Mindanaotoday.com | Historical series versus literary critical approaches of Rizal’s novels
By: RAI Bollozos Sanchez
HI there!
I am sorry, but the midterm examinations kept me busy these past weeks.
Nonetheless, I am grateful that a national media conglomerate has adapted Jose Rizal’s “Noli Me Tangere,” giving it a Gen-Z twist.
It is garnering viewers who are eager to learn by visually watching Rizal’s novel come alive on national television.
I want to send a strong warning to teachers who may take advantage of television shows and rely solely on them.
Thus, resulting in historical and literary fatigue if there were no supplementary lessons.
I have been teaching The Life, Works, and Writings of Jose Rizal since 2014.
As a result, I never assigned historical series, films, or documentaries to my students without prior guidance and discussion of historical contexts.
Assigning topics to report on is uncommon and is only requested once the student comprehends the proper historical content and context relating to the topic discussed.
To stir interest, I may apply literary criticism when discussing Rizal’s writing and publication of Noli Me Tangere or El Filibusterismo.
Cognizance of history goes beyond times, names, and events.
Discerning historical literature goes beyond the persona, plot, and setting to appreciate what was written or exposed.
It is paramount to feel the storyteller’s experiences using various literary critical approaches.
When I teach Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo, I always discuss the importance of literary criticism in helping my students appreciate the novel rather than dismiss it.
Whenever I discuss literary critical approaches, my students’ attention focuses on the values of society and their reflections on the economic, political, and cultural issues raised by the novels.
Additionally, when I use “critical literary approaches,” my students become interested, motivated, and appreciative of the literary piece.
Furthermore, my students become immersed in understanding how “literary content” may happen or how it happens in a “real-life” context.
Studying Rizal’s novels is the most effective way to involve students in critical thinking.
While there are numerous ways to interpret the novels using critical literary approaches,
For example, the conditions of the 19th-century Philippines espoused in the novel describe the social, cultural, economic, and political concerns during the period.
Using the notion of historicism to explore the novel acknowledges the reconceptualization of history and allows the students to understand historical nuances during the period.
On the other hand, literary psychology helps the student understand the text, characters, and the writer himself.
For instance, it is assumed that the personification of Crisostomo Ibarra was the characterization of Jose Rizal himself.
However, it could also be assumed that Rizal’s radical and violent unconscious was Elias, while his subconscious philosopher of him was Pilosopo Tasyo.
Lastly, one of my favorite critical literary approaches is the “reader-response,” which engages the student’s personal experiences relating to the texts of either the Noli or El Fili.
Learning history, you see, is not about what there is to know, but about why there is to understand and how we can discern real-life concerns in connection with historical novels.
The challenge to history teachers teaching Rizal is how diligent they are to learn critical literary approaches or whatever interdisciplinary approaches are in allowing the student to be more appreciative of history.
As a reminder, history is not only about linearity but also about the progression of historical thought.
Going back to the famous adaptation of Rizal’s Noli Me Tangere on national television, by letting them watch without understanding the novel’s original text compared to what they saw on TV, we are disabling them from finding a connection to real-life situations using critical historical thinking.
In the end, we failed them as their educators.
Historical series on TV are steps to enable them to appreciate history and not the pure lesson itself.
Nonetheless, pure classroom discussions are what we, as teachers, are also required to do.
Hence, we watch and compare it to the actual text of the novel itself.
In short, we, as teachers, study first before our students do. (MT)
####