criticism
Philippine
Literary Workshops and Contests
by Cirilo F. Bautista
As a communal text, any
literary discourse is a contrived utterance that
addresses several levels of reality, but to communicate
through this text, writer and reader must put
into operation certain sociological processes
that will make it intelligible. "I write,
therefore, I am," might as well provide the
structural foundation of this sociology. To write
a poem or a story involves the deliberate reworking
of social elements to achieve the writer's intention.
But it is, first of all, a linguistic construction,
fixed in a situs of specific explication, demanding
of the writer and the reader a vast expertise
in language, in the first, to configurate the
human condition according to a planned aesthetics,
in the second, to be able to embrace it.
Grammatical and compositional knowledge
- the first level of reality - clears away impediments
to the comprehension of the work's literalness,
that is, the human condition as articulated through
concrete and physical verbality. Matters of diction,
idioms, and phraseology when clarified and refracted
in relation to the writer's sociological perspective
will ultimately lead to the formula that encodes
the work's thought or idea. At the same time,
when linkages between the cultural milieu and
the linguistic character of the work are established,
semiotics produces the metaphoric significance.
In this second level, figurative language processes
literalness to make it yield additional facets.
Meaning becomes more than literal and offers itself
to cultural interpolation. Consequently, the work
encourages the reader to draw from the wellspring
of his societal consciousness those materials
that will complete and validate his interpretation.
In this sense (the poem or the
story) must be properly situated in relation to
the subtext (the social or human conditions) before
a signification is gained. Their context (relationship)
often produces in the reader a particular perception
of the textual idea. A creative discourse, then,
is ultimately culturally determined. It cannot
be understood without reference to the human factors
that provide its framework. Also, it emerges as
a rational conjoining of individual and national
experiences, the raw materials really of any creative
product. Shelley meant this when he wrote that
the "poets are the unacknowledged legislators
of the world," because, through their meditations
on human affairs, their texts become the uncredited
almanac of the human development. The power of
such works as Rizal's "Noli Me Tangere"
and Hernandez's "Isang Dipang Langit"
resides in the ability to pragmatize in artistic
terms the crisis and exigencies of the human condition.
The world of literature itself,
it must be apparent now, comprises another level
of reality. All existing literary discourses exert
a tremendous pressure on the human mind and heart,
compelling them to examine things in a new and,
sometimes, perilous manner. This "intertextuality,"
occurring on the cultural level and intervening
in the operation of the other levels, improves
our comprehension of the text, and the same time,
provides a rigorous criticism of any aspect of
personal and social existence. The writer labors
in isolation, and he is not even sure that the
poem or story will turn out the way he intends
it to. He only has himself to rely on in his attempt
to explicate the mysterious meanderings of his
soul. It is a painful and demanding commitment.
Consequently, he inclines to the invention of
devices that will postpone it, even if momentarily
only. Such ritual evasions - smoking cigarettes,
taking a shot of whiskey or a bottle of beer,
fussing over pages of notes, cleaning the computer,
making that last-minute phonecall to someone suddenly
remembered -- are ostensibly intended to oil the
machinery of his imagination but in reality are
diversionary tactics to justify the delay. For
man is a social animal, and writing frustrates
his contact with his species. Dylan Thomas called
it a "sullen art" because it effects
a melancholia in the writer. "The most terrible
thing for a poet is to be confronted by a blank
sheet of paper."
To write is to wrestle with that
horrible blankness, to squeeze it and to bleed
it and to maul it until it surrenders to fruitfulness.
The struggle debouches into a war whose rules
are unclear but whose pain is all too real. Only
after his war with words can the writer be at
war with other men, Thomas adds. That is why it
is imperative that the writer be adequately equipped
for this job. It is not enough that he knows the
principles of grammar, diction and composition
-- the basics of linguistic usage - but he must
know their aesthetic ramifications as well. The
role of metaphor, the forms of versification,
the reason for rhymes, and the balancing of illusion
and reality, for instance, once comprehensible
to him, will confer on his work an unmistakable
direction and a convincing excellence.
The Third World environment, in
general, does not offer the writer sufficient
equipment to accomplish his task. In fact, there
is a certain amount of hostility with which the
writers are viewed in the Philippines, truncating
their efforts to make creative writing a profession.
It is almost impossible for a writer to survive
through writing alone in the milieu. Why this
is so is another subject, but it is relevant to
mention in passing that we are a "seeing"
society, not a "reading" society. The
trimedia of radio, television and newspapers are
the dominant purveyors of what is called "literature
in a hurry," which reflects the primacy of
simple survival in a society that is not yet prepared
for the refinement of its national intellect.
The trimedia productions overwhelm the social
mind, influence the social taste, and determine
cultural direction.
In such an environment, creative
writing workshops, literary contests and such
literature-related activities as seminars and
conferences perform significant roles in influencing
the writer's artistic growth, his creative potential
and, ultimately, his literary productivity.
The importance of creative writing
workshops started being felt in the 1970s. Writers
before then had to learn the craft largely on
their own, mainly through trial and error and
emulation of their favorite authors. On the side,
they relied in their friends' critical evaluation
of their works. Their language teachers, if any
good, taught them skills with which they understood
the first level of reality; their literature teachers,
if any good, encouraged them to read the classical
and contemporary masters. But the matter of stylistic
refinements, of philosophical and cultural groundings
needed to situate their discourses in aesthetic
excellence - these they had to learn on their
own.
But the coming of workshops helped
clarify misty areas of creativity and craftsmanship.
Teachers with sufficient training in the creative
art fashioned pedagogical models that served as
guidelines to the beginning writers. Lectures
during sessions delineated linguistic and artistic
concepts that helped the writers focus on specific
problems and their solutions. Discussions of various
critical theories and their influences on writing
techniques provided a variety of options for literary
approaches. Finally, and this was the heart of
the workshop, a communal critique of works submitted
brought out the strength and weakness of the authors.
The analysis involved a close reading of the poem
or story to discover how it internalized the elements
of coherence, harmony, counterpoint, etc.; to
justify or reject prosodic or narrative tactics
in the context of the work's aesthetic direction,
and to evaluate the clarity of its meaning within
the boundaries of its function.
The machinery of today's writing
workshops are no different, except perhaps in
the sense that it is more organized, more momentarily
sustained, and more attractive to aspiring writers.
The National Writers Workshop in Dumaguete City
was the first to be set up in the country. Directed
by Edilberto Tiempo, it is patterned after the
famous Iowa Writers Workshop in Iowa City, U.S.A.,
which they themselves had attended.
The creative writing workshops
in Iowa, it must be remembered, has three levels
--the undergraduate, where students majoring creative
writing are accommodated; the graduate, where
students majoring in creative writing are accommodated;
the graduate, where students taking up the degree
Master of Fine Arts major in creative writing
are guided in their areas of genre concentration;
and the international, which is really a separate
and independent workshop for writers from various
parts of the world. Participation in the international
workshop is by invitation only, and participants
are acknowledged major writers from their specific
countries. It is not really any more a workshop
for, as its Director, the late Paul Engle, averred,
participants were already masters of their craft,
and the workshop was really meant to give them
a "vacation, to do whatever they want to
do." It was after the first two levels of
the Iowa workshops that the Tiempos shaped their
Silliman writers workshops .
Practically all Filipino writers
off any importance have joined this workshop at
one time or another, either as fellows, lecturers,
or panelists. It is held for four weeks every
summer amidst the pleasant and quiet surroundings
of the seaside city,. It will be an understatement
to say that it has a significant influence on
the growth of our literature. The applicants wanting
to join it increase in number each year, and the
works and the works of writers who have passed
through it continue to enrich our arts and letters.
The amount of learning these writers got from
this workshop is incalculable, and is measurable
only in the way they have contributed to the qualitative
and quantitative growth of our literature. Being
a pioneer, the Silliman Writers Workshop occupies
a premier position in the history of creative
writing in the Philippines.
The U.P. Creative Writing Workshop
is held also in summer, with the venue being any
of the university's campuses all over the country.
Understandably, it has the widest coverage in
terms of participants, for it can draw from thousands
of potential writers among the university's vast
student population.
The Bienvenido N. Santos Creative
Writing Center of De La Salle University, established
in 1991 in honor of the noted fictionist, holds
a workshop every December. Following Santos's
expressed wish, the workshop gives priority to
new writers, from our mass-based universities
-- U.E., F.E.U., Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila,
P.U.P. - and from La Salle campuses.
The Iligan National Writers Workshop,
in the short three years that it has been operating,
has already established a firm reputation as an
excellent training ground for aspiring poets,
fictionists and dramatists. Conceived and managed
by Jaime An Lim, Cirilo F. Bautista, Tony Tan,
Christine Godinez-Ortega, and supported by funds
from the MSU-IIT Office of the Chancellor for
Research and Extension, NCCA, and private corporations,
it brings together some fifteen writers from Luzon,
Visayas and Mindanao for a weeklong intensive
literary interaction. It is the only workshop
that publishes in book form the fellows' works
taken up in the discussion and the transcripts
of the panel discussions.
The U.S.T. Creative Writing Workshop,
directed by Ophelia A. Dimalanta, holds sessions
for two weeks in April.
The aforementioned are the "institutionalized"
workshops. There are other, smaller and irregular
ones sponsored by the offices and agencies. Writers
in English and in Filipino get training from workshops
sponsored by Unyon ng mga Manunulat sa Filipinas
(UMPIL), Galian sa Arte at Tula (GAT), the Rio
Alma Poetry Clinic, The Cirilo F. Bautista Poetry
Repair Shop, Palihang Amado Hernandez, Writers
Academy of the Philippines, Carlos Palanca Foundation,
and the National Commission for Culture and the
Arts, to mention a few.
What impact do these workshops
have in the production of Philippine literature
in English? A very significant impact, I would
say. From the '70s to the present, "literary
workshoppers," to coin a convenient term,
have formed the first order of literary artists
who have, to a large extent, determined the configuration
and philosophy of Philippine literature. Most
of them are college graduates or have had college
experiences. Because are inextricably linked to
the academe, they have a sustained faculty of
mentors and well-managed programs. We must not
forget that Philippine literature in English was
born in the campus as an initial adjunct to Filipino
students' obligation to learn the English language.
Because the American teachers in our schools used
literature to teach the language, linguistic and
literary skills were acquired by the students
at the same time. Those with literary ambition
were encouraged by their teachers and, if they
went on to the teaching profession themselves,
they in turn encouraged their own students. Before
the '70s, therefore, the linkage was tenuous and
temporary, depending on the presence of teachers
with the literary inclinations; afterwards, with
the workshops being set up and managed by the
English departments in the universities, student
writers' training became more systematic and directional.
This training eventually developed
into two branches: the criticism of creative writing
and the teaching of creative writing.
The first is really the focal interest of most
of our writers' workshops where the participants
do not actually do any writing but where their
submitted works- the workshop materials - are
subjected to rigid and varied critical scrutiny.
In effect, literary analysis serves the purpose
of showing the writers the different philosophies
and techniques of writing. Depending on the persuasion
of the panelists, therefore, the writers, in the
end, may be convinced to adopt this or that school
of thought in his craft. The Tiempos, for instance,
are very strong exponents of New Criticism; the
U.P. Writing Center inclines heavily towards all
forms of Marxism; the De La Salle Writing Center
encourages various kinds of engagement, and U.S.T.,
to a large extent, remains Thomistic.
The second emerged with the offering
of creative writing courses in the universities.
By the '80s, the academic community realized the
growing needs to organize and systematize the
teaching of the writing craft. Literary production,
they admitted, could only be improved in quality
and quantity by a conscious program to uplift
the literary producers. In De La Salle and U.P.,
for instance, there are bachelors if arts degrees
major in creative writing as well as MFA degrees
in the graduate schools. In other universities,
creative works are accepted as theses requirements
for graduation in undergraduate levels. With creative
writing degree units in formal educational curricula,
students with literary ambitions get competent
and sufficient instructions from teachers with
adequate preparation and experience in literary
craftmanship. Many of them are writers themselves
who pass on to their students invaluable knowledge
not found in textbooks. It is also worth noting
that there has been a significant increase in
the number of students pursuing creative writing
degrees. In DLSU, where I teach, the idea of offering
creative writing courses in the undergraduate
and graduate levels was unthinkable five years
ago. This semester, we have our fifth batch of
graduate creative writing students.
Thus, these two branches provide
the serious beginning writers with sufficient
support and encouragement to fulfill their potentials.
At the same time, they have attracted more and
more new writers. The mergence of the classroom
and the workshop, as it were, has brought together
all the forces necessary to make creative writing
a profession, with the underlying assumption that
literary production, like any human discipline,
can be taught and learned in a controlled environment.
In addition, the quality of writing continues
to show marked improvement. In addition, the quality
of writing continues to show marked improvement.
The new writers, possessed of the advantages of
the expert teachers and technological facilities,
are more familiar with recent developments in
literary theories, techniques and philosophy.
Consequently, their immersion in the world of
letters hastens their expertise and mastery of
their craft. Also, with more writers joining the
field, national literary titles exhibited in the
various book fairs held more frequently now.
There are those of course, who
belittle the effectiveness of writing workshops.
They argue that workshops do not make writers;
they even unmake them. What can be learned in
workshops can be learned somewhere else. A sane
enough attitude, on the surface, especially when
we hear of the insanity of some workshop panelists,
like the one who would tear a poem to pieces to
register his displeasure with it, or the one who
would insist that young fictionists would do the
country a lot of good by giving up writing and
planting camotes instead. We remember Sinclair
Lewis telling participants in workshop on how
to write fiction, "You want to know how to
write a novel? Well, go home and write a novel."
But that is not as easy as it seems.
One does not simply go home and write a poem if
he does not know what a poem is or how to go about
creating it. True, he can read poems, and books
about poems, but he would not have the benefit
of another consciousness explicating to him the
phenomenology and problems of writing. He would
not, in short, have the appropriate direction
suited to his potential and limitation. Only teachers
can do that. True, there are teachers who abuse
their position, but they really the exception
rather than the rule. Alone, it will take the
beginning writer some time to master his craft,
with the help of workshops and literary courses,
the time span can be significantly reduced. With
his sensitiveness and imaginativeness unhampered
by misconceptions, he can apply himself more productively
to the acquisition of those qualities that will
maximize his writing potential.
Taken historically and psychologically,
then, the effectiveness of these workshops is
beyond doubt. The Tiempos of Dumaguete believe
that workshops confer on the participants an amount
critical skill by which they are able to examine
a text rationally and dispassionately though they
may belong to different philosophies and personalities.
"Communal text investigation," as I
call it, exposes writers to crucial and even nebulous
aspects of creativity which will have profound
repercussions on their own craftsmanship. Knowledgeable
in the ways of the New Criticism, the Tiempos
emphasize poetic integrity and resonance, formal
excellence and veracious autonomy - qualities
a work must possess by necessity and not endowment
of external agencies. "Many Palanca-awardees
come to us to find out if they can really write,"
Ed Tiempo once averred. He implied a suspicion
for awards, for they are, at best, palliatives.
Workshops, Edith Tiempo said, "teach a writer
to be his own severest critic." If he learns
anything at all, it is to exercise the ability
to tell when the parts of a work succeed, and
how to functionalize these parts through judicious
selection, paring, repairing, and harmonizing.
In due time, his expertise may lead him to introduce
innovations in the structure and concepts of the
literary genres. Indeed, as a literary editor
and critic, I have come across such innovations
in the works of Filipino poets and fictionists.
The Carlos Palanca Foundation has
of late realized the value of creative writing
workshops. Through A.B. Battung, executive director,
it started last year as a series of workshops
designed for emerging writers in the provinces.
"In this way," Battung said, "we
would bring the benefits of literary know-how
to those who are not able, by reason of time or
distance, to join workshops in Metro Manila."
He has put together a team - composed of fictionist
Jose Dalisay, Jr., poet Cirilo Bautista, and dramatist
Rene Villanueva - which manages three-genre workshops
for pre-enrolled participants. The team has held
workshops in Bicol at the Ateneo de Naga University,
in Cebu at the San Carlos University, and in Ilocos
Norte at the Divine Word College. "In holding
these workshops," Battung added, "the
Palanca Foundation is signaling its recognition
of the important role that our writers carry,
not only in advancing our literary development
but also in shaping our national cultural taste."
Several outstanding writers from the provinces
have been discovered through the Palanca workshops.
Also, the usefulness of writing
workshops is evidenced in the patronage that our
cultural institutions have been giving them. For
years, the Cultural Center of the Philippines
extended funding assistance to creative writing
workshops. The National Commission for Culture
and the Arts, understandably, has been very supportive
of writing workshops.
In summary, it is evident that
there is no need for statistical figures to confirm
the factuality of creative writing workshops'
effectiveness. Indeed, there is no need for statistics.
After all, the effects of workshops are cumulative,
rather than periodic. But the effervescence evident
in the writing scene denotes a reinvigoration
of the creative spirit, and this alone, is an
encouraging sign. Big or small, these workshops
answer the need for a rational and sustained effort
to build up the country's literary resources by
attending to the requisites of its primary component:
the writers. The number of books published by
literary workshoppers increase annually, thus
fattening the literary treasury. Creative writing
workshops attract more and more new writers who
realize the beneficence of the workshops' intention
to develop persons extremely sensitive to the
human condition, to the alterations and flow of
the cultural milieu, and to the determination
of the national consciousness. Writer's contribute
to the sharpening of the people's desire for the
finer things in life, for the improvement of the
national intellect. Through their literary productions,
they propose ways of upgrading the quality of
national life. Their works, when judiciously inputed
by the state of authorities in their national
policies, may provide them with ideas for social
amelioration. The writers' honest and profound
critique of social realities is their ultimate
contribution to the formation of an uplifted national
intelligence. But the sensitivity, the imagination,
and the craftsmanship they need to accomplish
this critique is inaugurated to a great extent
in the environment of writing workshops.
The effect of literary competitions
in the production of literature in English, on
the other hand, is quite a different thing. At
best, the matter is speculative, for these contests
are arbitrary, limited, and often short-lived,
making it difficult for us to make conclusive
statements vis-a-vis literary production. From
the Commonwealth Literary Awards of the 1940s
to the Palanca Literary Awards of the 1990s, certain
currents of creative energy can be stipulated,
and this can be the basis of some tentative findings.
It stands to reason, however, that the popularity
of these contests definitely exerts certain influences
on individual writers' attitude toward literary
and social realities, and these can be understood
only if we ask the writers themselves.
The major and minor literary competitions
that we have -- the Palanca, the CCP, the Free
Press, The Graphic, The Panorama, the Procyon,
and the Home Life -- confer a psychological, and
not an artistic, beneficence on the writers. Winning
them has a palliative effect -- for a while the
writer is a few thousand pesos above the poverty
line and enjoys some degree of admiration --but
cannot be equated with the winner's ascendancy
over other writers. It would be erroneous, if
not pretentious, to assume that a contest winner
is a better artist than a non-winner. I have known
many naive writers who think winning the Palanca
is the highest achievement for a Filipino writer;
there are even those who think it is the equivalent
of literary apotheosis. They ignore the fact that
it is just a contest, that is all, and a winner
is just lucky that the judges, who have their
own nebulous system of rating entries, were favorably
disposed to his work. It is indisputable that
there are many outstanding writers who have never
won any literary prize.
Why then do writers join these
contests? In an attempt to find some answers,
I posed that question to some twenty (20) respondents
in an informal, random survey. They were a mix
of established and beginning writers, of winners
and non-winners. The tally I had at the conclusion
of the survey included all responses, even multiple
ones from the same respondents.
Why do you join literary contests?
Response |
Frequency |
| 1. To find out if I can
really write |
16 |
2. For the money |
10 |
| 3. To know if I'm good
as others |
6 |
| 4. To know if I have potentials |
4 |
Insufficient as it is, the survey
can give us some idea of the psychology of literary
contests. Response #1 indicates the writers desire
for the "confirmation" of his literary
ability; that is winning will be a validation
of his artistic capability. This is the most satisfying
effect of contests, for it resolves for him questions
that otherwise would remain unanswered. The Palanca
Prize, in this regard, is perceived as the best
validator; its prestige, history, and scope make
it a reliable measuring instrument. Winning it
provides entry into the exclusive group of outstanding
writers whose excellence has passed a rigid test
and who would, from now on, be forces to consider
in our literary development.
Confirmation gives the writer the
signal that the pursuit of letters is not, after
all, a futile thing for him. "I want to find
out if my estimation of myself as a poet is correct,
" a respondent said. "Am I getting anywhere
with my writing - I want to know," another
said. In effect, confirmation is a highly personal
search for the justification of a writing life.
The writer, as it were, competes with himself,
not with others. Winning finally settles for him
questions about writing as a serious engagement.
Response #2 reflects the practical
attractiveness of contests. Writers join them
for the money -- the bigger it is, the more their
desire to win. Those who gave this response were
either already multiple winners or financially
hard-pressed. For the first, sure of their ability,
the money, as it were, has already been earmarked
for certain things -- a TV, a vacation, to pay
a debt. Winning has become not only a habit for
them, but also a source of steady income. For
the second, winning is a small refuge from the
perils of insolvency. These are the struggling
writers whose social circumstances make them look
at contests as an agency for temporary salvation.
All of them said that present contest prizes are
unrealistic and should be raised to meet the demands
of our actual cost of living.
Response #3 shows the writers'
interpretation of contests as a canonical agent.
They compete to prove that they are as good as,
if not better than, writers who have won already.
Their competitiveness assumes a hierarchy of writers
where winners occupy top ranking. To win is to
be elevated to the pantheon of the literary greats.
"When I won my first Palanca," one of
them said, " I could not sleep for a week.
I felt so high." "I joined because I
got sick and tired of the boastfulness of one
winner. When I won, all of a sudden he became
silent." These respondents also think that
the more contests one wins, the more excellent
an artist he becomes.
Response #4 exhibits the naivete
of some writers. The respondents thought of contests
as an instrument to discover whether they had
talents, and they ended by losing. The truth is,
the Palanca and the CCP contests are not for those
without talent, and if one is just trying to find
out if he has, workshops are the appropriate venues
for him. Amateurish entries in these contests
are easily weeded out by the judges who have vast
experience in this kind of thing.
Whether literary contests and other
similar projects contribute to the production
of literature, as I have said, is difficult to
ascertain. It is not farfetched, however, to say
that they improve the quality of writing in the
country. The high level of competition, the increasing
number of contestants, and the spread of knowledge
about literary techniques and theories, force
a contestant to upgrade his skill. By comparison
and contrast, by absorption or opposition, he
posits himself against others and undoubtedly
learns from the experience. I know many writers
who study the style and techniques of contest
winners with the aim of understanding the finer
elements of literary discourses.
The psychology of contests, particularly
focused on the human desire for recognition, compels
the beginning writers to prove to themselves and
to others that they are worthy of membership in
the society of letters. In the process, they struggle
to grow artistically in order to meet the standards
of the contests. Because they cannot win if they
are no good, contests exert a subtle educative
influence on the participants. In this manner,
contests are invisible workshops, which hone the
skills of the beginning writers desirous of literary
notability. They are one way of learning and excelling
in the craft, albeit a difficult one.
Creative writing workshops, literary
contests, literary seminars and conferences, it
must be clear now, have a definite role in the
literary growth of our literature. Each in its
own particular way has direct and indirect influences
on the quality and quantity of literary production.
Taken together, they are a dominant force in the
formation and strengthening of our national soul
and in the direction of our social life.
Reference: from the book Illumined Terrain:
The Sites and Dimensions of Philippine Literature
back to criticism
| home |