Curriculum Vitae of Miguel B. Llora,and various other topics

This Filipino Studies page is divided into three distinct but interrelated sections. The section directly following this introduction is focused on the various formal academic engagements I have had in the past with Filipino Studies topics. The section following the formal engagements (i.e. papers, etc.) is a more informal section that involves a set of reviews on books and movies that fed into my more formal submissions (with links to the items on Amazon.com). By demarcating the two, any visitor to the site can either go directly to the review section or peruse the papers (or PowerPoint presentations) first and then move on to the reviews get an idea on some of the specific text used as reference -- the visitor is, in effect, given a choice. The last section is really just a 'pinoy pride' section. For detailed information on any items listed on this page, please feel free to explore and do be generous with your feedback.


	Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism by Benedict Anderson: Anderson writes a very compelling seminal piece that on the one hand flirts with the postmodern (through the introduction of words like 'imagined' and 'construction') but falls back on the ever secure category laden project of the Enlightenment. Aside from this, it seems apparent to me that Anderson had misread Rizal and may have misread other writers as well. Both items I see as problematic despite my recommending this book highly as a point of engagement. Where does one start? This common question by most students of nationhood and nationalism is a common quandary. Anderson is a good place to start as most dominant discourses go - but is certainly not a place to stop. "Nation-ness" is apparently the most universally legitimate value in political life but has apparently been elided as an "anomaly" by Marxism. Understandably so as, according to Anderson - in his postmodern best, nationalism cuts through the meta-narratives and provides a local solution. It is "Imagined" because the members of even the smallest nation will never know most of their fellow members. Most of them, or will not even hear of the rest, yet in the minds of each lives the image of the community, a shared community. It is imagined as "Sovereign" because the concept was born in an age in which Enlightenment and Revolution were destroying the legitimacy of the divinely ordained hierarchical dynastic realm. In my opinion, this was not such as bad thing, but it seems the ancien regime was replaced by a secular dominant model that opened up spaces of new problematics by creating a new currency and further demarcating the world along imagined lines. Coming to maturity at a stage of human history when even the most devout adherent of any universal religions were inescapably confronted with living "Pluralism." It is imagined as a community, because, regardless of the actual inequality and exploitation that may prevail in each, the nation is always conceived as a deep, horizontal comradeship. In fact all communities larger than primordial villages of face-to-face (and according to Anderson even these) are imagined. I don't take exception to the concept of imagined as if it is imagined it has become real. However, there are instant problematics assigned to this almost one size fits all solution. Besides falling into the Enlightenment project of demarcation and categorization, the problem of who decides what is what and who is who in this orgy of demarcation and categorization is still stuck with the problem of who decides and what is decided. Here is a classic example, Anderson posits that nation-ness has become sort of the de facto standard within which all the games are played and all the rules laid out. Anderson himself seems to be part of this dominant discourse and has given out, as an example, the rise of the imagined Philippines through the text of Jose Rizal. A more careful and responsible study of the Philippines will show that Rizal was less an advocate of independence but closer and more equal ties to the empire. Rizal fought for closer ties to the empire; equal status under those laws; representation in the central government in Spain to have a voice; checks on the abuses perpetuated by the Holy Orders, and not independence. If one wishes to look for shades of "nationalism" one should not read Noli Me Tangere nor El Filibusterismo nor for that matter Ultimo Adios but rather look to Emilio Aguinaldo, Andres Bonifacio and Marcelo H. Del Pilar. Despite Rizal's references to "Adios, Patria adorada...." (Farewell, dear Land,....) and Anderson footnote "Not only, of course by functionaries, though they were the main group. Consider, for example, the geography of Noli Me Tangere (and many other nationalist novels). Though some of the most important characters in Rizal's text are Spanish, and some of the Filipino characters have been to Spain (off the novel's stage), the circumambience of travel by any of the characters is confined to what, eleven years after its publication and two years after its author's execution, would become the Republic of the Philippines." (Anderson, 1991: 115). Taking aside authorial functions, just because a novel becomes a catalyst for revolt does not automatically make it a nationalist novel. Noli and Fili (as they are affectionately called) are not per se nationalist novels and were not direct players in nationhood. Noli and Fili (and Rizal for that matter) are part of the nationalist discourse but not in the form that Anderson suggests. Aside form the abovementioned, there still remains, despite the postmodern language, the problem of an almost nostalgic attachment to the Enlightenment project. Far from being the light of reason to shed light and resolve problems surrounding the human condition, the Enlightenment according to scholars such as Michel Foucault, replaced the ancien regime model of social marginalization and class demarcations with a better mousetrap of domination, which was simply a modernized technology of social control. It would no longer be possible to look to the obvious figures of sovereignty and privilege - embodied in king and counts - for the telling signs of "power." While Anderson attempts to define the nations along of secularized lines, the nation seems to take on a new ontological position replacing religions making one almost a new religion. Aside from the almost exclusive nature and its endorsement as "the" model of legitimacy calls back, I feel, to an Enlightenment scenario that excludes more than it includes. Having said all that, I strongly urge everyone to read this as "a" explanation rather than "the" explanation and move along from there.
	Nationalism and the State by John Breuilly: Breuilly makes a serious attempt to explore the genesis and evolution of nationalism. In this somewhat argumentative piece relating to nationalism and the state, Breuilly sees nationalism as a "product" rather than a "cause." Effectively, through his text he sees nationalism at conceived narrowly as a form rather of political opposition that a phenomenon in itself. Breuilly writes "to refer to political movements seeking or exercising state power and justifying such actions with nationalist arguments." Breuilly classifies nationalism into four categories: (1) unification, (2) separatist, (3) anti-colonial, and (4) reform. The main argument or theme or area of concern for Breuilly is with nationalist political action. Here it seems he has made a unique contribution to the area study of nationalism. Breuilly attempts, with some success, an extremely ambitious task of comparing nationalist movements over a considerable period of time and space. He does so in an effort to explain both of the conditions essential for such a movement to occur. Moreover, he does so to explain the implications of the interplay between a specific political context and the particular form of nationalism. Much like Leah Greenfeld (Nationalism, Five Roads to Modernity) and E.J. Hobsbawm (Nations and Nationalism Since 1780) [both also available on Amazon.com], Breuilly posits that these conditions are ripe only within the context of the rise of the modern state. Nationalism, at least the European sort gives rise and expression against a foreign threat. Of great importance to Breuilly is the path in which political and institutional structures of the state against particular individual nationalism react and the conditions their forms give their ultimate possibility for success. Breuilly takes away from nationalism its claim to be a historical "natural" occurrence and, much like Hobsbawm demonstrates its rise as a construct. Breuilly is concerned with power. Power is concerned with property. Property is concerned with class. If nationalist ideology stand in clear contradiction to class ideology and organization how would he explain the "ressentiment" that Greenfeld took such pains to explain? He does agree with Greenfeld in that he also sees nationhood as a purely modern phenomenon constructed by the agents of modernity. Breuilly re-emphasizes his primary assertion, that "Nationalism is, above and beyond all else, about politics." Partha Chatterjee, in his very insightful examination "The Nation and its Fragments" (also available on Amazon.com) offers a counter thesis that nationalism is solely a function of the modern state. Chatterjee asserts that nationalism is not purely a function of the rise of modernity to look at it solely from this perspective is to miss out on a vast cultural contribution. Nationalism is at its most potent, according to Breuilly, as an opposition movement. Only within specific circumstances (such occurrences as turning against "anti-national" collectives or "nation-building" in new states) and are likely to form more than one element in a state's foreign policy. Breuilly's thesis is to: the removal of the transcendental or instrumental interpretation of nationalism by deconstructing it not as an ideology but rather as a concrete political movement with particular aims -- first and foremost that of attaining and using power. Nationalism therefor calls attention to a sense of "national character." Breuilly attempts to fill what he sees as a serious chasm in the theorizing of nationalism. Breuilly defines nationalism as a creed of `political movements seeking or exercising state power' and justifying their actions with `nationalist arguments.' This reader detects a sense of circularity in his argument. Nationalism, Breuilly posits, `has little to do with the existence or non-existence of a nation' it had little to do with the unification of Germany or Italy. Bismarck was not a German patriot, and only pretended to be one in order to take the wind out of the sails of the liberal opposition. Very true; but his political maneuvering could only be feasible because national sentiment was already strong. Breuilly places nationalism working in opposition to an already existing state. Nationalism is a parasitic movement and ideology shaped by what is opposed. This, most certainly leaves out the vast irrationality of the nationalism most in evidence in history, the kind promoted by governments and directed towards external aggression. Moreover, for a universal to work in theory, an exception would prove the theory false. How would Breuilly explain the phenomenon of Israel, where the nation existed way before the state? If nationalism is explained in terms of its opposition against a state, it effectively renders nationalism an internal dynamic. Nationalism, at least in this context, would hold no significance to explain Israel's tenacity against forces that act against it from the outside. Running counter to Marxists like E.J. Hobsbawm, Breuilly dismisses Marxist explanations. Breuilly writes that `Marxism' has failed to `grapple with the subject' -- a formidable oversimplification. Breuilly should consider the likes of Antonio Gramsci (Gramsci through Joseph Buttigeg in "Prison Notebooks" Volume 1 -- also available on Amazon.com) who placed complexity into the discourse of nationalism from a Marxist perspective. Breuilly writes that it is difficult to encounter `a specific Marxist approach to anything.' He further posits that in any political movement social or economic interests are involved and factors of class cannot be overlooked -- effecting a circularity. Is it only abbout power and purely internal? Only history can answer that question.
	Nations and Nationalism since 1780 : Programme, Myth, Reality (Canto) by E. J. Hobsbawm: In this timeless and enduring book, Hobsbawm dispels the sentiment that national identity as we perceive it today is natural, primary or essential as to be apart from history -- in effect his stance is anti-primordial. For Hobsbawm, who, at least it appears to this reader, as a Marxist, the rise of "world communism" will transcend the petty provincialism of nationalism. Taking a page out of Benedict Anderson's "Imagined Communities"... a new world order will emerge. Is this Francis Fukuyama in sheep's clothing? OK, fair enough, where is there a space for the prevention of tyranny that Hobsbawm speaks of in this book? My guess is that a dynamic tension is formed around the Fukuyama notion of a new world order centered on a liberal democracy and capitalism while Hobsbawm is still dreaming of a world order around the notion of "people of the world unite!" The notion of "Nationalism" seems to be a hindrance in terms of the new world order by both writers. Hobsbawm wishes us to come to the conclusion that nationalism is wrong, dangerous and ugly. Nationalism is based on myth. Effectively, he sees that the "imagined community" or the myth of the nation is used "to fill the emotional void left by the retreat or disintegration of real human communities. As if to contradict himself, he does not flesh out what these "real" communities are. Are they real or are they "imagined"? If this is all much ado about nothing, then why do people spend so much time, energy and resource to arrange themselves in this fashion? According to Hobsbawm, a particular group of people, an intelligentsia of some nebulous configuration forced nationalism on everyone else. It seems to me that he is suggesting that it is a result of an agenda. The core of this new imagined community has to reach back to a form of ancient or imagined past that will bind those in the hear and now. The new "community" is constructed around the ruins of the past. What is important to consider when it comes to Hobsbawm is the triviality with which he attaches the notion of "imagined" as if it is doomed to fail. As if not making the distinction of when nationalism becomes chauvinism, he lumps them together as a phenomenon whose dusk is approaching. The book is extremely relevant with the rise of globalization. Hobsbawm is particularly keen when he asserts " A world of nations cannot exist," he posits "only a world where some potential national groups... excludes others." It is insightful that Hobsbawm points this out, however, must we throw away the baby with the bathwater and look instead for some notion of pan-nation that will see the end of diversity? If Hobsbawm is right, then his book is usefull to help us work toward some accommodation of diversity. Do we just become "people" then? If the cross migration continuous, are we "determined" by forces outside our control to decide who we are and what we become? Hobsbawm must be read and analyzed and I am grateful for experience and highly recommend this to all readers interested in the area of nationalism -- an idea that people use but rarely fully understand. This is your first step.
	The Nation and Its Fragments by Partha Chatterjee: In this well documented study, Partha Chatterjee challenges the view held by many western scholars that nationalism in Asia and Africa has been based on various modular forms supplied by the rise of nationalism in Europe. Chatterjee is concerned nationalism plays itself out in two very distinct "spaces": the "material" and the "spiritual." For Chatterjee there is the material (external) and the spiritual (internal). One is not touched by the other. The aim is to dispel the myth that post-colonial status assumes a western form. For Chatterjee language is important -- very important. It is the space that makes each unique situation, well, unique. The notion of what is not touchable by the outside forms of the colonial are what resides inside, a space that only language can provide. While the colonized had to adopt western technology to survive, this mechanism is balances out by preserving the spiritual. To flesh this out a bit, Chatterjee does acknowledge the contribution of the West to Asia and African nationalism, but only in what he identifies as the space of the "outside." This space is comprised by such things as the economy, statecraft, science and technology. There is more, apparently, the more important previously unreflected upon area of the "inner" domain of the spiritual. In his groundbreaking study, Chatterjee takes a page out of Benedict Anderson's "Imagined Communities" but he reacts to it. If nationalism is relegated to the realm of the rise of modernity, it misses lots of nuance and may be missing some very important elements. Chatterjee takes aim at the problematic head on at, as I mentioned earlier, the rise of nationalism as a process of modernity. His examination of the peasants in relation not only to Indian nationalism, but as a group within its own, often paradoxical values. Is this cultural nationalism an elite movement as discussed by Leah Greenfeld (Nationalism - Five Roads to Modernity) and E. J. Hobsbawm (Nations and Nationalism since 1780)? (both available on Amazon.com) Is so, how did the peasants come to be involved? This almost "subaltern" approach is indicative of its postcolonial/postmodern roots. Chatterjee argues that it must be superseded by `concrete forms of democratic community' that transcend hierarchical and bourgeois equality models. If you see the rise of a nation simply (or exclusively) within the framework of a function of modernity, do you then lose a sense of how the nation was formed from a cultural perspective? Gandhi's notion of family, community and group, based on mutual respect seems to pale in significance by the political and bureaucratic power of the modern state. Chatterjee then offers us the exception that the rise of Bengali nationalism. The items engaged in by Chatterjee are provocative to say the least and does challenge us to question what we feel or know about nationalism. Particularity and difference comes to the forefront of consideration in this book. We all need to take a long hard look at it.
	Nationalism: Five Roads to Modernity by Liah Greenfeld: Perhaps one of the most accessible and complete book relating to European nationalism I have had the pleasure to read. Greenfeld examines nationalism as it moves from nation to nation changing as it moves along. As a point of methodology, she asks three questions: [1] Why and how nationalism emerged? [2] Why and how it was transformed in the process from one society to another? [3] Why and how these different forms of national identity and consciousness translated into institutional practices and patterns of culture, molding the social and political structures of societies which defined themselves as nations? How she deals with it is the really fascinating part of this book. Greenfeld explores nationalism along 2 broad categorical dimensions: popular sovereignty and criteria of membership. For the most part, and educated middle class (as in England and Germany) or the nobility (as in France and Russia) tried to solve a crisis of identity as well as acute feelings of "status inconsistency" in times of drastic changes in the social structure and status hierarchy. This identity crisis of the upwardly mobile social groups gave birth to a conception of England as a community of "free" and "equal" individuals having recourse to political participation. From England the notion of the "nation" changed in form as it moved from country to country coming full circle in the United States where it took its original form. The core of Greenfeld's narration of the metamorphosis of the ideologies -- actually its development is the idea that, German intellectuals lacked the support and recognition of the nobility. The extreme financial and social insecurity German intellectuals felt led them to lose faith in the Aufklarung (Enlightenment) and to embrace a Pietist ontology (coupled with, lest we forget, a secularized Romanticism) which within its precepts held the seeds of racism and authoritarianism. Moreover, the concept of "ressentiment" as Nietzsche used it "On the Genealogy of Morality" (also available on Amazon.com) What is this "ressentiment"? Essentially, it is a notion of existential envy. Envy towards those economically or militarily more powerful countries that resulted (again in the Nietzschean sense) a "transvaluation of values" attached to the borrowed concept of national identity or an outright rejection of these values and the glorification of what one sees as his/her "indigenous" culture. Greenfeld really effects a wonderful analysis of the internal dynamics and the quid-pro-quo connection between the structures, the culture and the individual's psychology. More on this issue, she shows how elites in particular countries -- England, France and Russia evolved national identities the in turn shaped their own "place" or social status as well as aims, goals and hopes. From Greenfeld's perspective the elites formed their idea of society and later transferred it down, in its original form, to the rest of society. As far as this reader is concerned, it is not clear why national identity has such an intense role when it came to the rise of Nazism and the Russian revolution but not the particular form of American racism? Returning to the issue of ressentiment, Greenfeld argues that the specific groups invented nationalism in the fight for recognition (as I mentioned above) and used it as an umbrella concept for national identity, consciousness and recognition. The French and Russian cases are unique in that nationalism gave each case a unique basis for status and self esteem. The American case is different from the process it took in Europe but comes close to the English experience. In the case of America, Americans fought for liberal democracy or for what Greenfeld articulates as "Civic Nationalism." However, in all cases, the creation of national identity really involved redefining what was meant by "the people." Breaking it down further, she breaks down the evolution of nationalism to categories: there is the individualistic-libertarian (UK and US) and the collectivist-authoritarian (France, Germany and Russia). German nationalism, according to Greenfeld, is the epitome of ethnic authoritarian collectivism. Greenfeld is great because she discusses the role language and literature play in the creation of national identity. Moreover, she examines how religion and secularism; war and revolution; intellectuals and education factor in the process of national identity. Her interdisciplinary approach is really admirable considering the size of the project. Her use of Max Weber -- as in how particular groups or strata which are facing a threat to their status or status identity makes Weber accessible and understandable. The details relating to each and every example are too much for this review, and I strongly suggest a careful read. I give her a resounding 5 stars.

In the Philippines, Filipinos were introduced to the English language in 1762 by British invaders, not American.	The Philippines is the world's 3rd largest English-speaking nation, next to the USA and the UK.
The USA bought the Philippines, Puerto Rico and Guam from Spain in 1898.	Los Angeles, California was co-founded in 1781 by a Filipino named Antonio Miranda Rodriguez, along with 43 Latinos from Mexico sent by the Spanish government.
What antibiotic did Filipino doctor Abelardo Aguilar co-discover? Hint: Brand is Ilosone, named after Iloilo. Erythromycin.	Marc Loinaz first made the one-chip video camera a Filipino inventor from New Jersey.
This son of two Filipino physicians scored over 700 on the verbal portion of the Standardized Achievement Test (SAT) before age 13 - Kiwi Danao Camara of Punahou School, Hawaii.	Who was the Filipino-American dancer who scored a perfect 1600 on the SAT? -- Joyce Monteverde of California.
Who invented the fluorescent lamp? [...] Thomas Edison discovered the electric light bulb while Nikola Tesla -- a Filipino, thought up the fluorescent lighting. Agapito Flores, however, invented the fluorescent lamp we use today (a Cebu man named Benigno Flores of Bantayan Island, according to the Philippine Daily inquirer), a Filipino scientist. Americans helped then-Philippine leader Ramon Magsaysay to develop it for worldwide commerce.	Many foreigners have noted that the Filipino population has Asia's highest rates of inventors and international beauty queens.
Two Filipina beauties, Gloria Diaz and Margie Moran, were chosen as Miss Universe in 1969 and 1973.	Pure- or part- Filipino celebrities in American showbiz include Von Flores, Tia Carrere, Paolo Montalban, Lea Salonga, Ernie Reyes Jr., Nia Peeples, Julio Iglesias Jr., Enrique Iglesias, Lou Diamond Phillips, Phoebe Cates and Rob Schneider.
The first Filipino act to land a top hit on the US Billboard Hot 100 chart in the 1960s was the group Rocky Fellers of Manila. Sugar Pie deSanto (father was from the Philippines), The Artist Formerly Known as Prince (according to the October 1984 article "Prince in Exile" by Scott Isler in the magazine Musician), Jaya, Foxy Brown and Enrique Iglesias followed.	Besides gracing fashion magazine covers, this international supermodel from Manila had walked the runways since the 1970s for all the major designers, like Calvin Klein, Chanel, Christian Dior, Christian Lacroix, Donna Karan, Gianni Versace and Yves Saint Laurent - Anna Bayle.
Who is the personal physician of former U.S. Pres. Bill Clinton? Eleanor "Connie" Concepcion Mariano, a Filipina doctor who was the youngest captain in the US Navy.	Founded in 1595 by Spaniards, the University of San Carlos in Cebu City, Philippines is older than Harvard and is the oldest university in Asia. University of Santo Tomas in Manila, established in 1611, is Asia's second oldest.
Carlos P. Romulo (then a Philippines Herald war journalist) was the first Asian and/or Filipino to snatch America's Pulitzer Prize? Carlos P. Romulo is also first Asian to become UN President.	The first two Filipino-Americans to garner the same award 56 years later were Seattle Times' Alex Tizon and Byron Acohido, who is part-Korean.
Filipino writer Jose Rizal could read and write at age 2, and grew up to speak more than 20 languages, including Latin, Greek, German, French and Chinese. What were his last words? "Consummatum est!"("It is done!")	"What's still most impressive to me about the Philippines is the friendliness of the people, their sense of humor [...]," wrote Honolulu journalist John Griffin in a 1998 visit to Manila.

When I travel, people often ask me why I live in the Philippines? Well here it is...
It is the only place on earth where......
1. Every street has a basketball court.
2. Even doctors, lawyers and engineers are unemployed.
3. Doctors study to become nurses for employment abroad.
4. Students pay more money than they will earn afterwards.
5. School is considered the second home and the mall considered the third.
6. Call-center employees earn more money than teachers and nurses.
7. Everyone has his personal ghost story and superstition.
8. Mountains like Makiling and Banahaw are considered holy places.
9. Everything can be forged.
10. All kinds of animals are edible.
11. Starbucks coffee is more expensive than gas.
12. Driving 4 kms can take as much as four hours.
13. Flyovers bring you from the freeway to the side streets.
14. Crossing the street involves running for your dear life.
15. The personal computer is mainly used for games and Friendster.
16. Where colonial mentality is dishonestly denied!
17. Where 4 a.m. is not even considered bedtime yet.
18. People can pay to defy the law.
19. Everything and everyone is spoofed.
20. Where even the poverty-stricken get to wear Ralph Lauren and Tommy Hilfiger (peke)!
21. The honking of car horns is a way of life.
22. Being called a bum is never offensive.
23. Floodwaters take up more than 90 percent of the streets during therainy season.
24. Where everyone has a relative abroad who keeps them alive.
25. Where wearing your national colors make you baduy.
26. Where even the poverty-stricken have the latest cell phones. (GSM-galing sa magnanakaw)
27. Where insurance does not work.
28. Where water can only be classified as tap and dirty.
29. Clean water is for sale (35 pesos per gallon).
30. Where the government makes the people pray for miracles. (Amen to that!)
31. Where University of the Philippines where all the weird people go.
32. Ateneo is where all the nerds go.
33. La Salle is where all the Chinese go.
34. College of Saint Benilde is where all the stupid Chinese go and;
35. University of Asia and the Pacific is where all the irrelevantly rich people go.
36. Fast food is a diet meal.
37. Traffic signs are merely suggestions, not regulations.
38. Where being mugged is normal and It happens to everyone.
39. Rodents are normal house pets.
40. The definition of traffic is the 'non-movement' of vehicles.
41. Where the fighter planes of the 1940s are used for military engagements
and;
42. The new fighter planes are displayed in museums.
43. Where cigarettes and alcohol are a necessity, and where the lottery is a commodity.
44. Where soap operas tell the realities of life and where the news provides the drama.
45. Where actors make the rules and where politicians provide the entertainment.
46. People can get away with stealing trillions of pesos but not a thousand.
47. Where being an hour late is still considered punctual (Grabe talaga 'to!)
48. Where the squatters have more to complain (even if they do not pay their tax) - than those employed and have their tax automatically deducted from their salaries.
49. And where everyone wants to leave the country!
FILIPINO SIGNS OF WIT:
1. The sign in a flower shop in Diliman called Petal Attraction.
2. Anita Bakery
3. A 24-hour restaurant called Doris Day & Night
4. Barber shop called Felix The Cut;
5. A bakery named Bread Pitt
6. Fast-food place selling 'maruya' (banana fritters) called Maruya Carey.
7. Then, there are Christopher Plumbing
8. A boutique called The Way We Wear
9. A video rental shop called Leon King Video Rental
10. A restaurant in Cainta district of Rizal called Caintacky Fried Chicken
11. A local burger restaurant called Mang Donald's
12. A doughnut shop called MacDonuts
13. A shop selling 'lumpia' (egg roll) in Makati called Wrap and Roll
14. And two butcher shops called Meating Place and Meatropolis.
Smart travelers can decipher what may look like baffling signs to unaccustomed foreigners by simply sounding out the 'Taglish' (The Philippine version of English words spelled and pronounced with a heavy accent..
Filipino such as:
15. At a restaurant menu in Cebu "We hab sopdrink in can an in batol" [translation: We have soft drinks in can and in bottle].
16. Then, there is a sewing accessories shop called Bids And Pises - [translation: Beads and Pieces --or-- Bits and Pieces]
There are also many signs with either badly chosen or misspelled words but they are usually so entertaining that it would be a mistake to 'correct' them like.......
17. In a restaurant in Baguio City, the 'summer capital' of the Philippines: "Wanted: Boy Waitress"
18. On a highway in Pampanga: "We Make Modern Antique Furniture"
19. On the window of a photography shop in Cabanatuan: "We Shoot You While You Wait"
20. And on the glass front of a cafe in Panay Avenue in Manila: "Wanted: Waiter, Cashier, Washier".
Some of the notices can even give a wrong impression such as:
21. A shoe store in Pangasinan which has a sign saying: "We Sell Imported Robber Shoes" (these could be the 'sneakiest' sneakers);
22. A rental property sign in Jaro reads: "House For Rent, Fully Furnaced" (it must really be hot inside)!
23. Occasionally, one could come across signs that are truly unique - if not altogether odd. City in southern Philippines which said: "Adults: 1 peso; Child: 50 centavos; Cadavers: fare subject to negotiation".
24. European tourists may also be intrigued to discover two competing shops selling hopia (a Chinese pastry) called Holland Hopia and Poland Hopia - which are owned and operated by two local Chinese entrepreneurs, Mr. Ho and Mr. Po respectively - (believe it or not)!
25. Some folks also 'creatively' redesign English to be more efficient.
"The creative confusion between language and culture leads to more than just simple unintentional errors in syntax, but in the adoption of new words, "says reader Robert Goodfellow who came across a sign .....House Fersallarend' (house for sale or rent). Why use five words when two will do?
26. According to Manila businessman, Tonyboy Ongsiako, there is so much wit in the Philippines because "We are a country where a good sense of humor is needed to survive". We have a 24-hour comedy show here called the government and a huge reserve of comedians made up mostly of politicians and bad actors.
Now I ask you where else in the world would one want to live?