Many in the Philippines and abroad would be familiar with “Spoliarium” (1884) by Juan Luna de San Pedro y Novicio (1857-1899), which is today showcased as the centerpiece of the main gallery in the National Museum of the Philippines, occupying indisputable pride of place. Among various notable aspects of the painting, “Spoliarium” announced at the time to the colonial masters of Europe the genius residing in the indigenous peoples of Las Islas Filipinas, Spain’s premiere colony operating as the capital of its sunset empire in Asia. His masterpiece represented one proud colonial’s consummate execution of Academicism in painting—it showcased his expert draftsmanship, impeccable composition, skillful handling of oil, and according to prevailing standards of the visual arts his opus was occupied with high-minded Neoclassical historical subject matter rendered according to the popular Romantic style of the day. “Spoliarium” won the first out of three gold medals at the 1884 Exposición Nacional de Bellas Artes or National Exhibition of Fine Arts in Madrid. Established by Queen Isabellna II in 1853 by a Royal Decree, it was organized as an annual competition and represented the largest official exhibition of Spanish art, running from 1856 to 1968.
Jose Rizal received the oil masterwork as a veiled subversive declamation against Spain, wherein the bloodbath of the gladiators stood for Philippine resistance against Spanish colonial rule. Rizal’s footnote in his speech to his Madrid compatriots, celebrating the award, declared that the painting “embodied the essence of our social, moral, and political life: humanity in severe ordeal, humanity unredeemed, reason and idealism in open struggle with prejudice, fanaticism, and injustice.” By Rizal’s own admission, his novel Noli Me Tangere was directly inspired by “Spoliarium.”
Because Luna associated himself with the Katipunan, he was arrested in 1896 by Spanish authorities in the Philippines but then pardoned the following year.
As the Philippine Revolution proceeded, he was tasked by Emilio Aguinaldo to join the Paris delegation promoting diplomatic recognition of the Philippine revolutionary government. After the Treaty of Paris was signed the same year, he continued his mission in Washington, D.C.
Together with his contemporary and compatriot, Félix Resurrección Hidalgo y Padilla (1855-1913), Luna may be said to have introduced full-blown Realism to the Philippines, which in the early twentieth century segued into Romanticism, epitomized by Fernando Amorsolo.
“Tampuhan” (1895) is, especially for the postmodern, a riveting window into a historical time and place, that of late nineteenth-century colonial Philippines and just before the outbreak of the Philippine Revolution in 1896.
“Tampo” describes the sulking of one or more parties in a squabble, in this case, a lover’s quarrel; “tampuhan” is the verbal noun.
Modern Filipinos will readily recognize the fashionable attire, freshly laundered and ironed, of the fretting couple, doubtless members of the gentrified landed elite, sunlit veranda overlooking the street, bordered by an airy balustrade, capiz shell windows pushed wide open, both sides, accented by sundry period appointments.
Anticipating Amorsolo’s signature style, light exuberantly bursts from the background while simultaneously reflecting off radiant foreground figures.
“Tampuhan” recapitulates a lost Zeitgeist, similar to the intimations wrought by invaluable artworks and artifacts of this period, the likes of “The Quiason Family” (1880) by Simon Flores, “Mujer Filipina” (1895) by Lorenzo de la Rocha Icaza, or “Planting Rice” (1904) by Fabian de la Rosa.
Paintings like Luna’s fantasia keep historical dreams alive.
A concise description of this historical period is available in Britannica.
Momentous social, economic and political changes were ongoing just before the 1896 Philippine Revolution.
“By the late 18th century, political and economic changes in Europe were finally beginning to affect Spain and, thus, the Philippines. Important as a stimulus to trade was the gradual elimination of the monopoly enjoyed by the galleon to Acapulco. The last galleon arrived in Manila in 1815, and by the mid-1830s Manila was open to foreign merchants almost without restriction. The demand for Philippine sugar and abaca (hemp) grew apace, and the volume of exports to Europe expanded even further after the completion of the Suez Canal in 1869.
“The growth of commercial agriculture resulted in the appearance of a new class. Alongside the landholdings of the church and the rice estates of the pre-Spanish nobility there arose haciendas of coffee, hemp, and sugar, often the property of enterprising Chinese-Filipino mestizos. Some of the families that gained prominence in the 19th century have continued to play an important role in Philippine economics and politics.
“Not until 1863 was there public education in the Philippines, and even then the church controlled the curriculum. Less than one-fifth of those who went to school could read and write Spanish, and far fewer could speak it properly. The limited higher education in the colony was entirely under clerical direction, but by the 1880s many sons of the wealthy were sent to Europe to study. There, nationalism and a passion for reform blossomed in the liberal atmosphere. Out of this talented group of overseas Filipino students arose what came to be known as the Propaganda Movement. Magazines, newspapers, poetry, and pamphleteering flourished, most notably the biweekly paper La Solidaridad, which began publication in 1889. José Rizal, this movement’s most brilliant figure, produced two political novels—Noli me tangere (1887; Touch Me Not) and El filibusterismo (1891; The Reign of Greed)—which had a wide impact in the Philippines. In 1892 Rizal returned home and formed the Liga Filipina, a modest reform-minded society, loyal to Spain, that breathed no word of independence. But Rizal was quickly arrested by the overly fearful Spanish, exiled to a remote island in the south, and finally executed in 1896. Meanwhile, within the Philippines there had developed a firm commitment to independence among a somewhat less privileged class.
“Shocked by the arrest of Rizal in 1892, these activists quickly formed the Katipunan under the leadership of Andres Bonifacio, a self-educated warehouseman. The Katipunan was dedicated to the expulsion of the Spanish from the islands, and preparations were made for armed revolt. Filipino rebels had been numerous in the history of Spanish rule, but now for the first time they were inspired by nationalist ambitions and possessed the education needed to make success a real possibility.”
https://www.britannica.com/place/Philippines/The-19th-century
—Gregorio C. Borlaza et al., “The 19th Century in the Philippines,” Britannica, last updated March 10, 2026
After the pacification of the Philippines by the U.S. in the early part of the last century—on July 4, 1902, the U.S. government officially declared the end of the Philippine-American War, even though resistance persisted in various regions until as late as 1913—the U.S. set about remaking, not entirely successfully, its only colony in Asia, according to its own conception and model of democratic government.
During this period, Philippine art reflected the dramatic historical changes taking place.
 |
| Tampuhan (1895) by Juan Luna |
Victorio C. Edades (1895-1985) is the 1976 National Artist of the Philippines for the Visual Arts-Painting. Having introduced Modern Art to the Philippines, he has been called “Father of Modern Philippine Art,” a designation which, curiously, recapitulates the title “Father of Modern Art” assigned to Paul Cézanne, the Post-Impressionist painter whose style his most resembles.
Edades studied at the University of Washington, Seattle in the period 1919 to 1925, where he completed a Bachelor of Fine Arts and a Master of Fine Arts in Painting. Although he enrolled in architecture courses, he did not pursue his interest further.
Most significant in his artistic development was his exposure to over one thousand pieces in “The International Exhibition of Modern Art,” a touring exhibit that visited Seattle in 1922.
Joining art competitions in the U.S., he was further inspired when his painting “The Sketch” (1927) won second place in the Annual Exhibition of North American Artists.
Upon his return to the Philippines in 1928, he launched at the end of the year a one-man show of thirty paintings at the Philippine Columbia Club in Ermita, of which “The Builders” (1928) was the statement piece. It is a tribute to Cézanne’s flat shapes and strong outlines, although Edades chooses swarthy hues over the bright palette of the Post-Impressionists. His deep browns and dark greens suit the depiction of impoverished Philippine laborers. Endemic poverty—it is visible almost everywhere—is a recurring motif in the Philippine visual arts.
“The Builders” is very large, 1.05 x 3.67 m or 3.66 x 12.04 feet approximately.
None of his exhibit paintings sold. We might say that Edades mounted the first Salon des Refusés, a solo at that, in the Philippines.
In 1930 Edades participated in founding the Department of Architecture at the University of Santo Tomas (UST); he was appointed its acting head, and in 1935 he became the Director of the newly organized UST College of Architecture and Fine Arts.
Edades from this perch continued to promote the cause of modern art in the Philippines. He was the foremost leader of the Thirteen Moderns, launched together with Carlos Francisco and Galo Ocampo, in 1937. Under Edades’ leadership, Philippine Modernism carried on as a dynamic counterpoint to Amorsolo-style realism and naturalism.
Besides the 1976 National Artist of the Philippines award, Edades received various honors, including Doctor of Fine Arts, Honoris Causa, from UST in 1977.
His 1976 award citation hailed him as “the original iconoclast of Philippine art,” observing that “he changed the direction of Philippine painting decisively, ending the parochial isolation of Philippine art and placing it in the mainstream of international culture.”
Upon retirement in 1966, he began teaching at the Philippine Women’s College of Davao and continued to produce fine art.
Edades represents a watershed in the Philippine visual arts, “The Builders” its vanguard banner.
 |
| The Builders (1928) by Victorio Edades |
Galo B. Ocampo (1913-1985) is one of the pioneers of Philippine Modernism. Together with Victorio C. Edades and Carlos V. Francisco, he led the Thirteen Moderns, the first wave of Philippine modernists, constituted in 1937.
“Brown Madonna” (1938) illustrates well Ocampo’s Post-Impressionist style. It is a “Gauguinesque” painting that may have been inspired by Paul Gauguin’s “Ia Orana Maria” (1891), which the French émigré executed soon after settling in Tahiti. Ocampo’s painting, like “Ia Orana Maria,” is predominantly two-dimensional, besides floral, decorative, and rendered in tropical colors.
Ocampo significantly diverged from Spanish colonial religious art when he showed the Blessed Virgin Mary and Child as Malays, not Europeans. The rendition was novel at the time.
The painting shows damage where small strips have fallen off, especially visible in the skirt of the Virgin. A recent photo from the UST Museum Collection reveals that the damage has been restored.
Ocampo evolved as a painter. He launched into Surrealism following the shock and trauma of World War II.
 |
| Brown Madonna (1938) by Galo Ocampo |
 |
| Restored, UST Museum Collection |
“Jeepneys” (1951) by Vicente S. Manansala shows the 1981 National Artist of the Philippines for Visual Arts-Painting (posthumous) coming into his own. Although Manansala was an original member of the 1937 Thirteen Moderns, it was only after having survived World War II that he effectively begins his transformative journey.
“Jeepneys” is a critical step, showing the major influence of Cubism, with its geometrically based deconstructionism. Belts and patches of color switch in and out in the painterly execution of this early work. The masterpiece heralds transparent cubism, the artist’s mature and signature style.
There are somewhat inaccurately colored reproductions of this painting available on the internet. Colors shown here are probably closer to the actual, which is apparent from the photo below of the artwork displayed in the Ateneo Art Gallery.
 |
| Jeepneys (1951) by Vicente Manansala |
 |
| “Jeepneys” at the Ateneo Art Gallery |
Jose T. Joya (1931-1995) is the 2003 National Artist of the Philippines for Visual Arts-Painting (posthumous). He pioneered Abstract Expressionism in the Philippines, and more importantly, translated the style according to a recognizably Philippine idiom. His abstracts are intelligent and innovative; bold, assertive, and masculine. Bright and exuberant, they celebrate color, often warm.
It is unfortunate that he like several other important Philippine artists received his award posthumously, but it is just as well that the Philippine government eventually came around to awarding the man and his work.
 |
| Flight (1962) by Jose Joya |
Original member of the Thirteen Moderns founded in 1937, Cesar T. Legaspi (1917-1994) worked as a commercial artist until his retirement in 1968. Throughout the forties and fifties until the late sixties the first phase of his fine art could be described as Cubist works of social commentary about the economic hardship and poverty endemic in urban Philippines. His paintings from this period were, appropriately, dark. Already the artist displayed interest in modeling male musculature.
Beginning in the late sixties, he developed his own personal, meticulous and refined style of Transparent Cubism to dazzling effect. His principal subject, the male nude, he limned linearly in overlapping painstakingly diaphanous, interiorly lit planes. His style evinced a highly developed aestheticism. He is the 1990 National Artist of the Philippines for Visual Arts-Painting.
 |
| The Survivor (1972) by Cesar Legaspi |
THE QUIASON FAMILY (1880) BY SIMON FLORES
ReplyDelete“This painting is a fine example of a 19th-century group portrait of an ilustrado (educated) family. In oil portraits such as this can be seen images of Filipinos as proud members of an emergent class possessing new economic power and creating their own space in the works of their time.
“The family, consisting of the standing father and the seated mother with her two small children, are formally posed for the portrait in the 19th-century convention of representation. …Following the convention of ilustrado portraiture, the artist painstakingly recorded their Sunday finery in all the minutiae of embroidery, as well as transparent textures of their costumes, jewelry, and accessories in the style of miniaturismo.”
https://epa.culturalcenter.gov.ph/3/82/2281/
—Alice G. Guillermo, “The Quiason Family 1880,” Cultural Center of the Philippines Encyclopedia of Philippine Art, November 18, 2020
“The Quiason Family” is a medium-sized painting, 77 x 61 cm or 30 x 24 in. It shows Cirilo and Severina Quiason and their two children.
Simon Flores y de la Rosa (1839-1902) studied at Academia de Dibujo y Pintura, the first art school in the Philippines. Flores was known for his fine portraits of the Pampanga elite—twenty are known to exist—and for his attention to portraying details of their clothing and jewelry. Besides, he received religious art commissions and won local and international awards for his work.
“Flores was born in 1839 to a family rich in artisan traditions in San Fernando de Dilao (now Paco), Manila. His family originally descended from Balayan, Batangas. Under the supervision of his uncle Pio de la Rosa, Flores’ first education in art was informal and basic. After completing his studies at the Academia de Dibujo y Pintura under Lorenzo Guerrero and Lorenzo Rocha he set up his own studio. Through family connections within the local art community, Flores secured commissions to paint church murals as well as portraits and religious paintings for the rich in the province of Pampanga. During this time he also taught art, gave private art lessons, and married a woman named Simplicia, the daughter of a local religious leader.
“Flores’ popularity increased around 1871, the reasons for which were twofold. For one, the colonial government was extremely pleased with Amadeo I, a portrait Flores was commissioned to paint that is believed to represent Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. Another characteristic of Flores’ work that gained recognition was his attention to detail in painting the costumes and jewelry of his portrait subjects, especially traditional Filipino attire sewn from piña cloth, such as barongs, baro’t saya, and terno. For this skill, he is known as a master of miniaturismo. The themes of Flores’ paintings include culture, domesticity, personality, social and family roles, and wealth.”
https://www.tobinreese.com/simon-de-la-rosa-flores.html
—“Simon de la Rosa Flores (1839-1902),” Tobin Reese Fine Art
Gonzalinho
LA MUJER FILIPINA (1895) BY LORENZO ROCHA ICAZA
ReplyDeleteBorn to a Spanish family in the Philippines, at the time part of the Spanish Empire, Lorenzo de la Rocha y de Icaza (1837-1898) is notable for his role at the very beginning of art education in the Philippines. Rocha headed the Manila Academy of Painting, Sculpture, and Engraving, first as the interim director (1850-58) and then afterwards as the director (1892-98). The Academy had been established by the Spanish colonial regime in 1846 to succeed the first art school in the Philippines, launched in 1821 by Filipino Chinese painter Damián Domingo (1796-1834). His pioneering school had closed upon the artist’s demise thirteen years later.
Along with the nineteenth-century Philippine masters famous today, Juan Luna (1857-1899) and Félix Resurrección Hidalgo (1855-1913), Rocha had been schooled in traditional Academic art—realistic, and during the latter half of the nineteenth century, inspired by Romanticism, the cultural movement that in the visual arts dwelt upon the depiction of subjectivity and emotion; nature and the sublime; nationalism, heroism, and individualism; and the exotic or supernatural.
Academic art in the Philippines is unmistakably Romantic in inspiration. Its realistic execution represents a quantum departure from the naïve painting style, wonderfully charming, of Damián Domingo.
Rocha’s masterpiece “La Mujer Filipina” (1895) superbly illustrates the heights achieved by Academic art in the Philippines.
At first it would appear like an instance of genre art, but it becomes obvious quickly that it isn’t. Although the subject, a working-class woman at the market, is typical of genre painting, the treatment of the subject is not, because she has been idealized by the artist. She strides forward, slim and confident, flashing a bright, neatly pressed outfit that looks like it’s just been worn the first time.
“Her attire consists of a loose white cotton blouse with lace-edged elbow-length sleeves (the ‘baro’), a white ‘enagua’ with ‘ojetes’ (eyelets) peeks out below her skirt (‘saya’) with yellow-orange windowpane checks, a striped black and blue rectangular cloth tied over the hips (‘tapis’), and a light tan shawl (‘alampay’) worn to shield her shoulder and to be used as a head cover for protection from heat. A scapular with a devotional image on red cloth and rosary beads with crosses hang from her neck. She completes her outfit with elevated ‘bakya’ (wooden clogs) to keep her outfit clean from mud.
“…she carries a reed umbrella, likely of Chinese or Japanese origin, in front of her chest, while balancing a basket filled with wood, bananas, and a glass bottle on her head, [while] holding a fish still attached to a hook in her right hand.”
https://www.facebook.com/PearlOfTheOrient.ph/posts/mujer-filipina-1895oil-on-canvas-bylorenzo-de-la-rocha-icaza-1838-1898museo-de-b/352637084532975/
—Discover the Beautiful Philippines, “‘MUJER FILIPINA’ 1895, Oil on canvas by Lorenzo de la Rocha Icaza (1838-1898), Museo de Bellas Artes de Córdoba,” Facebook, July 1, 2024
Various comments “correct” the Facebook post, one stating that the “wood” is “sugarcane sticks.”
Gonzalinho
Additional Sources
Delete“One of the most significant events of the Spanish presence in the Philippine Islands was the creation of a School of Fine Arts, which was supported and promoted by the Cordoban politician Ángel Avilés during his time at the Ministry of Public Instruction and Fine Arts. Rocha, a Filipino artist who had spent some time training on the Iberian Peninsula, headed this school in its early days. This painting, an excellent example of the transmission to the island of the prevailing romantic tastes in Spain, and full of a good number of elements of daily life, was part of a group of works given to Avilés as a result of the visit made to the school in 1895, becoming part of his important private collection.”
Translated from Spanish to English by Google Translate
https://www.museodelprado.es/coleccion/artista/rocha-icaza-lorenzo/8082fb7f-c0e9-494c-88a5-046bfb4cc48e
—“Lorenzo Rocha Icaza: Manila (Filipinas), 10.08.1837, 1898,” Museo del Prado
A detailed history of his career as an artist and educator is available here.
“Lorenzo Rocha was a student at the Manila School of Painting, where he served as interim director until 1858, when Agustín Sáez became its first professional director. At that time, he was awarded a scholarship to continue his studies in Spain, where he was appointed Honorary Court Painter to the Spanish Crown.
“In 1862, his scholarship was extended until 1866. As a result of his work during this period, Lorenzo Rocha presented his painting “The Dream of Don Ramiro” at the National Exhibition of 1866 (inaugurated on January 25, 1867). The painting was awarded an Honorable Mention, Second Class, and acquired by the government for the Ministry of Overseas Territories. After returning to Manila, Lorenzo Rocha joined the faculty of the Academy of Painting, Sculpture, and Engraving, eventually becoming its director in 1892, a position he held until his death in 1898.
“…The new Academy was approved in 1846, modeled after those existing on the Iberian Peninsula, although it did not open until 1850. In its early years, it was directed by various government officials who held the position until their term of service ended and they returned to the Peninsula.
“Faced with this instability, which prevented the development of long-term projects, the Board of Trade requested authorization to search for a specialized director in Spain. In the meantime, they held a competition to fill the position on an interim basis, for which the painter Lorenzo Rocha y de Ycaza, the most outstanding student of the newly established school, was chosen. He was granted the right to receive the full salary assigned to the position until the arrival of the permanent director. The young student Lorenzo Guerrero (1835-1904) was also named as a collaborator; he would become a key figure in the history of the School, and his position, dedicated to teaching the native population, was performed without pay. The efforts to find a director bore fruit in the person of the Spanish painter Agustín Sáez Glanadell, who took up the post in 1857, thus ending the interim period of Lorenzo Rocha, whose services were gratefully acknowledged.
To be continued
Gonzalinho
Additional Sources
DeleteContinued
“The Commercial Court, seeking to compensate Lorenzo Rocha for his services and aware that specialized training was necessary to direct the Academy, offered him a scholarship to continue his painting studies in Spain for four years, inaugurating a practice that would become a regular occurrence a few years later.
“With the financial support of the scholarship, Rocha embarked for Spain, as reported in the newspaper El Mallorquín on Saturday, May 29, 1858.
“…we know that by 1860 he was settled in Madrid, continuing his studies at the Special School of Painting. It is possible that during this time he produced some work for the royal household, having already attained the privilege of being named Honorary Court Painter to the Spanish Crown.
“When, in 1862, the period for which his pension had been granted ended, Rocha requested reinstatement to his position as director of the Manila School…, but his request was denied because the post was still held by the Spaniard Agustín Sáez, who had been confirmed that very year.
“Faced with this situation, Rocha requested an extension of his pension from the Ministry of Overseas Territories ‘…in order to finish a composition painting that he has already begun…’ The Ministry consulted the director of the National Museum of Paintings about the painter’s progress, who favorably reported on the request, ‘…being aware of the progress that the applicant has achieved in such a difficult art through his constant application,’ and considering among his merits the honor of having earned the title of Court Painter. …Finally, he was granted an extension of his annual pension of 12,000 reales, first for two years and then for another two. The newspaper La Correspondencia de España reported on the granting of the second extension in 1864.”
Translated from Spanish to English by Google Translate
https://cuadernodesofonisba.blogspot.com/2018/04/un-nuevo-pintor-filipino-en-el-museo.html
—“Lorenzo Rocha – Pintor Filipino en El Museo del Prado,” Cuaderno de Sofonisba, April 26, 2018
Gonzalinho
COMPARE AND CONTRAST
Deletehttps://www.facebook.com/groups/127441434561018/?multi_permalinks=1650663828905430&hoisted_section_header_type=recently_seen
—FACTSZERO, “‘The image captures a group of Filipina ladies on their way to the market in the Philippines…,” Alaala at Kasaysayan sa Likod ng Lumang Larawan, Facebook, July 1, 2024
Compare Rocha’s “Mujer Filipina” with the detail of a photograph of the same subject taken c. 1906-1910. Heavily creased and crumpled, her dress is dingy and faded—we are guessing, because the photograph is two-toned. She sports a serviceable umbrella, not in the least stylish.
Gonzalinho
CAMPESINA INDIA (1906) BY FÉLIX MARTÍNEZ
DeleteEven more striking is the contrast between “Mujer Filipina” and “Campesina India” (1906) by Félix Martínez y Lorenzo (1859-c. 1916); the latter portrays a glum-faced, barefoot lady peasant drably clothed in rumpled togs.
ISLAS FILIPINAS (INDIA CHICHIRICA) (c. late 19th century) BY DEL MUNOZ, MALAGA AND J. LLERENA
ReplyDelete“Ilustracion Filipina (Filipino Enlightenment) Periodico Quincenal was a biweekly newspaper that started its publication in the early part of 1859. It was a popular periodical that featured excellent illustrations, prose, poems, and articles.
“The newspaper’s target readers were the cultured elites but due to the numerous illustrations, the cost of printing was high. The periodical was sold at one real or 25 centavos which made it expensive compared to other newspapers. It eventually issued its last edition in December 1860.
“Decades later, Miguel Zaragoza and his older brother Jose, who were fans of Ilustracion Filipina, established a similar periodical named La Ilustracion Filipina. Obviously, the brothers patterned theirs after Ilustracion Filipina. Retana dismissed the Zaragozas’ endeavor as a ‘poor imitation of the original’.
“Federico de Lerena was a major contributor of poems to Ilustracion Filipina. He was a Spanish writer, journalist, and poet who lived in the Philippines. He was a supporter of the Filipinos and colonial reform. He often wrote about the local scenery in the Philippines and its people incorporating these themes in his prose.
“One of the poems of de Lerena which was published in Ilustracion Filipina was ‘Titay La Chichirica’. The term India Chichirica was a descriptive term used for the native Filipina. Its connotation was of a coquettish and sophisticated female out to tempt the newly arrived Spanish and European males and make them fall in love with her. La India Chichirica was the Filipina version of Scarlett O’Hara.
“Another definition of chichirica that I came across is that of a Catharanthus rose. Also known as an old maid, rose periwinkle, and Madagascar periwinkle. In the Philippines, we refer to it as kantutay.
“A few years ago, quite by accident, I acquired a copy of a 19th Century colorized lithograph print of Islas Filipinas (India Chichirica). As per the caption, it was printed as part of a catalog or announcement for an exhibit of The Juan Luna Paintings and 19th Century Prints from the Far East Bank Art Collection. This exhibit could have happened in the late 1980s or early 1990s. The Far East Bank Art Collection is now part of the BPI Art Collection.
“The lithograph featured a young black-haired Filipina dressed in fashionable clothes holding a handkerchief and a fan standing on a cliff amidst a lush scene of greenery. Her posture and the look in her eyes beckon the mesmerized viewer. Who wouldn’t fall in love with this beguiling woman?
“On the bottom left of the engraving was the signed name of Lit. del Munoz, Malaga, and on the bottom right: J. Llerena lit. It is undated.
“In Carlos L. Quirino’s Old Manila (2nd Edition) and even in El Periodismo Filipino, the same exact lithograph print appears on both books. Quirino writes that the original illustration was made by C.W. Andrews and appeared in Ilustracion Filipina in 1859. It could have accompanied de Lerena’s Titay La Chichirica poem.
“The same lithograph but colorized was published in 1876 alongside Vicente Barrantes’ essay on ‘Las Mujeres de Filipinas’. Barrantes was a Spanish chronicler, poet, writer, and bibliophile. Jose Rizal was not fond of him as Barrantes wrote criticisms about Rizal’s Noli Me Tangere.”
https://www.thevisualtraveler.net/2020/07/la-india-chichirica-19th-century.html
—Margaux Camaya, “La India Chichirica: The 19th Century Filipina,” The Visual Traveler, July 18, 2020
The lithograph print dates to 1859, its colorized version to 1876.
Gonzalinho
“La india chichirica” translates to “Indian coquette.”
DeleteGonzalinho
Not a painting, but it is still an original work of art (lithograph).
DeleteGonzalinho
PLANTING RICE (1921) BY FABIÁN DE LA ROSA
ReplyDeleteFabián de la Rosa y Cueto (1869-1937) is accurately described as a master of genre painting in the “academic realist style” (Reuben R. Cañete).
According to Cañete, the academic realist style “eventually gave birth to an entire tradition of depicting Philippine rural scenes that would be popularized by Fernando Amorsolo and the Conservatives of the Mabini School from 1920 to 1950.”
https://epa.culturalcenter.gov.ph/3/82/2271/
—Reuben R. Cañete, “Planting Rice [Fabian de la Rosa],” CCP Encyclopedia of Philippine Art Digital Edition, November 18, 2020
De la Rosa was educated in traditional academic art; when he had the opportunity to visit Europe and study there, his style remained unaffected by Romanticism, the dominant style of the previous century, or by Modernism, the emergent style of the new era.
He began learning how to draw and paint early in life. At ten years old, he was taught by his aunt, Marciana de la Rosa.
At twelve years old, in 1881, he was taken under the wing of his uncle, Simon Flores, already an established artist.
That same year he enrolled at the Escuela de Artes y Oficios but had to discontinue after three years because his father passed away and he had to work to support the family.
At 24 years old, in 1893, he enrolled at the Escuela Superior de Pintura Escultura y Grabado, the Manila Academy of Painting, Sculpture, and Engraving.
In 1908 he was granted a scholarship by the Germinal Cigar Factory to study at the Académie Julian in Paris, France and the Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando in Madrid, Spain.
He returned to teach at the School of Fine Arts at the University of the Philippines, where he eventually became the director of the school from 1927 to 1937, the year of his demise.
De la Rosa is estimated to have produced 1,000 works of art (Gehringer Art, Ltd.).
“Planting Rice” (1921) is a masterpiece of Philippine genre art. It is another version of a similar painting which won the artist a Gold Medal at the Saint Louis International Exposition in the U.S. in 1904.
This remarkably ambient piece draws us into fellowship with a clutch of peasants laboring amidst the mottled shadows and crimson washes of a day at its close. The painting recapitulates Jean-François Millet’s “The Angelus” (1857-59) in a tropical setting.
To be continued
Gonzalinho
PLANTING RICE (1921) BY FABIÁN DE LA ROSA
DeleteContinued
“Planting Rice” is “a descendant of the tipos del pais (country scenes) and rural landscape scenes of the latter Spanish colonial period.”
It “would…play an important role in the crafting of an incipient narrative meant to produce Filipino nationalist affiliation with the scenery and life of lowland agrarian society rather than with urban lifestyles engendered by industrialization.”
—Cañete, op. cit.
The original 1906 painting cannot be separated from its political context. Four years after the U.S. government officially declared the end of the Philippine-American War, the newly installed colonial masters wished to display before the American public exotic curios from their freshly acquired overseas island possessions.
De la Rosa was an important influence on the first National Artist of the Philippines, Fernando Amorsolo, who was bestowed the award posthumously in 1972 under the category of Visual Arts-Painting.
Amorsolo, who had been orphaned at eleven years old when his father died, and his brother Pablo, lived with de la Rosa, their uncle, beginning in 1903. When the boy turned thirteen, he apprenticed under de la Rosa.
Amorsolo, like his uncle, depicted rural everyday life and applied his talents to portraiture. However, the National Artist of the Philippines was additionally distinguished by his signature tropical light and visionary imagination. His paintings—idyllic, radiant, invariably sanguine—were popularly received across Philippine society.
Gonzalinho