While scouring for cheap books in Recto, I found Jessica Hagedorn’s Dogeaters at the bottom of a heap of coverless books, torn magazines and mutilated comics. I hurriedly took it and paid 30 pesos because I thought I found a gem among a pile of trash. After reading the reviews found at the back cover, I knew I made a great bargain. I considered myself so lucky that day because I am about to read a book adored by American critics for just thirty pesos. But I was wrong, so dead wrong; I found a trash among a pile of wastes.

The book, set in the chaotic period of the Marcos era, portrays a society where American pop culture and local Filipino tradition mix shamelessly, gaudily and “transcends social strata, gender, culture, and politics.” A beauty pageant, a film festival and an assassination are the highlights of the novel where a crazily unrelated group of characters are entangled in one shoddy portrait of the Philippine society.

Dogeaters was hailed by the American critics as “the best novel available about the vibrant, bewildering Philippines.” The New York Times Book Review said in its review that the book is “a fast, frequently hair-raising first novel, full of images and fantasies reflecting the author’s Philippine background that maps the ruin at the heart of Philippine society in the last four decades.” The book also got favorable reviews from Entertainment Weekly, Kirkus Review and others. Not bad for a debut novel; getting those approving appraisals sure cemented her reputation as a Fil-Am writer writing about her beloved Philippines.

But after reading a chapter or two, I noticed that there is something terribly wrong. I began to question whether am I reading a book about the Philippines or what because I began to notice that the book is devoid of soul, a Filipino soul. It seems soul-less, walang kabuhay-buhay, walang kalatuy-latoy. I could not connect with the characters; I could not even empathize with them because they are not Filipino enough to me. Her novel is filled with characters who have no Filipino character traits (aside from eating dilis, hearing intently any radio dramas in the night and being passionate and very subscribing to beauty pageants); filled with characters who are sex-craved, sex-deprived maniacs, who seem to curse every second of their life; filled with flat characters who seem so out of place, out of tune, and simply outrageous. They seem distant, misplaced and lost in the setting. It even gave me an impression that though her characters wear ternos and barang tagalogs yet they have a heart, body, soul and mind of an American. Even the voice and tone of the novel is characteristically American and certainly not Filipino. It dawned upon me that the novel is very un-Filipino; a product of a writer who is detached from her roots, a contemptible product of American pop culture. A novel trying too hard to pass as a unique Filipino gem; as if written by someone who has never been to the Philippines or someone who relies only on tales, outdated books, chismis, travelogues, magazines, kwentong barbero, and even hearsays about the Philippines.

I do not know whether the aim of the book is to package the Philippines as an exotic, former US colony wanting for attention, as a country were perversity and conservatism mix like bananas and pineapples, as a place where pop culture thrives and flourishes, as a country where east meet west, to introduce the Philippines to the rest of the world - famous for those senseless EDSA revolutions, those kidnappings, famous for adobo, dilis, dogeating, NPA and Jollibee. Or it is intended to critique the Filipino society for its constant and continuing degradation, the ruin of the Filipino conscience, the breakdown of morality, the triumph of profanity. If the book was intended to prostitute the Philippines to the world then she made a good attempt of it. But if it was intended to critique the psychosis and neurosis of the Filipino society then she fell short miserably.

Her futile attempt failed on two counts. First and foremost, Dogeaters is not a social critique; it did not do justice to the things happening during the Marcos era. It provided minimal accounts of the horror and terror during those wretched years. Her depiction of the ills of the Philippine society was certainly done in bad taste and certainly not humorous. She gave no insights to the abomination that was occurring that time; she made me wonder what in the world was she thinking when she wrote the book. Even her point of view is skewed, twisted, inappropriate and detached from reality. Rather, the novel is a product of commercialization with capitalistic overtones; it was just written to make money. No, it is not a social critique, it is just a story peddled to make money. It is just one of those countless novels where the writer, charged up with greed and thirsty for recognition, writes to make a killing out of it at the expense of her countrymen. This is betrayal and treachery in the highest degree.

Secondly, the book has fake nostalgia written all over it. Generally, Fil-Am writers have this [fake] nostalgia about their [lost] Filipino heritage [sic]. They write shamelessly about their homeland, their cherished memories when they were still kids playing patintero in the streets, their titas and titos who used to give them aguinaldos every Christmas, their longing to come back home but could not because they are better off working in America than trying to survive here in the Philippines, about this and that and everything in between. They reminisce this, reminisce that and reminisce everything about the Philippines; they even confess that they are getting homesick by the second. Arrghh, don’t you just love their hypocrisy? Their Janus complex? I admit though that they are good writers (especially Hagedorn who writes with sound “narrative drive and lyrical sensibility”): they have their own unique style, they have the right techniques. But it’s their fake nostalgia that irritates me. These Fil-Am writers are trying too hard to be Filipinos in their works but fail miserably. They audaciously claim to be experts of the Philippines in the USA. In their quest to create a niche for themselves in the literary scene, they created none. Probably, they are just lost in the translation.

But the novel has its own merits too that should never be denied. The mere fact that it was lauded by such respectable reviewers is a feat itself. Only a few Filipino writers get their nods and very flattering remarks. The book’s only saving grace is that it was able to penetrate the deeply-saturated American market. If only Jessica Hagedorn could write sensibly, could be true to her Filipino roots, could provide fresh insights and write with a better perspective and point-of-view, then maybe she would earn her rightful place in Philippine literary scene. But until that time come, I will reserve my meager allowance for F. Sionil Jose’s books.

#########
first published in peyups.com
Wednesday, March 03, 2004 @ 02:29:28 AM

Pinanganak akong mag-isa, mamamatay akong nag-iisa.

#########

Nakakapagod mag pull-out sa sale pero masaya naman, enjoy. Marami ka palang nahahalungkat na kung anu-ano- mga naiwan na hangers, payong at t-shirts. Totoo pala ang saying na there is gold in trash. 

#########

Siep, I can read between the lines.  But the message is not meant for me or anyone else. I know you will not understand me, but maybe someday when things become clearer, you will see and realize the truth.

Habang hinihintay ang lahat, bigla akong binatukan ng realidad: naghihintay pala ako sa wala.

####
Matagal tagal na din akong hindi nagfri-friendster. At wala na ring masyadong nag-aadd sa akin, kaya tinatamad na akong i-update ang aking friendster page. At malamang medyo nalalaos na ang pausong ito, kung baga, ang friendster ay isang fad lamang. Pumatok lang naman ang friendster dahil sa notion na pwede mong mahanap ang mga long lost friends mo na nasa ibang lugar na o nasa abroad o saang sulok man ng mundo. Pumatok din ito dahil pwede mo silang bigyan ng testimonial para ikaw rin ay mabigyan testimonial. O di kaya para lang magpacute sa mga nagcucute-kyutan diyan. O yung iba, ginagamit ang friendster para maka-pick-up o di kaya'y para maghanap ng bf/gf (kasi desperado na sila).

Pero, para sa akin, ang gamit lang ng friendster ay para mahanap mo yung mga taong gusto mong mahanap, yung mga crush mo noon, yung mga kagalit mo noon; gusto mo lang silang kamustahin, kung ano na ang ginagawa nila, kung saan na sila nakatira, kung may asawa na ba sila o wala. Kung masaya ba sila sa buhay nila, contented na ba sila sa mga trabaho nila. yun lang naman ang friendster sa akin. Oh, nakalimutan ko pala, nakikiuso lang pala ako sa friendster, kasi naman lahat ng orgmates ko sa UP CIEM ay nagfrie-friendster, kay magfrie-friendster na rin ako. Wala naman masama kung makikiuso ako, ayaw ko rin naman na mapag-wanan ako ng uso, at least "in" ako kapag mayfriendster ako... hehehehe

Unless I would be free from your shackles, my heart would just be a barren and desolate desert/wasteland: crying for rain, pleading for mercy, gasping for freedom.

#########

yehey, napanood ko na ang chobits sa wakas. Haha, may karapatan na akong gamitin bilang wallpaper sila chii and the rest of the gang. Ngayon, kilala ko na sila chii at sumumo (at alam ko na kung bakit gustong gusto ni reg ito). Kaya naman pala gusto ni reg ito eh, kasi may touch of drama, comedy and a pinch of green. Yung episode na napanood ko ay yung pinapabili ng lalaki si chii ng underwear. Well, one comment: riot sa katatawanan. Napakakulit. Pero nakakalungkot kasi di ko natapos ang episode kasi ginagawa namin yung video presentation para sa STS eh. Project muna bago chobits.

#########

May sinend si Ray sa yahoogroups namin na nakakatawa. Parang patama siya sa mga babae. Personally, I am against to any form of gender discrimination. So sana, wag kayong magalit sa akin kung ma-oofend man kayo. But the funny thing is many of my friends say that the data sheet is actually true (but does not apply to all women). Lalo na yung mga nakalista sa ilalim ng "physical properties" at chemical properties. But I don't agree sa uses niya. Ano? Pang-trophy lang ang inyong gf/asawa/kabit/anak/ina/lola? Nosiree, that is bullsh*t, plain bullsh*t. Kung sino man ang gumawa nito, nakakahon ang kanyang pag-iisip sa mga maling stereotypes na kumakalat sa kaisipan ng mga tao. It is sickening and nauseating that we just regard women as just mere ornaments, just like we flaunt our best orchids to our neighbors, or our sportscar to wow our kumpadres. Oh well, we live in a very sick world. Come to think of it, our next president is a high school drop-out and full of macho-shit and posturings (this would be the case unless GMA would do something miraculous or ask for divine intervention). God save the Philippines.

My insomnia is bugging me again. Knocking at my door. Will I let her in or not? My bane of existence at this ungodly hour.

#########

Nagmistulang chobits site yung blog ko dahil tadtad ng chobits wallpaper. Si reg naman kasi eh, pinipressure ako na dapat may "chobits theme" yung blog. Or baka the other way around, ginagawa ko ito para lumipat na siya from xanga.com to blogdrive. At least dito, pwede niya icustomize yung blog niya at very user-friendly. Di nga ako marunong ng html, pero dahil sa sipag tiyaga (at kapal ng mukha), natransform ko ang blog ko into something na di ko aakalain na magagawa ko 20 days ago. Nagbuting-ting, Dinaan sa trial-and-error. At least ngayon gamay ko na yung html codes ng blog ko (salamat sa feature na view source).

Pero honestly, hindi ko pa napapanood ang chobits, although bukambibig ni reg ang anime na ito. (Di ko alam kung bakit niya ito nagustuhan or napagtripan pero may hunch na ako kung bakit. Knowing reginald, malamang yun yung primary reason... hehehehe). reaction pa nga ni cheryl, bakit daw chobits inspired ang aking blog eh di naman ako nanonood ng chobits . Tumawa ako at ngumiti. Oo nga naman, bakit kaya?

Napaisip tuloy ako ng di inaasahan. Ano ang nasa chobits at naging theme siya ng aking blog (considering na di pa ako nakapanood ng kahit isang episode at di ko alam ang takbo ng story - ang alam ko lang ata is isang persocon si chii)? At bakit sa dinami-dami ng anime, bakit chobits?

Siguro, dahil, marahil, baka, ewan ko, di ko alam, keber, kebarbaridad! Di ko alam. Pwamis.

Baka siguro cute si chii, kaya ayun. O baka malakas ang "influencing" powers ni reg kaya ganyan. O baka (hindi cow), trip lang, flavor of the month.

Actually, kaya nagkaganyan, dahil mga chobits wallpaper lang ang may mga ganung colors na pwede kong gamitin sa blog ko. Gusto ko subdued colors, earth colors na di nakakaagaw ng pansin. Eh since marami ang chobits ng mga ganyang klaseng wallpaper kaya ayun, nagmistulang floating advertisement ng chobits ang aking blog.

Makapanood na nga para naman may karapatan na ako gamitin siya. Hehehehe, calling all my friends, pahiram naman ng mga cd ng chobits para mapanood ko na sa wakas itong anime na ito.

#########

Tulog na ako. *yawns* May exam pa ako mamaya, and the sad part is di pa rin ako nag-aaral. Nakakatamad kasi eh. Good luck na lang sa akin. At good luck sa inyong lahat!

Kailan ba talaga ako dapat huminto? Kailan ako dapat huminto sa pagmamahal sa iyo? Kung patay na ako, nakalatag sa kabaong na nakasuot ang amoy moth balls na barong tagalog at naka lipstick para mamula-mula ang mga labing namumutla?

Paano naman kasi, mahal kita pero mukhang ayaw ng tadhana sa atin. O baka ayaw mo talaga sa akin. O baka ayaw ng mga friends mo sa akin. O baka ayaw ni satanas na magkaroon ako ng gf. Kung ano man ang rason, kaya ko na sigurong tanggapin. Na hindi talaga tayo dapat. Na hanggang ligaw tingin na lang ako. Na hanggang sa panaginip na lang kita maisasayaw (ngek! ano ito, "El Bimbo"?)

Kung ano man ang rason malamang kaya ko nang i-take kasi "mature" na ako, kasi malaki na ako, kasi sanay na ako sa mga ganyang pangyayari. Kung baga in basketball parlance, I am a vetaran of many playoffs frustrations. Parang Timborwolves, laging natatanggal sa first round ng playoffs. Sana, kasing dali lang ng basketball ang ating lovestory noh? Kung mashoot ko sa three points, tayo na. Kung hindi, tayo pa rin (hehehe, joke! ayoko masapak at mabatukan muli sa ulo).

Paano naman kasi, nakakamamatay ang pag-ibig ko sa iyo. Salamat sa iyo napaso ang aking kamay dahil habang minamasdan kita di ko alam na nahahawakan ko na ang sigarilyo ng katabi ko. Salamat sa iyo, muntik na akong masagasaan kasi nanaginip ako ng gising na tayo na daw, na tayo ay nasa sunken magdamag naglalampungan at iba pa. Salamat sa iyo, muntik na akong malunod sa karimlan. Salamat sa iyo, nakakalimutan ko na ang aking mga magulang, mga kapatid, mga frendly frends, mga frendsters, mga katropa sa may kanto, mga tambay sa bilyaran. Salamat sa iyo, bumabagsak ako sa aking mga subjects (okey lang kung isang subject kaso ang problema maraming subjects ang lumgalglag galing sa himpapawid, naghihikahos na muling makalipad). Salamat sa iyo, napapabayaan ko na ang aking sarili. Dahil ikaw lang lagi ang aking iniisip.

Dahil ikaw lang ang nasa isipan ko, ikaw ang aking almusal, pananghalian at dinner. Pati merienda at midnight snack ikaw pa rin. Ikaw ang nakakabusog sa aking puso (at minsan libog). Kung pwede ka lang pagkain, malamang di na ako magugutom pang muli dahil katumbas mo ang lifetime supply na jolibag o domac.

Pero dahil sa iyo, nasasaktan ako. Dahil sa iyo unti-unti akong namamatay. Sana huminto na ang pag-ikot ng aking mundo sa iyo dahil nasasaktan lang ako. Dahil unti-unti na akong naagnas at nabubulok. Sana noon ko narealize na makamandag ang iyong alindog, nakamamatay ang iyong pag-ibig.

I have been battling with my beliefs these past few months. I don't know whether i am basically a theist or an atheist. A part of me believes that there is a god but a part of me screams out loud that there is no god. And this swinging back and forth confuses me that it becomes a nightmarish experience. Hey, i don't like this joy ride anymore. I thought the adventure would be worth it but I don't know. I'm confused, hell yeah I'm confused. I don't know whether this foray into the theist/atheist debate became an eye-opener or an enlightening experiencing.

It all started in peyups.com.

Although i was a hesitant christian, i was also hesitant in going over to the other side. I played safe for a while, but it seems that fence sitting is not my favorite activity. So, i took the road less travelled, being the devil's advocate in the debate. Although, i was defending god against the atheists, I also found atheism logically sound and appealing than believing in the supernatural. So, that was my dilemma. I was beginning to slide down. My mind became a battleground of some sort. And in the process i was losing my reason and my logic. I began to realize that I am an atheist trapped in a theist's body. But wait, I don't know for sure. I think I am a theist because i believe in a supernatural being but I don't subscribe to any religion (but on paper I am a Roman Catholic).

Actually, my hesitation (to become a full fledged atheist) comes from the fact that I find it uncomfortable to become one of the odd apples (pardon the analogy). Because it is easy to be a Christian in a Christian world
than being an atheist in a Christian world. It would be disastrous if you choose the latter. Especially in the Philippines where a whopping 90% are Christians.

Not that I am scared of my soul or something, but i hate the stigma and the "outcast" thing. I hate to have the stigma of being a social leper, an untouchable, doomed forever because of my belief. People will become biased of me, that i will be accused of being immoral and satanic and anti-christ and everything related to evil and darkness.

But where does that put me? To believe in one thing, but saying the other. Am I reduced to an abominable specter, doomed by my own inconsistency? I dont know and I don't care. Call me chicken if you want to.

Somewhere down the road, I will eventually choose which road to travel, and from there on there will be no turning back because I already made a choice, whish is final and irrevocable. But for the time being, I am testing the water, frog-hopping and living carelessly.


*note: Below is a quiz (with my answers and results) referred to me by scout_finch (a blogger friend). Just for the fun of it, I took an atheist perspective (but that not necessarily mean that I am an atheist already). Just for the sake of being one for a second or so.

Battleground God
http://www.philosophers.co.uk/games/god.htm

Can your beliefs about religion make it across our intellectual battleground?

In this activity you’ll be asked a series of 17 questions about God and religion. In each case, apart from Question 1, you need to answer True or False. The aim of the activity is not to judge whether these answers are correct or not. Our battleground is that of rational consistency. This means to get across without taking any hits, you’ll need to answer in a way which is rationally consistent. What this means is you need to avoid choosing answers which contradict each other. If you answer in a way which is rationally consistent but which has strange or unpalatable implications, you’ll be forced to bite a bullet.


1. God exists.
false

2. If God does not exist then there is no basis for morality.
false

3. Any being which it is right to call God must be free to do anything.
false

4. Any being which it is right to call God must want there to be as little suffering in the word as is possible.
false

5. Any being which it is right to call God must have the power to do anything.
false

6. Evolutionary theory maybe false in some matters of detail, but it is essentially true
true

No injuries so far, but watch out! Danger ahead!

7. It is justifiable to base one's beliefs about the external world on a firm, inner conviction, regardless of the external evidence, or lack of it, for the truth or falsity of these convictions.
false

8. Any being that it is right to call God must know everything that there is to know.
false

9. Torturing innocent people is morally wrong.
false

10. If, despite years of trying, no strong evidence or argument has been presented to show that there is a Loch Ness monster, it is rational to believe that such a monster does not exist.
false

11. People who die of horrible, painful diseases need to die in such a way for some higher purpose.
false

12. If God exists she could make it so that everything now considered sinful becomes morally acceptable and everything that is now considered morally good becomes sinful.
false

You're doing brilliantly!
Only five more questions to go and not so much as a scratch so far! Well done!

13. It is foolish to believe in God without certain, irrevocable proof that God exists.
true

You may have just taken a direct hit!
You stated earlier that evolutionary theory is essentially true. However, you have now claimed that it is foolish to believe in God without certain, irrevocable proof that she exists. The problem is that there is no certain proof that evolutionary theory is true - even though there is overwhelming evidence that it is true. So it seems that you require certain, irrevocable proof for God's existence, but accept evolutionary theory without certain proof.

So you've got a choice:

Bite a bullet and claim that a higher standard of proof is required for belief in God than for belief in evolution.

Take a hit, conceding that there is a contradiction in your responses.


Decision: Bite the bullet.

14. As long as there are no compelling arguments or evidence that show that God does not exist, atheism is a matter of faith, not rationality.
false

15. The serial rapist Peter Sutcliffe had a firm, inner conviction that God wanted him to rape and murder prostitutes. He was, therefore, justified in believing that he was carrying out God's will in undertaking these actions.
false

16. If God exists she would have the freedom and power to create square circles and make 1 + 1 = 72.

oh-oh, here comes the trick question. I sense a trap in here. Arghh, it is hard to choose. I might contradict myself here.
False

whew! buti na lang!

17. It is justifiable to believe in God if one has a firm, inner conviction that God exists, regardless of the external evidence, or lack of it, for the truth or falsity of the conviction that God exists.
false

You have reached the end!

Congratulations! You have made it to the end of this activity.

You took zero direct hits and you bit 1 bullets. The average player of this activity to date takes 1.39 hits and bites 1.12 bullet. 191484 people have so far undertaken this activity.


Battleground Analysis
Congratulations!
You have been awarded the TPM medal of distinction! This is our second highest award for outstanding service on the intellectual battleground.

The fact that you progressed through this activity without being hit and biting only one bullet suggests that your beliefs about God are internally consistent and well thought out.


A direct hit would have occurred had you answered in a way that implied a logical contradiction. The bitten bullet occurred because you responded in a way that required that you held a view that most people would have found strange, incredible or unpalatable. However, because you bit only one bullet and avoided direct hits completely you still qualify for our second highest award. A good achievement!


Analysis of your Bitten Bullet
Bitten Bullet 1

You answered "True" to questions 6 and 13.

These answers generated the following response:

You stated earlier that evolutionary theory is essentially true. However, you have now claimed that it is foolish to believe in God without certain, irrevocable proof that she exists. The problem is that there is no certain proof that evolutionary theory is true - even though there is overwhelming evidence that it is true. So it seems that you require certain, irrevocable proof for God's existence, but accept evolutionary theory without certain proof. So you've got a choice: (a) Bite a bullet and claim that a higher standard of proof is required for belief in God than for belief in evolution. (b) Take a hit, conceding that there is a contradiction in your responses.

You chose to bite the bullet.

Pumunta ako kanina sa Vinzon's para makita ang final results ng USC elections. Kasi hanggang ngayon di ko pa rin lubos na matanggap na natalo ang STAND-UP. Baka kasi linoloko lang ako ng kaibigan ko. Kasi gusto ko makita kung saan kami naging mahina, saan yung achille's heel namin.

Pagdating ko doon, nakita ko yung mga taga-Kule minamasdan yung resulta na nakasulat sa mga pinagtagpi-tagping manila paper. Gusto ko nga sabihin sa kanila na, bad trip mga tsong, olats tayo. Pero syempre di ko sinabi kasi di ko alam kung sinu-sino ang ibinoto nila. Malay mo, mga Alyansa pala sila. Eh di napahiya pa ako. (Pero malaki ang probability na STAND-UP rin sila.)

Three hundred something ang lamang ni Kris (ALyansa) kay Atom (STAND-UP), mga ganun din ang lamang ni Kristina (Alyansa) kay Eunica Aure (STAND-UP). Pumasok ang siyam na konsehal ng Alyansa, isa sa STAND-UP, at dalawang independent. Sa college representative naman, halos nanalo lahat ng mga kandidato ng Alyansa. Dinominate talaga ngayon ng Alyansa ang USC elections. Walang patawad. Siguro panahon talaga nila ngayon. Kung sa bagay, for the last four years kami rin naman ang nagdodominate sa USC elections.

Noong nalaman ko na Alyansa lang ang babangga sa STAND-UP, alam kong magiging mahirap para sa STAND-UP na manalo dahil hindi hati ang oposisyon. Nagkaroon tuloy ng "united opposition." At yun yung kinakatakutan namin dahil kung mas maraming naglalaban laban na partido nagiging pabor para sa STAND-UP. Siguro natuto na sila sa kanilang mga pagkakamali kaya nagsanib sila (di ako sigurado kung nagkaroon nga ng kolaborasyon pero di malayo na mangyari yun dahil iisa lang naman talaga ang kanilang layunin eh: patumbahin ang STAND-UP).

Tiningnan ko ang bawat resulta ng bawat kolehiyo. Ganun pa rin. KUng saan traditionally malakas ang STAND-UP, doon kami lumalamang kagaya ng CAL, College of Science, Fine Arts at CHE. Samantala ang ALyansa naman ay humakot sa kani-kanilang balwarte - CSSP (dahil sa di matibag-tibag na Buklod-CSSP), Law (kasi law student si Kris Ablan at kasi talagang galit ang mga taga-law sa STAND-UP), ECON at Business Ad (no comment na lang pero sige na nga para may masabi ako: ang mga kapitalista ay galit sa mga aktibista kaya ganyan). Pero ang nakakagulat ay ang Engg. Sa mga nakalipas na taon, laging nanalo ang STAND-UP dito, minsan lumalamang ng 300-400 votes pero ngayon baliktad ang nangyari: lumamang ng 200 votes ang Alyansa.

Habang tinitingnan ko ang resulta, nag-iisip ako kung bakit nagkaganoon. Kung bakit natalo kami. Kung bakit pinagkaitan kami ng tadhana. Hinahanap ko ang kasagutan sa mga numero na tumatambad sa aking paningin. Numbers don't lie ika nga nila. Kaya naghanap ako ng mga patterns. Kinompare ko pa siya sa mga past performance ng bawat college for the past four years. Consistent naman, nanalo kami sa colleges na talagang amin, at sila sa kanilang mga balwarte. Wala akong mahanap kung hindi ito: natalo kami sa Engg kaya nagkaganyan, dahil balwarte namin ito noon pero ngayon ay nakuha na ng kabila. Dito nagkatalo, sa Engg, sa dati kong kolehiyo. Buti na lang sa ILIS, tinambakan namin ang Alyansa ng mahigit isang daang boto. Buti di ako napahiya sa mga nakatataas kasi ginawa ko ang dapat kong gawin: protektahan ang mga balwarte namin.

Pero paano ko i-eexplain ang pagkatalo ng mga iba't ibang college representative na kung saan malakas ang STAND-UP. Di ko alam. Wala akong maisasagot diyan kasi case to case basis ang pagexlain ng anomaly na yan. Bakit lahat ng mga konsehal ng ALyansa ay nanalo samantala isa lang ang pumasok na taga STAND-UP? Siguro dahil nadala sila ng partido, dahil nagblock voting sila, dahil nag-straight sila. Marami akong pwedeng maisagot dito. Logical ang nangyari dahil since nanalo ang Alyansa sa Chair at Vice-chair, hindi rin malayong mangyayari na mananalo ang karamihan sa konsehal ng Alyansa. Magiging mas illogical kung nanalo ang Alyansa sa Chair at Vice-chair pero lahat naman ng konsehal ay taga STAND-UP.

Ano pa ba? May nakaligtaan ba akong dapat i-analyze o bigyan ng paliwanag?

Ah tama, naalala ko na. Bakit lumakas ang Alyansa ngayon? Yan ang million dollar question ngayon. Bakit nga ba? Baka kasi pinaghandaan talaga nila ang eleksyon ngayon. Dahil alam nila may mahusay silang kandidato sa pagkachairperson. Dati kasi mga patapon lang ang kanilang mga pinapatakbo kaya naman kumakain ng alikabok. Kasi dati inaakala nila na kung maganda o guwapo ang isang kandidato, malaki ang tsansa na mananalo ito. Mga ehemplo: Mariz Umali at Chin Tubianosa. Personality based kasi ang kanilang campaign. Samantala ang STAND-UP naman, nanalo dahil sa kanilang mga programa at advocacies. Pero mukhang naka-catch-up ang Alayansa ngayon. Pero titingnan pa natin kung ano ang mangyayari sa susunod na election. Kung ito na ba ang simula ng pagdecline ng STAND-UP o nasalisihan lang talaga kami ng Alayansa.

Paglabas ko sa Vinzon's nakita ko ang isang grupo ng STAND-UP nakatambay sa labas. Obvious sa kanilang mga mukha ang hinagpis ng pagkatalo. Linapitan ko sila. Tinanong ako ng isa kong kaibigan, "Nakita mo na ba ang resulta?"

Sabi ko, "Oo, bad trip nga eh."

Sabi niya, "wala eh, ganun talaga eh."

Sabi pa ng isa, "next year babawi tayo."

Sabi ko, "sana. Sana makabawi tayo."