GE9 – Life and Works of Rizal
Worksheet 6
Name: Arlene Joy S. Garcia Schedule: 5:30-7:30 pm
Instruction: Give your interpretation of the following texts.
1. On Morga and Rizal’s view of Indio’s cuisine.
Views
Morga Their daily fare is composed of: rice crushed in wooden
pillars and when cooked is called morisqueta (this is the
staple throughout the land); cooked fish which they
have in abundance; pork, venison, mountain buffaloes
which they call carabaos, beef and fish which they know
is best when it has started to rot and stink (Retana 1909,
174).
Rizal This is another preoccupation of the Spaniards who, like
any other nation, treat food to which they are not
accustomed or is unknown to them with disgust. The
English, for example, feel horror to see a Spaniard eating
snails. To the Spaniard roast beef is repugnant and he
can- not understand how Steak Tartar or raw beef can
be eaten; the Chinese who have tahuri and eat shark
cannot stand Roquefort cheese etc. etc. This fish that
Morga mentions, that cannot be good until it begins to
rot, is bagoong [salted and fermented fish or shrimp
paste used as a sauce in Filipino cuisine] and those who
have eaten it and tasted it know that it neither is nor
should be rotten (Rizal 1890, 264).
Date: July 6, 2020
Interpretation
- Morga’s trying to convey is that every
country has their own taste and
preferences in cuisines. There are foods
that are the same but different in
process. In his account, he describe the
cuisine that Filipino prefer to eat is
called bagoong and it may look
disgusting, the indio’s eat it very well.
- In my own interpretation, Rizal describe
that every country has their own
delicacies and it depends on their
culture. When a certain nation is not
familiar with other country’s food they
do not patronizing it, instead they eat
what they used to. Just like in the
Philippines, bagoong for Filipinos is
delicious but for other countries it looks
disgusting. For us, we do not eat snails
because it is not in our culture to eat
snails.
GE9 – Life and Works of Rizal
Worksheet 6

2. On Blumentritt’s criticism of Rizal’s annotation in his introductory note in Rizal’s Morga

Blumentritt’s criticism
My great esteem for your notes does not impede me from - We all know that Rizal is known as historian. For me,
confessing that, more than once, I have observed that you Blumentritt noticed that Rizal committed mistakes in
participate in the error of many modern historians who censure judging the events in the past by what he observed only
the events of past centuries according to the concepts that in his present time. Also, Blumentritt doesn’t want Rizal
correspond to contemporary ideas. This should not be so. The to criticize Catholicism even though they didn’t do
historian should not impute to the men of the sixteenth century anything for reforms. He should just keep the critique
the broad horizon of ideas that moves the nineteenth century. about religious orders in the Philippines.
The second point with which I do not agree is against
Catholicism. I believe that you cannot find the origin of
numerous events regrettable for Spain and for the good name
of the European race in religion, but in the hard behavior and
abuses of many priests (xii)

3. On Isabelo de los Reyes’ comment on Rizal’s Morga

De lo Reyes’ comment Interpretation

But that very laudable patriotism of his, it seems to me, blinds - Delos Reyes wanted to emphasize that Rizal has
him at times, and as an historian ought to be rigorously conviction on what he thinks about something. He
impartial, the optimism of the said author [referring to Rizal] pointed that as historian, you must not rely only on one
turns out to be passionate in some points, taking exceptions of dimension but also to other perspective to fully know
the general rule, and vice-versa. The consensus among authors what that it mean.
who had no reason to lie in these cases ought to be taken into
account. The true character of that [pre-Hispanic] civilization
and what is still preserved of it in the present customs of the
people (Quoted in Rizal's reply to de los Reyes, La Solidaridad)
GE9 – Life and Works of Rizal
Worksheet 6

4. On Rizal’s sarcastic reply to de los Reyes’ comment of his annotation

Rizal’s reply Interpretation

I do not know how discreet it is to raise oneself as a judge - Rizal only fight for what is right and and doesn’t care
of others . . . [when] neither one or the other was an about what others think like Mr. Delos Reyes since
eyewitness or more or less an influential actor. But this, not all people have the same interpretation.
which in anyone else could be censured as vain
presumption, ceases to be so in Mr. Isabelo de los Reyes
who knows very well how to interpret the historians of the
Philippine
As I based my assertion on seven contemporary writers, I -On this part, Rizal trying to say that in everything that you
do not know if in this case, I shall be the exception and de write, you must accept criticism since it is inevitable and not
los Reyes the general rule. I know that the authority of de all people will agree to your perspective.
los Reyes is worth seven times more than mine; but with
my seven authors and he with his Fr. Rada, we can balance
ourselves, if he does not take offense... dealing with
historical facts, only the testimony of contemporaries can
be authori- tative, a testimony that ought to be subjected to
the processes of criti- cism (ibid.)