle aka Philippine eagle.
rina 06.20.08 at 9:30 am
well, i’m definitely biased because i worked for an environmental NGO, but… the phil. eagle can also be a powerful symbol, in that it finds its world/habitat disappearing around it, and yet it still struggles and hangs on, and its survival also symbolizes the health of the ecosystem from which we get food, water, medicine, etc. as for the machismo, the eagle is monogamous, and both parents take care of their young. that’s not a bad brand of machismo to spread
Connie Veneracion 06.20.08 at 11:04 am
Ormocanon, re “pests”
Weeelll… “pest” is a relative term. It depends from one’s point of view. Relatives who are always looking for dole-outs and freebies are pests.
re “Maybe it’s one of the reasons…”
Maybe. There is always a agenda and they are never made public most of the time.
Rina, re “the phil. eagle can also be a powerful symbol”
No doubt. I only wish that the symbolism were more consistent. But the sampaguita?? Rizal??
julie 06.20.08 at 1:50 pm
I agree with bertN, I even have a shirt with Bonifacio, one of the shirts made then by Pidro shirts
BatJay, Ang Dating Hippopotamus 06.21.08 at 2:08 pm
akala ko, ang national bird natin ay lechon manok. philippine eagle pala.
nabalitaan mo ba yung philippine eagle na ni release nila sa mount apo (si kabayan ata ang pangalan niya). product ito ng captive breeding program sa davao. nakuryente raw.
Connie Veneracion 06.21.08 at 2:34 pm
“Kabayan”? Ang alam ko may inampon daw na eagle si Noli de Castro. Yun ang nakuryente???
ormocanon 06.22.08 at 6:56 am
“Weeelll… “pest†is a relative term. It depends from one’s point of view. Relatives who are always looking for dole-outs and freebies are pests. :)”-Ms. Connie V.
Are you referring, by any chance, to somebody’s ‘wily’ cousins?
Connie Veneracion 06.23.08 at 1:33 am
HAHAHAHA Very smart. Very smart!
Jin Kazama 06.24.08 at 11:46 am
Ironic talaga ang nangyari sa atin? Parang may nangyayaring self fulfilling prophecy dito e. I remember a part of Pres. Quezon’s speech that he’d rather have a governement run like hell by Filipinos.
Look at where we are now? Hell talaga.
Masmaganda pa siguro kung baboy na lang ang national animal natin. Symbol of power? Ang lakas nun, a? AND it’s good for making a living. How can you beat that? HAHAHA
Sana wag nating gayahin ang mga Kano na mahilig sa symbolism puro naman ngawa. More flash than thunder.
re “Maybe it’s one of the reasons…â€
Maybe. There is always a agenda and they are never made public most of the time. - malamang narealize ng mga trapo and predicament of having the maya as a national bird. Like in geometry (or logic ba yun? hehe):
if a=b and b=c, then a=c
Kung ang maya=pests and pests=trapos, then maya=trapo. Kung symbol nating ang maya, then we glorify trapos. HAHAHA. Joke lang.
And I’d have to agree about the sampaguita. Nice symbolism put by miss connie.
At tama kayo, dapat nga si Bonifacio and national hero natin. Ano ba naging silbi ng mga “intellectual kuno” sa history natin? Wala. Puro daldal, walang gawa. Ano nga ba ginawa niya? Wrote Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo para mapukaw ang damdamin ng bawat pilipino na mag-alsa? That’s f***ing lame. At wala siyang ginawang public service nung doctor siya. Personal reasons ang meron siya for pursuing a medical career. Kaya siya galit sa mga espanyol e dahil nasasapawan ang yaman niya.
Colonial mentality lang ang umiral diyan sa pagpili kay Rizal. Bonifacio was a made man, hindi intellectual, PERO he had the guts to do something. Even if Boni idolized Rizal, still, he had the courage for action. And it WAS the time for action. What did Rizal do? Nagpamartyr. Nagpa-awa effect. Hindi ba niya naisip na masmahalaga siyang buhay, kaysa patay.
Aguinaldo? A national hero? Are we sick? He betrayed Bonifacio.
Same goes with Ninoy, he WAS a cunning guy. Beware.
Why do we have this twisted affinity for choosing heroes who sacrifice themselves and die? Maybe we should change the last line of our national anthem: Ang mamatay ng may bulak sa ilong.
Madaming magagalit sa akin nito.
The hero is the one who gets the job done and wins the war. The losers never get to enjoy the spoils. haha
Jin Kazama 06.24.08 at 11:52 am
O kaya si Lapu-lapu na lang kaya national hero natin? =)
Connie Veneracion 06.24.08 at 12:13 pm
There are no heroes. Men are guided by self-interests. Even state-proclaimed or even media-proclaimed heroes are products of the interests of those in power.
It’s human.
Jin Kazama 06.24.08 at 1:22 pm
Miss connie, NOW that you’ve mentioned it, I have to agree with you on the self-interest angle
Connie Veneracion 06.24.08 at 3:49 pm
O, ‘di ba?
Miguk 06.26.08 at 8:35 am
I think Aguinaldo did more than anyone and deserves more recognition than he receives. You can say that he betrayed Bonifacio, etcetera, but name a revolution that didn’t have infighting? He was the only one successful against the Spanish and kept the Americans on tenderhooks for years until betrayed by his own people. However, since he didn’t die young I guess that precludes him from being considered a hero since that seems to be a prerequisite.