Get some Fundamental Q&A about Contemporary Philippine arts from the Regions (STEM SUBJECT)

I am a Filipino student, wherein I really find this subject very interesting as how much it relearns and explore the rich culture we have in Philippines. CPAR or the Contemporary Philippine arts from the Regions is a part of Senior High School curriculum that widely tackles the form of art creating different timelines. Provided my this questions, I have answered this with my own research and resources in internet.

Source: https://learnodo-newtonic.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Famous-Filipino-Paintings-Featured.jpg.webp

1How is medium a factor in representing the Filipino identify in a work of art?

       Well, Filipino arts has very wide several of influence. As a matter of fact, the medium became the greatest factor for us Filipinos to represent ourselves and become a means of validating our identity as genuine and authentic native on the country of Philippines for it is utilized it to treasure the symbolizing patriotism and to commemorates our traditional or instinctive characteristic, and culture of our own lineage, branding ourselves as a proud Filipino.

2.      Explain the term idealizing in a work of art according to Leo Benesa.

         Leo Benesa thoroughly emphasize that the term idealizing in a work of art as reflection display of Filipinos to their representative prospect in every day’s life such as the scene of their livelihood, stories of their being native and exhibiting their culture’s identity as per art of farmers plowing the field and fishermen casting nets – all of this innate subjects engraved  into a medium are what makes being Filipino without even venerating them was clandestine in the essence of partaking to the Filipino soul. Generally, it is portraying the subject as to what is in reality.

3.      Why Amorsolo’s works are considered “the most expressive of the ethos of the race and the predominantly agricultural countryside”?

-          As we perceive Amorsolo’s works, considered “the most expressive of the ethos of the race and the predominantly agricultural countryside” – I have understood that he earnestly illuminates the life of the farmers on their field wherein Filipino men and female are portrayed in solid effort in farming but with a smile in their faces – it is clearly show that Filipinos farmers are great workers as far as how onerous the works is, they always have the radiant atmosphere with a beam, graciousness and tender smile. Mostly Amorsolo’s paintings features the rural landscape of Philippines as mostly scenery are covered with vegetation, agricultural area and nature. The combination of all these elements in Armosolo’s body of work makes his artworks important to the formation of Filipino national identity, honoring Filipino farmers, and pride of representing Philippines.

4.      Do you agree with Leo Benesa’s claim about Amorsolo’s works that they are the “most expressive ethos of the race and the predominantly agricultural countryside”?

          Indeed, I agree with Leo Benesa about her claims towards Amorsolo’s work in arts. Comprehending the thought of “most expressive ethos of the race and the predominantly agricultural countryside”, I have observed and appreciated that Armosolo’s works, in fact illustrates the beauty of most scene of rural life – farmers harvest rice in the background while villagers rest under the shade of a mango tree in the foreground. It is undeniably attribute a great appeal of his works to the Filipinos as it displays a nostalgia ambience for simpler times during the period of urbanization and cultural change. Generally, it was incredibly prolific to basically captures the traditional Filipino occupation of the farm life of men and women in a hot sunny day and depicts how persistent they are and how the farmers work together. The painting is very Filipino with respect to the subject matter as the identity of Filipino farmer who were predominantly toil the agricultural field from countryside with efforts and smile in their faces.

5.      Do you think that the usage of English in literature lessens the “Filipino-ness” of the literary?

 I believe that the usage of English in literature does not lessen the Filipino-ness of the literary, as we all have to understand that despite any kind of language we used in portraying a story, as long as it has the sense of carrying a passage or message to others bringing together with their culture and characteristics of the theme – it is considered as a piece of literature. Language is not the bases of a literature, it is the image or verses used a medium to depict the people and scene of a certain nation illustrating a nationalistic native characteristics, genuine emotions or feelings, and the spirit and soul it that creates a bond with others. Generally, one of the most appealing aspects of art, in my opinion, is the fact that each work is interpreted differently based on the individual's background or viewpoint. What an item means to its author is another factor that distinguishes it. If we want to demonstrate Filipino pride and believes that the English language allows him to do it more effectively, then we should do so. In order to fully explain and deliver his intended message, the artist should use whatever works for him and in whichever language he is most contented with. Noli Mi Tangere, one of the most revolutionary and known books to Filipino literature, was written in Spanish, not written in Filipino – however it does not lessen the Filipino-ness of Jose Rizal but it further served its purpose of conveying a strong, powerful message about the life of Filipinos during the Spanish occupation.