Last September 19, 2015, I,
together with some of my block mates went to visit the National Arts Gallery in
Manila. At first sight of the façade of the building, I was astonished. Besides
the fact that it is my first time seeing the place up close—because I only
normally see the venue in pictures online or just in history books—the National
Museum was so much more than what I had anticipated. As we entered the building,
the ambiance that I first thought of is that it was classy and similar to that
of a mansion. There were chandeliers and the reception crew was very welcoming.
We left our bags upfront, paid for the entrance fee and went on with the tour.
For the reason that most of us were first timers, we didn’t know where to
start. It was overwhelming to see numerous rooms and having that excitement
made us amped up to explore. Of course, we had to stick with the objective,
which was to complete the requirement. We approached the receptionist and asked
for help in order for us to know the specific rooms or floors we were required
to visit. Once we got what we needed, we began the tour ourselves, most of our
block mates split up into groups. The first room that we visited was of course
the one near the lobby, although it wasn’t part of the required rooms to visit.
It had a sculpture of this enchanting angel that caught our eyes. Behind it
were two paintings, the remarkable ‘Spoliarium’ by Juan Luna and ‘El Asesinato
Del Gobernador Bustamante’ by Felix Resurreccion Hidalgo. Proceeding to the
upper floor, we continued to the Pillars of Philippine Modernism. We saw
artworks made by Manuel Rodriguez Sr., Juvenal Sanso and Galo Ocampo, Jose
Alcantara and the well-known national artist Napoleon Abueva. But the one
painting that caught my attention was the masterpiece made by Diosdado M.
Lorenzo entitled “Landscape” (1966). Medium used was oil on board and its
dimensions are approximately 18 inches in height.
This painting brought me hedonistic pleasure. The first
time I saw it I was captivated by how the colors were so inviting and it was
pleasing to the eyes. Honestly I was tempted to touch the artwork, my block
mates only prevented me from doing it because it was prohibited. The thing that
sent me that temptation was because the painting looked 3-dimensional because
of the thickness of the overlapping paint. You can see the strokes of the paint
brush and how heavy or light it was damped on the board. The colors were bright and dark at the same
time and it created harmony within the masterpiece. One thing I loved the most
and probably the reason why it brought me hedonistic pleasure was because it
was so realistic, it made me agree through the way it depicted its message. The
feeling I get whenever I stare at nature was the same feeling I felt when I
looked at this painting. You can imagine the simplicity of the artist and the
art itself. It was positively relaxing.
Even my block mates were attracted to this painting.
As we proceeded with the tour, we went through this
hallway that had a special gallery exhibition. Although still it wasn’t part of
the required rooms to be visited, I was intrigued with one special artwork. It
was by Arturo Rogelio Cruz and was entitled “Departure” and “Arrival”. It was
honestly one of the most unique artworks I’ve seen in the museum because it did
not resemble that of a painting. The material used was acrylic on burlap. There
was also a story behind it which made the art more interesting. We then visited
the GSIS collections in the northwest hall, which showcased most of the artworks
made by Vicente S. Manansala. Other artworks were also featured in that
collection but the one I loved the most was entitled “Sunset in Intramuros”
(1979).
This art piece was made by Federico Aguilar-Alcuaz, with
oil on board used as a material, however, its dimensions weren’t provided. This
masterpiece gave me an aesthetic feeling. Although I did not grew up being
familiar with the sights of Intramuros, it made me feel one thing, reminiscence.
This painting was made a long time ago, if I were given the chance to go back
in time and see if Intramuros really did looked that breathtaking, I’d take it.
It was beautiful because it was inviting to the audience. The way the sky was
painted over the city made it warm. The lights coming from the lamp posts really
did made me feel like I wanted to go there and see it for myself. From a
distance, the way the colors were shaded at the bottom part of the painting
made it look like it had a vignette effect. It was beautiful because the
elements were blended really well, it had no purpose or any objective to
deliver, it was just there. The view of Intramuros was present and it made me
want to appreciate it.
As we continued on with the tour, it was already around
lunchtime, and frankly all I could think of was food. But as we approached the
Social and Political Commentary After the 1970s section, I thought this tour
will make the wait more worth it. This particular painting literally captured
of what I thought was the most emotional message anyone could relate to. This
painting called “Bondage” (1993) was made by Papo de Asis who used oil on
canvas as material. It’s dimensions also weren’t provided.
This painting to me kind of features a man, being locked
up or enslaved by something much more powerful than him, and to me that was the
society and its limitless control over anybody who belongs in it. There’s
somehow a death persona who is riding a horse in the left part of the image and
a woman on the other. Based on how I understood the image, the woman was the
significant other of the man, and death took him away and locked him into this
sculpture. Just like what society does to every human being, being limited by
rules and powerless over the people who run the system. This gave me an emotive
perspective on how I should look at the painting. The artist had the ability to
make the audience feel what the man was feeling in the picture, and that is the
feeling of being trapped. Maybe the artist was feeling this way when he was
making the artwork. Or maybe he was able to imagine how the artwork would
influence the audience and make them feel what was expressed in his art. The
painting was expressive of the feeling of being locked up, without having the
capacity to escape and your only fate was death. That was what I felt in
appreciating the painting. Just by looking at the art itself, you forget about
anything else and just tend to focus on what was inside the image.
Near the conclusion of the tour, there’s this one artwork
left that truly captivated my attention. It was made by one of the artists who
I heard was known for capturing the harshest realities in our country today. It
was entitled “Piping Tagulaylay” (1983) by Antipas Delotavo.
The material used in this painting was oil on canvas as well,
unfortunately, the dimensions weren’t also provided. At first I was intrigued
of the title because I wasn’t aware of the meaning of the word “Tagulaylay”, so
I googled it. It meant monotonous singing. I came upon the conclusion that
Piping Tagulaylay meant the silent monotonous singing of the Filipino society.
The colors, which were mostly toned down in in terms of hue showed the dullness
and how plain living was. To me it meant that the singing meant here was how
the lifestyle of the Filipinos, especially those who experience poverty and
mediocrity, had no color or excitement. There was no happiness, no sadness,
just the neutrality of the image. It made me open my eyes and understand the
reality of this image and every day I see it with my own eyes. I was able to
formulate my own opinion because of the reality depicted in this artwork. It
was cognitive in a helpful way because it made me open my eyes to the real
state and situation of the Filipino society.
As we were leaving the venue, even though most of us were
starving already, the thought of missing just one room of the museum made me
think of coming back soon. Sure it wasn’t as exciting and as fun as going to
the mall or going to the amusement part with my friends, but going to the
museum taught me one thing. Being at peace with the silence and just getting
the chance and time to explore every artwork in the museum made me appreciate
more the simple things in life. Most of the images captured in the paintings
were the minimalist scenes depicted in reality, like the traditional bahay kubo
or even just the scenery of a big city. These simplest things in life inspired
the artists to create and express their feelings and get their imagination to
work.
Hedonistic, emotive, cognitive or even aesthetic, those
paintings were able to capture the audience in their own ways. You tend to
forget the chaos outside the museum, and just focus on what were in there. We
may have different preferences, but any art has a value of its own. I salute
the artists who lived through their passion regardless of what the society
thought about them. They inspire me to do the same as well.
All in all the tour was much more than what I was
expecting. I thought it was just going to be a plain old field trip but it wasn’t.
I learned a lot and was able to apply the lessons I’ve learned in this course.
One thing I learned and thought that it would be worth sharing in this
narrative is that, different artists have different styles in creating
different artworks. Although some artworks still belonged in the same category,
they were still diverse and beautiful in their own ways. The ability of the
painting to just hang on the walls and capture the attention of the audience is
unbelievable, no words, no music, just the painting itself. A single image,
along with elements combined in a creative way, can truly tell a thousand
words. Most of the artists featured in the museum already passed away, but
their legacy lives on through their masterpieces, and that is something you
cannot take away from the power of art.
*this was only a draft of the travelogue I made for my Philosophy class, still pretty raw but I guess it was still worth sharing
