In this blog you are to comment on one or more of the assigned articles in relation with any of the topics touched on in the lecture PDFs every week. Your posts should be brief (150 words or the equivalent to 1 paragraph) and, most importantly, a reflection of your preparation for class.
Sec 1C - Week 6
Spain as a Worthy Power: 16thC (Charles V and Philip II)
I think the article "Are Filipinos Hispanics?" is very interesting considering the connection the philippines, Spain, and Acapulco. It is strange how the identification of being Hispanic changes with the context it's being used in. The article believes that the answer to this question is both yes and no. I believe that there needs to be a specific interpretation set up for the concept of being Hispanic. It is crucial because it can help with finding more about one's past and gives an even more diverse outlook on the Hispanic identity.
This week, I was particularly fascinated by the article that discussed the national identity of Filipinos. Although I had previously learned in lecture that the Spanish colonized and controlled the Philippines for a significant period of time, I had never thought about actually classifying Filipinos as Hispanic. The article offered three different perspectives on Filipino national identity. First, it suggested that if the word Hispanic is used to refer to people who’s ancestors lived in Spain or Latin America, then Filipinos would not be considered ‘Hispanic’. Comparatively, it proposed that if the word ‘Hispanic’ is used to refer to people who live in countries that were colonized and greatly influenced by Spain, then the Filipinos people would indeed be classified as Hispanic. I tend to agree with the third perspective that suggests that Filipinos are Hispanic in some ways and not Hispanic in others. During Spain’s period of colonial expansion, the nation created a global empire that extended into both the Northern and Southern Hemisphere; it is hard to ignore the vast influence Spain had on the various peoples living under its rule in the 16th Century. Thus, the Spanish colonization of the region influenced Filipino culture, language, infrastructure, and religion. On the other hand, today, most Filipinos do not speak Spanish and do not have any distinct ties to Spain. In this way, Filipinos also have a national identity that is purely their own- one that is unrelated to Spain.
I must admit, I have mistaken a few Filipinos for Latinos and vise versa. I know that they are on two different sides of the globe so they are two very separate cultures. However, after attending lecture today, I learned that my assumptions did have some justification. The three centuries of Spanish occupation of the Philippines under the Hapsburg dynasty proved very influential on the region but the Filipinos maintained a strong, separate identity. The perspectives that the article highlights are very insightful and provide various analyses on the relationship between Hispanics and Filipinos. While one suggests that the term "Hispanic" addresses people of Latin American or Spanish descent, the other applies the term to people outside of those two regions to include the colonies and areas the Spain occupied. The other offers a mix of the two and says that Filipinos can be classified as Hispanic in some aspects in their culture while others are strictly unique to the Philippines. Because there was not a huge migration of Spaniards over to the Philippines during occupation like there was to Latin America during the colonial era, the Spanish influence was not as strong and Filipinos were able to maintain a unique culture. However, the mix of the two backgrounds had an impact on language, religion and traditions. The article mentions that the Philippines are highly devout Catholics, an obvious result of Spanish Occupation. However, many do not speak Spanish today, which is a sign that they did not completely assimilate to Spain's culture. Also, their similar appearance could be explained by the interracial mixing that occurred during the period, which lasted through the generations to today. However, I believe that these two peoples are very different but the impact of the Spanish on the Filipinos can be distinguished through many aspects of the Filipino lifestyle.
This week in lecture we looked at the rise of Spain as a World Power in the 16th century--due, in part, to exploration and conquest. Furthermore, it is establish that Spain transformed from marginality to an influential, powerful country within the span of fifty years. While Columbus's voyage was not initially recognized, the importance of exploration and conquest increased after Magellan and Elcano circumnavigated the globe for the first time and after Cortés and Pizarro conquered the Aztec and Inca Empire, respectively. Subsequently, Spain was seen upon as a definite World Power, for by the middle of the 16th century, the majority of the Northern and Southern Hemispheres were explored and the conquest and colonization of the Americas occurred. Relative to this week's readings, the article I found the most interesting was the one regarding the 'real' ethnicity of Filipinos entitled "Are Filipinos Hispanic?" Fundamentally, this article addresses whether Filipinos can be considered as Hispanics or not. Since Filipino culture today contains many similarities with Spanish culture (e.g., Christianity and the Roman Catholic Religion, Spanish surnames, Spanish cultural traditions, and Spanish words in their language), many may find it quite difficult to answer the question with a simple 'yes' or 'no.' According to Dr. Barbara S. Gaerlan, an interviewee in the article, she states that the answer can either be 'yes,' 'no,' or even 'yes and no.' All of this can be attributed to how one defines Hispanic. According to the US Census Bureau, the definition of Hispanic is essentially one who is of Hispanic, Latino or Spanish origin and speaks Spanish as their main language. By this definition, one can then decipher that Filipinos are not Hispanic. However, it is imperative to note that Hispanic can also be defined as those pertaining to countries that have been colonized by Spain due to historical influences, notwithstanding their global location or current language. Without hesitation--through this definition--a separate argument can be established and conclude that Filipinos are technically Hispanic. Moreover, in lecture we also talked about how the Philippines was, in fact, conquered by Spain from 1565-1570 by Philip II. After conquering half of the Philippines by 1570, the city of Manila was shortly founded and by the end of the 16th century, it had become a trading empire (with China, India, and the East Indies). In essence, it is quite difficult to assess whether a nation's inhabitants can be considered the race of those who conquered them. At first, I find it rather silly to think that that is a reasonable conclusion, but we must also note that in the case of the Philippines, some aspects of the Spanish culture have completely embedded in Filipino tradition. Can the retention of Spanish culture be a decisive factor as to whether Filipinos should be considered Hispanic? Or was the acquisition of the Spanish culture by Filipinos a form of acculturation (even though their original customs were raided by the Spanish conquest of the Philippines)?
The article that caught most of my attention this week was the Philipino article. I never thought of filipinos as being hispanics because the term is usually used to refer to people that come from Latin America. When I first started reading the article I thought that yes Filipinos are hispanics because they are just like other countries in Latin America, they were conquered by the Spaniards, spoke the language, had the same religion and culture, but then again it depends on the way we define the word "hispanic." In my opinion it is a controversy because we can't just set a standard definition to the word "hispanic" many people would have different opinions on filipinos if we should consider them hispanic or not. Another one of the articles that surprised me was the inbreeding article. I can't believe people would mate with close siblings, like uncles and nieces to be on the less drastic side, in order to keep their "blue-blooded inheritance." Even if they saw all the genetic problems they were having and they still kept doing it, they practically killed themselves in their desire to keep their blue-blooded inheritance going.
Upon reading the article “Are Filipinos Hispanic?” I found it quite surprising to read about Filipinos being considered Hispanic because I had never thought of them being classified by this pan-ethnic label. Attending a high school with quite a lot of Filipino students, they were always identified as Asians by themselves and others. The reason for this is that the term “Hispanic” is so closely associated with the “Latino” term that we never usually view Asians as Hispanics. In the article, Dr. Barbara S. Gaerlan from UCLA mentions that the way a person views the definition of “Hispanic” is important to deciding what classification to take. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, a Hispanic is a person whose ancestors originated in Spain and/or Latin American countries and to the present speak Spanish. Under this definition, Filipinos are not Hispanic since they are from an Asian country and for the most part speak Tagalog. However, if countries colonized by Spain are Hispanic, then Filipinos can be considered Hispanic since as we learned in lecture, Spain conquered the Philippines in 1865 and ruled it for more than 300 years. As a result, Spain influenced the Philippines in music, religion, culture, and language during this period of time. Dr. Kevin L. Nadal of the City University of New York shares that in earlier censuses and other surveys Filipinos were classified as Hispanics while nowadays they belong to the Asian American category. Due to the similarities between Latinos/Hispanics and Filipinos, Filipinos often get mistaken for Hispanics nowadays. This confusion might have spurred from the fact that the Philippines had contact with Latin America specifically with Mexico with the Manila galleon that went from Manila to Acapulco, Mexico during the 16th and 19th centuries. I am certain that this annual voyage took some Mexican influence to the Philippines. Overall, to me Filipinos are not Hispanic but rather Asian, yet as Dr. Barbara said, each person’s point of view depends on the stand they take based on the “Hispanic” definition.
In lecture we spoke briefly and short about Cervantes and his novel Don Quixote. There is an article titled, “Regarding Cervantes, Multicultural Dreamer” from the New York Times which I tried to relate to the lecture. The only aspect that I figure related was the expulsion portion of the article and lecture. The Muslims were not yet expulsed from the Peninsula for the first half of the book. After 1492, Cervantes then spoke about the expulsion of the Muslims which had a great impact of the population and contributed to depopulation. I have no background information on Cervantes, so I only have the point of view from lecture and this article. On another note, Torrecilla mentions the stereotypes of the Spaniards which include being lazy. This idea of laziness ties into the article, “Spanish stereotypes: They love siestas.” The article speaks about siestas and their impact on the society. Now, that the Spaniards don’t have their afternoon naps with siestas then they are sleep deprived. It seems like it plays a great part in the norm in Spain to sleep in the afternoon. It can kinda tie to being lazy, complaining about the need to sleep in the middle of the day. I guess it kinda ties into the cultural aspect of Spain as well. The Article about Filipino's being Hispanic caught my attention as well, however, that depends on the person who identifies with being Hispanic or not. It's a choice i'm assuming.
After reading the article " Are Filipinos Hispanic?" I was surprised that an Asian country would consider the pan-ethnic label of "Hispanic". The definition of "Hispanic" has a broad definition based on individual identification, but the fact that Philippines are still considering and questioning their identity as Hispanic, really reiterates Spain's influence and power imprinted across the world. The fact that Philippines played a huge role in progressing Spain's trade empire, Manila Galleon, serves a major constituency in Spanish identity. The fact that they continue to inhibit the legacy of the Spanish culture in their social, personal, and spiritually well-being is a cultural compromise that accepts and acknowledge the "Hispanic" identity.
What I found interesting this week is that Spanish rules of the 16th century followed a trend of keeping their power with the people they are closed to. This meant marrying with eachothers family or appointing their people to high posts. In relation to this weeks reading, this trend was apparent when Charles 1 was appointed as ruler of the Catholic Monarchs kingdom. Charles 1 was the son of Juana who was the daughter of the Catholic Monarchs. This shows how the rulers maintained their power of their kingdoms by keeping the power between the family. In my opinion, this makes sense because at the end of the day the only ones you can trust more than strangers or friends are family members. Charles 1 had not been raised in Spain, he was educated in Flanders, and when he arrived in Spain he did not speak Spanish correctly. People began to go against him for that fact and also because he appointed foreigners from Flemish to high posts. This upset the people because he did not elect Spaniards to high posts. This comes back to the same idea that Spanish rulers followed the trend of keeping their power between people of their own kind or people who they trust, in order to maintain their power and not be betrayed. In the article, “Inbreeding caused demise of the Spanish Habsburg dynasty, new study reveals”, this same idea is presented because it shows how European rulers would marry between family in order to keep their power. However, doing this caused serious health problems, bringing its own extinction through inbreeding. They state how Charles II suffered from various serious health problems due to the fact that his parents were a product of inbreeding between family members.
The article "are all Filipinos Hispanics?" was very informative as it confirmed some of the thoughtsthat I had. The article explains just how the Filipinos person can classify themselves either as pan American or Hispanic. As we learn in class Spain had several territories and the Phillipines was one of their most important forts. What I did not know was that the United States had an influence on the island and that explains why English is their national language along with Tagalog. This knowledge of both languages makes the Filipinos very common with the Hispanic population in the United States, which makes them relate to Hispanics more. Dr. Nadal, in the article, says that the Spanish names, culture, catholicism, and family values are common between both groups of people, and I agree as I have seen that first hand when they welcome me into their homes. The reason why Filipinos may not be considered Hispanic is because of their different traits but if one were to see the other aspects more specifically the cultural ones, they can see that they are the same. The article says that the Filipinos can choose what he or she classifies under, which shows just how rich in culture the people of the Phillipines are.
The article that caught my attention the most this week was “Are Filipinos Hispanic?” I know that Hispanic is a term used mostly in the United States and for the most part if refers to people being associated with Spain. During this week’s lectured I was reminded that the Philippines were also at one point a colony of Spain and that it was actually named after King Philip II. After looking a bit more into this I realize that although the Americas were colonized earlier than the Philippines, the Philippines were under Spanish rule for a longer period of time, although there was not as much contact between the people. The lack of contact can be seen in some of the cultural aspects and the language. The majority of the former Spanish colonies in Latin America now speak Spanish as their main language while in the Philippines only a few people speak it, although Tagalog has some Spanish influences. When it comes down to it I think that Filipinos identifying with the term Hispanic is more of a personal preference. Just like there are some people who prefer to be referred to as Latino rather than Hispanic, I think there are some Filipinos who identify with the term Hispanic and others who don’t. It was interesting to be reminded that there are other cultures and places that were under Spanish rule especially because whenever I think about Spanish colonies, the only ones that come to mind are the ones in Latin America.
Although all articles were very interesting this week the one that caught my attention the most was the article about Cervantes and his famous novel Don Quijote. It was quite interesting to see the critical analysis that was provided about this novel in particular the analysis towards the underlying reflection of Spain and its continual conflict with Jews and Moors. Like mentioned in lecture, Don Quijote is one of the most famous and greatest novels of literature but being that it is highly esteemed, details such as the misplacement of historical events and judgmental stereotyping of Moors and Jews that reflect the general Christian-Spain view are highly gone unnoticed. Another detail that was quite interesting was that it was proposed that Cervantes might have been of converso origin making it possible that all the critiques about these cultures might have been written in attempts to legitimize his own identity as a Christian-Spaniard to be able to publish his novel. Although this may be true, the continual allusions to Judaism can be a reflection of his own acknowledgement of his ancestry.
The lecture from Monday was particularly interesting to me because I did not know that the Philippines were originally conquered and colonized by Spain; I had sort of always figured that the U.S. had been the ones to colonize there, since I knew the Philippines had/has close ties with the U.S. The Philippines were named after the King of Spain at the time, King Phillip II (1565-1570). The article, “Are Filipinos Hispanic?” really intrigued me, since the definition of Hispanic as we defined in class was “any person descendant from people of Spain and/or Latin America”. It was a little strange to think of the Philippines as Hispanic, mainly because we associate them as part of Asia. To learn that they have a lot of similar customs as many of us Hispanics do really shows the impact Spain had on the “New World”. I think it was really important to identify the different perspectives of the Filipino community on this issue. While the newer generations do not identify themselves as Hispanic, the older ones who still hold on to Spanish tradition or customs do identify their Hispanic descent, and yet there is still another group who thinks to be both. The latter one, I think, is the most sensible one; it acknowledges Spain’s role in its history yet it realizes times have changed and that heritage is being lost.
The article I found most interesting this week was “Regarding Cervantes, Multicultural Dreamer.” I read portions of Don Quixote in high school but didn’t understand most of the allusions to the Moors and Muslims. Now that I’m more familiar with Spanish history, I wonder if I would pick up on the historical references and Cervantes’ sympathy for the Moors that the article mentions. What I find most curious, however, is that Don Quixote has gained so much fame and recognition regardless of its promotion of values that were at odds with its time. Despite writing in a time during which reverse influence was taking place and Muslims were being expelled from Spain, Cervantes remained relatively open-minded. I wonder if the reason Don Quixote was not flat-out rejected by the public is because Cervantes was so cautious about his empathy, and not very explicit. But the fact that Cervantes potentially came from a converso family is especially surprising to me, since conversos were rejected for such a long time because they weren’t “old Christians”—and yet there’s the possibility that one of Spain’s most famous literary masterpieces was written by one of these conversos.
I found the article titled Regarding Cervantes, Multicultural Dreamer to be very interesting this week. I was unaware that Cervantes himself tried to claim that Don Quixote was originally written in Arabic, but I find it even more surprising, as the article details how it's extremely unlikely that it could have been written in Arabic. As Professor Torrecilla mentioned in lecture, Cervantes was captured by pirates and spent many years under Moorish captivity, yet doesn't display the apparent lack of trust towards Muslims. Furthermore, Cervantes describes in his stories of many Jews and Muslims present in Spain during his story, although most had been forced out of the country and almost all that had remained had been converted. Although his stories involve kidnap, converting, and betrayals, I found it intriguing that he wrote as a philosopher with an open mind and the decision to explore such actions and morals instead of as a warrior with a singular viewpoint. It would appear that Miguel Cervantes was indeed a very complex man who didn't share the same ideals with most of his time.
This week, I liked the article “Spanish stereotypes: They Love Siestas”.This week in lecture we have been discussing the stereotypes of Spaniards during the 16th to 17th centuries. Although in the 15th and 16th centuries in times of the Catholic Monarchs, Spain was perceived as strong, united by religion, first in exploration, and a dominant world power, the stereotype of Spain changed a lot in a short period of time. IN the 16th to 17th centuries, around the time of Philip II, Spaniards were perceived as proud, religious, sober, resistant to adversities, grave, distant, reserved, courageous and cruel, and finally, lazy (J. Torrecilla, Lecture Feb. 14). Spain had a lot of prestige in Europe, but the people were not perceived as hardworking and kind. This article touched on the changing stereotypes in Spain in the modern day. We already know from previous articles that Spain is not the same unified country that it was, and the religious beliefs and common ideas have changed. However, the concept of the siesta, or a mid-day nap, is something that seems very characteristic of Spain- in fact, I was looking forward to taking some siestas this fall when I study abroad. After reading this article, I realize I was wrong. The Spaniards are not taking siestas like they used to, and only one in ten Spaniards takes a daily nap. Their economy is changing and is more demanding than it once was, and people do not have the time in their workdays to take naps. People are sleep deprived, and multinational office hours with a very short lunch break are the norm now. It is interesting that Spain’s stereotype is likely changing, and people are not “lazy” like they were once thought to be, and the whole image of Spain has changed. If someone asked me now, “what do you expect Spaniards will be like?” I would have no idea. All of my ideas of Spanish stereotypes or what I thought modern Spain is like are wrong, and Spain has changed a lot. I guess I will not be taking siestas after all!
The article “Are Filipinos Hispanic?” got my attention right away. I always notice some similarities between Latinos and Filipinos and wonder why this is so? After lecture and reading this article, I realized that it is because Spain colonized the Philippines for hundreds of years. Just as Spain influenced a lot of aspects of Latin America, it also influenced Filipino life. In fact, the name “Philippines” is from King Philip. The most similar thing I find between Filipinos and Latinos is language. I always remember in high school hearing Filipinos talk in Tagalog and hearing some familiar words from Spanish. I always wondered how an Asian region and language can have similarities to a Latin region. I think it is very interesting to see how cultures mixed and created new subcultures in the beginning stages of colonization. However I also think it is important that Filipinos still held on to their own Asian culture. I think it is a good thing that they were not completely “Spaniard-ized.” This article also makes me wonder what other culture mixes and influences there are in the world. Although colonization and colonialism commonly has a negative aspect, I believe the best part is the “convivencia” that occurs. In addition, I always meet Filipinos with Spanish names, either first, last or both, and now I know why.
As history has demonstrated, many stereotypes of Spain have developed over time. In my opinion, stereotypes are created in order to generalize a community or group of people to give a broad and for the most part inaccurate sense of the people. How these stereotypes came about is a long line of historical accounts as well as common opinions. As mentioned in lecture, during the 16th and 17th century Spaniards were perceived as extremely proud, sober, resistant to adversity as well as lazy among others. These stereotypes along with the fact that the siesta originated or was named by Spaniards that Spaniards sleep a lot could have played a part in the recent stereotype. However, research has shown otherwise. As mentioned in the article “Spanish stereotypes: They love siestas,” Spaniards are not living up to their stereotype of napping daily. Even though, this could’ve been the case at one point in time, Spaniards are no longer the leader in rest. Laziness can sometimes be associated with sleep. This brings up an interesting point in the historical trajectory of Spain’s stereotypes. As I mentioned before, in the 16th and 17th centuries, Spain was associated with laziness due to the higher ranking officials who were too proud to work or be involved in trading because it was seen as negative or associated with slavery. Would this association in history be a precedent to the siesta? Moreover, the idea that sleep is no longer a priority for Spaniards is due to the growing modern demands of their economy.
I thought the "Are Filipinos Hispanic?" article and lecture portion was very elucidating. In fact, one of my close friends from back home is Filipina, but her family embraced Hispanic culture. I never really understood this because in my mind, I would categorize the Phillipines as part of the Asian Pacific Islands so I believe them to be Asian. So whenever I would see this kind of heterogenous cultural mix of Hispanic/Asian in Filipino households, I wouldn't understand how the Hispanic part got there in the first place. Now that I've read this article, I feel much more informed and realize that in truth, to be Filipino also means to be Hispanic. What I got from the article is that the two seem to be intertwined because although the Phillipines are geographically distant from Spain, the Hispanic culture still prevades in their language, food, and customs so that it is inseparable from Phillipine culture. This actually reminds me of the Muslim influence in Spain because for example, Spanish derives much of its language from Arabic and Latin, so that it is hard to separate the two. Is the word "alegbra" Spanish or Arabic? This resembles the part in the article when they talk about Tagalog having spanish words as well. Obviously, cultural and ethnic identity are not black and white. Both are fluid notions that are composites of many different "puzzle pieces". To be Spanish is also to be Muslim. To be Filipino is also to be Hispanic.
I think the article "Are Filipinos Hispanics?" is very interesting considering the connection the philippines, Spain, and Acapulco. It is strange how the identification of being Hispanic changes with the context it's being used in. The article believes that the answer to this question is both yes and no. I believe that there needs to be a specific interpretation set up for the concept of being Hispanic. It is crucial because it can help with finding more about one's past and gives an even more diverse outlook on the Hispanic identity.
ReplyDeleteThis week, I was particularly fascinated by the article that discussed the national identity of Filipinos. Although I had previously learned in lecture that the Spanish colonized and controlled the Philippines for a significant period of time, I had never thought about actually classifying Filipinos as Hispanic. The article offered three different perspectives on Filipino national identity. First, it suggested that if the word Hispanic is used to refer to people who’s ancestors lived in Spain or Latin America, then Filipinos would not be considered ‘Hispanic’. Comparatively, it proposed that if the word ‘Hispanic’ is used to refer to people who live in countries that were colonized and greatly influenced by Spain, then the Filipinos people would indeed be classified as Hispanic. I tend to agree with the third perspective that suggests that Filipinos are Hispanic in some ways and not Hispanic in others. During Spain’s period of colonial expansion, the nation created a global empire that extended into both the Northern and Southern Hemisphere; it is hard to ignore the vast influence Spain had on the various peoples living under its rule in the 16th Century. Thus, the Spanish colonization of the region influenced Filipino culture, language, infrastructure, and religion. On the other hand, today, most Filipinos do not speak Spanish and do not have any distinct ties to Spain. In this way, Filipinos also have a national identity that is purely their own- one that is unrelated to Spain.
ReplyDeleteI must admit, I have mistaken a few Filipinos for Latinos and vise versa. I know that they are on two different sides of the globe so they are two very separate cultures. However, after attending lecture today, I learned that my assumptions did have some justification. The three centuries of Spanish occupation of the Philippines under the Hapsburg dynasty proved very influential on the region but the Filipinos maintained a strong, separate identity. The perspectives that the article highlights are very insightful and provide various analyses on the relationship between Hispanics and Filipinos. While one suggests that the term "Hispanic" addresses people of Latin American or Spanish descent, the other applies the term to people outside of those two regions to include the colonies and areas the Spain occupied. The other offers a mix of the two and says that Filipinos can be classified as Hispanic in some aspects in their culture while others are strictly unique to the Philippines. Because there was not a huge migration of Spaniards over to the Philippines during occupation like there was to Latin America during the colonial era, the Spanish influence was not as strong and Filipinos were able to maintain a unique culture. However, the mix of the two backgrounds had an impact on language, religion and traditions. The article mentions that the Philippines are highly devout Catholics, an obvious result of Spanish Occupation. However, many do not speak Spanish today, which is a sign that they did not completely assimilate to Spain's culture. Also, their similar appearance could be explained by the interracial mixing that occurred during the period, which lasted through the generations to today. However, I believe that these two peoples are very different but the impact of the Spanish on the Filipinos can be distinguished through many aspects of the Filipino lifestyle.
ReplyDeleteThis week in lecture we looked at the rise of Spain as a World Power in the 16th century--due, in part, to exploration and conquest. Furthermore, it is establish that Spain transformed from marginality to an influential, powerful country within the span of fifty years. While Columbus's voyage was not initially recognized, the importance of exploration and conquest increased after Magellan and Elcano circumnavigated the globe for the first time and after Cortés and Pizarro conquered the Aztec and Inca Empire, respectively. Subsequently, Spain was seen upon as a definite World Power, for by the middle of the 16th century, the majority of the Northern and Southern Hemispheres were explored and the conquest and colonization of the Americas occurred. Relative to this week's readings, the article I found the most interesting was the one regarding the 'real' ethnicity of Filipinos entitled "Are Filipinos Hispanic?" Fundamentally, this article addresses whether Filipinos can be considered as Hispanics or not. Since Filipino culture today contains many similarities with Spanish culture (e.g., Christianity and the Roman Catholic Religion, Spanish surnames, Spanish cultural traditions, and Spanish words in their language), many may find it quite difficult to answer the question with a simple 'yes' or 'no.' According to Dr. Barbara S. Gaerlan, an interviewee in the article, she states that the answer can either be 'yes,' 'no,' or even 'yes and no.' All of this can be attributed to how one defines Hispanic. According to the US Census Bureau, the definition of Hispanic is essentially one who is of Hispanic, Latino or Spanish origin and speaks Spanish as their main language. By this definition, one can then decipher that Filipinos are not Hispanic. However, it is imperative to note that Hispanic can also be defined as those pertaining to countries that have been colonized by Spain due to historical influences, notwithstanding their global location or current language. Without hesitation--through this definition--a separate argument can be established and conclude that Filipinos are technically Hispanic. Moreover, in lecture we also talked about how the Philippines was, in fact, conquered by Spain from 1565-1570 by Philip II. After conquering half of the Philippines by 1570, the city of Manila was shortly founded and by the end of the 16th century, it had become a trading empire (with China, India, and the East Indies). In essence, it is quite difficult to assess whether a nation's inhabitants can be considered the race of those who conquered them. At first, I find it rather silly to think that that is a reasonable conclusion, but we must also note that in the case of the Philippines, some aspects of the Spanish culture have completely embedded in Filipino tradition. Can the retention of Spanish culture be a decisive factor as to whether Filipinos should be considered Hispanic? Or was the acquisition of the Spanish culture by Filipinos a form of acculturation (even though their original customs were raided by the Spanish conquest of the Philippines)?
ReplyDeleteJose Alberto Rojas
The article that caught most of my attention this week was the Philipino article. I never thought of filipinos as being hispanics because the term is usually used to refer to people that come from Latin America. When I first started reading the article I thought that yes Filipinos are hispanics because they are just like other countries in Latin America, they were conquered by the Spaniards, spoke the language, had the same religion and culture, but then again it depends on the way we define the word "hispanic." In my opinion it is a controversy because we can't just set a standard definition to the word "hispanic" many people would have different opinions on filipinos if we should consider them hispanic or not. Another one of the articles that surprised me was the inbreeding article. I can't believe people would mate with close siblings, like uncles and nieces to be on the less drastic side, in order to keep their "blue-blooded inheritance." Even if they saw all the genetic problems they were having and they still kept doing it, they practically killed themselves in their desire to keep their blue-blooded inheritance going.
ReplyDeleteUpon reading the article “Are Filipinos Hispanic?” I found it quite surprising to read about Filipinos being considered Hispanic because I had never thought of them being classified by this pan-ethnic label. Attending a high school with quite a lot of Filipino students, they were always identified as Asians by themselves and others. The reason for this is that the term “Hispanic” is so closely associated with the “Latino” term that we never usually view Asians as Hispanics. In the article, Dr. Barbara S. Gaerlan from UCLA mentions that the way a person views the definition of “Hispanic” is important to deciding what classification to take. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, a Hispanic is a person whose ancestors originated in Spain and/or Latin American countries and to the present speak Spanish. Under this definition, Filipinos are not Hispanic since they are from an Asian country and for the most part speak Tagalog. However, if countries colonized by Spain are Hispanic, then Filipinos can be considered Hispanic since as we learned in lecture, Spain conquered the Philippines in 1865 and ruled it for more than 300 years. As a result, Spain influenced the Philippines in music, religion, culture, and language during this period of time. Dr. Kevin L. Nadal of the City University of New York shares that in earlier censuses and other surveys Filipinos were classified as Hispanics while nowadays they belong to the Asian American category. Due to the similarities between Latinos/Hispanics and Filipinos, Filipinos often get mistaken for Hispanics nowadays. This confusion might have spurred from the fact that the Philippines had contact with Latin America specifically with Mexico with the Manila galleon that went from Manila to Acapulco, Mexico during the 16th and 19th centuries. I am certain that this annual voyage took some Mexican influence to the Philippines. Overall, to me Filipinos are not Hispanic but rather Asian, yet as Dr. Barbara said, each person’s point of view depends on the stand they take based on the “Hispanic” definition.
ReplyDeleteIn lecture we spoke briefly and short about Cervantes and his novel Don Quixote. There is an article titled, “Regarding Cervantes, Multicultural Dreamer” from the New York Times which I tried to relate to the lecture. The only aspect that I figure related was the expulsion portion of the article and lecture. The Muslims were not yet expulsed from the Peninsula for the first half of the book. After 1492, Cervantes then spoke about the expulsion of the Muslims which had a great impact of the population and contributed to depopulation. I have no background information on Cervantes, so I only have the point of view from lecture and this article.
ReplyDeleteOn another note, Torrecilla mentions the stereotypes of the Spaniards which include being lazy. This idea of laziness ties into the article, “Spanish stereotypes: They love siestas.” The article speaks about siestas and their impact on the society. Now, that the Spaniards don’t have their afternoon naps with siestas then they are sleep deprived. It seems like it plays a great part in the norm in Spain to sleep in the afternoon. It can kinda tie to being lazy, complaining about the need to sleep in the middle of the day. I guess it kinda ties into the cultural aspect of Spain as well.
The Article about Filipino's being Hispanic caught my attention as well, however, that depends on the person who identifies with being Hispanic or not. It's a choice i'm assuming.
After reading the article " Are Filipinos Hispanic?" I was surprised that an Asian country would consider the pan-ethnic label of "Hispanic". The definition of "Hispanic" has a broad definition based on individual identification, but the fact that Philippines are still considering and questioning their identity as Hispanic, really reiterates Spain's influence and power imprinted across the world. The fact that Philippines played a huge role in progressing Spain's trade empire, Manila Galleon, serves a major constituency in Spanish identity. The fact that they continue to inhibit the legacy of the Spanish culture in their social, personal, and spiritually well-being is a cultural compromise that accepts and acknowledge the "Hispanic" identity.
ReplyDeleteWhat I found interesting this week is that Spanish rules of the 16th century followed a trend of keeping their power with the people they are closed to. This meant marrying with eachothers family or appointing their people to high posts. In relation to this weeks reading, this trend was apparent when Charles 1 was appointed as ruler of the Catholic Monarchs kingdom. Charles 1 was the son of Juana who was the daughter of the Catholic Monarchs. This shows how the rulers maintained their power of their kingdoms by keeping the power between the family. In my opinion, this makes sense because at the end of the day the only ones you can trust more than strangers or friends are family members. Charles 1 had not been raised in Spain, he was educated in Flanders, and when he arrived in Spain he did not speak Spanish correctly. People began to go against him for that fact and also because he appointed foreigners from Flemish to high posts. This upset the people because he did not elect Spaniards to high posts. This comes back to the same idea that Spanish rulers followed the trend of keeping their power between people of their own kind or people who they trust, in order to maintain their power and not be betrayed. In the article, “Inbreeding caused demise of the Spanish Habsburg dynasty, new study reveals”, this same idea is presented because it shows how European rulers would marry between family in order to keep their power. However, doing this caused serious health problems, bringing its own extinction through inbreeding. They state how Charles II suffered from various serious health problems due to the fact that his parents were a product of inbreeding between family members.
ReplyDeleteThe article "are all Filipinos Hispanics?" was very informative as it confirmed some of the thoughtsthat I had. The article explains just how the Filipinos person can classify themselves either as pan American or Hispanic. As we learn in class Spain had several territories and the Phillipines was one of their most important forts. What I did not know was that the United States had an influence on the island and that explains why English is their national language along with Tagalog. This knowledge of both languages makes the Filipinos very common with the Hispanic population in the United States, which makes them relate to Hispanics more. Dr. Nadal, in the article, says that the Spanish names, culture, catholicism, and family values are common between both groups of people, and I agree as I have seen that first hand when they welcome me into their homes. The reason why Filipinos may not be considered Hispanic is because of their different traits but if one were to see the other aspects more specifically the cultural ones, they can see that they are the same. The article says that the Filipinos can choose what he or she classifies under, which shows just how rich in culture the people of the Phillipines are.
ReplyDeleteThe article that caught my attention the most this week was “Are Filipinos Hispanic?” I know that Hispanic is a term used mostly in the United States and for the most part if refers to people being associated with Spain. During this week’s lectured I was reminded that the Philippines were also at one point a colony of Spain and that it was actually named after King Philip II. After looking a bit more into this I realize that although the Americas were colonized earlier than the Philippines, the Philippines were under Spanish rule for a longer period of time, although there was not as much contact between the people. The lack of contact can be seen in some of the cultural aspects and the language. The majority of the former Spanish colonies in Latin America now speak Spanish as their main language while in the Philippines only a few people speak it, although Tagalog has some Spanish influences. When it comes down to it I think that Filipinos identifying with the term Hispanic is more of a personal preference. Just like there are some people who prefer to be referred to as Latino rather than Hispanic, I think there are some Filipinos who identify with the term Hispanic and others who don’t. It was interesting to be reminded that there are other cultures and places that were under Spanish rule especially because whenever I think about Spanish colonies, the only ones that come to mind are the ones in Latin America.
ReplyDeleteAlthough all articles were very interesting this week the one that caught my attention the most was the article about Cervantes and his famous novel Don Quijote. It was quite interesting to see the critical analysis that was provided about this novel in particular the analysis towards the underlying reflection of Spain and its continual conflict with Jews and Moors. Like mentioned in lecture, Don Quijote is one of the most famous and greatest novels of literature but being that it is highly esteemed, details such as the misplacement of historical events and judgmental stereotyping of Moors and Jews that reflect the general Christian-Spain view are highly gone unnoticed. Another detail that was quite interesting was that it was proposed that Cervantes might have been of converso origin making it possible that all the critiques about these cultures might have been written in attempts to legitimize his own identity as a Christian-Spaniard to be able to publish his novel. Although this may be true, the continual allusions to Judaism can be a reflection of his own acknowledgement of his ancestry.
ReplyDeleteThe lecture from Monday was particularly interesting to me because I did not know that the Philippines were originally conquered and colonized by Spain; I had sort of always figured that the U.S. had been the ones to colonize there, since I knew the Philippines had/has close ties with the U.S. The Philippines were named after the King of Spain at the time, King Phillip II (1565-1570). The article, “Are Filipinos Hispanic?” really intrigued me, since the definition of Hispanic as we defined in class was “any person descendant from people of Spain and/or Latin America”. It was a little strange to think of the Philippines as Hispanic, mainly because we associate them as part of Asia. To learn that they have a lot of similar customs as many of us Hispanics do really shows the impact Spain had on the “New World”. I think it was really important to identify the different perspectives of the Filipino community on this issue. While the newer generations do not identify themselves as Hispanic, the older ones who still hold on to Spanish tradition or customs do identify their Hispanic descent, and yet there is still another group who thinks to be both. The latter one, I think, is the most sensible one; it acknowledges Spain’s role in its history yet it realizes times have changed and that heritage is being lost.
ReplyDeleteThe article I found most interesting this week was “Regarding Cervantes, Multicultural Dreamer.” I read portions of Don Quixote in high school but didn’t understand most of the allusions to the Moors and Muslims. Now that I’m more familiar with Spanish history, I wonder if I would pick up on the historical references and Cervantes’ sympathy for the Moors that the article mentions. What I find most curious, however, is that Don Quixote has gained so much fame and recognition regardless of its promotion of values that were at odds with its time. Despite writing in a time during which reverse influence was taking place and Muslims were being expelled from Spain, Cervantes remained relatively open-minded. I wonder if the reason Don Quixote was not flat-out rejected by the public is because Cervantes was so cautious about his empathy, and not very explicit. But the fact that Cervantes potentially came from a converso family is especially surprising to me, since conversos were rejected for such a long time because they weren’t “old Christians”—and yet there’s the possibility that one of Spain’s most famous literary masterpieces was written by one of these conversos.
ReplyDeleteI found the article titled Regarding Cervantes, Multicultural Dreamer to be very interesting this week. I was unaware that Cervantes himself tried to claim that Don Quixote was originally written in Arabic, but I find it even more surprising, as the article details how it's extremely unlikely that it could have been written in Arabic. As Professor Torrecilla mentioned in lecture, Cervantes was captured by pirates and spent many years under Moorish captivity, yet doesn't display the apparent lack of trust towards Muslims. Furthermore, Cervantes describes in his stories of many Jews and Muslims present in Spain during his story, although most had been forced out of the country and almost all that had remained had been converted. Although his stories involve kidnap, converting, and betrayals, I found it intriguing that he wrote as a philosopher with an open mind and the decision to explore such actions and morals instead of as a warrior with a singular viewpoint. It would appear that Miguel Cervantes was indeed a very complex man who didn't share the same ideals with most of his time.
ReplyDeleteThis week, I liked the article “Spanish stereotypes: They Love Siestas”.This week in lecture we have been discussing the stereotypes of Spaniards during the 16th to 17th centuries. Although in the 15th and 16th centuries in times of the Catholic Monarchs, Spain was perceived as strong, united by religion, first in exploration, and a dominant world power, the stereotype of Spain changed a lot in a short period of time. IN the 16th to 17th centuries, around the time of Philip II, Spaniards were perceived as proud, religious, sober, resistant to adversities, grave, distant, reserved, courageous and cruel, and finally, lazy (J. Torrecilla, Lecture Feb. 14). Spain had a lot of prestige in Europe, but the people were not perceived as hardworking and kind. This article touched on the changing stereotypes in Spain in the modern day. We already know from previous articles that Spain is not the same unified country that it was, and the religious beliefs and common ideas have changed. However, the concept of the siesta, or a mid-day nap, is something that seems very characteristic of Spain- in fact, I was looking forward to taking some siestas this fall when I study abroad. After reading this article, I realize I was wrong. The Spaniards are not taking siestas like they used to, and only one in ten Spaniards takes a daily nap. Their economy is changing and is more demanding than it once was, and people do not have the time in their workdays to take naps. People are sleep deprived, and multinational office hours with a very short lunch break are the norm now. It is interesting that Spain’s stereotype is likely changing, and people are not “lazy” like they were once thought to be, and the whole image of Spain has changed. If someone asked me now, “what do you expect Spaniards will be like?” I would have no idea. All of my ideas of Spanish stereotypes or what I thought modern Spain is like are wrong, and Spain has changed a lot. I guess I will not be taking siestas after all!
ReplyDeleteThe article “Are Filipinos Hispanic?” got my attention right away. I always notice some similarities between Latinos and Filipinos and wonder why this is so? After lecture and reading this article, I realized that it is because Spain colonized the Philippines for hundreds of years. Just as Spain influenced a lot of aspects of Latin America, it also influenced Filipino life. In fact, the name “Philippines” is from King Philip. The most similar thing I find between Filipinos and Latinos is language. I always remember in high school hearing Filipinos talk in Tagalog and hearing some familiar words from Spanish. I always wondered how an Asian region and language can have similarities to a Latin region. I think it is very interesting to see how cultures mixed and created new subcultures in the beginning stages of colonization. However I also think it is important that Filipinos still held on to their own Asian culture. I think it is a good thing that they were not completely “Spaniard-ized.” This article also makes me wonder what other culture mixes and influences there are in the world. Although colonization and colonialism commonly has a negative aspect, I believe the best part is the “convivencia” that occurs. In addition, I always meet Filipinos with Spanish names, either first, last or both, and now I know why.
ReplyDeleteAs history has demonstrated, many stereotypes of Spain have developed over time.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, stereotypes are created in order to generalize a community or group of people to give a broad and for the most part inaccurate sense of the people.
How these stereotypes came about is a long line of historical accounts as well as common opinions. As mentioned in lecture, during the 16th and 17th century Spaniards were perceived as extremely proud, sober, resistant to adversity as well as lazy among others. These stereotypes along with the fact that the siesta originated or was named by Spaniards that Spaniards sleep a lot could have played a part in the recent stereotype. However, research has shown otherwise. As mentioned in the article “Spanish stereotypes: They love siestas,” Spaniards are not living up to their stereotype of napping daily. Even though, this could’ve been the case at one point in time, Spaniards are no longer the leader in rest. Laziness can sometimes be associated with sleep. This brings up an interesting point in the historical trajectory of Spain’s stereotypes. As I mentioned before, in the 16th and 17th centuries, Spain was associated with laziness due to the higher ranking officials who were too proud to work or be involved in trading because it was seen as negative or associated with slavery. Would this association in history be a precedent to the siesta? Moreover, the idea that sleep is no longer a priority for Spaniards is due to the growing modern demands of their economy.
Yvette De la Cruz
I thought the "Are Filipinos Hispanic?" article and lecture portion was very elucidating. In fact, one of my close friends from back home is Filipina, but her family embraced Hispanic culture. I never really understood this because in my mind, I would categorize the Phillipines as part of the Asian Pacific Islands so I believe them to be Asian. So whenever I would see this kind of heterogenous cultural mix of Hispanic/Asian in Filipino households, I wouldn't understand how the Hispanic part got there in the first place. Now that I've read this article, I feel much more informed and realize that in truth, to be Filipino also means to be Hispanic. What I got from the article is that the two seem to be intertwined because although the Phillipines are geographically distant from Spain, the Hispanic culture still prevades in their language, food, and customs so that it is inseparable from Phillipine culture. This actually reminds me of the Muslim influence in Spain because for example, Spanish derives much of its language from Arabic and Latin, so that it is hard to separate the two. Is the word "alegbra" Spanish or Arabic? This resembles the part in the article when they talk about Tagalog having spanish words as well. Obviously, cultural and ethnic identity are not black and white. Both are fluid notions that are composites of many different "puzzle pieces". To be Spanish is also to be Muslim. To be Filipino is also to be Hispanic.
ReplyDelete