Philippine pottery is often described in lowly terms because of its primitive form and design. Thus, one of the most uninteresting exhibits one could encounter in any local museum is probably the pottery section. But the right curator's note or tour guide spiel would make a big difference, as it guides the visitor to the craft, the process of manufacture, period styles, usage, and most interestingly, the stories associated with the artifacts. One specimen in San Agustin Museum's collection, for example, is particularly eye-catching because of a note that goes this way: "Kalinga pottery is the most advanced Filipinos ever achieved in pottery-making."
One look at the pottery and the unschooled observer will be easily convinced, seeing how the technique and design are more sophisticated compared to the rest of Philippine-made pottery.
But compared side by side with other Southeast Asian and Chinese and Japanese pottery, the supposed apotheosis of Philippine pottery would pale much in comparison. From this context, the museum description unwittingly reminds of Nick Joaquin's well-expounded gripe: we Filipinos easily get satisfied with whatever we come up with -- in short, the old "Pwede na yan" (That will do) mentality.
With deeper study, however, things are not what they seem on the surface. From the looks of it, we Filipinos purposely did not strive to do better in the field simply because we relied upon others' already existing expertise. The Chinese and other Asians have been churning out far more advanced potteries than we could ever hope to have when we came in contact with them, so why not import them, or barter with them, rather than manufacture our own? That is a lot more pragmatic.
Nonetheless, however lowly the terra cotta works we were able to come up with, native potteries have their own charm despite their relative simplicity or naivete. They possess a unique aesthetic that is equally valuable compared with the advanced pottery technology of others. After all, they belong to a different eon, a far more primitive one (think BC's instead of AD's), with its own aesthetic sensibilities, societal nuances, and geographic considerations. That they persist at all up to this day is no small wonder.
The design, noticeably enough, is particularly interesting, for it runs the gamut -- from the naif to the highly bizarre shapes and forms, many of which have no equivalents in other Asian cultures. The unknowing museum visitor would be wise not to make snide remarks about 'inferiority.'
Our modest pottery output is a reminder that smallness and lack of grandiosity do not automatically imply inferiority. Ancient Filipino pottery deserves respect -- from the lowliest tapayan used for drinking water and fermenting buro to the Vigan burnay, to the anthropomorphic Maitum and Manunggul burial jars, to the Leta-Leta presentation dishes, to T'boli-patterned vases, up to the intricately appliqued Kalinga pottery.
Making a wider survey of local pottery, journalist Pio Verzola Jr. marvels at the extent to which we have developed all sorts of banga, from Batanes to Tawi-Tawi, judging from the technical terms we have collectively evolved.
Melchor Orpilla, an Alaminos-based poet and cultural worker, has compiled the following definitions for potteries used in Pangasinan alone: "Pasig is the usual stone jars from Vigan (locally called burnay there). Samang is a kind of Chinese jar; and usually called samáng in Lingayen. Kalamba is a big earthen container just like batya. Buyog is a controversial term, with some calling buyog the earthen inuman with buking, while some others referring to a big banga for drinking too. The inuman with buking is also called kambong. Pilon is a container specially for polutipot or lingket (molasses). Kamáw is a plate-like container. Gurgurita is a small rounded body container of drinking water with a long neck and usually with an ear for handling. Dungdong is a very big banga used to cook for a large number of people. Banga is the usual earthen cooking ware with rounded bottom without an edge. The sayap is a kind of banga that has an edge around its body and is usually shallower."
In Bayambang up to the late 1970's, households used two kinds of dalikan or clay stove: the round charcoal-fed one and the bigger, avocado-shaped firewood-fed version. The latter has evolved in newer versions wrapped in tin can and resembling a pugon or furnace.
Buyog or buyugan was used for drinking water, and was quite a marvel for its ability to keep the water relatively cold as compared to storing water in today's PET (plastic) containers. The original buyog must have come without the aluminum spigot, and at the time, natives must have used coconut or bamboo ladles and cups.
The dark brown pasig was also used to make and store buro, salt, wine, or other food items that can be preserved.
The big red or black banga was used for boiling medicinal leaves or, indeed, cooking something on a big scale, while the smaller banga called sayap was for for cooking family-size dishes such as pinakbet.
Sold in the public market were toy kitchen sets (miniature dalikan, banga, platito, etc.) for little girls which came in two styles: plain and painted with the loudest of colors and the folksiest of designs.
We also used the word burnay to refer to chocolate-brown jars coming from Vigan for decorative purposes or as plant vase. Lasong or lasungan were used in making latik (large lasong) or bibingka (small lasong). (Could this be where the term puto lasong came from?) Clay saucers, which must have a name as well, were used to feed poultry.
One might add the term gusi (which may not be indigenous), to refer to those more recently evolved porcelain vases that must have taken inspiration from the Chinese. These were mostly used as decor as well. Paso or clay planters came in a number of sizes and styles.
The reddish clay vessels, however, were most likely bought from nearby San Carlos City, the former Binalatongan which Malunguey, now called Bayambang, used to be a part of.
With the above considerations, one must look at our own native pots a little bit differently, no matter how lowly they may be to the untrained eye.
References:
Bucaio.blogspot.com http://bucaio.blogspot.com/2014/04/bisita-iglesia-2014-central-pangasinan.html
Joaquin, Nick. A heritage of smallness. https://theurbanhistorian.tumblr.com/post/5966825494/a-heritage-of-smallness-by-nick-joaquin
Orpilla, Melchor. Facebook comment, September 2019
Peralta, Jesus T. The Tinge of Red: Prehistory of Art in the Philippines. Book review: https://filipiniana101.blogspot.com/2014/03/a-definitive-guide-to-philippine.html
Verzola, Pio Jr. The lowly banga. Accessed from: https://iraia.net/blog/2016/12/01/lowly-banga/?fbclid=IwAR1AWvhtfmk3L97R6LtKjpe9sSNRiWejy9r0ZSubnAhpJ-T-KAzxVJkJg5g
A quick survey of the most important terra cotta works (photos and descriptions) can be found here: http://filipiniana101.blogspot.com/2014/03/who-are-these-people-what-could-they-be.html ;
http://ben-matias.blogspot.com/2010/06/treasures-of-archaeology-national.html
No comments:
Post a Comment