Philippine Political Caricature in the American Era (1900-1941)

SUMMARY

Philippine political cartoons gained full expression during the American era.
Filipino artists recorded national attitudes toward the coming of the Amercans as well as
the changing mores and times. Historian Alfred McCoy’s is professor of SE Asian
History at the U. Of Wisconsin at Madison where he also serves as director of the
politics & history of the opium trade. His extensive research in Philippine and American
achives provides a comprehensive background not only to the cartoons but to the
turbulent period as well. Artist-writer Alfredo Roces, who designed the book, contributes
an essay on Philippine graphic satire of the period. It gained awards such as; Philippine
Catholic Mass Media Award, for History 1986, Gintong Aklat Award (Manila), & Special
Citation for History, 1987.

 Vince Sotto, the publisher of the INDEPENDENT, a never missed a chance to

attack the catholic church

 In 1906, the Philippine Supreme Court had ruled that the Roman Catholic Church
was the legal owner of all disputed properties, thus stripping the nationalistic
Aglipayan Chruch of the Parish Churches it had occupied right after the
revolution.

 During the mid 19th century from Alejandro Roces, whose descendants became
publishes of the Manila Times, While Santa Cruz Church still stands, the
controversial parish house became a branch of Phil. Trust, a chruch owned bank.

 Fernando Amorsolo, gives the illustration his usual racist edge. While the corrupt
Filipino police man is shown with normal features, the chinese are caricatured as
emaciated, leering creatures more rodent than human.

 In 1917 a mysterious informant named Pedro Chua wrote the Philippines free
press alleging the senior police where accepting bribes from chinese gambling
houses in Binondo and Quiapo district.

 Vicente Sotto’s Independent insisted, in this editorial cartoon, that Chua’s

charges were accurate.

 Although the Independent’s cartoon depicts Harrison as a hero, his suggested

reform was hardly heroic. Despite the stern rhetoric, which obviously appealed to
the paper’s penchant for hyperbole. Harrison’s suggested reform was little more
than a temporary palliative.
  1908 the nationalist weekly “El Penacimiento” published an editorial filled Aves
de Rapina (birds of prey) which attacked the Philippine commisions’s secretary of
the interior, Dean C. Norcester for abusing his office to the exploit the country.

 Eventually the protest reached Malacanang Palace and Governor Francis B.

Harrison made a tentative move towards reform. In a letter to the Director
General of the civil service, the governor denounced the rapacious demans of
the landlords. He suggested passage of a bill which sets rents at 12% of
assessed value of the property.

Accounts pointed that the Philippine press has had a love-hate relationship with
political cartoons as only in 1985 has there been a published book on Phlippine
cartoons. The book of McCoy and Roces was the first one to legitimize cartoons as
sources of Filipino thoughts and views. Although the book only covered the period of
early American through the commonwealth, reaching the years before World War II, it
reflected on two cartoon themes: anti-American sentiments and the condemnation of
the rulling class. Interestingly, the book highlighted the mutual dependence of cartoons
to the commentaries of the news daillies where these were published. In effect, McCoy
and Roces highlighted the interwined role of the cartoonis and the writer in storytelling
history of those times.
The literature shows tension on the functions and purposes of political cartoons.
As a channel of information, it has the power to be perceived as a strong device in
creating perceptions. Through its modes of cynicism and satire, coupled with wit and
entertainment, political cartoons can create waves of effects to those who are negatively
portrayed and to those who see the portrayals. Some, however, feel that political
cartoons are dubious sources of information. Cartoons are collections of metaphorical
symbols that can be twisted and turned. Since the cartoons are products of the minds of
the cartoonists, then the symbols and images can mean different things to different
individuals. Furthermore, the use of humor also becomes the source of another layer of
doubt, especially if the cartoon is argued to be a source of insight and history. In a post
colonial Phlippines, however, political cartoons can also be sources of praise and
postivity.
Despite the differences in time periods, political cartoons have targeted the same
cause: to expose ills in society. Such ills are based on the on-going conditions of
nations, cultural groups, organizations, and event the artist him/herself. Moreover, the
rendering of political sentiments, too, in cartoons might be different from one cartoonist
to another as opinion in cartooning is diverse as the cartoonist and the newspaper
editorial boards. It appears, therefore, that in the subjective nature of political cartoons,
one can see how history has been shaped and nurtured.
As a part of the editorial pages, public opinion is highly espoused in political
cartoons where cartooning is seen as part of the documentary in the past. Political
cartoons have retained their stature as presenters of the will of the people. Seemingly,
Philippine political cartoons are valid historical instruments. Literature suggested that
the art works, when substantiated with official documents, can be useful in documenting
policies, developing historical books, and challenging already existing histories. If,
however, the political cartoons as historical materials do not contain substance, then
interpretation can be difficult.
It appears that if the historian does not know the medium, then he/she has no
right to use it. Cartoons will only become valid evidence only. If it is seen by a trained
eye. If historians do not perceive the meaning behind the dominant icons, then they
cannot equally use the powerful tools of sarcasm, exaggeration, satire, and art in the art
form. If, however, the historians know how to read through the visual and literary nature
of political cartoons, then imagine the vast knowledge it can provide them. The use for
example, of satire to exaggerate images that he public can relate to, can provide
sufficient cultural evidences on determing turning points history.
Proper interpretation of the texts is also needed in order for political cartoons to
aid in history writing. As a synthesis of art, literature, and history, political cartooning
becomes an effective vehicle in transporting social realities in time capsules. For
example, rise and fall of leaders can be verified using these forms. How leaders are
portrayed on the pages of newspapers, magazines, and the like are records on the
possible ineffciencies of those who are made into caricatures in effect, the portrayal of
the art form stemmed from various combinations of factors. Furthermore, since political
cartoons are not stand alone objects, the editorial that accompanies the cartoons can
also be a rich source of reading. Meaning can escape the historian if he/she does not
know what he/she is looking for.
Lastly, as a form of caution, historians must always be keen on the amount of
cencorship and gate keeping that the art form went through before its publication. This
suggests that the archived political cartoons may not be reliable as a singular entity.
Hence, support documents from other sources are needed to validate the drawings.