DECEMBER MOOD AND SOME TAGALOG POEMS
December 17, 2013
I noticed that Christmas is becoming less and less interesting. I sort of no longer look forward to it unlike when I was younger. Perhaps it is true that Christmas is only for children. I remember that when I was a kid, I would be very happy if I would get presents for Christmas. I did not care if the gifts were cheap, so long as I got them because it was Christmas.
My writer-friend Santiago Villafania said that there is such as thing as “December Mood.” It’s kinda ironic really. The feeling of emptiness and loneliness while everybody around seems to be happy or at least trying to be happy. Christmas songs being carried by the cold winds would instead chill the soul instead of thrill it. When I was in grade school, my classmate Estelito Abonalla told me about this Christmas phenomenon experienced by kids–waking up at dawn to the sound of Christmas song coming from a passing vehicle, say, a tricycle. I could relate because I experienced it too. My heart would leap in excitement for the coming new day. A day that would eventually lead to Christmas day.
Anyway, one memorable Christmas season for me was in the year 2000. I was then staying in Imus, Cavite and writing for The Daily Tribune. I was also trying to finish ROTC. I was “BS RO” so to speak. I would go to the Tribune office to get my money. They were so generous. I would even get my bonus! I was then reading “For Whom the Bell Tolls” by Hemingway. The coldness of the war scenario in the novel would creep up on me. I was after-all just like the characters in the story. I was alone in that flat, and the place felt like a bunker.
Last night, I reread “Kirot ng Kataga,” a book of poems in Tagalog by Cirilo Bautista. You see, I bought the book in December 2000. It’s just a short book, more of a chapbook really. But man, it’s a classic! And the book calls to mind as I rewrite my poems in Tagalog. Let me post some excerpts here of my new poems. This one is from “City of Springs.”
Mga isda, ianod
n’yo ng huklubang ilog
ang huli kong pagdulog:
Ay! Aking sinusumpa,
kung lahat nang makata
ay bayad pag tumula—
Hindi s’ya matataga!
Hindi s’ya matataga!
I also wrote something about the death penalty. Of course, right now we have no capital punishment but just the same, I wrote about it. You see, it would really depend upon Congress if it would revive the same. The 1987 Constitution gives them such allowance. Here’s the last stanzas of “Bisperas (Awit ng Lalaki sa Bitayan)”:
Subalit ay sino itong paparating?
Huling pag-idlip ko ay gagambalain.
Nagmamadali pa’t nakabarong man din—
bagong abogadong sadyang matulungin!
Remedyo raw sana sa aking problema’y
automatic review ng Korte Suprema.
Ang aming kapatas na kasabwat pala,
lahat nang salarin ay kanyang kinanta.
Ang utak ng krimen ay ang aming meyor
na kulang ang pondo para sa eleks’yon.
Kunwari pa’y banal at suki sa Pasyon,
‘yun pala, tit’yempo saka mandarambong.
At dagling umalis itong si attorney.
Tatawagan n’ya raw pati Presidente.
Dapat daw ang husga ng aking ponente’y
swak sa absuwelto at hindi garote!
Ngayong hinahanda ng aking berdugo
ang kanyang ineks’yon at lasong likido.
Sa may isang sulok ay may telepono:
akala mo’y diyos na nakadek’watro.
I also worked on a poem about the poetic process itself. It even delves into the writer’s life and plight. Here’s the beginning stanzas of the poem “Pasada,” also included in my upcoming book:
Sinasabing kadalasan ay malalim na gabi
at ilang ang ruta ng makata.
Mga daliring tumitipa ay susi
sa makina ng makinilya at netbook
at makinaryang umaangil
ang daigdig sa loob ng bungo’t dibdib.
There you go folks. You can expect that I will labor some more for the next poems. I am actually working on a very long poem on my experience as an organizer of poetry gigs here in my locality. Things I do. I don’t expect to be rich by doing said things, but still, I do it. But does it mean that I will no longer do other things that could make me filthy rich? Legal and moral things? Nope. Not at all.
Until next time.
NAME-CALLING AS POWER-RELATIONS
November 20, 2012
Been thinking about name-calling as an element of power relations specially in the case of the Tsinoy. In the area of politics, opposing parties resort to name-calling to cut the opponent down to size instead of engaging him in a level-headed and head-on debate. And in the Philippine setting, it could even lead to disastrous consequences. One party might just decide to bring the animosity to a more physical level and resort to arms.
In political and literary theory, name-calling is seen as an articulation of power-relations. As early as the Spanish era, it was postulated that name-calling or “bansag” was a way for the subjugated to get even with the colonizers. There was even a “patood” that goes this way: “Duwang kastila/Nagboborobintana.”
The answer to that is of course mucus in a runny nose. It could be a way for the Bikolnon peasant folk to “hit back” at their Castillan hacienderos who would merely look at them from their windows while the former toiled in the farms. Name-calling is then a product of class struggle and an adversarial culture. In the realm of psychology, it could be a sign of immaturity on the part of the name-caller.
Being so, name-calling is a “no-no” in the academic setting. Aside from the aforementioned implications, it is tantamount to bullying and psychological violence. It results to animosities. It is also a hindrance to learning hence should never be resorted to by the students, and more importantly, by the teachers.
Our penal code has a provision on libel and slander, the former particularizing on written or published while the latter on oral defamation. Article 353 defines libel in general:
“Art. 353. Definition of libel. — A libel is public and malicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status, or circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit, or contempt of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is dead.“
Articles 358 and 359 provide for slander:
“Art. 358. Slander. — Oral defamation shall be punished by arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period if it is of a serious and insulting nature; otherwise the penalty shall be arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos.
Art. 359. Slander by deed. — The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period or a fine ranging from 200 to 1,000 pesos shall be imposed upon any person who shall perform any act not included and punished in this title, which shall cast dishonor, discredit or contempt upon another person. If said act is not of a serious nature, the penalty shall be arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos.”
Likewise, the Civil Code has a provision on the matter:
“Art. 26. Every person shall respect the dignity, personality, privacy and peace of mind of his neighbors and other persons. The following and similar acts, though they may not constitute a criminal offense, shall produce a cause of action for damages, prevention and other relief:
(1) Prying into the privacy of another’s residence:
(2) Meddling with or disturbing the private life or family relations of another;
(3) Intriguing to cause another to be alienated from his friends;
(4) Vexing or humiliating another on account of his religious beliefs, lowly station in life, place of birth, physical defect, or other personal condition.”
And under Article 33 of the Civil Code cases of defamation can be subject of an independent civil action (from the criminal case):
“Art. 33. In cases of defamation, fraud, and physical injuries a civil action for damages, entirely separate and distinct from the criminal action, may be brought by the injured party. Such civil action shall proceed independently of the criminal prosecution, and shall require only a preponderance of evidence.”
Name-calling could fall under the purview of the above provisions and could be subject of a criminal and civil case. And under Art. 26 of the Civil Code, it falls within the purview of the fourth provision on vexing or humiliating on account of other personal condition, and could be a ground for damages, particularly moral damages and exemplary damages. Surely, name-calling could result to “mental anguish.” And said civil action could be proceeded with independent of the criminal case.
So how does name-calling affect Tsinoys? For instance, the teacher keeps on twisting the Chinese-sounding name of the student to make it sound ridiculous. It could humiliate the student for in our culture, one’s family name must be defended by all means being something we inherited from our forefathers. It could also have repercussions on racism. And as we said name-calling is merely a manifestation of power-relations which can be traced back to history.
CALABANGA LECTURE
October 5, 2012
Tired as a dog but to sleep as a god. Today was kinda tough. Had a case to report (Llorente v. CA), sample pleadings to submit and a blogging lecture to attend to. Needless to say, I spent the previous night working on the powerpoint presentation. I thought it would only take me a few minutes but I was wrong. I started to have these ideas, something natural to me, literary theories. Just had to start with oral tradition and how it interplays with print and electronic media. Also had to read “Cyberpoetry: Words in Battlefields,” an essay I wrote in 2000. And then I just had to add a blog-making demo.
Will have to catch up on the pleadings since I had to be at CBSUA-Calabanga by 2PM. I did miss the lectures of Jusan Misolas and Rea Robles, there was just too much work to be done. Besides I have never been to Calabanga, hence I could not make an estimate as to the travel time. I even had to ask around when I got there. But it’s nice to be in the countryside once in a while. The place should really have an agricultural college.
After class, the Muse invited me to her place. She cooked something, chicken adobo with diced bananas. One hearty way to spend the later part of the day.
CHILLING EFFECT
October 2, 2012
A law professor shared with us the contention of Fr. Joaquin Bernas with regard the RA 10175 or the Anti-Cybercrime Law. It confirmed my initial understanding that indeed, said law violates our rule on double jeopardy being that after being charged under said law, prosecution for RPC crimes are not barred. This, notwithstanding that conviction under said law would mean a penalty one degree higher than that provided for in the RPC.Our country is a signatory to a treaty that seeks to decriminalize libel. So with this law, we are in effect dishonoring said international agreement. The provision that provides for seizure of data based on a prima facie finding by the Justice Secretary without need for warrant was also reacted upon.
It is contended that only an amendment will cure the defects of RA 10175, and not IRRs from administrative bodies. But then again I ask: Is the chilling effect that it gives tantamount to “prior restraint”?
CURSORY READING OF RA 10175
September 27, 2012
I have been thinking of what constitutes “prior restraint”. I really have to read the RA 10175 in detail to make up my mind. Although my opinion would be just a speck of immaterial dust because it is the Supreme Court that is the final arbiter whether a law is constitutional or not. The findings of the High Court may not be law and a mere interpretation of what the law is, but still, it is part of our legal system.
I have been thinking that RA 10175 specialized libel, in the sense that there is now electronic libel. The thing is, since the passing of the electronic evidence rule, electronic libel has always been possible. Only this time, with this new law, it has become more specialized.
Since the Revised Penal Code provision on libel has always been there, will this new law constitute “prior restraint”? For one, our law on libel has never been seen as “prior restraint” at least, not according to jurisprudence.
You see in the Chavez case the DOJ and the NTC was warning media entities that continued airing of the “Hello Garci” tape would violate the Anti-Wiretapping Law hence they threatened said entities with closure and arrest. In that case, the “prior restraint” or censorship was the warning, while the threat of closure and arrest constituted “subsequent punishment”. We all know that the SC ruled against such “warning” even if it did not come in the form of official government issuance or order. It was after-all done in furtherance of government function and was threatening to violate freedom of the press. The Court even ruled that granting that the continued airing of the tapes could lead to a possible breach of the Anti-Wiretapping Law, said “warning” was never justified. It constituted “prior restraint.” The only justification would be if there is “clear and present danger”.
In other words, the Court was saying: “Let them do their job, and if they violate the anti-wiretapping law, then so be it. They could be prosecuted later. You just have no business telling them to shut up.”
Now we have to look at RA 10175 if it has the same effect as the “prior restraint” in the Chavez case which came as a “warning” from administrative bodies.
Now reading the RA 10175 itself, we can see that it has provisions on cybercrime offenses against the confidentiality, integrity and availability of computer data systems such as data interference, cybersquatting, illegal interception, etc. It has something on fraud, identity theft, cybersex, child pornography, and of course, libel.
The provision on libel reads: “Libel. — The unlawful or prohibited acts of libel as defined in Article 355 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, committed through a computer system or any other similar means which may be devised in the future.”
You see, it specialized libel, in effect making it electronic libel.
And here is the provision that they say would make you think twice before doing an FB click or share: “Aiding or Abetting in the Commission of Cybercrime. – Any person who willfully abets or aids in the commission of any of the offenses enumerated in this Act shall be held liable.”
This one makes electronic libel a heavier offense than libel as a felony, or as punished by the RPC: “All crimes defined and penalized by the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and special laws, if committed by, through and with the use of information and communications technologies shall be covered by the relevant provisions of this Act: Provided, That the penalty to be imposed shall be one (1) degree higher than that provided for by the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and special laws, as the case may be.”
Hence if you commit Inciting to War and Giving Motives for Reprisals via FB by telling China to “Get it on! We are ready to slug it out with you. Our OFWs there will start the fight!” (Of course, I don’t really mean this. Just an example) the FB status will be the electronic evidence as saved via “print screen”. And you will be imposed a higher penalty if found guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
And of course, there is the warrant requirement (without prejudice to provisions of law allowing for warrantless arrests and searches, of course): “Exclusionary Rule. — Any evidence procured without a valid warrant or beyond the authority of the same shall be inadmissible for any proceeding before any court or tribunal.”
I agree that indeed many provisions are vague specially those pertaining to who aids or abets in cybercrime and how. Hence there is the provision on the IRR: “Implementing Rules and Regulations. — The ICTO-DOST, the DOJ and the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) shall jointly formulate the necessary rules and regulations within ninety (90) days from approval of this Act, for its effective implementation.”
Hmmm… So far there is nothing similar to that “warning” in the Chavez case. There is no warning for example, that if we post on FB scurrilous libels against China, tending to involve the country in a war with it and tending to expose our citizens there for reprisals on their persons and property, we shall be committing Inciting to War and Giving Motives for Reprisals hence we must be restrained from posting anything. Else, we will be arrested or our PCs or netbooks, confiscated. Nothing of that sort. Only that this law makes the law on libel so much fiercer.
How will the Court rule on the petitions?
Abangan ang susunod na kabanata.
THE PROBLEM WITH RA 10175
September 26, 2012
Too much law books made me forget about the news. It was only last night when I learned that RA 10175 or the CyberCrime Prevention Act of 2012 has been passed into law. I have been hearing about it and thought that it was only a bill. But mistaken I was, for it is now a law. And dura lex sed lex.
But Article 7 of the Civil Code provides that a law must conform to the Constitution else it could be nullified.
So many writers are questioning the validity of this law. I for one blogged earlier that the measure ought to be unconstitutional because there is a fundamental prohibition to any law that would violate freedom of speech and expression. True enough, there are now petitions calling for its unconstitutionality. From what I have read in one petition, RA 10175 makes the convict liable for libel both as a cybercrime and as a felony (as punished by the Revised Penal Code). There is definitely something wrong with that given our rule regarding double jeopardy. This is aside from the fact that the 1987 Constitution as explicated in the case of Chavez v. Gonzales provides for a two-fold rule when it comes to Freedom of Speech and Expression. Namely, there must be: 1.) Freedom from prior restraint, and 2.) Freedom from subsequent punishment.
And I learned that Sen. Guingona was the lone dissenter, invoking the above doctrine.
In my limited knowledge of the law, I know that with the RPC provision on libel notwithstanding, there is always an allowance for the so-called “Doctrine of Fair Comment.” Well-placed and well-constructed criticism is always welcome in a democratic society. The law on libel is there, perhaps just to discourage people from bringing the law into their own hands by verbally maligning those who have wronged them. It then prods people to use the machinery of the legal system to attain justice.
The more important issue now is what constitutes “prior restraint”? In the Chavez case, it was the Justice Secretary and the NTC’s warnings to the media that continued airing of the scandalous “Hello Garci” tape shall be a violation of the Anti-Wiretapping Act, hence a ground for closure and arrest. Would a duly enacted law on cybercrime or electronic libel constitute “prior restraint”?
But in the Chavez case the Supreme Court ruled that not every violation of the law will justify straitjacketing the exercise of freedom of speech and of the press. The government must prove “clear and present danger”. And there was no showing that the feared violation of the anti-wiretapping law clearly endangers the national security of the State. Hence the DOJ and NTC warnings constituted “prior restraint” as they were delivered as part of official government function. The act does not have to be converted to a formal order or official circular to be considered a breach of press freedom.
Is a possible commission of electronic libel enough to restrain bloggers and social networkers from printing strongly-worded statements on issues they care about? Is there “clear and present danger” that the government would collapse because of it? In the case of Chavez, it was a mere order and yet it was shot down. In the case of RA 10175, it is not just an order, but a law, for that matter. Definitely, it comes under the purview of official government function and inherent State power which is law-making or police power. And Article Three of the Constitution or the Bill of Rights is addressed to the State and its agents. It is a provision that would safeguard the people from possible government overstep on private rights.
CRAM SESSION
September 21, 2012
Something seems to be wrong with the wifi connection at law school. I cannot get in. Or maybe my netbook has a virus lurking somewhere. Good thing that Naga City has so many hotspots.
Been getting up early. I have so many things to read and digest. And I figure, getting up at dawn is the more poetic way of working on my laws.
All quiet at the Eastern part, to paraphrase a great novel.
Perhaps we will push through with the WG on the 29th. I was feeling kinda lazy because I have so much work. And there is this plan by Kabulig that there will be a performance poetry gig on the 29th, same venue as mine. I learned about it from the manager of Sosimo. He told me that someone’s arranging to use their venue also. I was thinking of consolidating the two events, but now I learned that the Kabulig event is postponed. So if things work out with the sponsor, we will have WG on the 29th at Almaree’s. Will update you readers.
I wrote this new poem entitled “Cram Session”. It’s about the Robredo tragedy. I sent it to a magazine for possible publication. I really hope it gets printed. Fingers crossed.
AFTERSHOCKS
September 3, 2012
Earthquakes everywhere. There was another one in Mindanao just after the Visayas episode. And also somewhere in the Middle East, in Iran, particularly. Shaking, shaking, the earth is shaking.
Freedom of Information Bill. Indeed it is provided in the 1987 Constitution that the law must provide for the right of the people to transparent governance. The people must have the right to check or investigate, if need be, the paper trail of government transactions except those provided by law to be really confidential such as things of national security or those covered by executive privilege. And of course, the ever-famous SALN. I am totally for this law.
But the anti-blogging law? A big no no. For one, it surely is unconstitutional. It is well-settled that freedom of the press is inviolable. There must be no prior restraint.
I really intend to attend the Ani 37 launch in October. I just hope that my schedule will permit. I miss the CCP complex. I should also like to see Mr. Hermie Beltran again. It has been three years since I submitted works for Ani. Also, I read in our exchanges at FB that Mr. Ariel Tabag will host our beermatch. I think other contributors will tag along. Perhaps it will be in some unassuming watering hole near CCP. Something to look forward to.
Palanca hang-over, yes. Congratulations to the winners this year. Perhaps I should prepare my entries early for next year, for soon it will be bar review. Cramming won’t be the rule. I have been really busy with other things except writing. My Talaang Ginto win last summer was totally unexpected. You see, I sent an entry only because Koyang Jess Ferrer of KWF sort of asked me to. Besides, I have been writing English poetry again. I think I have enough works in Bikol-Naga, Iriganon and Filipino already. Besides, when I started writing, I wrote in English.
For me, literary practice must be compleat. Meaning, the task of the writer is to find his voice, philosophy and culture base. He must be a writer for the people, not some weird snob who avoids the crowd. He must be willing to share his skills with other writers, specially the young and upcoming. He must publish regularly in magazines, journals and anthologies. He must come up with books from time to time. He must think of unique projects to promote his art. He must write because he is a writer not because he wants to win awards. Such motivation is infantile if not self-serving.
THE SOCIAL FUNCTION DOCTRINE
May 31, 2012
Imagine the walk: The sharp air and scorching sun, the hot cemented road as mirror of heat, cheap rubber slippers almost melting. The cool wind and soft earth of farm life albeit slowly drifting away, could have been the only thing that provided for them a mirage of hope, at least in their minds. It was in December of 2008 when the Banasi Farmers had their 444-kilometer ‘Baklay’ or walk from Barangay Pawili, Bula, Camarines Sur to Malacanang. Four years hence, both the administrative case before the DAR (Department of Agrarian Reform) and the judicial matter before the RTC (Regional Trial Court) are still pending resolution. A reprise of the Sumilao Farmers’ walk, it also brought to public consciousness the same issue: The implementation of our Agrarian Reform Program.
“Sadi nako namulat. Ading baluy ko 1980’s pa di, alagad diri ko mapa-finising ta adi nganing kaso,” (I have always known this place. My house has been here since the 1980’s but I cannot do finishing touches because the case is still pending.) says Jesus Clavero, one of the farmer-beneficiaries of the Certificate of Land Ownership Award (CLOA) of a 123-hectare land in the Banasi area. The families are supposed to be given 1.7 hectare each. Their title however, is constantly being assailed by the Fajardo family.
Various non-government organizations supported them in their cause. They also found an ally in the person of the late “Ka Rene” Peňas of PAKISAMA who also led the Sumilao Farmers. “Maboot iyang tawo. Tatao makisama dawa kiisay. Tatao magseryoso, tatao magpatawa. Mahilig sa videoke. Kaya ku mabadil iya ku pag-uli niya sa Mindanao, namundo ako,” (He was a kind person. Able to adjust to people. He can be serious, as he can be funny. He loves the videoke. So when he was shot when he returned to Mindanao, I was saddened.) Jesus Clavero adds.
Communing with the Farmers
The SALIGAN-Bikol (Sentro ng Alternatibong Lingap Panligal) is also one of the NGO’s that are rendering support to the Banasi Farmers. The group serves as their legal arm, helping them on the side of litigation. This writer, together with two other SALIGAN interns spent four (4) days from May 20 to May 23, 2012 with the farmers, communing with them so as to understand their economic, social and legal standpoint. We ate with them, bathe in their water-source, experienced their daily farm-work, shared stories with them, advised them on legal matters when we can. We lived with them for only this way can we appreciate fully their legal standing.
The law protects the concept of property ownership, but likewise regulates it. This is due to the social function of property. Property ownership has a social function in such that property owners are obligated to maximize the use of their property not only for themselves but for others as well. National food security and social security are just some of the purposes of the agrarian reform program. Agricultural lands must be utilized to the maximum to ensure sufficient food production. Agricultural lands must be accessible to those who have talent in farming as not everybody is endowed with a green thumb. This also allows for farmers to have their own livelihood as giving them the opportunity to own lands would inspire them to produce more. But this must come with government support on infrastructure, credit, farm extension, legal assistance, electrification and development of rural institutions. The land owner is also justly compensated, and the farmer-beneficiaries disallowed from selling the land acquired through the program, but only with some exceptions provided by law.
Agrarian Dispute
The oldest of the peasant-folk in Banasi is Publio Clavero, now 85 years old. He was among those who joined the ‘Baklay’ of 2008. He was hospitalized when the group got to Lucena, but somehow, he survived the long walk. He lived to tell the tale that this legal battle started in 1972. But their story started much earlier, when the Fajardo family allowed the farmers, then comprised of only four families, to live in Banasi and till the land. When the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program was implemented, and with the Banasi Farmers as applicants, the relationship between the Fajardos and the farmers turned sour. Jesus Clavero, now 59, and son of Publio says: “Sabi kuno ku gurang na Fajardo: Ka ginibo ninyo, bagana ninyo ko sinuntok, kaya bumabalus ako kaninyo,” (The old Fajardo patriarch is said to have stated: Because of what you did, it is like as if you punched me. I will have my revenge.)
“Pero nguwan, maray naman kintana su mga Fajardo, kaya lang, ading Gaite na namanugang kanda ana desidido na ipadagos a kaso,” (But now the Fajardos have mellowed down, it is Gaite who married into the Fajardo family, who is determined to pursue the case) Jesus Clavero adds.
Currently, there is an ejectment case pending before the RTC against the Banasi Farmers. But the determination by the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) whether or not the Banasi farm is covered by the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) serves as a sort of a prejudicial question for the determination of the ejectment case. The Fajardos are contending that the Banasi farm cannot be covered by the agrarian reform law since they claim that said area is a grazing land for cattle. They appealed before the Office of the President for the purpose. The administrative case is still awaiting resolution. The law provides that agricultural lands are covered by the agrarian reform program, while grazing lands are not.
Farm Life
Life in the Banasi Farm is simple. The house of Jesus Clavero is near the ‘salog’ or river which runs down from Mount Isarog. You wake up early at around 5AM, drink fresh water from the earthen jar or tapayan, and go through the daily obstacle course of trees, grass and cascading path of earth and stones going down the river for a bath. Then there’s the farm work: The rice paddies, sugar cane plantations (Banasi is near PENSUMIL, a sugar factory), fruit-bearing trees and some livestock (goats and cows) and poultry (chickens, swans and ducks) to take care of. You will not go hungry there as high-grade rice is abundant as well as fruits and freshly-picked vegetables. Huge damulags or carabaos abound the place, but they are nice enough to give way when you are passing by the dirt road where they stand. Guard dogs keep their watch specially during the night when everybody has gone to bed and the place is pitch black. There is the kamalig and the farm hut where people do deskanso or take their break from farm work. It is also a place where they gather to tell stories and discuss social issues.
The Banasi Farmers are a socially aware lot. One night there was a thunderstorm and the lightning exploded near our roof. We were not sure if it was the lightning or the wind that broke the TV antennae down. But I saw the two old men, Manuy Jesus and his cousin Manuy Galdo seriously fixing the antennae the next day. So I approached them to offer help. Their backs at me, I heard the latter say in a soft voice, almost a whisper: “Mabayad ta sana si Corona.” (Just so we could see Corona.)