Baby, who was the cultural officer of DILG, thinks that the idea of keeping Filipino art in the Philippines "is narrow, misguided nationalism." All the fuss about the exportation of the Luna painting "goes against the philosophy and practice of the art world and all the principles of artistic expression."
Consider, she points out, if all other countries adopted this narrow perspective advocated by one daily newspaper and the wife of the Finance Secretary. "There would be nothing but French art in the Louvre, only English and American art in the great museums and universities in the United Kingdom and United States. Van Gogh, Rembrandt, Picasso would be small, obscure, local painters. Artists would be imprisoned and hobbled, their creative juices smothered by irrational chauvinism."
Baby continued: "Globalization was applied to art long before it was to trade. Luna’s paintings were for sale in Madrid in his lifetime... The opportunity for Filipino great masters to at last take their rightful place in the art collections and museums of the world is too valuable to be lost. It should not be the victim of politics, business rivalries, or short-sighted, wrong-headed notions of patriotism. True love of country and of art lies in the free, open globalization of Filipino art."
Amen to all that, I must say. Further, it is clear that no law was violated when the owner of the Luna painting, Parisian Life, sent the painting to an auction house in Hong Kong. In the first place, the painting has not yet been declared a National Treasure.
Historian Ambet Ocampo wrote in his column that there is in any case, a process to be followed even if the painting is covered by the Marcos decree being cited by the Finance Secretary’s wife. A panel of experts will have to be convened by the National Museum to determine if this painting, described effusively as rare, beautiful, and important in the Christie’s catalogue, is a National Cultural Treasure.
Ocampo wrote: "If designated as an important cultural treasure, it can still be exported and sold provided the government is given first option. Furthermore, the government is given three months, under the law, to raise the money for this painting that has been repeatedly described as "priceless" although it actually has a P15-million price tag on it. Do you think the cash-strapped government will pay P15 million for this painting? Considering previous history, I doubt it."
Then Ocampo expressed his opinion that good as the painting may be, it isn’t in the same league as the "Spoliarium", "Blood Compact" or "Bulaqueña". So, what’s the fuss? Kim Camacho’s auction house didn’t get the commission to sell it?
Hopefully, we don’t end up with one of those noisy emotional responses. The danger for that is high, given that Ambet’s paper is the one pushing for the restrictive approach. It carried a strong editorial on it last Friday. We all know how this photo op crazy government can be terrorized by shrill cries like this.
Yet, this is an important issue that would determine if we would be bypassed by the international art trade, thereby limiting the potential market of Filipino artists. Investment grade paintings are popular even in these troubled economic times. Somehow, people think it is the last refuge for the investor who had been disappointed by the stock market and other investment options or is worried about an economic depression.
Why should we limit the market for Lunas and Amorsolos and Magsaysay Hos to Filipino collectors? Most of them already have extensive collections. And government can’t afford to buy these paintings in this era of budget deficits. Wouldn’t we be proud if the Smithsonian or the Getty Museum acquired a Luna, maybe even this particular Luna or an Amorsolo or Manansala, and exhibited them in their museums? That will put us in the consciousness of art lovers worldwide.
I remember seeing the Spoliarium in a dark corner of some hall at the old DFA office in Padre Faura when I was covering the foreign affairs beat as a young reporter in the 70s. No one would have guessed it was a national treasure because no one cared enough to give it the care and place of honor a national treasure deserved. It would have been better if it was in a serious foreign museum of art and we can point it out as a masterpiece by a Filipino artist. That would have done us a lot more good, image wise as a people.
In fact, the many leads that poured into to the police headquarters in the last few days came from concerned citizens. Using the latest communication and other crime-solving technology, the police managed to put the pieces of the puzzle together. There has got to be some lessons we can learn from all that.
First of all is the importance of trust. Citizens wouldn’t have helped with such enthusiasm if they didn’t trust the police. I guess that’s our basic problem here. We don’t trust the police and for good reason. Kidnap and carnap victims often find out to their horror when they go and report a crime, the criminals who did them in are wearing police uniforms. The first big problem of our police is how to win citizen trust.
Secondly is the need to invest in modern crime fighting equipment such as communication equipment and computers and computer data bases. Yet, many of our police officers in the field don’t even get enough gasoline allowance to patrol their area of responsibility. Some even have to supply their own paper and carbon paper for their reports. In the Washington DC sniper case, we can just admire in awe how flawless their coordination was when they followed leads from clear across the country in Washington state and then to Alabama.
Thirdly, and this is something even the Americans should have learned from the harrowing case, an extensive computer file of gun ballistic records is needed to quickly solve cases like this. Rightist gun lovers like members of the National Rifle Association in the United States have successfully prevented the compilation of such an extensive data base. Back here at home, we just don’t have the funds to do a good compilation that is easily accessible by law enforcement agencies. This is something we ought to look at more seriously.
At least, the nightmare is over for the Americans, so far as the snipers are concerned. Here, we still live in some amount of fear that some criminally inclined religious fanatic or ideologue would strike in some crowded place any time. Maybe we should just drop our distrust and resolve to help the police in the hope that they already deserve it. We just don’t have a choice.
There were three morticians trading stories in a bar one night. The first one says, "What a day I had today. The guy wasn’t wearing his seat belt and his head flew into the windshield. Took me all day to make the face look natural."
Not to be outdone, the second mortician says, "You think that’s bad? I had this guy in who got hit by a train while he was riding his bike. Took me TWO days to put all the pieces back together!"
The third mortician just shook his head. "You guys have it easy," he said. "I had this hooker parachutist whose chute didn’t open. She landed on a flagpole and it took me all week just to wipe the smile off her face!"
(Boo Chanco’s e-mail address is bchanco@bayantel.com.ph)